HomeMy WebLinkAbout05/19/2026 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA
WORK SESSION
May 19, 2026 Tuesday 2:00 PM
Council meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Hybrid meetings allow people to join online or in person at
the City & County Building. Learn more at www.slc.gov/council/agendas.
Council Work Room
451 South State Street, Room 326
Salt Lake City, UT 84111
SLCCouncil.com
2:00 PM Work Session
Or immediately following the 1:00 PM
Community Reinvestment Agency Meeting
7:00 pm Formal Meeting
Room 315
(See separate agenda)
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS:
Alejandro Puy, Chair
District 2
Erika Carlsen, Vice Chair
District 5
Victoria Petro
District 1
Chris Wharton
District 3 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: 09:01:56
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.
For more information on the Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget, visit the Council’s
hub: link.slc.gov/slcfy27.
Click Here for the Mayor’s Recommended Budget for Fiscal Year 2026-27.
Work Session Items
1.Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget: Department of Economic
Development ~ 2:15 p.m.
45 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed budget for the Department of
Economic Development for Fiscal Year 2026-27.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 21, 2026 and Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 19, 2026 and Tuesday, June 2,
2026 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD
2.Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget: Information Management
Services ~ 3:00 p.m.
45 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed Information Management Services
(IMS) budget for Fiscal Year 2026-27. The department provides technical and
communication support for the City.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 21, 2026 and Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 19, 2026 and Tuesday, June 2,
2026 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD
3.Tentative Break ~ 3:45 p.m.
20 min.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - n/a
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a
4.Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget: Human Resources Department ~ 4:05 p.m.
30 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed Human Resources Department
budget for Fiscal Year 2026-27. The Department of Human Resources (HR) is an
internal-facing department that serves all City employees and administers benefits.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 21, 2026 and Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 19, 2026 and Tuesday, June 2,
2026 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD
5.Ordinance: Budget Amendment No.5 for Fiscal Year 2025-
26 ~ 4:35 p.m.
30 min.
The Council will receive a briefing about Budget Amendment No.5 for the Fiscal Year
2025-26 Budget. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect
adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and
modifications. The proposed amendment includes funding for new police officers,
replacement of aging police patrol vehicles, the purchase of a transport van, and a pass-
through of property tax revenue to the Salt Lake City Public Library, among other items.
For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY26.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, June 2, 2026 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, June 9, 2026
6.Board Appointment: Housing Authority of Salt Lake City –
Turner Bitton ~ 5:05 p.m.
5 min.
The Council will interview Turner Bitton, resident of District 2, prior to considering
appointment to the Housing Authority of Salt Lake City for a term ending May 19, 2030.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
7.Board Appointment: Planning Commission – Kevin Chung ~ 5:10 p.m.
5 min.
The Council will interview Kevin Chung, resident of District 7, prior to considering
appointment to the Planning Commission for a term ending May 19, 2030.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
8.Board Appointment: Historic Landmark Commission –
Rosemary Stum ~ 5:15 p.m.
5 min.
The Council will interview Rosemary Stum, resident of District 5, prior to considering
appointment to the Historic Landmark Commission for a term ending May 19, 2030.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - n/a
Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a
TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 19, 2026
9.Tentative – Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget: Property Tax
Impact Schedule TENTATIVE
-
The Council will discuss the proposed property tax impact schedule that was received
with the Mayor’s Recommended Budget for Salt Lake City for Fiscal Year 2026-27,
including reviewing and discussing the items proposed for funding through a property
tax increase.
FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion)
Briefing - Recurring Briefing Through May and June 2026
Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 21, 2026 and Tuesday, May 19, 2026
Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 19, 2026 and Tuesday, June 2,
2026 at 7 p.m.
TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD
Standing Items
10.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair -
-
Report of the Chair and Vice Chair
11.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director -
-
Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and
announcements. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to
City Council business, including but not limited to scheduling items.
12.Tentative Closed 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
link.slc.gov/slcfy27
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Austin Kimmel
Public Policy Analyst
DATE: May 19, 2026
RE:Fiscal Year 2026-27 Budget: Department of Economic Development
Budget Book Pages: Key changes pg. 50; Department Budget pp. 185-189; Staffing document pg. 300
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The proposed budget for the Department of Economic Development (DED) for Fiscal Year 2027 (FY27) is
$2,564,887. This reflects a decrease of $331,391, or 11.44%, compared to FY26.
A large factor in the decreased budget compared to FY26 is the recommendation to reduce the Construction
Mitigation Grant Program because of an anticipated lower need as projects funded by the Streets Reconstruction
Bond wind down. See page 2 of the staff report for more information.
Economic Development’s budget is funded entirely by the City’s General Fund. The department’s primary
function is to lead Salt Lake City’s efforts in promoting local economic opportunities and business expansion.
The department also focuses its efforts on job creation, Salt Lake City’s business districts, providing support and
resources for small- and medium-sized local businesses, and increasing the City’s tax base.
Goal of the briefing: To review the proposed Fiscal Year 2027 budget for the Salt Lake City Department of
Economic Development and to consider the Mayor’s recommendation to approve it by June 30, 2026.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1.Department Efficiencies: The Council may wish to ask Economic Development to describe any
efficiencies identified during the preparation of this year's proposed budget, including what cost savings
were incorporated into the FY27 budget request.
2.City Code Title 2 – Role of Economic Development: The Council has an open legislative intent
from FY24 regarding City Code Title 2, which defines the roles of City departments. The Administration
has indicated the Attorney's Office is working with Economic Development to propose updates clarifying
the department's role. The Council may wish to request an update on this effort and whether a timeline
has been established to bring the proposed City Code amendments to the Council.
3.Central Business District and Sugar House Special Assessment Areas: The Council has an
open intent from FY15 to hold a briefing on the costs of enhanced services provided to the Central
Business District Special Assessment Area (SAA) and the planned Sugar House SAA. Economic
Development and Public Services indicated they “will be prepared to share operational costs for
Project Timeline:
Briefing: May 19, 2026
Budget Hearings: May 19 & June 2, 2026
Potential Action: TBD
Page | 2
enhanced services provided currently in the Central Business District and Sugar House, if a briefing is
requested. Since a proposed Sugar House SAA is expected to come before the Council in the coming
months, the Council may wish to formally request that briefing in FY27.
4.Construction Mitigation Grant Program Funding: The Council could ask the Administration to
clarify how it determined $205,000 was the appropriate amount for the program in FY27. During the
FY26 budget review, the department said it would use the year to consider recalibrating the program.
The Council may wish to request a general update and to ask whether the department has, or intends to,
modify the program in the future.
5.Construction Mitigation Grant Program Eligibility: The Council may wish to ask the
Administration if there is an opportunity to broaden eligibility for the Construction Mitigation Grant
Program beyond city-led road reconstruction projects. For example, the Council could explore whether
small businesses affected by natural disasters, fires, or nearby private construction projects could qualify
for assistance under this or a similar future program.
6.Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF): Although not included in the General Fund budget
for Economic Development, the Council may wish to ask the department whether it intends to propose
any changes to the EDLF program in FY27.
PROPOSED FY27 BUDGET SUMMARY
Construction Mitigation Grant Program: $145,000 Decrease
The proposed budget continues funding the Construction Mitigation Grant Program, which Economic
Development manages. However, in FY27, the program's budget is proposed to decrease by $145,000. The
Administration justifies the decrease because projects related to the voter-approved Streets Reconstruction
Bond are winding down.
If the Construction Mitigation Grant budget is adopted as proposed, the total FY27 budget for the grant
program would be $205,000. This is shown in the chart above under Charges & Services. Council Members will
notice a $350,000 decrease under Capital Expenditures. The administration plans to move Construction
Mitigation funding to Charges & Services as a housekeeping effort.
The City's Construction Mitigation Grant Program provides grants up to $3,000 per qualified business affected
by specific construction sites in a given fiscal year. The program helps retain existing businesses as critical and
necessary improvements are made to upgrade or reconstruct the infrastructure around them.
Operating Budget for Department of Economic Development
2024-25 2025-26 2026-27 Difference
Actuals Adopted Proposed Dollars %
Personnel Services $3,264,784 $2,330,070 $2,143,679 ($186,391)-8.00%
Operations &
Maintenance $33,636 $49,500 $49,500 Unchanged Unchanged
Charges & Services $276,634 $166,708 $371,708 +$205,000 +123.09%
Capital
Expenditures -$350,000 -($350,000)-100.00%
Improvements
Expense $737,757 ----
FTE by Fiscal Year 23.00 14.00 14.00 --
Totals 4,312,810 2,896,278 2,564,887 -331,391 -11.44%
Page | 3
When the program first began, the maximum grant was $2,000. The Administration observed that fewer
businesses applied for grants at that lower amount compared to the number of applications received when the
maximum was raised to $3,000.
Start of FY26: $350,000
Additional funding received in FY26 Budget Amendment No. 3: $168,000
Total received in FY26: $518,000
Total amount spent in FY26: $162,000*
Unspent funds, which will drop to fund balance at the end of FY26: $356,000*
* Note: These figures are subject to change. FY26 spending and unspent figures are current as of this report’s
publication date. Economic Development indicated that additional businesses may apply for grants before the
fiscal year ends.
Personnel
Other Key Changes:
Personal Services Base-to-Base Changes: $166,314 decrease
Insurance Rate Changes: $16,235 increase
Pension Changes: $11,346 decrease
Vacancy Savings: $41,557 decrease
Salary Contingency for Non-Reps: $16,357 increase
o Note: Per the Mayor’s Recommended Budget, “This funding is designated for increases for
non-union-represented employees. It may be used to bring employees up to market or for one-
time compensation. It is not intended to be used as a cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) for all
non-represented employees.”
Increase for Part-time employees who earn below $18.35: $234 increase
ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION
A. Business Development Division Performance Measurements
B. Healthcare Innovation (Tech Lake City, Biohive, etc.)
Page | 4
Program efforts include building the city's brand and industry visibility, increasing private and public
investment, expanding education-to-workforce pathways, and removing barriers to business growth. It
has key partnerships with BioHive, BioUtah, Biotechgate, the Salt Lake City School District, higher
education institutions, and other stakeholders in the healthcare innovation space.
C. Economic Development Loan Fund
The Economic Development Loan Fund (EDLF) is a program operated by Economic Development for
the purpose of promoting business development and expansion by making loans available to businesses
that qualify for specific criteria.
Based on recent information shared by Economic Development staff, the program’s available balance is
approximately $8.5 million, and outstanding loans total over $1.7 million.
The EDLF loan program is part of the City’s Housing and Loan Fund, separate from the General Fund.
Since the program does not lapse, it is separate from the department’s annual operating budget.
D. Open Streets
The Administration recommends rescoping the City’s Open Streets program. As part of the FY27
budget, it plans to redirect the $400,000 in the Non-Departmental budget, used for Open Streets, to
activation around the reopening of Temple Square. These efforts will be led by the Downtown Alliance.
Open Streets began in 2020 as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic and was led by Economic
Development.
OPEN LEGISLATIVE INTENTS:
A.FY15 - Maintenance of Business Districts (listed under the Public Services Department)
It is the intent of the Council to hold a briefing regarding the costs of enhanced services provided to the
Central Business District, in order to consider: a) revising how City services are provided and paid for, b)
services that may be offered to other established or developing Business Districts in the City, and c)
maintenance of amenity upgrades (such as lighting and benches). It is also the intent of the Council that
this discussion happen in time to incorporate any changes into the renewal of the Central Business
District agreement and Sugar House Business District. This Intent includes SAAs. The work should
involve the Department of Economic Development and the Finance Department.
FY26 Administration Response: In coordination with Economic Development, Public
Services will be prepared to share operational costs for enhanced services provided currently
in the Central Business District and Sugar House, if a briefing is requested.
FY25 Administration Response: Public Services is not aware of whether a study of
enhanced services was ever completed by Economic Development or City Finance. Unless
Council passes a special assessment specifically for enhanced maintenance and clean-up, there
is no budget or mechanism to pay for business district expenses (outside of the assessment for
economic promotion conducted by the Downtown Alliance.)
B.FY24 - Department Role Clarity in Ordinance (Listed under the Attorney’s Office)
It is the intent of the Council to ask the Attorney’s Office to propose updates to the City’s code that
define and discuss the respective roles of City departments. This review should include, but not be
limited to, the Sustainability, Economic Development, and Public Lands Departments. Per Council
discussion, Sustainability is the priority.
Page | 5
FY26 Administration Response: Updates to City Code for Title 2 have been reviewed and
submitted to the City Council on behalf of the Sustainability department and await scheduling.
The City Attorney’s Office is working with the Department of Economic Development to advise
the department in their response to specific points for definition and clarity raised by the City
Council.
FY25 Administration Response: Research and analysis are ongoing for amendments to
Chapter 2.08 of City Code; acknowledging the priority is Sustainability.
ACRONYMS
CAN – The Department of Community & Neighborhoods
COLA – Cost of Living Adjustment
DED – The Department of Economic Development
EDLF – Economic Development Loan Fund
FTE – Full-time Equivalent
FY – Fiscal Year
SALT LAKE CITY DEPT. OF ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT BUDGET 26-27
Presenting: Lorena Riffo-Jenson, Jake Maxwell
Accomplishments
•DED has so far aided $2.9 billion in announced investment in FY26, with over $500 million additional in the
current pipeline. Western Governors University required complex coordination by DED to make this happen.
•DED quickly deployed three $100,000 emergency loans ($300,000 total) to key businesses on Main Street that
were burned in a catastrophic fire.
•DED Expanded fall Innovation Day to support 75 kids (up from 50) and added a Spring Innovation day,
increasing the yearly number of kids inspired by SLC businesses and technologies. Additionally, over 2000 kids
have gone through the Starborn Academy which happened as a result of our initial small investment.
•DED received the Mac Conway Award for excellence in Site Selection Magazine, recognizing investment,
job creation, and economic growth performance.
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Found Efficiencies
Department Budget FY 26 -27
•Moved to a city subscription for project management (Asana) to streamline project management
practices and workflows.
•Optimizing website by simplifying language, eliminating redundancies, improving user experience.
•Implemented the following process improvements for the Economic Development Loan Fund
(EDLF) and Emergency Loan Fund (ELP):
1. Improved staff workflows.
2. Established direct connections to technical assistance partners.
3. Refined collateral assessment to ensure appropriate loan security.
4. Streamlining borrower monitoring and reporting to detect financial stress before delinquency.
5. Strengthened default-response and collections procedures.
•Working with IMS, seeking a “one front door” on the SLC website for businesses seeking city business
services.
Overview
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Request Scenario Total
+$0
FTE: +0 / PTE: +0
$0
FTE: 0 / PTE: 0
5% Cut Scenario Total
-$145,000
FTE: +0 / PTE: +0
$2,564,887
FTE: 0 / PTE: 0
$2,896,278
FTEs: 14 / PTE: 1
Current Budget
5% Cut Scenario
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Current Change Total
Personnel Services $2,330,070 -$186,391 $2,143,679
Contracts $0 $0 $0
Capital $0 $0 $0
Other $566,207.76 -$145,000 $421,207.76
New Insights $0 $0
FTE: 0 / FTE: 0 $0
$2,896,278
FTEs: 14 / PTE: 1
-$331,391
FTE: +0 / PTE: +0
$2,564,887
FTE: 14 / PTE: 1
5% Cut Scenario Details
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Insights Description & Anticipated Impact of
Service Reduction
Reduced Cost
FTEs/PTEs
Ongoing or
One-Time
1
FY25 was the high-water mark for the Construction Mitigation Grant program with
bond projects wrapping up. We requested a decrease in FY26 of $250,000, leaving
us with a $350,000 budget for the program. We are still adjusting to the post-bond
construction volume and feel mostly confident we can make our 5% cut here
without impacting businesses accessing grant funds. -$145,000
One-time
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Construction Mitigation Program will now be the Business Support Program
What will the program continue to do to support businesses and business nodes?
•Support and enhance the vitality of business nodes when the city affects the area due to
construction
•Work side-by-side with business nodes to understand how best to support them through city
construction
•Provide business support through marketing and other technical assistance to foster vibrancy during
difficult economic times.
THANK YOU
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 BUDGET
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
link.slc.gov/slcfy27
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Kira Luke
Budget and Policy Analyst
DATE: May 19, 2026
RE: FY 2026-27 Budget – Information Management Services (IMS) Department
Budget book pages: Key Changes p. 76–77 · Department Overview p. 213–221 · Staffing
Document p. 305–308
DEPARTMENT AT-A-GLANCE
The Department of Information Management Services (IMS) provides multiple forms of support for
General Fund departments and Enterprise Funds in the City. IMS provides technical support,
maintains and manages the City’s networks and technology, coordinates and supports the City’s
internal and public-facing communications, manages the City’s data and Geographic Information
Systems (GIS), and implements and manages new projects and initiatives.
IMS is an Internal Service Fund, which means that its revenue comes from charging fees to other
City departments and funds based on the services provided. In recent fiscal years, IMS’s budget has
grown due to consolidating software subscriptions within their budget, rather than distributing
throughout each department. Similar to the General Fund, IMS has its own Fund Balance that can
be drawn from to accomplish budget recommendations.
The Mayor’s Fiscal Year 2026-27 (FY27) recommended budget for IMS totals $41,549,230 which
is a $1.5 million or 3.5% decrease from the final adopted budget for Fiscal Year 2025-26 (FY26).
POLICY QUESTIONS
1.Innovation pilot: The department has proposed a budget neutral $200,000 pilot program to
enable employees to “improve City services, increase efficiency and accessibility, and enhance
the quality of life for constituents.” The Department reports the funding is a repurposing of
existing IMS fund revenues. As the pilot is intended to foster creativity and innovation, the
specific problems or opportunities it may address have not yet been identified.
a. The Council may wish to hold a discussion with the Department about how this pilot is
intended to benefit the City, and pros and cons of initiating it in this fiscal year.
Schedule:
Briefing: May 19, 2026
Public Hearing: May 19 and June 2, 2026
Potential Action: TBD
b. The Department noted that risk and failure are often part of successful innovation. The
Council may wish to ask what metrics of success IMS will be watching for in the first year
of this program, and how outcomes will be reported.
2. Communication centralization:
a. The Council may wish to hold a discussion about benefits and challenges of the current
model, especially in terms of:
i. coordination of separate applications departments purchase given the overall
issues this has caused for the City in the past,
ii. opportunities to share platforms and engagement tools to empower City
Department communicators with consistent standards,
iii. balancing availability of communication staff resources within IMS and dispersed
in departments,
iv. compliance with State and Federal mandates regarding privacy and security,
domains, etc.
v.when it may be appropriate to advise departments versus recommend
requirements to the cabinet. The Citywide Engagement Team has established
standards that clarify when departments should handle communications
internally, when to enlist IMS support, and when work should or shouldn't go to
an outside contractor.
3.Artificial Intelligence (AI): in 2024, the Administration released a policy governing internal
City use of Generative AI, with an accompanying guide provided by the Innovations and Project
Management Team to promote ethical and responsible use of AI. The department reports
anecdotal user interest in complying with the policy, although there is no mechanism for
monitoring compliance. Available software applications, abilities, and user needs/interests are
evolving so rapidly that at present, the Department reports that long-term enterprise-wide
licensing would be premature.
a. The Council may wish to review the policy and hold a discussion on any hopes, interests,
or concerns with City use of Generative AI tools.
4. mySLC - Constituent Relationship Management (CRM) software:
a.The Council may wish to discuss to what extent mySLC use has enabled Departments to
gather new insights on constituent requests, inform budget decisions, and assess the
resources used to respond to service requests.
b.Council may wish to ask what is on the horizon to maximize the city’s use of mySLC
across all departments.
5.Digital Access: The City has supported a few initiatives over the past few years to address the
digital divide through adoption of a Digital Equity Policy, increasing access to laptops by
donating surplus or out-of-date inventory (Computers for the Community), and adding public-
facing free internet wherever possible when the City is implementing capital improvements
(currently available in several City parks until 10pm).
a.The Council may wish to ask for any insights IMS has learned about public wifi use, and
whether they could inform promotion of public spaces or events.
b.The Council may wish to ask for any other updates on the role Salt Lake City plays in
addressing the digital divide.
ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The Department reports that this year’s budget was guided by the priorities of improving technology
guidance to better tie technology decisions to citywide outcomes; stronger customer-service focus,
and “advancing AI and innovation in a measured way.”
Information Management Services
FY25-26 Adopted FY26-27 Mayor
Recommended Budget Difference
Personnel Services $18,188,861 $18,080,916 -$107,945
Charges And Services $21,791,894 $21,541,377 -$250,517
Operating And
Maintenance
$2,695,380 $1,306,690 -$1,388,690
Capital Expenditures $376,800 $325,000 -$51,800
Debt Principal $—$295,250 295,250
Total $43,052,934 $41,549,230 $-1,503,704
Key Expense Changes in FY27
1. $248,539: Annual Salary Proposal/contingency for non-represented employees
2. $595,974: Contractual costs $347,474 + Inflationary $248,500.
a. This amount reflects annual increases for required technology contracts,
software subscriptions, and service agreements. Increases in recent fiscal
years have typically been over a million, so the $595k increase represents a
significant reduction from anticipated costs. The department reports
achieving this through a combination of:
i. successfully negotiating lower prices on new contracts
ii. savings from previous years when new software implementation
necessitated temporarily paying for both legacy and new systems; and
iii. limiting new licenses.
3. $350,000: Security Information and Event Management (SIEM)/Exabeam
consolidation. This is a consolidation of cybersecurity monitoring funding between
IMS and the Airport.
4. $200,000: Innovation initiative. New initiative to create and pilot targeted
innovation efforts to improve service delivery and operational efficiency.
5. $100,000: Facilities’ camera system. This funds replacement of existing internal
security cameras within City facilities.
6. $100,000: Axon Fusus (Real-Time Crime Center software). Transfer from Police
Department budget to centralize technology costs under IMS.
7. $295,250: Debt Principal. IMS has explained this as a restructured obligation for the
SLC phone system: the original lease expired, the software agreement was
restructured with a cloud migration, and a 0% interest loan was established.
Reductions:
Personnel Services Change
Annual Salary Proposal $
248,539
Base-to-base changes $
75,078
Insurance Rate Changes $
40,194
Pension Changes $
22,440
FY26 BA #2 CCAC Market-Rate Adjustments $
159,414
Personnel Services Correction $
(653,613)
Total $
(107,945)
Communication Centralization
Over the past few years, IMS has built up capacity to provide communication, engagement and
design services to all City Departments. The teams within IMS serve several roles, from establishing
best practices and branding consistency citywide, offering trainings and guides for all departments’
communication staff, and providing media and graphic support for City Departments.
As part of budget preparation, all City Departments were asked to provide feedback on their
experience/awareness of the Communications and Engagement resources within IMS. These
responses are considered anecdotal data and not scientifically representative of each
department/division’s interactions with IMS, but may be helpful in identifying successes and
obstacles from Departments' perspectives. Overall, positive themes that emerged showed the
majority of respondents are using centralized communications resources and view them as valuable
and increasingly integrated into departmental operations. Where obstacles are reported, the
concern is typically not quality, but rather adjustments that would be needed to existing
communication processes and expectations to fully adopt the system. Summary tables of responses
are below; full text can be found in Attachment 1.
Responses Count (of 22 depts and divisions)
Used IMS Comms resources 17 / 22
Said yes or described specific usage
No obstacles
Reported no barriers or challenges 14 / 22
Left blank
Sub-questions unanswered 5 / 22
Named obstacles
Lead time, capacity, comfort levels 5 / 22
Resource/service area Departments/Divisions report using (out of 23 total)
Branding/design 17
ShapeSLC 6
Social media 4
Graphic design 4
Video/media 3
Language access 2
Web/accessibility 2
Updates and running list of ongoing initiatives (information in italics is copied
directly from Department responses):
Apprenticeships:
Report from the Department:
During the current fiscal year, the IT Apprenticeship Program successfully supported six
apprentices, providing them with broad exposure to IMS operations and services while
emphasizing foundational service desk and end-user support functions. ...
Looking ahead, IMS will also participate in the Youth City Summer 2026 Internship /
Apprenticeship Program and has committed to sponsoring three additional positions. This
continued investment reflects IMS’s commitment to workforce development, community
engagement, and creating meaningful career pathways for youth interested in technology and
public service.
Digital accessibility: FY 26 marked a major citywide effort to improve digital accessibility and
enhance the overall usability of SLC.gov and the City’s digital content. While the work supported
compliance with federal accessibility standards, the broader goal was to create a more accessible,
user-friendly experience for all community members. This included rewriting web content in plain
language, making information more actionable, and improving site navigation and usability. To
support these efforts, IMS launched six new trainings focused on digital accessibility and content
best practices. The City also shifted how information is shared online, reducing reliance on PDFs
and prioritizing mobile-friendly and search-optimized web content. In addition, significant
archiving and cleanup efforts helped reduce outdated and redundant information across SLC.gov,
including the removal or archiving of more than 8,000 documents.
Computers for the Community Program.
Report from the Department:
Salt Lake Community College Basic Needs Tech Access Program
Club Ability Foundation
Somali Community Self Management Agency
Variable X
Utah Marshallese Association
Ronjake Autism Support Network
Tech Charities
Catholic Community Services
The Department reports that while the proposed extension to employee computer lifecycle may
temporarily reduce devices available to donate in this program, over time as the city continues to
add staffing, the program should remain steady.
Free public Wi-Fi
1. Free public Wi-Fi can be found at Sorenson Unity Center, and the YouthCity locations at
Liberty Park, Fairmont Park and Ottinger Hall, through our partnership with Comcast
Lift Zones
2. Many Parks, and City properties offer free public Wi-Fi access through our City Connect
network. IMS is working with Engineering and Facilities to continue expanding free wifi
to City owned public spaces in conjunction with existing projects, when possible.
ShapeSLC, the City's centralized public engagement platform launched in FY26
Report from the Department:
The Citywide Engagement team took steps to improve both the resident and staff experience
on shapeSLC, and made the following improvements:
Developed a Comms Base shapeSLC resource with detailed project creation guides.
Provided process clarity for internal users about how to coordinate with City Council staff on
projects they are involved with
Conducted more than 10 internal trainings to support adoption and buy-in
Launched an external awareness campaign to increase resident registrations and expand
public awareness of the platform.
mySLC – Constituent Relationship Management (CRM) Software:
mySLC is a fundamental change to the way that constituents report service requests to the City. It
has been a major implementation process and essential to get right, since it serves as a frequent
touchpoint for constituents interacting with the City, and directly affects how the public views the
City’s customer service.
Timeline since implementation:
Since 2022, the focus has been on internal coordination & system refinements:
o City staff have gotten familiar with case creation, monitoring, and closure.
o Cross-department improvements have been made to ensure the cases are properly
documented and shared, and constituents are contacted.
o From a behavior standpoint, this has been the largest hurdle. City staff have always
processed these requests in email and adjusting the CRM has taken time.
In 2024, the “guest experience” was the main focus. This involves:
o isolating certain automated interactions and making improvements, especially when
automated responses cause confusion or frustration.
o creating and publishing the “mySLC.gov” user interface for online submission.
o developing dashboards for at-a-glance monitoring of the cases.
o Building the “Knowledge Base” which will have articles to explain City processes,
standard Q&A, etc.
In FY25, focus was on:
o department training & consistency,
o the mySLC interface,
o release of a new mobile app
o Other coordination with department heads and exploring the use of the data in policy
and budgeting decisions.
In FY26, there has been focus on the mobile app launch and improving access/use.
o IMS reports 16 departments participating and nearly 5,000 registered users, with
new users added monthly (see Attachment 2 for more use statistics and details).
As with any technical project, each of these steps has required significant time for testing, training,
feedback and improvement.
Goals of the CRM:
Help staff keep track of public requests for service or information, and contact information
Automate work assignments
Track responses or flag needed follow-ups on a topic
Save staff and constituents time by providing a knowledge base to answer common questions
Provide data elected officials can use in making service level decisions.
Biennial Resident Survey
Report from the Department:
The City is currently in the RFP process for a new resident survey provider. Once a provider is
contracted, a resident survey will be conducted in FY 27. In 2025, the Survey Committee—
comprised of representatives from the Mayor’s Office, Council Office, and the Department of
Information Management Services—developed the Salt Lake City Inclusive Survey Best Practices
& Strategy to establish the City’s expectations for public surveys conducted by research and data
analytics firms. The guidance emphasizes equitable survey practices, diverse representation
across all council districts—especially historically underrepresented communities—and strategies
to engage new and previously disengaged residents. It also outlines standards for rigorous quality
control, actionable and representative data collection, and transparent reporting back to the
public on survey findings and next steps.
This guidance also established the criteria for selecting a new vendor to conduct citywide surveys.
The committee recently completed an RFP process to select a new vendor, which is expected to be
in place by the end of June 2026. The new partnership presents an opportunity to introduce
innovative survey practices and strengthen how the City gathers, interprets, and applies
constituent feedback to inform policy and budgeting decisions. Moving forward, the Survey
Committee’s goal is to align citywide survey timing with the budget process so constituent input is
collected early enough to shape policy priorities and budget recommendations meaningfully.
AI – Artificial Intelligence
CAN – Community and Neighborhoods
CCAC – Citizens' Compensation Advisory Committee
CRM – Constituent Relationship Management
DED – Department of Economic Development
FY – Fiscal Year
HR – Human Resources
IMS – Information Management Services
Attachment 1 - Q13 Dept Responses
Attachment 2 - MySLC Growth Report May 2026
Question 13 — Department Responses
FY 2026-27 Budget · Centralized Communications Resources
INTERNAL USE ONLY
Question 13: Over the past several years, the City has invested in centralized communications resources
within IMS to support consistent branding, shared tools, and engagement planning across departments.
These resources are available to all departments developing communications materials for internal use or
public outreach.
Sub-questions: (a) Has your department had opportunities to use these resources? (b) If so, to what
extent? (c) Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
911 Dispatch
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
b. If so, to what extent?
They helped us create a specific email signature generator that incorporated our badge with the city
approved fonts and formats.
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
Our logo/badge is different from all others in the city, like PD and Fire. We strive to embody the city
branding where we can but also recognize the need for our badge to be recognized as public safety.
Airport
The Airport has its own IT division, but we also use resources from IMS when necessary.
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
b. If so, to what extent?
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
Community and Neighborhoods (CAN)
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
Yes, most of our divisions utilize these resources. We frequently collaborate with the centralized
communications team to create social media content and plans, refine and revise surveys, to coordinate
with communicators outside of our department, to provide resources to consultants on brand guidelines,
and to create materials like flyers. We also utilize the team for technical assistance when creating projects
on shapeSLC.
b. If so, to what extent?
We work with their team on a monthly, if not weekly basis. CAN has already published roughly 10 projects
on the new engagement software shapeSLC. Their team has supported us in the creation of materials
(including social media posts, flyers, community engagement boards) for a wide variety of projects.
No, however we are still working to increase awareness across the department that these resources are
available. We are still working to ensure that all are aware of the brand guidelines and new tools available
to help project managers follow them.
Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA)
Centralized communication through IMS helps ensure a cohesive, citywide strategy, and the cross-
departmental coordination adds real value. At the same time, the nature of our work and the experience
of our communications staff mean we're largely self-sufficient, with few instances where we need to draw
on shared resources.
Department of Economic Development (DED)
Yes
PIO guidance, graphic design team, city led meetings (branding, tabling opportunities, resource training),
social media filming — but have been asked to do it ourselves.
Lead time from graphic design can be lengthy and we understand why.
Fire Department
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
The Fire Department has worked closely with IMS within our Community Relations Division, our
Emergency Management Division and our Technology Division. We coordinate with IMS on emergency
communications, software, and external communications to the public. We have no challenges in
accessing the resources.
Golf
The Golf Division handles marketing communications internally and does not utilize the centralized
communications resources.
Human Resources
Yes
We've used the branding services to help design communication material and even the logo for the
annual Benefits 5K T-shirt. The resources are helpful and do a great job.
As the resources have gained wider recognition, it takes a little more planning because they have been
busy. That's a good thing!
Information Management Services (IMS)
The Citywide Communications & Engagement and Web & Media Services teams have developed the
tools and guiding materials referenced here (including Comms Base, shapeSLC platform and modules,
Language Access, Design Style Guide, Asana etc.), and as such use them daily. Also on a daily basis,
these teams work closely with staff across the City, providing ongoing coaching and support to help them
apply strategic communications best practices utilizing said resources. The absence of centralized
resources would lead backwards to the time of inconsistency and an increased disconnection between
work groups and the resources being used. Streamlining communication internally ultimately offers Salt
Lake City residents broad public-value benefits that are difficult to achieve when efforts are fragmented
across individual departments or projects.
In addition to supporting traditional communications, engagement, design, and media citywide, these
teams support the communications strategies for updated technology initiatives supported by IMS. One
such example being Citywide Comms' launch of shapeSLC as the City's centralized public participation
platform. Their lead out on this technology ensured clear, consistent messaging starting with across-the-
board buy-in from City leadership and staff and extending to the end user – the public. The coordinated
work on shapeSLC ultimately helped drive awareness, adoption, and user confidence, both internally and
externally.
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
Police Department
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
b. If so, to what extent?
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
Public Services
Streets
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
b. If so, to what extent?
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
Urban Services
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
Yes
b. If so, to what extent?
MySLC, City-wide branding and web site presence.
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
No
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
b. If so, to what extent?
Yes, City-wide branding.
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
No
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
b. If so, to what extent?
Yes, City-wide branding.
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
No
Public Lands
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
Yes
b. If so, to what extent?
The Communications Team frequently refers to these resources for branding guidelines, ShapeSLC
toolkit, language translation assistance, and web accessibility resources.
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
No, the Comms Base has been an important resource for our team.
Parks
Planning & Design
Trails and Natural Lands
Urban Forestry
Park Ranger Program
Yes
We used ShapeSLC for our public survey last year. All of our printed materials are created by the Public
Lands Communications team, to be consistent with citywide branding.
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
Public Utilities
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
b. If so, to what extent?
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
Public Services
Fleet
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
b. If so, to what extent?
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
Sustainability
a. Has your department had opportunities to use these resources?
b. If so, to what extent?
brochures, etc.), or attempt to do ourselves. We also work with the CCE team on video production for
social media (1–2 per quarter). We have also worked with them on support for building webpages that
look appealing and comply with ADA requirements, and on understanding how to use shapeSLC. We
worked with the CCE team on a communications plan for the Waste Routes Change Day in February
2025.
c. Are there any obstacles or challenges your department has experienced in accessing these
resources?
This document was compiled with AI assistance. All source responses are reproduced verbatim from departmental submissions.
MySLC Growth Report
IMS: mySLC Growth Report
mySLC
•16 City Departments
•152 Active Request Types
IMS: mySLC Growth Report
mySLC - Case Volume Growth
•Averaging a 1.5% monthly increase
•Average of 26% increase from same month last year
IMS: mySLC Growth Report
mySLC User Growth
•Total # of Registered Users: 4,968
•Total # of Downloads: 8,801
•Average Monthly Growth in Registered
Users: 28.4%
IMS: mySLC Growth Report
mySLC - Benchmarks
Adoption Rate Benchmarks
Source / Context Benchmark Notes
mySLC (perm-set base, 4,968 users)39.1%1,940 downloads ÷ 4,968 registered users
mySLC (Salesforce report, 4,170 users)46.5%1,940 downloads ÷ 4,170 filtered users
Salt Lake City Context
what % of SLC residents have we reached
Metric Value Notes
Salt Lake City population (2026 est.)226,341 World Population Review, 2026
Adult population (18+)~174,000 ~77% of total population
Registered (perm set) as % of adult pop 2.9%mySLC penetration into adult resident base
THANK YOU
MySLC Growth Report– Information Management Services
S A L T L A K E C I T Y
Information Management
Services
D E P A R T M E N T B U D G E T F Y 2 0 2 6 –2 0 2 7
Presented by Zach Posner, Chief Information Officer
Providing a Unified and Cohesive Budget Overview from Each Department and Fund
Accomplishments —Internal
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Generative AI & Tech Modernization
•Internal AI Pilot Program
•ChatGPT vs. Copilot Chat evaluation
•Coding Cohort & Custom GPT for meeting minutes
•Rate calculator for Public Utilities
•Public-facing site for civil hearings and parking
tickets
Infrastructure
•23+ miles of new optical
fiber
•19 City facilities connected
•Azure & Data Lake Pilot
launched
•Data Bricks
Accomplishments —Customer Focused
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Citywide Communications Hub
(Comms Base)
Public Participation Platform
(shapeSLC)
Software Streamline
(Asana)
Digital Services & ADA Compliance
(Web 3.0)
Microsoft Authenticator
Implementation
IMS Division Headcount
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
103 FTE
Filled Positions
8
Divisions
1 FTE
Open Position
Software
Services
28
Office of the Chief Information Officer (CIO)
9
Network
Services
21
Field &
Support
17
Web & Media
Services
9
Citywide
Comms
8
Innovation
6
GIS &
Data Analytics
6
FY 26-27 Budget Overview
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Proposed
Budget Changes
($1,503,704)
Change in FTEs: 0
Change in PTEs: 0
FY26 Approved Budget
$43,052,934
FTE: 104 | PTE: 19
Total Budget
FTE: 104 | PTE: 19
Total Requested Budget
$41,549,230
FY27 Requested Budget
FY 26-27 Budget Overview
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
($1.5M)
Net Budget Change
Contractual and Inflationary
Increases of $1.9M
Budget Reductions of $3.4M
Highlights
•Contractual items increased by $347k
o i.e. 911 systems, Microsoft, Workday
•Inflationary items increased by $249k
o i.e. Admin Services, Exabeam, Smartnet
•Hardware costs are up as a whole
o Moving to a 4-year lifecycle of City laptops
•Cybersecurity has been and will continue to be a priority
Strategic Direction & Vision
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Technology
Governance
•Citywide technology
vision
•Drive down
redundancies
•Increase transparency
•Bring Customers to
the table
•Spend to vision
alignment
•Data privacy
Customer
Focus
•Culture of delivery
•Onboarding & service
delivery
•Business relationship
management
Constituent Service
via AI
•Updated AI Policy
•Extend pilots to our
customers
•Partner on agentic
opportunities
•Flexibility to meet
customer needs
Opportunities —Innovation Fund
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
•Set aside $200,000 for small innovation ideas
o Proposed cap at $35,000
•Driven by city staff, supported by management
•Ideas must be novel and focused on ROI, but not
necessarily monetary, e.g.:
o Resident savings (time and money)
o Customer satisfaction
o Business process improvements
CULTIVATE
INNOVATION
IDEAS
Opportunities —Customer Satisfaction
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
•Current employee satisfaction score: 2.13 out of 3
•Transitioning to a customer-focused organization by:
o Revamping service desk operations starting with
internal systems systems and ITIL training
o Developing core strength in Business
Relationship Management
o Use Governance as a mechanism for customer
voice and ownership
FOCUS
ON
CUSTOMERS
Opportunities —Governance
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Re-engage IMS Steering Committee to help connect
budget to City priorities
•Four Key Outcomes:
1.Transparency
2.Engagement
3.Cybersecurity
4.Standards
•Updated Policy currently under legal review
ALIGN
WITH CITY
PRIORITIES
Opportunities —Generative AI
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
•Updated AI Use Policy (under review)
o Expands to Citywide AI governance framework
o Responsible innovation with clear governance
o Strong data protection and human accountability
o Transparency, records compliance, and risk-based controls
•New AI Trainings on Policy; Upskilling SLC
employees;Workshops on specific topics
•AI Toolkit
•Use Cases
•Approval Processes
•Implementation Guidance
•Ongoing Updates
SUPPORT
RESPONSIBLE
GEN AI USE
Budget Changes
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
FTEs: 104 | PTEs: 19 →No headcount change
Category Current (FY26)Change Total (FY27)
Personnel Services $18,188,861 ($107,947)$18,080,913
Contracts / Inflationary / Consulting $24,637,273 ($1,995,756)$22,641,517
Capital $226,800 $0 $226,800
Other (Transfers / Budget Amendments)$0 $500,000 $500,000
New Insights (Cameras)$0 $100,000 $100,000
Total $43,052,934 ($1,503,704)$41,549,230
FY 26-27 Budget Overview
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
($1.5M)
Net Budget Change
Budget Increases of $1.9M
Budget Reductions of $3.4M
Highlights
•Contractual items increased by $347k
o i.e. 911 systems, Microsoft, Workday
•Inflationary items increased by $249k
o i.e. Admin Services, Exabeam, Smartnet
•Hardware costs are up as a whole
o Moving to a 4-year lifecycle of City laptops
•Cybersecurity has been and will continue to be a priority
Found Efficiencies
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
$3.45M
In Budget Reductions
Net budget change of $1.5M
8 divisions
participated in
comprehensive review
How We Got There
IMS worked with each of our 8 divisions to conduct a
comprehensive review of the budget to identify efficiencies.
Through this collaborative effort, we achieved $3.445 million in
reductions meeting our target of a 5% decrease from the FY26
budget.
While challenging, this process strengthened our financial
discipline and positioned us for a more sustainable budget
moving forward.
Found Efficiencies —Line Item Detail
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Line Item / Description Amount Type
Personnel Services True Up ($653,613)Ongoing
Correction of prior accounting error; limits flexibility for apprenticeship & temp staff.
Software Subscription Decreases ($525,836)Ongoing
Negotiated Accela renewal reductions (~$250k).Reductions from Authenticator migration & cybersecurity flexibility.
Special Consultants Decreases ($1,770,726)Ongoing
Workday −$630k.Salesforce, LaserFiche, Cloud, Dev aggregated —requires judicious oversight.
Computer Hardware ($167,001)Ongoing
Extend laptop/PC lifecycle from 3 to 4 years.
Education & Training ($206,910)Ongoing
Migrate travel & training to online, on-demand providers.
Other Expenses ($121,257)Ongoing
Office supplies ~$40k, Cintas ~$13k, Skillsoft moved to Software Subscriptions $30k, special projects $20k.
Total Division Budget Reductions ($3,445,343)Ongoing
Found Efficiencies —Division Budget Reductions
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
$-
$200,000
$400,000
$600,000
$800,000
$1,000,000
$1,200,000
$1,400,000
$1,600,000
$1,800,000
$2,000,000
Special Consultants
$1,770,726
Personal Services
$653,613
Software Subscription
$525,836
Education & Training
$206,910
Computer Hardware
$167,001
Other Expenses
$121,257
Easy Medium Hard
Computer Donation Program
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
FY26
•323 Computers donated (Up from the 161 in FY25)
•High demand by the community
•515 laptops requested
•323 committed to the community
FY27
•Will continue annual donations of up to 500 in FY27
Computer Donation Program
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Awarded programs in FY26:
•Salt Lake Community College -Basic Needs Tech Access Program
•Club Ability Foundation
•Somali Community Self Management Agency
•Variable X
•Utah Marshallese Association
•Ronjake Autism Support Network
•Tech Charities
•Catholic Community Services
Concluding Notes
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
New Strategic Direction for IMS
Strong Customer focus enabled by Governance and AI
Budget Cuts Limit Agility
Budget cuts help us focus but limit our ability to respond to mid-year needs and unexpected demands
throughout the year.
Citywide Budget Discipline Required
Sustainable delivery requires disciplined budget management across the City —no surprises. Collaborative
stewardship is essential.
THANK YOU
Questions & Discussion
Salt Lake City Information Management Services
APPENDIX
Supporting Budget Detail
Strategic Gaps —The Big Problems to Solve For
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Business Relationship
Management Business Analysis SharePoint
Software Lifecycle
Management Governance AI
Project Management
Office Innovation Fund Training
S A L T L A K E C I T Y
MySLC Growth Report
D E P A R T M E N T B U D G E T F Y 2 0 2 6 –2 0 2 7
Presented by Zach Posner, Chief Information Officer
Providing a Unified and Cohesive Budget Overview from Each Department and Fund
mySLC
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
•16 City Departments
•152 Active Request Types
mySLC –Case Volume Growth
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
•Averaging a 1.5% monthly increase
•Average of 26% increase from same month last year
mySLC –User Growth
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
•Total # of Registered
Users: 4,968
•Total # of Downloads:
8,801
•Average Monthly Growth
in Registered Users:
28.4%
mySLC –Benchmarks
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Adoption Rate Benchmarks
Source / Context Benchmark Notes
mySLC (perm-set base, 4,968 users)39.1%÷ 4,968 registered users
mySLC (Salesforce report, 4,170 users)46.5%÷ 4,170 filtered users
Salt Lake City Context
what % of SLC residents have we reached
Metric Value Notes
Salt Lake City population (2026 est.)226,341
Adult population (18+)~174,000
Registered (perm set) as % of adult pop 2.9%penetration into adult resident base
Appendix —Category Grouping (5% Cut Scenario)
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Category FY26 Change FY27
Capital $1,176,800 (851,800)$325,000
Computer Hardware $3,102,576 (493,736)$2,608,840
Consultant $3,067,646 (1,538,126)$1,529,520
Education & Training $647,245 (194,410)$452,835
Other $2,404,228 +$561,348 $2,965,576
Personnel Services $18,188,861 (107,947)$18,080,913
Software $14,465,579 +$1,070,968 $15,536,546
Total $43,052,935 ($1,553,703)$41,499,230
Appendix —Major Software FY26 YTD
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
•Microsoft $2,018,338
•Adobe $329,385
•Exabeam $582,012
•Salesforce $1,483,832
•Amplify $380,259
•Workday $2,066,007 (FY25)
Appendix —How the 5% Budget Cuts Are Calculated
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
Item Amount
Approved FY26 Budget $43,052,934
BA #2 money included in initial FY26 base
CCAC Money $159,414
Language Access $50,000
FY26 Initial Budget $43,262,348
Cut Goal of 5%$2,163,117
Budget Goal Before New Work $41,099,231
FY27 Transfer of Work
Axon Fusus (Transfer from Police)$100,000
Exabeam –SIEM (Transfer from Airport)$350,000
Final Budget Goal $41,549,231
AI Roadmap FY 27
Department Budget FY 26-27 | Salt Lake City Information Management Services
•Updated Use of Artificial Intelligence Policy (currently in review)
–New policy creates The existing policy gives staff basic rules for using generative AI safely. The draft policy expands that approach into a Citywide
AI governance framework:broader scope, clearer data rules, formal tool approval, stronger protections for high-impact uses, and a path for
safe adoption rather than unmanaged use.
•Responsible innovation with clear governance.
IMS sets AI standards, approves tools and use cases, maintains the AI Toolkit, and supports departments in safe adoption.
•Strong data protection and human accountability.
Staff must classify data, use only authorized tools for sensitive information, and review, fact-check, and validate AI outputs before use.
•Transparency, records compliance, and risk-based controls.
The policy requires disclosure when AI significantly shapes City work, treats AI prompts/outputs as potential GRAMA records, and adds stricter controls
for high-impact uses.
•AI Trainings
–Policy: Develop AI training that turns the draft policy into clear, role-based guidance for safe, responsible, and compliant use across City
departments.
–Upskilling: Launch AI upskilling trainings that help staff move beyond policy awareness into practical, responsible, and service-focused use of AI.
–Workshops / Lunch-and-Learns: Offer workshops and lunch-and-learns to support hands-on learning, peer sharing, and practical AI adoption
across departments.
•AI Toolkit SharePoint Site (similar to Comms Base)
–The Toolkit includes:
•Approved and prohibited AI use cases
•Processes for approving AI platforms, features, connectors (agents), and environments
•Implementation guidance and role-based training resources
•Procedures for reporting and reviewing incidents and near misses
•Ongoing updates to reflect policy changes and lessons learned
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 BUDGET
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
link.slc.gov/slcfy27
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Kira Luke, Budget & Policy Analyst
DATE:May 19, 2026
RE: Proposed FY2026-27 Human Resources Department
Budget
BUDGET BOOK PAGES: Key Changes pg.55-56; Dept. Overview pg.206-211; Staffing Document pg.304-305
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
The Human Resources Department (HR) is internal-facing, working with all departments to provide employee support
programs and administer benefits for the City’s 3,786 full time employees (FTEs). The HR Department is 92% funded by
the City’s Risk Fund and the rest from the General Fund. This staff report focuses primarily on the General Fund budget
proposal. Other budget changes are addressed separately in the Compensation & Benefits and Insurance & Risk
categories within the Unresolved Issues staff report(s) and briefing(s). HR's proposed General Fund FY2026-27 budget
totals $5,410,437, a minimal increase of $161 from the FY2025-26 adopted general fund budget of $5,410,276. The
Department includes an administrative team, benefits, compensation and classification, employee and labor relations,
employees’ university, HR information systems, Police Civilian Review Board, and recruiting and onboarding.
POLICY QUESTIONS
1. The Council may wish to ask for more information about the intended goals and outcomes of the Learning and
Development program overhaul.
2. One of HR’s goals and metrics for FY 27 is keeping the average time to recruit and fill a vacant position under 40
days. The Council may wish to have a discussion about whether there are any positions that typically exceed
that timeframe, and what strategies are currently used to pursue reduce time to fill for those.
ADDITIONAL AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
The proposed FY27 HR budget is essentially flat; $286,737 increases in base-to-base, market rate, position
reclassifications, insurance changes, and a software cost increase are balanced with -$286,576 in vacancy savings,
pension reduction and the elimination of two vacant FTE positions.
The Department reports their goals for the year are:
-Development of director dashboards in Workday
-Bolster recruitment and outreach efforts
-Gather best practices throughout the City on programs that can be cataloged and made available City wide
-Launch succession planning in key departments
-Adding 3 new small group training sessions on hiring and recruiting.
Personnel
General Fund FTE total in proposed FY27 budget: 32.4, -2 from FY26.
1. Notable changes include an overhaul in the Learning and Development (L&D) program, resulting in a number of
FTE reclassifications and shifts outlined below.
Schedule:
Briefing: May 19, 2026
Page | 2
a. Eliminate Sr. L&D Specialist Role (-$138,292 / -1.0 FTE): The position was identified as an area where
cost savings could be realized as part of a planned overhaul of the L&D program.
b. Reclassify L&D Tech -> L&D Specialist (+$18,984 / 0 FTE): Fills the gap left by the eliminated Sr.
Specialist at a lower cost point, maintaining L&D delivery capacity.
c. Reclassify Special Projects Manager -> L&D Manager (+$33,732 / 0 FTE): Consolidates L&D
management duties under the reclassified position. Described as a multi-year effort to overhaul learning
programs.
d. Repurpose L&D Manager FTE -> Employee Relations Manager ($0 / 0 FTE): Budget-neutral creation of
an Employee Relations Manager to oversee the HR Business Partner team.
2. Eliminate Vacant HR Tech Position (-$85,371 / -1.0 FTE): A Senior HR Technician (Grade N19) position was
held vacant and identified as an opportunity for cost savings. No service-level impact is anticipated.
Recruitment metrics
In the Mayor’s Recommended Budget (MRB) book, the metrics for Recruitment are expressed as a decimal point for
FY2024 and 2025 (p. 207). In those fiscal years, the goal was goal to “reduce time-to-fill by 5% for hardest-to-fill
positions.” For 2024, the recruitment team reduced the time to fill by 5% and in 2025 they reduced it by 21%.
The Department reports that in this fiscal year, the metric is updated to keeping citywide recruitment under 40 days.
This change comes as a result of recognizing the variability of the phrase “hard to fill,” and the improved measurement
tools available through Workday.
Compensation Software
The salary survey management software the City uses is up for renewal. A one-year extension doubles the annual cost,
resulting in a $22,000 increase. The department plans to conduct an RFP in 2026 to ensure the City is using the most
cost-effective long-term solution. The cost beyond FY27 is anticipated to be an ongoing increase, like most software
services.
General Fund Key Changes: FY25-26 Adopted → FY26-27 Recommended
Source: Key Changes p.55–56; Dept. Overview p.210–211; Round 1 Q&A. All amounts are General Fund only.
Line Item $ Change (GF)FTE Change
BASE ADJUSTMENTS
Base-to-Base Changes +$70,710 —
Insurance Rate Changes +$46,393 —
Salary Contingency for Non-Represented Employees +$39,764 —
CCAC Salary Adjustments +$55,154 —
Pension / 401k Changes ($20,448)—
Vacancy Savings ($42,465)—
Base Adjustments Subtotal +$149,108 —
Additional changes
Eliminate Vacant HR Tech Position ($85,371)−1.0
Eliminate Sr. Learning & Development Specialist Role ($138,292)−1.0
Page | 3
Reclassify L&D Tech → L&D Specialist +$18,984 —
Reclassify Special Projects Manager → L&D Manager +$33,732 —
Repurpose L&D Manager FTE → Employee Relations
Manager
$0 —
Compensation Software Cost Increase (PayFactors)+$22,000 —
Subtotal ($148,947)−2.0
OPERATING LEDGER
Beginning Operating Ledger +$261,652 —
FY26-27 General Fund Total $5,410,437 32.40
Change from FY25-26 Adopted ($5,410,276 / 34.40 FTE)+$161 −2.0
ACRONYMS
FTE – Full-time Employee
FY – Fiscal Year
HR – Human Resources
L&D – Learning and Development
MRB – Mayor’s Recommended Budget
SALT LAKE CITY DEPARTMENT OF
HUMAN RESOURCES BUDGET 26-27
HR Accomplishments FY26
New Parental Leave Policy – Birthing mothers now get 6 weeks of
recovery leave.Bonding leave was updated to 6 weeks of
intermittent leave for birthing mother and/or partner with birthing
mothers now getting 12 weeks total.
– Employees and candidates have visibility to the total
compensation value of working for Salt Lake City.
– Non represented employees were
able to request credit for previous related experience to count
toward vacation accrual. 797 non-represented employees received
credit, helping retention throughout the City.
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Found Efficiencies FY26
Department Budget FY 26 -27
•Strategic Re-organization: We reorganized the department into two distinct focuses,
compliance and employee lifecycle. When vacancies arose, changes were made based on
needs, alignment,workloads and job duties.
•Re-classified Benefit Supervisor role down to an Analyst
•Eliminated an HR Tech FT role and created 2 PT front desk roles
•Eliminated Office Facilitator role and created entry level L&D Tech role
•Delayed the hiring of vacant roles
•Cross Training: Critical areas of our business (HRIS and Benefit teams) refreshed cross-
training to better prepare against operational risk and disruption of services.
Overview
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Budget Increase Total
+$22,000
FTE: +0 / PTE: +0
$5,432,276
FTE: 39 / PTE: 3
5% Budget Cut Total
-$223,663
FTE: -2 / PTE: +0
$5,410,437
FTE: 37 / PTE: 3
$5,410,437
FTE: 39 / PTE: 3
Current Budget
Recommended Budget
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Current Change Total
Personnel Services $5,148,624 -$21,839 $ 5,126,785
Contracts/
Inflationary $0 $0 $0
Capital $261,652 $22,000 $283,652
Other $0 $0 $0
New Insights $0 $0
FTE: -2 / PTE: 0 $0
Total $5,410,276
FTE: 39 / PTE: 3
$161
FTE: -2 / PTE: +0
$5,410,437
FTE: 37 / PTE: 3
Contractual Changes
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Compensation software: $22,000
The compensation software we use to provide salary survey data, price jobs, validate job
descriptions and other compensation efficiencies is up for renewal. An RFP will be
conducted this year and the cost reflects the anticipated increase.
Reorganizational Changes
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Eliminate HR Technician: ($85,371)
Reorganization that occurred earlier in FY26 resulted in a vacant HR Technician position.
Efficiency and cost saving measures identified this role as one that could be absorbed in
our organizational structure.
Reorganizational Changes
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Eliminate Sr. L&D Specialist: ($138,292)
Reclassification of L&D Tech to L&D Specialist: $18,984
Reclassification of Special Program Manager to L&D Manager: $33,732
The Employee University Manager retired and her direct report, a Sr. L&D Specialist,
moved out of the country. These vacancies allows us the opportunity to look at
organizational efficiencies.
Reorganizational Changes
Department Budget FY 26 -27
Repurpose FTE and Salary from EU Manager to ER Manager: $0
The FTE and salary from the vacant Employee University Manager role will be
repurposed into an Employee Relations Manager. The HR Business Partner team is vital
to the strategic interaction between departments and the Human Resources
department. The volume of work has increased, and the evolving needs of the
department make this a necessary adjustment.
FY27 Organizational Changes/Reductions
Department Budget FY 26 -27
L&D MgrRecruiting Mgr
HRBP
HRBP
ADA/FMLADA/FMLEEO Mgr
AnalystAnalyst PT
Analyst
Analyst
AnalystSuperv.
DeputyDeputy
Comp
Mgr
Benefits MgrPolicyCRB
HRBP
HRBP
HRBP
HRBP
HRBP
HRBP
HRIS Mgr
HR Tech
Sr. L&D
L&D Tech
Analyst
Analyst
Recruiter
Recruiter
Recruiter
Recruiter
Onboard
Front PT
Front PTHR Tech
Compliance Life Cycle
ER Mgr
Recruiter
Concluding Notes or Data Points
•The restructure and alignment scenarios are good moves for our department and will
create positive succession planning and growth opportunities.
•The funds for the compensation software are necessary to keep our processes competitive
and have access to important salary data. The software is more cost effective than hiring an
FTE which would be necessary.
•We will continue to streamline our office and enhance our employee facing programs.
Thank you for your continued support.
Department Budget FY 26 -27
THANK YOU
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: Jennifer Bruno, Lehua Weaver, Austin Kimmel, Kira
Luke, Allison Rowland, Sylvia Richards, Michael Sanders,
and Kate Werrett
DATE:May 19, 2026
RE: FY26 BUDGET AMENDMENT #5
View the Administration’s proposal
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
Budget Amendment No. 5 includes 27 proposed amendments, with $104,313,768 in revenues and
$112,259,130 in expenditures, including $49,547,961.04 from the General Fund. The amendment
proposes changes in 11 funds and adds 13.0 FTEs for the Police Department.
If the Budget Amendment is approved by the Council, the available fund balance will be 16.48% of the
FY26 Adopted Budget. This is 3.48% or $17,838,787 above the 13% minimum Council policy target.
Updated Fund Balance numbers and percentages are found in the table on page 2 of this report.
Goal of the briefing: To review the proposed Fiscal Year 2026 Budget Amendment No. 5 for Salt Lake City
and consider approving the amendments following a public hearing.
STRAW POLL REQUESTS
The Administration has requested straw polls for item A-2: Inland Port Related Police Expenses and
Revenues so the Police Department may facilitate hiring for the May 2026 academy class.
POLICY QUESTIONS
The following policy questions are related to item D-6: CIP: CPTED Assessments, New Street Lights and
Other Improvements. Additional details on page 7 of the staff report.
Schedule:
Page | 2
The Council may wish to consider discussing with the Administration the below questions
UPDATED FUND BALANCE CHART
The table below shows updated Fund Balance numbers and percentages based on the proposed
changes in Budget Amendment No. 5. If approved, the fund balance is projected to be 16.48%, which
is 3.48% or $17,838,787 above the target fund balance of 13% of projected General Fund revenue.
IMPACT FEE UNALLOCATED “AVAILABLE TO SPEND” BALANCES AND REFUND TRACKING
Page | 3
The table below is current as of February 28, 2026. Impact fees must be encumbered or spent within six years of
the City receiving them. Expired impact fees must be returned to the entity that paid them with interest over the
intervening six years.
Type
Unallocated Cash
“Available to
Spend”
Next Refund Trigger Date
$ Expiring in
FY2028
Police $1,735,106 More than two years away -
Parks $8,644,984 More than two years away -
Fire $994,408 More than two years away -
Transportation $2,601,362 More than two years away -
REVENUE UPDATE
The Administration provided the following table with updated revenue details.
ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION
Section A: New Items
A-1: Reclass Airport Director of Finance Pay Grade (Airport: Ongoing, $20,000)
A-2: Inland Port Related Police Expenses and Revenues (General Fund: One-time, $2,500,000;
General Fund: Ongoing, $2,500,000; IMS: One-time, $103,700; Fleet Fund: One-time, $748,500)
Page | 4
The Police Department is requesting approval for funding through an interlocal agreement with the Utah Inland
Port Authority (UIPA) to support 12 sworn positions and one civilian position with associated supplies,
equipment, and vehicles to support public safety operations in and around the Inland Port.
A-3: Workers Compensation Premium (General Fund: Ongoing, $1,731,829.00)
A-4: New Fund: Library Pass-Through (General Fund: Ongoing, $33,195,704)
A-5: CRA Pass-Through True-Up (General Fund: Ongoing, $4,536,141)
A-6: CRA Pass-Through to the Library (General Fund: One-Time, $2,311,032)
Page | 5
A-7: Increase in Workers Compensation Premiums (Risk Fund: Ongoing, $1,710,000.00)
This item accommodates previous underbudgeting resulting from the FY25 transition to new compensation in
several areas:
1. The premium payment for FY26 was underbudgeted by $255,000.
2. The premiums calculated by Workers Compensation Fund of Utah (WCF) underestimated the City's
gross wages in the first two years; the agreement includes true-ups, which are billed after the premiums
have been paid. The true-up amount for FY26 was $800,000 and not anticipated in the existing budget.
3. The adopted budget also didn't account for legacy claims that were unresolved at the time of transition.
There are many outstanding claims which may still take years to resolve, and are not covered under the
City's premium payments. The amount needed for FY26's legacy claims is $655,000.
Now that there are two years of premium data to aid in the WCF calculations, the Attorney's Office anticipates
more refined predictions and accurate budgeting for premiums and outstanding claims going forward.
A-8: Fund Transfer to Fleet for Police Department Vehicles (General Fund: One-time,
($1,001,800); General Fund: One-time, $1,001,800; Fleet Fund: one-time, $1,001,800)
The Police Department is requesting a budget transfer to the Fleet Fund to address immediate vehicle
acquisition needs. The proposal is to use one-time savings from personnel and supplies. The request will fund
the replacement of 12 aging patrol vehicles that are beyond their service life and experiencing increased
maintenance demands. Additionally, a dedicated transport van for the Public Order Unit (POU) is proposed to
be funded.
The requested patrol vehicles are intended to replace outdated fleet vehicles with newer, more reliable
equipment.
The POU transport van is intended to meet increasing operational demands associated with natural disasters,
large-scale events, long-duration deployments, special events, and public demonstrations. Currently, the
department must rely on rented vans for these operations. The Department noted that rental vehicles are not
designed or equipped for public safety use and lack essential emergency equipment, including lights, sirens,
communications systems, and safety modifications. This creates operational inefficiencies and limits the
department’s ability to respond effectively and safely.
The estimated cost for the dedicated transport van is approximately $250,000, while each patrol vehicle is
estimated at $62,650. Once purchased, vehicles are expected to be deployed into service within approximately
five to six months.
Please note that this request is separate from the Community Project Funding (CPF) grant application for which
a public hearing was held on May 5. The department was notified on April 30, 2026, that the CPF grant is
moving forward at a reduced funding level and will fund only the Operations Management vehicle. The grant
will not fund patrol vehicles or transport vans, and therefore no General Fund expenditures associated with this
request will be reimbursed or offset through the grant.
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
None
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
None
Section D: Housekeeping
Page | 6
D-1: 400 South Bridge Funding Rescope (General Fund: One-time, $0)
The administration would like to rescope FY26 and FY23 bridge funding ($1 million and $93,322 respectively)
and broaden the uses of the existing Bridge Preservation Program’s fund pool from “bridge repairs and routine
maintenance” to “major bridge repairs and full rebuilds.” This would affect the upcoming 400 South bridge
replacement over the Jordan River, which also will use a proposed new project delivery model: a Construction
Manager/General Contractor (CM/GC) method. The department believes this model will improve collaboration,
reduce risk, and potentially accelerate project completion for large, complex projects like the 400 South bridge.
The additional funds requested would cover increased costs incurred by widening the footprint of the new bridge
to accommodate one lane of traffic in each direction, and allow pedestrian access to be maintained during the
reconstruction.
D-2: Budgeting All Funding Available for the Old Library, Plaza 349 and the Justice Court Capital
Improvement (CIP: One-time, $4,489,610.79)
When the revenue associated with these projects was recognized in the CIP fund, the corresponding amount also
had to be recorded as an expense. Although the funds were not initially allocated to any specific project, they
were still reflected as an expense in the fund. As a result, once the funds were later allocated to individual
projects, it created the appearance of double-counting the expense.
The funds were not allocated to the Old Library, Plaza 349, or the Justice Court projects until FY2026 BA 4. This
amendment corrects the double expensing of the funds.
D-3: Sustainability's Environmental & Energy Division Housekeeping and Utah Renewable
Communities Start Up Costs (General Fund: One-time, $902,186; Refuse: One-time, $453,592;
Refuse: One-time, $1,355,778)
This housekeeping item has two parts:
First, $453,592 would be transferred from Sustainability’s Waste & Recycling Division Fund balance to the
Environment & Energy Division Fund balance. In FY25, IMS charges to the department were incorrectly coded
to the Environment & Energy Division. This amendment correctly allocates the Waste & Recycling Division’s
share of those charges.
Second, $902,186 would be transferred from the General Fund to the Refuse Fund for the Utah Renewable
Communities (URC), as approved by the Council at its April 21 meeting. Salt Lake City is the lead participant in
the URC program. Rocky Mountain Power (RMP) requires a participating agency to sign a contract
backstopping the software and administrative startup costs. These costs are expected to be recovered from
ratepayer revenues once the program launches, meaning the City’s financial obligation will be temporary. The
item will result in a cash balance of $4.9 million, or 15% of operating expenditures in the Refuse fund.
D-4: Park Land Acquisition (Parks Impact Fees: One-Time, $405,000)
This amount would be withdrawn from Parks Impact Fees and used for the acquisition of just over one acre of
park space. A closed session will be required to discuss this item.
D-5: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant Funded Railroad Crossing Improvements on 700 South (CIP:
One-time, $101,005)
In 2023, the Council approved the FY2022 Railroad Safety Grant in Consent Agenda No. 8 for improvements to
a railroad crossing at 700 South. At the time of the grant award, the revenue was recognized but the expenditure
budget wasn’t created. This amendment moves $101,005 to CIP.
This item relates to Item E-3 which receives the funding in CIP and creates the expenditure budget. The budget
will be loaded with other 700 South project budgets.
Page | 7
D-6: CIP: CPTED Assessments, New Street Lights and Other Improvements (General Fund: One-
time, ($200,000); General Fund: One-time, $200,000; CIP: One-time, $200,000)
The Administration is proposes a one-time transfer of $200,000 from the Mayor’s Office to the Capital
Improvement Program (CIP) fund to support Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)
initiatives. This would bring the total CPTED project budget to $500,000 when combined with the previously
allocated $300,000 in CIP funding. According to the Administration, the intent of the amendment is to
consolidate funding and allow the resources to remain available beyond the current fiscal year.
The primary focus areas include high-priority "hotspots" identified in the Public Safety Plan, with a specific
emphasis on expanding streetlighting infrastructure and optimizing urban landscaping The Administration
anticipates approximately $70,000 of the new funding will support LED streetlight upgrades along North
Temple, while the remaining balance will be directed toward lighting improvements along the Jordan River
corridor.
POLICY QUESTIONS
The Council may wish to consider discussing with the Administration the below questions
4. Beyond lighting improvements on North Temple and the Jordan River Trail, what additional CPTED
interventions are planned with this allocation (e.g., landscaping, sightline improvements, access control,
or other environmental design measures)?
5. Which specific locations or “hotspots” have been identified for CPTED improvements, and what
measurable or visible changes should residents expect in those areas?
6. What progress has been made on the previously approved $300,000 Jordan River Trail CPTED
allocation, including project status, expenditures to date, timeline, and whether the project remains on
schedule and within budget?
D-7: Impact Fee Excess Capacity & Interest Income Transfer (Impact Fee: One-time,
$1,814,796.04; General Fund: One-time, $1,814,796.04; CIP: One-time: $443,705.06; Impact Fee:
One-time, $0)
This is a request for Excess Capacity to be paid out of Streets Impact Fees to the General Fund in the amount of
$1,814,796. The Administration is also requesting to subsequently transfer funds from the General fund to
Streets Impact Fees in the amount of $989,253 Parks Impact Fees in the amount of $1,112,238, Fire Impact Fees
in the amount of $137,307, and Police Impact Fees in the amount of $19,702, for a total of $2,258,501. These
transfers are to pay the Impact Fee funds interest earned on related fund balance amounts but were mistakenly
paid to the General Fund in error. The difference of $443,705 in transfers from General Fund CIP to Impact
Fees not covered by the $1,814,796 will be covered by excess CIP funds.
Note: Impact Fees in general cannot be transferred to the General Fund. This is the exception. Excess Capacity
was approved within the IFFP. Excess capacity is capacity previously built into the system that is in excess of the
level of service, that can accommodate growth. Impact fee will buy into this excess capacity and effectively
reimburse the General Fund for this prior investment.
D-8: CIP Transfer to General Fund Correction (CIP: One-time, $6,786,000)
As part of the FY2026 Non-Departmental Key Changes, three transfers were included as revenue sources but
were not included as expenditures in the FY2026 CIP Key Changes. This amendment adds the following items to
the FY2026 CIP Key Changes:
FY2020 BA 6 - $2,000,000 & FY: In 2020, after the earthquake, $2,000,000 was allocated to cover
insured costs. Via FY2023 BA 5, an additional $2,650,000 was also allocated to reimbursable repairs.
These funds were reimbursed and need to be transferred to the General Fund.
$800,000 of a 2022 General Fund transfer to CIP was unused and is proposed to be returned to the
General Fund.
$1,366,000 of CIP fund interest to be transferred to the General Fund.
Page | 8
D-9: General Obligation Series 2026 Bonds (Debt Service: One-time, $1,062,474; CIP: One-time,
$49,336,400)
This item would make revenue available from the second tranche of the Parks, Trails, and Open Space General
Obligation Bond, which closed at the end of April. Projects include Glendale Park Phase 2 ($23.4 million), Allen
Park ($3.7 million), Fleet Block ($5.4 million), and Fairmont Park ($5.9 million). In addition, several locations
along the Jordan River Corridor will share $2.4 million, and several neighborhood parks will share $3.4 million.
Funds are also set aside for contingences, project management, art, and the salaries and other costs associated
with three FTEs whose work is dedicated to these projects.
D-10: UDOT Green Bike Expansion Supplied CIP Budget (CIP: One-time, $895,004)
This item provides $894,004 in CIP funding from a Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) grant to
expand Green Bike stations in the city. Salt Lake City would receive funding from federal aid highway funds
managed and distributed by UDOT.
This item is related to item E-1.
D-11: Moving Mayor's Funding from Non-Departmental to the Mayor's Office (General Fund:
One-time, ($580,000); $580,000)
This housekeeping item consolidates all budget and expenses related to the National League of Cities into the
Mayor’s Executive Staff cost center. Currently, expenses for the event are split between Non-Departmental and
the Mayor’s Office. Moving them into a single cost center will improve financial transparency and accuracy.
D-12: Moving State ARPA Funds from Grant Fund to Public Utilities / Remove CIP Budgets (CIP:
One-time, ($2,000,000); Misc. Grants: One-time ($2,000,000); Misc. Grants: One-time,
$2,000,000; Stormwater: One-time, $0.00)
In 2022, Salt Lake City received a $2 million grant from the Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget as part of
the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). These funds were combined with the City’s ARPA funds to construct new
stormwater infrastructure for the Granary District Floodplain Mitigation project to increase runoff storage and
conveyance and reduce FEMA Floodplain Hazard Zones.
The funds received in FY22 through Budget Amendment No. 7 led to a revenue and expenditure budget being
established in CIP. However, the revenue was never transferred to CIP. Instead, the project was completed, and
expenses were paid by the stormwater fund. This housekeeping item moves the money from the state grant fund
to replenish the stormwater fund for these expenses. The City received its last reimbursement from the State
after completing the project. The amendment also removes the unused revenue and expenditure budget in the
CIP fund for this project.
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
E-1: UDOT Green Bike Expansion (Misc Grants: One-time, $895,004)
This amendment is to recognize a grant award in the amount of $895,004 for the purpose of building more bike
stations around the city. Through this grant, the city will receive financing from federal aid highway funds that
are managed and distributed by UDOT. A corresponding amendment will also establish a budget in CIP.
A public hearing has not yet been held for this item, as is standard for grants the city receives. Council staff is
working with the administration to confirm the appropriate process for processing this grant and with
Greenbike to ensure that the funding will not be delayed.
This item is related to item D-10.
Page | 9
E-2: COPS FY 25 De Escalation Grant (Misc Grants: One-time, $500,000)
This amendment is to recognize a grant award in the amount of $500,000 for the purpose of enhancing de-
escalation and crisis response training for the city’s law enforcement.
The Salt Lake City Police department has received a COPS grant for the FY 2025 Safer Outcomes: Enhancing De-
Escalation and Crisis Response Training for Law Enforcement-Support for Law Enforcement Agencies. The
award total of $500,000 will be used for the following:
• A virtual reality training simulator, as well as the initial setup and training ∼ $292,950
• Travel training costs for FEMA ICAT Train-the-trainer training and CIT International Conferences ∼
$50,730
• Local and department training in de-escalation and crisis response ∼ $111,825
• Overtime for staff providing and receiving training ∼ $44,495
A public hearing on the grant was held 9/2/2025
This item relates to D-5. It receives the $101,005 in CIP and creates the expenditure budget. For more
information, please refer to Item D-5.
This amendment is to recognize a grant award in the amount of $26,000 for the purpose of providing nutritious
snacks to Youth City program participants.
This is a renewal grant from the Utah State Board of Education Chile and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP)
grant program to provide snacks to Youth City participants.
Public hearing is scheduled for 3/24/2026
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $1,000,000
for the purpose of providing design services for the Civic Center area of downtown Salt Lake City.
This funding will be used for a design consultant to develop construction documents for public bidding. The
design will consider and respond to the larger network of Civic Center District public spaces, transportation
needs and the Downtown neighborhood.
Public hearing was held 9/2/2025
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $20,000 for
International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Law Enforcement-Based Victim Services mini-grant. The
funds would be used for supplies for outreach items, travel training costs for victim advocate team.
Public hearing was held 1/13/2026
Page | 10
G-1: Outdoor Recreation Initiative (ORI) City Creek Daylighting Project (Misc Grants: One-time,
$600,000)
The City Creek Daylighting project will convert a culverted section of City Creek along the Folsom Trail into an
open waterway and enhanced public corridor in the Fairpark neighborhood. Funding will finalize construction
documents and prepare the project for phased implementation, building on prior design work and a $150,000
investment from the Salt Lake City Community Reinvestment Agency. Shaped through extensive community
engagement and environmental planning, the project is positioned to advance toward construction. These grant
funds are from the Utah Division of Outdoor Recreation Outdoor Recreation Initiative. The city and CRA are
collaborating with Seven Canyons Trust on this City Creek Daylighting Project.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ongoing Costs to the General Fund
ACRONYMS
ARPA – American Rescue Plan Act
BA – Budget Amendment
CACFP – Child and Adult Care Food Program
CAN – Community and Neighborhoods Department
CIP – Capital Improvement Program
CIT – Crisis Intervention Team
CM/GC – Construction Manager/General Contractor
COPS – Community Oriented Policing Services
CRA – Community Reinvestment Agency
CPF – Community Project Funding
CPTED – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency
FTE – Full-Time Employee
IACP – International Association of Chiefs of Police
ICAT – Integrated Communications, Assessment, and Tactics
IFFP – Impact Fee Facilities Plan
IMS – Information Management Services
ORI – Outdoor Recreation Initiative
POU – Public Order Unit
RMP – Rocky Mountain Power
TRCC – Salt Lake County Tourism, Recreation, Cultural, Convention and Airport Grant
TY – Tax Year
UDOT – Utah Department of Transportation
UIPA – Utah Inland Port Authority
URC – Utah Renewable Communities
WCF – Workers Compensation Fund of Utah
Page | 11
Attachment 1: New Ongoing Costs to the General Fund
Council staff has provided the following list of potential new ongoing costs to the General Fund. Many of these
are new FTE’s approved during this fiscal year’s budget amendments, noting that each new FTE increases the
City’s annual budget costs if positions are added to the staffing document.
BAM#2 D-3 IMS Fund Budget
Carry Forward $159,414 Ongoing -0-
CCAC recommended
funding for multiple
departments to address
compensation for
positions lagging behind
market rate. Changes &
funding weren’t included
in annual budget.
BAM#2
D-4 Language Access
Transfer from Mayor’s
Office
$50,000 Ongoing -0-
Contract language access
services funding was
inadvertently left out of
IMS budget when it was
transferred from Mayor’s
to IMS during the annual
budget.
BAM#3 None.
BAM#4
A-3: Wildland
Firefighting Expansion
Funding
$88,000 One-Time,
$75,000 Ongoing -0-
Reflects additional
resources needed for red
flag days.
A-13: Funding for Gap
in Homeless Resource
Center Grant Funding
for Salaries
$292,833 Ongoing -0-
The State HRC grant
funding was reduced by
$292,833. Funding to
maintain the HRC
functionality levels
matches the reduction.
A-17: Justice Court,
City Prosecutor's
Office and Legal
Defenders Association
(LDA) Staffing
Increases
$1,554,826 Ongoing 8
Annualized, the
additional FY2027
staffing costs are
$1,554,826.
BAM #5
A-2: Inland Port
Related Police
Expenses and
Revenues
$2,500,000 Ongoing 13
Funding for positions is
through the 2029 tax
year, with the potential
for continuation through
future amendments
beyond 2030. Due to the
timing of the receipt of
funding and recruitment
efforts, expenditures will
only be partially realized
in FY26, requiring a
budget carryforward for
the unspent balance into
FY27.
Page | 12
A-3: Workers
Compensation
Premium
$1,731,829 Ongoing
The FY26 budget
included the increase to
the Risk Fund, but did not
include the expense from
Non-Departmental. This
is a housekeeping item to
account for the
corresponding transfer.
A-4: New Fund:
Library Pass-Through
(General Fund:
Ongoing, $33,195,704)
$33,195,704 Ongoing
This amendment includes
the revenue and
expenditure for the
transfer of funds to the
Library.
A-5: CRA Pass-
Through True-Up
(General Fund:
Ongoing, $4,536,141)
$4,536,141 Ongoing
This is a true-up of the
revenue that passes
through the General Fund
prior to being transferred
to the CRA.
A-7: Increase in
Workers
Compensation
Premiums
$1,710,000 Ongoing
This addresses
underbudgeting from the
FY25 transition to a
premium-based workers
compensation plan. The
request covers three
areas: a $255,000
premium shortfall, an
$800,000 true-up after
WCF underestimated the
City's gross wages, and
$655,000 for legacy
claims that were
unresolved at the time of
transition and are not
covered by current
premiums.
TOTAL $45,805,747
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
STRAW POLLS
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
TO:City Council Members
FROM: Jennifer Bruno, Lehua Weaver, Austin Kimmel, Kira
Luke, Allison Rowland, Sylvia Richards, Michael Sanders,
and Kate Werrett
DATE:May 19, 2026
RE: STRAW POLL – FY26 BUDGET AMENDMENT #5
The Administration has requested straw polls for item A-2: Inland Port Related Police Expenses and
Revenues so the Police Department may facilitate hiring for the May 2026 academy class.
Please see pages 3 and 4 of the FY26 Budget Amendment #5 Council Staff Report for more information.
Straw Poll Question YES NO
Does the Council support the Administration proceeding with hiring for the
May 2026 police academy class to fill the 12 sworn and one civilian position
funded through the interlocal agreement with the Utah Inland Port
Authority?
FY2026 Budget Amendment #5
Revenue Forecast
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Revenue Update
(-) Sales, Use and Excise Tax:
Decrease due to natural gas tax
Mild weather, subdued prices based on industry trends
(-) Charges For Services:
Due to reduction in Police Secondary Employment
FY26 Budget was developed during contract negotiation
Correlated to expenditures, Budget Neutral
(+) Miscellaneous Revenue:
Fire Reimbursement from Palisades Fire in CA and
flooding in NM
(+) Parking Meter Revenue:
Increase due to increase to rates and hours
(+) Permits:
Increase due to building permit related activities
Budget Amendment #5
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
$49,574,961 IN EXPENSES IN
THE GENERAL FUND.
CHANGES IN ELEVEN (11)
FUNDS, WITH A TOTAL REVENUE
INCREASE OF $104,313,768 AND
A CORRESPONDING
EXPENDITURE INCREASE OF
$112,259,130
THE PROPOSAL INCLUDES THE
ADDITION OF THIRTEEN (13)
GENERAL FUND POSITIONS.
Revenue Expense
General Fund $46,941,604.04 $49,574,961.04
Airport Fund 0.00 20,000.00
Impact Fees 2,258,501.10 2,219,796.04
IMS Fund 103,700.00 103,700.00
Fleet Fund 2,251,500.00 2,251,500.00
CIP Fund 44,042,798.21 51,272,503.27
Debt Service Fund 1,062,474.60 1,062,474.60
Refuse Collection Fund 902,186.00 902,186.00
Storm Water Fund 2,000,000.00 0.00
Misc Grants Fund 3,041,004.00 3,142,009.00
Risk Fund 1,710,000.00 1,710,000.00
TOTAL $104,313,767.95 $112,259,129.95
Fund Balance
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Budget Amendment #5
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
Section A: New Items: Eight (8) Items
Section D: Housekeeping: Twelve (12) Items
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources: Six (6) Items
Section G: Council Consent Agenda: One (1) Item
New Items
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
A-1: Reclass Airport Director of Finance Pay Grade: Airport, $20K
A-2: UIPA Inland Port Related Expenses and Revenues: GF, $2.58 Mill / GF $2.5 Mill / IMS, $103K /
Fleet, $1.25 Mill
A-3: Workers Compensation Premiums: GF, $1.73 Mill
A-4:Property Tax Pass-through (Library) : GF, $33.19 Mill
A-5: Property Tax Pass-through (CRA True-up): GF, $4.53 Mill
A-6: Property Tax Pass-through (CRA) to the Library: GF, $2.31 Mill
A-7: Increase in Workers Compensation Premiums: Risk, $1.71 Mill
A-8: Fund Transfer to Fleet for Police Department Vehicles: GF, $1.0 Mill / Fleet, $1.0 Mill
Housekeeping Items
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
D-1: 400 South Bridge Funding Rescope: CIP, $0.00
D-2: Budgeting All Funding Available for the Old Library, Plaza 349 and the Justice Court Capital
Improvements: CIP, $4.48 Mill
D-3: Sustainability's Environmental & Energy Division Housekeeping and Utah Renewable
Communities Startup Costs: GF/Refuse, $902k
D-4: Park Land Acquisition: Impact Fees, $405K
D-5: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant Funded Railroad Crossing Improvements on 700 South: CIP,
$101k
D-6: CIP: CPTED Assessments, New Street Lights and Other Improvements: GF/CIP, $200k
Housekeeping Items
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
D-7: Impact Fee Excess Capacity & Interest Income: Impact Fees/GF, $1.81 Mill / CIP $443K
D-8: CIP Transfer to General Fund Correction: CIP, $6.78 Mill
D-9: General Obligation Series 2026 Bonds (Parks, Trails, and Open Space second tranche):
Debt Serv, $1.06 Mill / CIP, $49.33 Mill
D-10: UDOT Green Bike Expansion Grant Supplied CIP: CIP, $895K
D-11: Moving Mayor’s Funding from Non-Departmental to the Mayor’s Office: GF, $0.00
D-12: Moving State ARPA Funds from Grant Fund to Public Utilities / Remove CIP Budgets:
CIP/Misc Grants, -$2 Mill / Misc Grants, $2 Mill
Grant Items
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
E-1: UDOT Green Bike Expansion: Misc Grants, $895K
E-2: COPS FY 25 De Escalation Grant: Misc Grants, $500K
E-3: Utah Dept. of Transportation, Railroad Safety Grant 2022: Misc Grants, $101K
E-4: Utah State of Education Child and Adult Care Food Program Grant: Misc Grants, $26K
E-5: Salt Lake County Tourism, Recreation, Cultural, Convention and Airport (TRCC) Grant: Misc
Grants, $1 Mill
E-6: International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Law Enforcement-Based Victim Services:
Misc Grants, $20K
Consent Agenda Items
FINANCE DEPARTMENT
G-1: Outdoor Recreation Initiative (ORI) City Creek Daylighting Project: Misc Grants, $600K
Questions
SALT LAKE CITY TRANSMITTAL
To:
Salt Lake City Council Chair
Submission Date:
04/28/2026
Date Sent to Council:
05/01/2026
From:
Department *
Finance
Employee Name:
Hillier, Randy
E-mail
Randy.Hillier@slc.gov
Department Director Signature
Director Signed Date
04/28/2026
Chief Administrator Officer's Signature
Chief Administrator Officer's Signed Date
04/30/2026
Subject:
FY25 Budget Amendment #5
Additional Staff Contact:
Randy Hillier, Mary Beth Thompson
Presenters/Staff Table
Randy Hillier randy.hillier@slc.gov and Mary Beth Thompson: marybeth.thompson@slc.gov
Document Type
Ordinance
Recommendation:
The Administration recommends that subsequent to a public hearing, the City Council adopt the following amendments to the FY 2025 adopted budget
Background/Discussion
The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $49,547,961.04 in expenses in the general fund. The amendment proposes changes in eleven (11) funds, with a total revenue increase of $104,313,768 and a corresponding expenditure increase of $112,259,130. The proposal includes the addition of thirteen (13) general fund-funded positions.
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
NA
Public Process
Public Hearing
This page has intentionally been left blank
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. _____ of 2026
(Fifth amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including
the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2025-2026)
An Ordinance Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2025, which adopted the
Final Budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2025, and Ending
June 30, 2026.
In June of 2025, the Salt Lake City Council adopted the final budget of Salt Lake City,
Utah, including the employment staffing document, effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1,
2025, and ending June 30, 2026, pursuant to the requirements of Utah Code section 10-6-118.
The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with
the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments
to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes specifically
stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and
inspection by the public.
All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing
document as provided above, have been accomplished.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of
Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized
by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2025.
SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including
amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes
specifically stated herein, attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance shall be, and the same
hereby are adopted and incorporated into the budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the
amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 2025, and ending June 30, 2026, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128 of
the Utah Code.
SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is
authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including
amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in the
office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection.
SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ____ day of _____, 2026.
Chris Wharton, Council Chair
ATTEST:
Keith Reynolds, City Recorder
Transmitted to the Mayor on
Mayor’s Action: Approved Vetoed
Mayor Erin Mendenhall
ATTEST:
Keith Reynolds, City
Recorder
(SEAL)
Bill No. ____ of 2026.
Published
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
Jaysen Oldroyd Jaysen Oldroyd
This page has intentionally been left blank
Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount Expenditure
Amount Revenue Amount Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
1 Reclass Airport Director of Finance Pay Grade Airport 0.00 20,000.00 Ongoing -
2 UIPA Inland Port Related Police Expenses and Revenues GF 2,583,931.00 2,583,931.00 Ongoing 13.00
2 UIPA Inland Port Related Police Expenses and Revenues GF 2,500,000.00 2,500,000.00 One-time -
2 UIPA Inland Port Related Police Expenses and Revenues IMS 103,700.00 103,700.00 One-time -
2 UIPA Inland Port Related Police Expenses and Revenues Fleet 1,249,700.00 1,249,700.00 One-time -
3 Workers Compensation Premiums GF 0.00 1,731,171.00 Ongoing -
4 New Fund: Library Pass Through GF 33,195,704.00 33,195,704.00 Ongoing -
5 CRA Pass-Through True-up GF 4,536,141.00 4,536,141.00 Ongoing -
6 CRA Pass-Through to the Library GF 2,311,032.00 2,311,032.00 One-time -
7 Increase in Workers Compensation Premiums Risk 1,710,000.00 1,710,000.00 Ongoing -
8 Fund Transfer to Fleet for Police Department Vehicles GF 0.00 (1,001,800.00)One-time -
8 Fund Transfer to Fleet for Police Department Vehicles GF 0.00 1,001,800.00 One-time -
8 Fund Transfer to Fleet for Police Department Vehicles Fleet 1,001,800.00 1,001,800.00 One-time -
1 400 South Bridge Funding Rescope CIP 0.00 0.00 One-time -
2 Budgeting All Funding Available for the Old Library, Plaza
349 and the Justice Court Capital Improvements CIP (4,489,610.79)(4,489,610.79)One-time -
3
Sustainability's Environmental & Energy Division
Housekeeping and Utah Renewable Communities Start Up
Costs
GF 0.00 902,186.00 One-time -
3
Sustainability's Environmental & Energy Division
Housekeeping and Utah Renewable Communities Start Up
Costs
Refuse 0.00 (453,592.00)One-time
3
Sustainability's Environmental & Energy Division
Housekeeping and Utah Renewable Communities Start Up
Costs
Refuse 902,186.00 1,355,778.00 One-time -
4 Park Land Acquisition Impact Fees 0.00 405,000.00 One-time
5 UDOT Railroad Safety Grant funded Railroad Crossing
Improvements on 700 South CIP 101,005.00 101,005.00 One-time
6 CIP: CPTED Assessments, New Street Lights and Other
Improvements GF 0.00 (200,000.00)One-time -
6 CIP: CPTED Assessments, New Street Lights and Other
Improvements GF 0.00 200,000.00 One-time -
6 CIP: CPTED Assessments, New Street Lights and Other
Improvements CIP 200,000.00 200,000.00 One-time -
7 Impact Fee Excess Capacity & Interest Income Transfer Impact Fees 0.00 1,814,796.04 One-time -
7 Impact Fee Excess Capacity & Interest Income Transfer GF 1,814,796.04 1,814,796.04 One-time -
7 Impact Fee Excess Capacity & Interest Income Transfer CIP 0.00 443,705.06 One-time -
7 Impact Fee Excess Capacity & Interest Income Transfer Impact Fees 2,258,501.10 0.00 One-time -
8 CIP Transfer to General Fund Correction CIP 0.00 6,786,000.00 One-time -
9 General Obligation Series 2026 Bonds Debt Service 1,062,474.60 1,062,474.60 One-time -
9 General Obligation Series 2026 Bonds CIP 49,336,400.00 49,336,400.00 One-time -
10 UDOT Green Bike Expansion Grant Supplied CIP Budget CIP 895,004.00 895,004.00 One-time -
11 Moving Mayor's Funding from Non-Departmental to the
Mayor's Office GF 0.00 (580,000.00)One-time -
11 Moving Mayor's Funding from Non-Departmental to the
Mayor's Office GF 0.00 580,000.00 One-time -
12 Moving State ARPA Funds from Grant Fund to Public
Utilities / Remove CIP Budgets CIP (2,000,000.00)(2,000,000.00)One-time -
12 Moving State ARPA Funds from Grant Fund to Public
Utilities / Remove CIP Budgets Misc Grants 0.00 (2,000,000.00)One-time -
12 Moving State ARPA Funds from Grant Fund to Public
Utilities / Remove CIP Budgets Misc Grants 0.00 2,000,000.00 One-time -
12 Moving State ARPA Funds from Grant Fund to Public
Utilities / Remove CIP Budgets Storm Water 2,000,000.00 0.00 One-time -
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed
Section A: New Items
Section D: Housekeeping
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
1
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
1 UDOT Green Bike Expansion Misc Grants 895,004.00 895,004.00 One-time -
2 COPS FY 25 De Escalation Grant Misc Grants 500,000.00 500,000.00 One-time -
3 Utah Dept. of Transportation, Railroad Safety Grant 2022 Misc Grants 0.00 101,005.00 One-time -
4 Utah State of Education Child and Adult Care Food Program
Grant Misc Grants 26,000.00 26,000.00 One-time -
5 Salt Lake County Tourism, Recreation, Cultural, Convention
and Airport (TRCC) Grant Misc Grants 1,000,000.00 1,000,000.00 One-time -
6 International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Law
Enforcement-Based Victim Services Misc Grants 20,000.00 20,000.00 One-time -
Consent Agenda #2
1 Outdoor Recreation Initiative3 (ORI) City Creek Daylighting ProjectMisc Grants 600,000.00 600,000.00 One-time -
Total of Budget Amendment
Items 104,313,767.95 112,259,129.95 0.00 0.00 13.00
Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount Expenditure
Amount Revenue Amount Expenditure
Amount
Ongoing or One-
time FTEs
Total by Fund, Budget Amendment #5:
General Fund GF 46,941,604.04 49,574,961.04 0.00 0.00 13.00
Airport Fund Airport 0.00 20,000.00 0.00 0.00 -
Impact Fees Impact Fees 2,258,501.10 2,219,796.04 0.00 0.00 -
IMS Fund IMS 103,700.00 103,700.00 0.00 0.00 -
Fleet Fund Fleet 2,251,500.00 2,251,500.00 0.00 0.00 -
CIP Fund CIP 44,042,798.21 51,272,503.27 0.00 0.00 -
Debt Service Fund Debt Service 1,062,474.60 1,062,474.60 0.00 0.00 -
Refuse Collection Fund Refuse 902,186.00 902,186.00 0.00 0.00 -
Storm Water Fund Storm Water 2,000,000.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 -
Misc Grants Fund Misc Grants 3,041,004.00 3,142,009.00 0.00 0.00 -
Risk Fund Risk 1,710,000.00 1,710,000.00 0.00 0.00
Total of Budget Amendment Items 104,313,767.95 112,259,129.95 0.00 0.00 13.00
Administration Proposed Council Approved
Section I: Council Added Items
Section F: Donations
Section G: Council Consent Agenda -- Grant Awards
2
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Current Year Budget Summary, provided for information only
FY 2025-26 Budget, Including Budget Amendments
FY 2025-26 Adopted Budget BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total Total Revenue
General Fund (FC 100)453,721,525 0.00 - - 46,941,604.04 500,663,129.13
Debt Service Fund (FC 101)30,514,822 1,062,474.60 31,577,296.60
Other Improvement Fund (FC 150)3,000 3,000.00
Capital Improvement Fund (FC 300)41,675,084 12,206,670.04 5,798,741.00 46,301,299.31 105,981,794.35
Water Utility Fund (FC 400)192,010,432 51,079,400.00 243,089,832.00
Sewer Utility Fund (FC 410)357,160,859 357,160,859.00
Stormwater Utility Fund (FC 420)25,327,969 2,000,000.00 2,000,000.00 29,327,969.00
Street Lighting Utility Fund (FC 430)5,874,881 5,874,881.00
Department of Airports Fund (FC 540)606,598,500 - 606,598,500.00
Fleet Management Fund (FC 610)23,925,700 - 1,581,719.00 2,251,500.00 27,758,919.00
Risk Management Fund (FC 620)69,846,524 1,710,000.00 71,556,524.37
Governmental Immunity Fund (FC 630)4,529,865 4,529,865.00
Information Mgt Serv Fund (FC 650)43,052,934 50,000.00 - 103,700.00 43,206,634.00
Local Building Authority Fund (FC 660)1,172,525 1,172,525.00
Refuse Collection Fund (FC670)25,469,123 8,918,482.00 902,186.00 35,289,791.00
Golf Fund (FC 680)14,156,634 250,000.00 14,406,634.00
Housing and Loan Fund (FC 690)14,082,500 14,082,500.00
CDBG Fund (FC 710)4,885,779 4,885,779.00
Miscellaneous Grants Fund (FC 720)12,714,477 3,490,212.72 4,139,704.89 57,600.00 3,041,004.00 23,442,998.61
Demolition Weed and Forfeiture (FC 730)4,365,000 4,365,000.00
Emergency 911 Dispatch (FC 750)4,295,000 4,295,000.00
Downtown Alliance Fund (FC 760)1,700,000 2,500,000.00 4,200,000.00
Donations Fund (FC 770)500,000 500,000.00
Funding Our Future Fund (FC 780)58,749,999 58,749,999.00
Transportation Fund (FC 785)14,332,500 14,332,500.00
DEA Taskforce (FC 901)1,159,208 1,159,207.61
Community Reinvestment Agency Fund (FC 920)86,036,232 86,036,232.00
Sports Arena Fund (FC 740)79,512,660 79,512,660.00
Emergency Loan Program Fund - 273,000.00
Total of Budget Amendment Items 2,177,373,732 273,000.00 71,326,282.76 4,139,704.89 16,606,542.00 104,313,767.95 2,373,760,029.67
3
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Total Expense BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total Total Expense
General Fund (FC 100)464,359,952 353,000.00 913,000.00 8,700,923.00 49,574,961.04 523,901,836.30
Debt Service Fund (FC 101)36,589,783 1,062,474.60 37,652,257.60
Other Improvement Fund (FC 150)3,000 3,000.00
Capital Improvement Fund (FC 300)48,175,084 16,339,140.04 6,298,741.00 53,492,299.31 124,305,264.35
Water Utility Fund (FC 400)216,611,815 66,849,851.00 283,461,666.00
Sewer Utility Fund (FC 410)159,022,034 12,083,142.00 171,105,176.00
Stormwater Utility Fund (FC 420)26,465,800 7,349,551.00 0.00 33,815,351.30
Street Lighting Utility Fund (FC 430)8,418,357 1,327,234.00 9,745,591.00
Department of Airports Fund (FC 540)476,954,577 100,000.00 20,000.00 477,074,577.00
Fleet Management Fund (FC 610)23,735,252 13,202,498.00 1,581,719.00 2,251,500.00 40,770,969.00
Risk Management Fund (FC 620)69,846,524 1,710,000.00 71,556,524.37
Governmental Immunity Fund (FC 630)4,302,013 94,791.00 4,396,804.00
Information Mgt Serv Fund (FC 650)43,052,934 2,451,295.18 9,000.00 103,700.00 45,616,929.18
Local Building Authority Fund (FC 660)1,172,525 1,172,525.00
Refuse Collection Fund (FC670)29,357,332 9,350,559.00 902,186.00 39,610,077.00
Golf Fund (FC 680)26,570,200 957,404.00 250,000.00 27,777,604.00
Housing and Loan Fund (FC 690)14,082,500 14,082,500.00
CDBG Fund (FC 710)4,885,779 4,885,779.00
Miscellaneous Grants Fund (FC 720)12,714,477 3,490,212.72 4,139,704.89 57,600.00 3,142,009.00 23,544,003.61
Demolition Weed and Forfeiture (FC 730)4,365,000 4,365,000.00
Emergency 911 Dispatch (FC 750)9,646,688 9,646,688.00
Downtown Alliance Fund (FC 760)1,700,000 2,500,000.00 4,200,000.00
Donations Fund (FC 770)500,000 500,000.00
Funding Our Future Fund (FC 780)48,111,572 48,111,571.83
Transportation Fund (FC 785)15,106,833 15,106,833.00
DEA Taskforce (FC 901)1,159,208 1,159,207.61
Community Reinvestment Agency Fund (FC 920)86,036,232 86,036,232.00
Sports Arena Fund (FC 740)79,512,660 79,512,660.00
-
Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,912,458,131 353,000.00 137,008,677.94 4,139,704.89 16,897,983.00 112,259,129.95 2,183,116,627.15
4
Fiscal Year 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Finance Department
City Council Office
Contingent Appropriation / Notes
5
This page has intentionally been left blank
Impact Fees PAGE 1
FYTD 02/28/2026 AAA BBB CCC DDD = AAA - BBB - CCC
Police
Allocation
Budget Allocation
Encumbrances
FY24-FYTD26
Expenditures Remaining
Police Impact Fee Activity? Y
Values
Description Cost Center
IFFP Consultant Contract Amendment - Police 8423003 29,000$ 10,182$ 1,540$ 17,278$
Finance & Accounting O/H Charges - Police FY25B1D8-3035-Finance & Accounting O/H Charges - Police 35,065$ -$ -$ 35,065$
Impact Fee Tracking Reporting & Compliance FY26Key Changes-3035-Impact Fee Tracking Reporting & Compliance 38,984$ -$ -$ 38,984$ A
Police Impact Fee Refunds FY24B5A6-3035-Police Impact Fee Refunds 47,592$ -$ 1,397$ 46,195$
Impact Fee One-Time Historical Reporting FY26Key Changes-3035-Impact Fee One-Time Historical Reporting 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$
Grand Total 200,641$ 8,408$ 2,937$ 187,521$
Parks
Allocation
Budget Allocation
Encumbrances
FY24-FYTD26
Expenditures Remaining
Parks Impact Fee Activity? Y
Values
Description Cost Center
Liberty Park All Abilities Play Park & Playground FY25B1D15-3037-Liberty Park All Abilities Play Park & Playground 2,000,000$ 1,119,185$ 880,815$ -$
Glendale Waterpark Master Plan & Rehab 8422406 2,246,982$ 57,919$ 2,189,063$ -$
9Line Orchard 8420136 149,953$ -$ 149,953$ -$
9 Line Park 8416005 1,733$ -$ 1,733$ -$
Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 60,928$ -$ 60,928$ -$
Cwide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 23,262$ -$ 23,262$ -$
Glendale Regional Park Phase 1 8423450 4,350,000$ -$ 4,350,000$ -$
Rose Park Neighborhood Center 8423403 157,280$ -$ 157,280$ -$
Green Loop 200 E Design 8422408 513,788$ -$ 513,788$ 0$
Park's Consultant's Contract 8419204 2,638$ -$ 2,596$ 42$
FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 125,740$ -$ 125,495$ 245$
Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 1,056$ -$ -$ 1,056$
Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 1,570$ -$ -$ 1,570$
Waterpark Redevelopment Plan 8421402 1,705$ -$ -$ 1,705$
Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$
Imperial Park Shade Accounting 8419103 6,398$ -$ -$ 6,398$
Fisher House Exploration Center 8421401 132,208$ 1,400$ 123,813$ 6,996$
Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 9,350$ -$ -$ 9,350$
Bridge to Backman 8418005 262,043$ -$ 251,758$ 10,285$ C
Rich Park Comm Garden 8420138 12,431$ -$ -$ 12,431$
Three Creeks West Bank New Park 8422403 150,736$ 8,474$ 128,260$ 14,002$
IFFP Consultant Contract Amendment - Parks 8423005 29,000$ 10,182$ 1,540$ 17,278$
Trailhead Prop Acquisition 8421403 21,830$ -$ -$ 21,830$
Lighting NE Baseball Field 8423409 299,269$ 20,685$ 244,524$ 34,060$
Finance & Accounting O/H Charges - Parks FY25B1D8-3037-Finance & Accounting O/H Charges - Parks 35,065$ -$ -$ 35,065$
Impact Fee Tracking Reporting & Compliance FY26Key Changes-3037-Impact Fee Tracking Reporting & Compliance 38,984$ -$ -$ 38,984$
Impact Fee One-Time Historical Reporting FY26Key Changes-3037-Impact Fee One-Time Historical Reporting 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$
IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 54,808$ -$ -$ 54,808$
Equal Grounds Project (Calisthenics-Fitness Area)FY25CIP-3037-Equal Grounds Project (Calisthenics-Fitness Area)86,200$ -$ -$ 86,200$
RAC Playground with Shade Sails 8422415 178,298$ 10,666$ 74,252$ 93,380$
County #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 240,239$ -$ 143,325$ 96,914$
Sugar House Park - 50/50 Cost Share for One Pav 102,000$ -$ -$ 102,000$
UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 120,893$ -$ -$ 120,893$
Historic Renovation Allen Park 8422410 315,770$ 2,250$ 156,146$ 157,374$
1200 East Median Reconstruction FY26B2A4-3037-1200 East Median Reconstruction 232,470$ -$ -$ 232,470$
Poplar Grove Park Full Court Basketball ExpansionFY24CIP-3037-Poplar Grove Park Full Court Basketball Expansion 253,500$ -$ 8,182$ 245,319$
SLC Foothills Land Acquisition 8422413 319,139$ -$ 43,020$ 276,119$
900 S River Park Soccer Field 8423406 287,848$ 130$ 8,420$ 279,298$
Open Space Property Acquisition (Trails)8423453 300,000$ -$ -$ 300,000$
Street Futsal Courts 1:1 Match FY25CIP-3037-Street Futsal Courts 1:1 Match 350,000$ -$ 35,350$ 314,650$
Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ -$ -$ 327,678$
Pocket Park Community Space - Jake Garn Way FY25CIP-3037-Pocket Park Community Space - Jake Garn Way 330,000$ -$ -$ 330,000$
Parks Bilingual Signage Installation FY24CIP-3037-Parks Bilingual Signage Installation 331,200$ -$ -$ 331,200$
Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 431,860$ 37,639$ 16,577$ 377,644$
Jordan Park Event Grounds 8420134 404,139$ 845$ 15,108$ 388,186$
Fire Station No. 7 Tennis and Pickleball Court Res 416,150$ -$ -$ 416,150$
Open Space Property Acquisition (City Parks)8423452 450,000$ -$ 33,140$ 416,860$
Riverside Basketball Court Renovation FY26CIP-3037-Riverside Basketball Court Renovation 450,500$ -$ -$ 450,500$
Jordan Park Pedestrian Pathway 8422414 475,079$ 1,165$ 21,649$ 452,264$
Safe, Open and Clean Park Restrooms FY26CIP-3037-Safe, Open and Clean Park Restrooms 456,000$ -$ -$ 456,000$
Concord St to Alzheimer's Jordan River Cleanup FY26CIP-3037-Concord St to Alzheimer's Jordan River Cleanup 480,000$ -$ -$ 480,000$
Marmalade Plaza Project 8423451 996,905$ -$ 513,452$ 483,453$
Jefferson Park Improvements FY24CIP-3037-Jefferson Park Improvements 530,000$ 28,284$ 13,691$ 488,025$
Gateway Triangle Property Park 8423408 499,457$ -$ 6,942$ 492,515$
RAC Playground Phase II 8423405 521,564$ -$ -$ 521,564$
Riverside Park Pathway Loop FY25CIP-3037-Riverside Park Pathway Loop 530,000$ -$ -$ 530,000$
337 Park Development FY24CIP-3037-337 Park Development 550,000$ -$ 85$ 549,915$
Cottonwood Park Trailhead and Parklet FY24CIP-3037-Cottonwood Park Trailhead and Parklet 648,000$ -$ -$ 648,000$
Fairmont Park Basketball Court FY25CIP-3037-Fairmont Park Basketball Court 678,600$ -$ -$ 678,600$
SLC Foothills Trailhead Development 8422412 1,241,318$ 70,924$ 341,593$ 828,801$
Mem. Tree Grove Design & Infra 8423407 864,449$ -$ -$ 864,449$
Playground Shade FY25CIP-3037-Playground Shade 500,000$ -$ -$ 500,000$
Playground Shade FY26CIP-3037-Playground Shade 500,000$ -$ -$ 500,000$
Warm Springs & North Gateway Park FY25B1D15-3037-Warm Springs & North Gateway Park 1,000,000$ -$ -$ 1,000,000$
Folsom Trail Landscaping, Irrigation & Completing 1,000,000$ -$ -$ 1,000,000$
Pioneer Park 8419150 3,052,938$ 523,932$ 1,480,804$ 1,048,202$
Amplifying Our Jordan River Revitalization FY25CIP-3037-Amplifying Our Jordan River Revitalization 1,300,000$ -$ -$ 1,300,000$
Parks Legal Compliance with 2010 ADA StandardsFY26CIP-3037-Parks Legal Compliance with 2010 ADA Standards 1,314,000$ -$ -$ 1,314,000$
Event Infrastructure and Pavilion Replacements FY26CIP-3037-Event Infrastructure and Pavilion Replacements 2,597,000$ -$ -$ 2,597,000$
Civic Campus and Green Loop Implementation FY26CIP-3037-Civic Campus and Green Loop Implementation 2,900,500$ -$ -$ 2,900,500$
Glendale Park Phase 2 Design & Construction FY25B1D15-3037-Glendale Park Phase 2 Design & Construction 11,350,000$ 137,465$ 6,735,620$ 4,476,915$
Grand Total 50,655,396$ 2,031,146$ 18,852,164$ 29,772,086$ CONT PAGE 2
8,644,984$
8484003
UnAllocated
Budget
Amount
1,735,106$
PAGE 2
Impact Fees CONT FROM PG 1
FYTD 02/28/2026
Fire Allocation Allocation
Encumbrances
FY24-FYTD26
Expenditures Remaining
Fire Impact Fee Activity? Y
Values
Description Cost Center
8419202 3,079$ -$ 3,021$ 58$
Fire Station 1 Fencing FY24B4A6-3036-Fire Station 1 Fencing 130,275$ -$ -$ 130,275$
IFFP Consultant Contract Amendment - Fire 8423004 29,000$ 10,182$ 1,540$ 17,278$
Finance & Accounting O/H Charges - Fire FY25B1D8-3036-Finance & Accounting O/H Charges - Fire 35,065$ -$ -$ 35,065$ B
Impact Fee One-Time Historical Reporting FY26Key Changes-3036-Impact Fee One-Time Historical Reporting 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$
Impact Fee Tracking Reporting & Compliance FY26Key Changes-3036-Impact Fee Tracking Reporting & Compliance 38,984$ -$ -$ 38,984$
Grand Total 286,402$ 10,182$ 4,561$ 271,659.49
Streets Allocation Allocation
Encumbrances
FY24-FYTD26
Expenditures Remaining
Street Impact Fee Activity? Y
Values
Description Cost Center
Sum of Street Allocation
Budget Amended
Sum of Street Allocation
Encumbrances
Sum of Street Allocation
YTD Expenditures Sum of Street Allocation
Remaining Appropriation
FY24B5A7-3038-Update of the Streets IFFP - Unappropriated Transportation Impact Fees 30,183$ 37,360$ -$ (7,177)$
600/700 North Reconstruction FY24B3A6-3038-600/700 North Reconstruction 3,204,371$ 3,204,371$ -$ -$
FY23 Road Projects BA1 A-5 8423625 (224,557)$ -$ (224,557)$ -$
2100 South Reconstruction FY24B3A5-3038-2100 South Reconstruction (131,247)$ -$ (131,247)$ -$
200 S Recon Trans Corridor IF 8423602 252,000$ -$ 252,000$ -$
Crescent Apartments Impact Fee Refund FY25-Crescent Apartments Impact Fee Refund 8,641$ -$ 8,641$ -$
300 N Complete Street Recons I 8423606 40,000$ -$ 40,000$ -$
Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 (1,359,910)$ -$ (1,359,910)$ -$
500/700 S Street Reconstruction 8412001 11,703$ -$ 11,703$ -$
Corridor Transformations IF 8422608 25,398$ -$ 25,398$ -$
200S Transit Complete Start Suppl IF 8422602 37,422$ -$ 37,422$ -$
500 to 700 S 8418016 22,744$ 20,767$ 1,977$ -$
Transportation Safety Improvement IF 8422620 6,316$ -$ 6,316$ -$
700 South Phase 7 IF 8423305 (166)$ -$ (166)$ -$
1700S Corridor Transformation IF - Traffic Safety 8422622 35,300$ -$ 35,300$ -$ D
900 South 9Line RR Cross IF 8422604 28,000$ -$ 28,000$ -$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8419008 (108,000)$ -$ (108,000)$ -$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8420105 (200,000)$ -$ (200,000)$ -$
Gladiola Street 8406001 15,169$ 11,885$ 1,625$ 1,659$
Urban Trails FY22 IF 8422619 6,500$ -$ -$ 6,500$
Update of the Streets IFFP (Rescope 8419203)FY24B5A7-3038-Update of the Streets IFFP (Rescope 8419203)29,817$ 9,289$ 7,739$ 12,788$
400 South Viaduct Trail IF 8422611 90,000$ 9,484$ 63,207$ 17,309$
Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 18,699$ -$ -$ 18,699$
2025 IFFP Amendment - Streets FY25B5A12-3038-2025 IFFP Amendment - Streets 20,000$ -$ -$ 20,000$
Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 181,303$ 12,884$ 136,936$ 31,483$
Transportation Safety Improvements IF 8421500 241,135$ 67,904$ 139,210$ 34,021$
Finance & Accounting O/H Charges - Streets FY25B1D8-3038-Finance & Accounting O/H Charges - Streets 35,065$ -$ -$ 35,065$
Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 340,236$ 250,390$ 54,638$ 35,207$
Impact Fee Tracking Reporting & Compliance FY26Key Changes-3038-Impact Fee Tracking Reporting & Compliance 38,984$ -$ -$ 38,984$
75-Year-Old Traffic Signal Replacement FY24CIP-3038-75-Year-Old Traffic Signal Replacement 40,000$ -$ -$ 40,000$
Transit Cap-Freq Trans Routes 8423608 110,000$ 1,139$ 64,816$ 44,045$
Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 46,883$ -$ (1,117)$ 48,000$
Impact Fee One-Time Historical Reporting FY26Key Changes-3038-Impact Fee One-Time Historical Reporting 50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$
5th West Commons Conversation Center(s)FY25CIP-3037-5th West Commons Conversation Center(s)50,000$ -$ -$ 50,000$
Safer Crossings: Main St., Glendale Park, and CitywFY24CIP-3038-Safer Crossings: Main St., Glendale Park, and Citywide 90,000$ 2,215$ 14,226$ 73,559$
FY24 Street IF Refunds FY24B5D9-3038-FY24 Street IF Refunds 75,000$ -$ -$ 75,000$
Transit Capital Program / Funding Our Future Tran FY26CIP-3038-Transit Capital Program / Funding Our Future Transit FY26 100,000$ -$ -$ 100,000$
Neighborhood Byways IF 8422614 104,500$ -$ -$ 104,500$
Transit Capital for Frequent Transit Routes / Oper FY24CIP-3038-Transit Capital for Frequent Transit Routes / Operational Investments-FY24 110,000$ -$ 513$ 109,488$
Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 124,593$ -$ -$ 124,593$
Missing Sidewalks & Bikeway Network Gaps FY26 FY26CIP-3038-Missing Sidewalks & Bikeway Network Gaps FY26 150,000$ -$ -$ 150,000$
Vision Zero Corridors & Safety Improvements Cityw FY26CIP-3038-Vision Zero Corridors & Safety Improvements Citywide FY26 230,000$ -$ -$ 230,000$
Traffic Signal Replacements & Upgrades FY26 FY26CIP-3038-Traffic Signal Replacements & Upgrades FY26 400,000$ -$ -$ 400,000$
Grand Total 4,376,082$ 3,627,689$ (1,095,331)$ 1,843,724$
Sum of Budget-Amended Sum of Encum- brances Sum of YTD Expenditures
Total 55,518,521$ 5,677,425$ 17,764,330$ 32,074,991$
E = A + B + C + D
TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE
2,601,362$
8484005
13,975,860.10$
$994,408
8484002
Impact Fees - Summary
FYTD 02/28/2026
Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area
Area Cost Center Notes:
8484001 1,735,106$
8484002 994,408$ B
8484003 8,644,984$ C
Impact fee - Streets 8484005 2,601,362$ D
13,975,860$
Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month
202407 (Jul2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202408 (Aug2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202409 (Sep2024)2025Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202410 (Oct2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202411 (Nov2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202412 (Dec2024)2025Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202501 (Jan2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202502 (Feb2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202503 (Mar2025)2025Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202504 (Apr2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202505 (May2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202506 (Jun2025)2025Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202507 (Jul2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202508 (Aug2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202509 (Sep2025)2026Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202510 (Oct2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202511 (Nov2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202512 (Dec2025)2026Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202601 (Jan2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202602 (Feb2026)2026Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Current Month
202603 (Mar2026)2026Q3
202604 (Apr2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202605 (May2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202606 (Jun2026)2026Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202607 (Jul2026)2027Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202608 (Aug2026)2027Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202609 (Sep2026)2027Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202610 (Oct2026)2027Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202611 (Nov2026)2027Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202612 (Dec2026)2027Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202701 (Jan2027)2027Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202702 (Feb2027)2027Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202703 (Mar2027)2027Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202704 (Apr2027)2027Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202705 (May2027)2027Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202706 (Jun2027)2027Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202707 (Jul2027)2028Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202708 (Aug2027)2028Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202709 (Sep2027)2028Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202710 (Oct2027)2028Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202711 (Nov2027)2028Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202712 (Dec2027)2028Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202801 (Jan2028)2028Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202802 (Feb2028)2028Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202803 (Mar2028)2028Q3 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202804 (Apr2028)2028Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202805 (May2028)2028Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
202806 (Jun2028)2028Q4 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Fiscal
Quarter
E = A + B + C + D
Police Fire Parks Streets
TotalCalendar
Month
FY
2
0
2
6
FY
2
0
2
7
FY
2
0
2
8
FY
2
0
2
5
This page has intentionally been left blank
Salt Lake City FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Initiative Number/Name Fund
One-time
or Ongoing Amount
1
Section A: New Items
A-1: Reclass Airport Director of Finance Pay
Grade Airport Ongoing $20,000.00
Department: Airport Prepared By: Lorin Rollins
For questions, please include Lorin Rollins
The Airport Executive Director is currently in the hiring process for the Director of Finance/CFO position at the Airport.
A change in the position's pay grade from an A03 to an A02 would enhance the opportunity to hire potential applicants
and is being requested at the suggestion of the Recruiting Firm performing the nationwide search to fill the position.
A-2: Inland Port Related Police Expenses and
Revenues GF One-time $2,500,000.00
GF Ongoing $2,500,000.00
IMS One-time $103,700.00
Fleet One-time $748,500.00
Department: Police Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich / Glen Mills
For questions, please include Shellie Dietrich, Glen Mills and Mary Beth Thompson
SLC has contract funding for additional police staffing to help cover the area of the Inland Port. A total of $5,000,000 in
funding will be received during this fiscal year, with an additional $2.5 million in funding to come in subsequent fiscal
years. This funding will establish an additional 12.0 sworn and 1.0 civilian employee positions along with supplies,
equipment, and vehicles. Due to the timing of receipt of this funding and hiring of the positions, this funding will be
partially utilized in FY 2026 and will require a budget carryforward for the unspent balance in FY 2027 ongoing.
The Police Department is requesting a straw poll to facilitate hiring in the May 2026 academy class.
A-3: Workers Compensation Premium GF Ongoing $1,731,829.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Sharon Mangelson
For questions, please include Sharon Mangelson, Mary Beth Thompson and Lauree Roberts
In FY 2025, the City changed from self-insured for Workers Compensation to a premium based plan with the Workers
Compensation Fund of Utah. This has increased the amount that will be billed to the General Fund through the Non -
Departmental transfer. The FY 2026 increase in premiums was included in the Risk fund budget but was inadvertently
excluded from the transfer from Non-Departmental to Risk. This amendment creates the additional budget needed to
cover this increase.
A-4: New Fund: Library Pass-Through GF Ongoing $33,195,704.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson and Adie Thakur
Due to recent changes to state law, the Salt Lake City Library is no longer a taxing entity. As such, property tax revenue
for the library now must pass through the General Fund before being sent to the Library. This amendment budgets the
revenue and expenditure for this transfer of funds to the Library. This amendment is also to recommend the creation of
a new fund for pass-through revenues and expenses.
A-5: CRA Pass-Through True-Up GF Ongoing $4,536,141.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson and Adie Thakur
Salt Lake City FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Initiative Number/Name Fund
One-time
or Ongoing Amount
2
This amendment is a true-up of the amount of revenue that passes through the General Fund prior to being transferred
to the Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA). Tax revenues for the CRA have come in higher than anticipated so the
budget must now be adjusted to accommodate the higher amount.
A-6: CRA Pass-Through to the Library GF One-time $2,311,032.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mary Beth Thompson
For questions, please include Mary Beth Thompson and Miranda Johnson
The Community Reinvestment Agency (CRA) received $2,311,032 in tax increment from Salt Lake County that
inadvertently included funds that should have been attributed to the Salt Lake City Library for CRA project area in which
the Library does not participate. To rectify this error, the CRA will accept the cash and subsequently direct a payment to
Salt Lake City as a pass through. From the City, the funds will then be sent to the Library.
A-7: Increase in Workers Compensation
Premiums Risk Ongoing $1,710,000.00
Department: Attorney’s Office Prepared By: Sharon Mangelson, Cindy Lou
Trishman
For questions, please include Sharon Mangelson and Cindy Lou Trishman
The City's workers compensation coverage changed in FY 2025 from self-insured (utilizing a third party administrator
TPA) to a premium based insurance policy covered by Workers Compensation Fund of Utah (WCF). We are in the
second year of the coverage. Our premiums are calculated in advance, based on projected payroll information (gross
wages and other personal services data). During FY 2026, WCF performed an audit of our gross wages and we were
billed a true-up amount of over $800,000, which was unbudgeted/unanticipated. The true-up amount for FY2025 was
approximately $480,000 and we were able to cover it by the existing budget, but are unable to do so in FY 2026. In
addition WCF is acting as the TPA for all w/c claims that were initiated prior to the start of the contract with WCF. These
claims are not covered by the premiums, but are billed to the City by WCF. These claims were also inadvertently excluded
from the FY26 budget and are projected to be about $655,000, which also cannot be covered by existing budget. There is
an offsetting revenue in the Risk Fund as all w/c claims are billed to City departments, based the employees for whom
the claims were paid. Any excess premiums above claims paid are allocated based on a prior year calculation.
A-8: Fund Transfer to Fleet for Police
Department Vehicles GF One-time ($1,001,800.00)
GF One-time $1,001,800.00
Fleet One-time $1,001,800.00
Department: Police Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich
For questions, please include Chief Redd and S hellie Dietrich
The Police Department is requesting to transfer budget from the Police Department to Fleet to address immediate needs
for vehicle acquisition, as well as to replace vehicles with funding from one time efficiency savings in personnel and
supplies. A critical priority for the department is the purchase of a dedicated transport van for the Public Order Unit.
This vehicle is essential for effective on‑scene response and sustained operational presence during natural disasters,
large‑scale events, long‑duration deployments, special events, and public demonstrations. These situations require rapid
mobilization of personnel and equipment, and the current fleet does not provide adequate capacity to meet these
operational demands.
At present, the department must rent vans to support these operations. These rental vehicles are not properly sized or
equipped for public safety use and lack required emergency equipment such as lights, sirens, communications systems,
and safety modifications. This creates operational inefficiencies and limits the department’s ability to respond effectively,
putting both our officers and the public at risk.
Additionally, the department’s existing fleet is aging and experiencing increased maintenance needs, resulting in reduced
reliability and higher operational costs. A significant portion of police vehicles are beyond their optimal service life,
leading to gaps in availability and constraining the department’s ability to maintain consistent service levels.
Salt Lake City FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Initiative Number/Name Fund
One-time
or Ongoing Amount
3
Transferring available department budget to the fleet fund provides a cost‑effective and timely solution that remains
within existing financial constraints while supporting both operational readiness and long ‑term fleet sustainability. This
acquisition will enhance the department’s ability to maintain public safety, support community events, and respond
efficiently to emergencies and deploy officers safely. This request will provide an additional 10 patrol vehicles.
Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources
Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources
Section D: Housekeeping
D-1: 400 South Bridge Funding Rescope CIP One-time $0.00
Department: CAN - Engineering Prepared By: Mark Stephens / Josh Willie
For questions, please include Mark Stephens, Josh Willie, Tammy Hunsaker and Brent Beck
This budget amendment rescopes funding from fiscal year 2026 of $1 Million and from fiscal year 2023 of $93,322 in
Bridge Preservation funds. Community and Neighborhoods (CAN) is asking to broaden the scope from needed bridge
repairs and routine maintenance to also include major bridge repairs and full rebuilds. Engineering is currently
advancing the design of the 400 South bridge replacement over the Jordan River using a Construction Manager/General
Contractor (CM/GC) project delivery method. This is an alternative delivery method where the city contracts with a
General Contractor during the design phase to coordinate with the Design Consultant on scheduling, pricing, an d
constructability. The CM/GC method improves collaboration, reduces risk, and often accelerates project completion on
large, complex projects. The additional funds will help cover increased costs associated with slightly widening the
footprint of the new bridge to better accommodate maintaining one lane of traffic in each direction during reconstruction
of the 400 South bridge, eliminating the ne ed for off-site vehicular detours. The wider footprint will also allow pedestrian
access to be maintained throughout construction. Any remaining funds after completion of the 400 South bridge project
will likely be used to support other bridge maintenanc e needs across the City.
As is necessary, Engineering will supplement the 400 South bridge project with Streets Reconstruction Funding from
the following appropriations: FY 2025 CIP-3000-Street Reconstruction Program-Cap Maintenance, FY 2025 CIP-3033-
Street Reconstruction Program, FY 2026 CIP-3033-Street Reconstruction Program, FY 2026 CIP-3000-FOF Streets-
Street Reconstruction Program, FY 2026 CIP-3000-Street Reconstruction Program, FY 2026 CIP-3044-Street
Reconstruction Program.
D-2: Budgeting All Funding Available for the Old
Library, Plaza 349 and the Justice Court Capital
Improvements
CIP One-time ($4,489,610.79)
Department: Finance Prepared By: Bret Montgomery
For questions, please include Bret Montgomery and Mike Atkinson
In FY 2026 BA#4 A-11, funding was approved for the old library, Plaza 349, and Justice Courts capital improvements in
the amount of $5,498,741.00, which included $889,800 from the General Fund. This amendment did not take into
account the $2,655,304.21 of CIP fund 3021 SRTB 2022B Non-taxable bond interest approved in FY25 BA#1 D-2 or the
$1,834,306.58 of CIP Fund 3021 SRTB 2022B Non-taxable bond interest in FY26 BA#2 D7 that were both approved.
This means that $9,988,351.79 has been approved in total . This amendment is to bring the approved budget total into
alignment with the available bond interest by removing the $4,489,610.79 that was previously approved in prior Budget
Amendments.
Total approved for these projects so far:
$5,498,741 Approved in FY26BA#4
Salt Lake City FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Initiative Number/Name Fund
One-time
or Ongoing Amount
4
-$9,988,351.79 from three BA's
-$4,489,610.79 FY26 BA#5 Housekeeping total
D-3: Sustainability's Environmental & Energy
Division Housekeeping and Utah Renewable
Communities Start Up Costs
GF One-time $902,186.00
Refuse One-time ($453,592.00)
Refuse One-time $1,355,778.00
Department: Sustainability Prepared By: Ammon Jacobsmeyer
For questions, please include Ammon Jacobsmeyer and Debbie Lyons
Sustainability is requesting that $453,592 be transferred from the Waste and Recycling Division Fund balance to the
Environment and Energy Division Fund balance. In FY 2025, all IMS charges were incorrectly coded to the
Environmental & Energy Division. This amendment will correct the allocation of the Waste and Recycling Division's
share of the FY 2025 IMS charges.
In addition to the adjustment pertaining to the IMS charges, t he amendment also includes a request for a General Fund
transfer of $902,186 to allocate towards the Utah Renewable Communities (URC) startup cost agreement, should
backstop funds be necessary to cover program start-up costs. Utah Renewable Communities is a coalition of cities,
counties, and other municipalities that are working with RMP to source renewable energy for our communities to meet
community goals.
URC Start-up Costs are estimated to be $902,186. With regulatory approval of the program on March 4 by the Public
Service Commission, Rocky Mountain Power (RMP) requires that an agency sign a contract to backstop RMP’s software
and administrative start-up costs which are needed to send out notices and new bills for the program . Salt Lake City is
the largest community participating in this program creation, working with RMP to provide new renewable energy
resources that are equivalent to 100% of our community-wide electricity demand. Unless there is a major failure of the
program, once revenue collection begins, these start-up costs fronted by RMP will be recouped from ratepayer revenues
after which Salt Lake City’s obligation is expected to end.
The Start-Up Cost Agreement and a related ordinance must be signed before June, and the funding from this
amendment is needed to be able to sign the contract. The additional revenue and subsequent expenditure will leave a
cash balance of $4.9 million, or 15% of operating expenditures in the Refuse fund.
D-4: Park Land Acquisition Impact Fees One-time $405,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Gregg Evans
For questions, please include Gregg Evans
The Public Lands Department in coordination with Real Estate Services is requesting a budget amendment in the
amount of $405,000 that will utilize Parks Impact Fees to fund the acquisition of 1.09 acres of open space.
***This item will require a closed session to discuss th is confidential land acquisition***
D-5: UDOT Railroad Safety Grant Funded
Railroad Crossing Improvements on 700 South CIP One-time $101,005.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mike Atkinson
For questions, please include Mike Atkinson, Bret Montgomery and Amy Dorsey
Salt Lake City FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Initiative Number/Name Fund
One-time
or Ongoing Amount
5
Note that this item is related to item E-3 which transfers the funding to CIP. This amendment receives the funding
transferred from the Misc. Grants Fund and creates the expenditure budget in CIP to complete the project(s) outlined in
the grant funding agreement. In FY 2023 council approved a grant application (Utah Dept. of Transportation, Railroad
Safety Grant 2022) on the fiscal year’s consent agenda #8. When the grant was awarded, the revenue was recognized, but
an expenditure budget to move the funds to CIP was never created. The grant was given for improvements to a railroad
crossing on 700 South, so it would be most appropriate to load the budget in PRJ -230003 with the other 700 South
project budgets.
D-6: CIP: CPTED Assessments, New Street Lights
and Other Improvements GF One-time ($200,000.00)
GF One-time $200,000.00
CIP One-time $200,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: Lindsey Nicola
For questions, please include Lindsey Nikola, Mike Atkinson, Ben Luedtke and Mary Beth Thompson
This amendment is for a one-time budgetary transfer of $200,000 from the Mayor’s Office to the Capital Improvement
Program (CIP) fund to support Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) initiatives. Combined with
$300,000 in existing CIP allocations, this creates a total project budget of $500,000. These resources will be deployed
for professional CPTED assessments and physical implementation. Primary focus areas include high-priority "hotspots"
identified in the Public Safety Plan, with a specific emphasis on expanding streetlighting infrastructure and optimizing
urban landscaping (e.g., strategic planter placement and vegetation management) to eliminate concealment points and
enhance natural surveillance.
D-7: Impact Fee Excess Capacity & Interest
Income Transfer Impact Fee One-time $1,814,796.04
GF One-time $1,814,796.04
CIP One-time $443,705.06
Impact Fee One-time $0.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mike Atkinson / Bret Montgomery
For questions, please include Mike Atkinson, Bret Montgomery and Mary Beth Thompson
This is a request for Excess Capacity to be paid out of Streets Impact Fees to the General Fund in the amount of
$1,814,796.04. The Administration is also requesting to subsequently transfer funds from the General fund to Streets
Impact Fees in the amount of $989,253.26, Parks Impact Fees in the amount of $1,112,238.27, Fire Impact Fees in the
amount of $137,307.43, and Police Impact Fees in the amount of $19,702.15 , for a total of $2,258,501.10. These
transfers are to pay these Impact Fee funds interest earned on related fund balance amounts but mistakenly paid to the
General Fund in error. The difference of $443,705.04 in transfers from General Fund CIP to Impact Fees not covered by
the $1,814,796.04 will be covered by excess CIP funds.
D-8: CIP Transfer to General Fund Correction CIP One-time $6,786,000.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Mike Atkinson / Bret Montgomery
For questions, please include Mike Atkinson, Bret Montgomery and Mary Beth Thompson
The transfers listed below were all included in FY 2026 Non-Departmental Key Changes as revenue but failed to be
included as expenditures on FY 2026 CIP Key Changes. This amendment corrects the oversight.
1. This budget item returns temporary General Fund support that was advanced for earthquake repairs.
Salt Lake City FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Initiative Number/Name Fund
One-time
or Ongoing Amount
6
In Fiscal Year 2020 Budget Amendment #6, $2,000,000 was appropriated to begin repairs resulting from the 2020
earthquake until insurance reimbursement was received. In FY 2023 Budget Amendment #5, an additional $2,650,000
was appropriated to continue the repair work.
2. This budget item returns to the general fund the $800,000 unused portion of the one-time $10,000,000 General
Fund transferred to CIP in fiscal year 2022. The other funds were used for $1,200,000 for GF Security, $6,000,000
deeply affordable housing, and $2,000,000 livable streets.
3. This budget item returns $1,366,000 in interest earned on CIP fund balances that was inadvertently paid to CIP
instead of to the General Fund.
D-9: General Obligation Series 2026 Bonds Debt Service One-time $1,062,474.60
CIP One-time $49,336,400.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Jou Ying Su / Marina Scott
For questions, please include Jou Ying Su, Marina Scott, Mike Atkinson , Ben Luedtke and Mary Beth
Thompson
In November 2022, voters authorized the issuance of up to $85 million in general obligation bonds to fund Parks, Trails
and Open Space projects. The General Obligation Bonds, Series 2026 is the second tranche from this authorization. It is
scheduled to be sold on April 7, 2026. This amendment creates the revenue budget for the bond proceeds and the
expenditure budget to pay for renovation of the parks and open space projects associated with the bonds.
There will be eleven project funds to which bond proceeds will be allocated. The Glendale Regional Park (1200 West
1700 South) project will receive $23,350,000. The Allen Park (1900 South) project will receive $3,650,000. The Public
Open Space at Fleet Block project will receive $5,400,000. The Fairmont Park (1040 East Sugarmont Drive) project will
receive $5,850,000. The Reimagine Neighborhood Parks, Trail, or Open Spaces (various locations) projects will receive
$3,375,000. The Jordan River Corridor (various locations) project will receive $2,400,000.
Contingencies/ Program Management will receive $4,000,000. The Art Allowance will receive $441,000. Salaries,
benefits, and operational costs for 3 FTEs for FY27 and FY28 will receive $870,400.
The bond's cost of issuance will be $393,600 and will be paid at closing that is currently scheduled on April 28, 2026.
D-10: UDOT Green Bike Expansion Supplied CIP
Budget CIP One-time $895,004.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Lynn Jacobs / Julianne Sabula
For questions, please include Lynn Jacobs, Julianne Sabula, Bret Montgomery and Mike Atkinson
This amendment provides the budget for CIP to accomplish the necessary acquisitions and construction related to the
Green Bike Expansion grant provided by UDOT. This grant is for $895,004 meant for the purpose of building more bike
stations around the city. Through this grant, the city will receive financing from federal aid highway funds that are
managed and distributed by UDOT.
D-11: Moving Mayor's Funding from Non-
Departmental to the Mayor's Office GF One-time ($580,000.00)
GF One-time $580,000.00
Department: Mayor’s Office Prepared By: Kathy Nunez
For questions, please include Kathy Nunez, Mary Beth Thompson and Lindsey Nikola
The purpose of this reallocation/amendment is to consolidate all budget and associated expenditures related to the
National League of Cities event into a single cost center. Currently, expenses for this event are split between Cost
Salt Lake City FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Initiative Number/Name Fund
One-time
or Ongoing Amount
7
Centers. Centralizing both the budget and expenditures within the Mayor’s Executive Staff cost center (10101) will
improve financial transparency and ensure more accurate reporting of total event costs.
D-12: Moving State ARPA Funds from Grant Fund
to Public Utilities / Remove CIP Budgets CIP One-time ($2,000,000.00)
Misc Grants One-time ($2,000,000.00)
Misc Grants One-time $2,000,000.00
Storm
Water One-time $0.00
Department: Finance Prepared By: Amy Dorsey
For questions, please include Amy Dorsey
In January of 2022 Salt Lake City was awarded a $2,000,000 grant from the State of Utah, Governor's Office of Planning
and Budget office. This grant was part of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) the state received from the US Treasury
office. The funds from this grant were combined with City ARPA funds to construct new stormwater infrastructure for
the benefit of increasing runoff storage and conveyance and reducing FEMA Floodplain Flood Hazard Zones.
This funding was received in FY 2022 BA #7 as state grant revenue. At the time these funds were received, a revenue and
expenditure budget was established in CIP , however the revenue was never transferred to CIP. Instead, the project was
completed and expenses were paid by the stormwater fund. This housekeeping item is to move the money from the state
grant fund to replenish the stormwater fund for these expenditures. The amendment will also remove the revenue and
expenditure budget in the CIP fund that was established for the project but never used.
Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
E-1: UDOT Green Bike Expansion Misc Grants One-time $895,004.00
Department: CAN-Transportation Prepared By: Lynn Jacobs / Julianne Sabula
For questions, please include Lynn Jacobs, Julianne Sabula and Tammy Hunsaker
This amendment is to recognize a grant award in the amount of $895,004 for the purpose of building more bike stations
around the city. Through this grant, the city will receive financing from federal aid highway funds that are managed and
distributed by UDOT. A corresponding amendment will also establish a budget in CIP.
A public hearing was not held since the city didn’t apply for this grant.
E-2: COPS FY 25 De Escalation Grant Misc Grants One-time $500,000.00
Department: Police Prepared By: Amy Dorsey / Laura Nygaard
For questions, please include Amy Dorsey, Laura Nygaard, and Shellie Dietrich
This amendment is to recognize a grant award in the amount of $500,000 for the purpose of enhancing de-escalation
and crisis response training for the city’s law enforcement.
The Salt Lake City Police department has received a COPS grant for the FY 2025 Safer Outcomes: Enhancing De-
Escalation and Crisis Response Training for Law Enforcement-Support for Law Enforcement Agencies. The award total
of $500,000 will be used for the following:
• A virtual reality training simulator, as well as the initial setup and training ∼ $292,950
• Travel training costs for FEMA ICAT Train-the-trainer training and CIT International Conferences ∼ $50,730
• Local and department training in de-escalation and crisis response ∼ $111,825
Salt Lake City FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Initiative Number/Name Fund
One-time
or Ongoing Amount
8
• Overtime for staff providing and receiving training ∼ $44,495
A public hearing on the grant was held 9/2/2025
E-3: Utah Dept. of Transportation, Railroad
Safety Grant 2022 Misc Grants One-time $101,005.00
Department: CAN-Engineering Prepared By: Mark Stephens / Josh Willie
For questions, please include Mark Stephens and Josh Willie
In FY 2023 council approved a grant application (Utah Dept. of Transportation, Railroad Safety Grant 2022) on the
fiscal year’s consent agenda #8. This budget amendment is to move $101,005 to CIP. Note that this item is related to
item D-5 which receives the funding in CIP and creates the expenditure budget. When the grant was awarded, the
revenue was recognized, but an expenditure budget to move the funds to CIP was never created. The grant was given for
improvements to a railroad crossing on 700 South, so it would be most appropriate to load the budget in PRJ -230003
with the other 700 South project budgets. The current grant worktag is GR-100895 (AWD-000189).
Grant awarded in 2023, received as a grant, but never moved to CIP
E-4: Utah State of Education Child and Adult
Care Food Program Grant Misc Grants One-time $26,000.00
Department: CAN Prepared By: Amy Dorsey / Katy Lopez
For questions, please include Amy Dorsey, Katy Lopez and Tammy Hunsaker
This amendment is to recognize a grant award in the amount of $26,000 for the purpose of providing nutritious snacks
to Youth City program participants.
This is a renewal grant from the Utah State Board of Education Chile and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) grant
program to provide snacks to Youth City participants.
Public hearing is scheduled for 3/24/2026
E-5: Salt Lake County Tourism, Recreation,
Cultural, Convention and Airport (TRCC) Grant Misc Grants One-time $1,000,000.00
Department: Public Lands Prepared By: Amy Dorsey / Tyler Murdock
For questions, please include Amy Dorsey and Tyler Murdock
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $1,000,000 for the
purpose of providing design services for the Civic Center area of downtown Salt Lake City.
This funding will be used for a design consultant to develop construction documents for public bidding. The design will
consider and respond to the larger network of Civic Center District public spaces, transportation needs and the
Downtown neighborhood.
Public hearing was held 9/2/2025
E-6: International Association of Chiefs of Police
(IACP) Law Enforcement-Based Victim Services Misc Grants One-time $20,000.00
Department: Police Prepared By: Amy Dorsey / Laura Nygaard
For questions, please include Amy Dorsey, Laura Nygaard and Shellie Murdock
Salt Lake City FY 2025-26 Budget Amendment #5
Initiative Number/Name Fund
One-time
or Ongoing Amount
9
This budget amendment is to recognize the City's funding availability grant award in the amount of $20,000 for
International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) Law Enforcement-Based Victim Services mini-grant. The funds
would be used for supplies for outreach items, travel training costs for victim advocate team.
Public hearing was held 1/13/2026
Section F: Donations
Section G: Consent Agenda
Consent Agenda #2
G-1: Outdoor Recreation Initiative (ORI) City Creek Daylighting
Project Misc Grants $600,000.00
Department: CRA Prepared By: Amy Dorsey / Cara
Lindsley
The City Creek Daylighting project along the Folsom Trail is a critical step toward restoring one of Salt Lake City’s
historic waterways and reimagining a major west side corridor as a vibrant, accessible public space. This project will
uncover a buried section of City Creek between 800 West and 1000 West in the Fairpark neighborhood, where the creek
currently runs through a concrete culvert beneath the former Folsom rail line. In its place, a visible, meandering stream
will flow alongside the trail, surrounded by native landscaping, seating, lighting, and recreational amenities. These funds
will support the completion of construction documents, advancing the project toward implementation. 40% designs to
act as a starting point for a new phased approach, and $150,000 invested by the Salt Lake City Community Reinvestment
Agency, this is a well-planned, community-driven project that is ready to move forward. The work is rooted in years of
community input and shaped by both technical and environmental considerations.
Section I: Council Added Items
This page has intentionally been left blank
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION
451 SOUTH STATE STREET
PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455
ERIN MENDENHALL
Mayor
MARY BETH THOMPSON
Chief Financial Officer
CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
___________________________________ Date Received: _______________
Jill Love, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: __________
______________________________________________________________________________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 4/28/2026
Alejandro Puy, Chair
FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer
SUBJECT: FY26 Budget Amendment #5
SPONSOR: NA
STAFF CONTACT: Mary Beth Thompson, Randy Hillier
DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget Amendment Ordinance
RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that subsequent to a public hearing,
the City Council adopt the following amendments to the Fiscal Year 2026 adopted budget.
BUDGET IMPACT:
REVENUE EXPENSE
GENERAL FUND $46,941,604.04 $49,574,961.04
AIRPORT FUND 0.00 20,000.00
IMPACT FEES 2,258,501.10 2,219,796.04
IMS FUND 103,700.00 103,700.00
FLEET FUND 2,251,500.00 2,251,500.00
CIP FUND 44,042,798.21 51,272,503.27
DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,062,474.60 1,062,474.60
REFUSE COLLECTION FUND 902,186.00 902,186.00
STORM WATER FUND 2,000,000.00 0.00
MISC GRANTS FUND 3,041,004.00 3,142,009.00
RISK FUND 1,710,000.00 1,710,000.00
TOTAL $104,313,767.95 $112,259,129.95
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION:
Revenue for FY 2026 Budget Adjustments
The chart below presents General Fund Projected Revenues for FY 2026. Based on revenue data across the first
part of the fiscal year, it is projected that revenues will be realized at approximately $3,378,864 beyond the FY
2026 Adopted Budget.
Revenue FY26 Annual Budget
FY26 Amended
Budget Projection
Amended Variance
Favorable/(Unfavorable)
Property Taxes 148,580,334 148,580,334 148,580,334 -
Sales, Use & Excise Taxes 126,026,000 126,026,000 125,360,000 (666,000)
Franchise Taxes 17,220,000 17,220,000 17,140,000 (80,000)
Total Taxes 291,826,334 291,826,334 291,080,334 (746,000)
Charges For Services 6,686,820 6,686,820 5,006,431 (1,680,389)
Fines & Forfeitures 3,085,827 3,220,827 2,977,231 (243,596)
Interest Income 9,000,000 9,000,000 9,000,000 -
Interfund Service Charges 34,569,169 34,569,169 34,774,907 205,738
Intergovernmental Revenue 6,205,000 6,205,000 6,199,278 (5,722)
Licenses 21,847,694 21,847,694 22,666,392 818,698
Miscellaneous Revenue 3,838,663 3,838,663 4,484,128 645,465
Parking Meter Revenue 3,273,255 3,273,255 5,018,737 1,745,482
Parking Tickets 2,200,000 2,200,000 2,200,000 -
Permits 18,981,859 18,981,859 21,730,107 2,748,248
Property Sale Proceeds - - 64,607 64,607
Gain on Property Dispositions - - 2,545 2,545
Rental & Other Income 1,201,460 1,201,460 1,256,254 54,794
Operating Transfers In 24,780,192 24,780,192 24,879,186 98,994
Total W/O Special Tax 135,669,939 135,804,939 140,259,803 4,454,864
Sales Tax Addition 1/2%58,000,000 58,000,000 58,000,000 -
Total General Fund 485,496,273 485,631,273 489,340,137 3,708,864
The table below presents updated Fund Balance numbers and percentages, based on the proposed changes
included in Budget Amendment #5.
With the complete adoption of Budget Amendment #5, the available fund balance will remain at 16.48 percent
of the FY 2026 Adopted Budget. For context, at budget adoption fund balance was at 12.93 percent.
FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL
Beginning Fund Balance 27,841,978 146,448,554 174,290,532 19,731,675 104,201,060 142,867,679
Prior Year Encumbrances (3,547,119) (18,657,815) (22,204,934) - - (18,919,920)
Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 24,294,859$ 127,790,739$ 152,085,598$ 19,731,675$ 104,201,060$ 123,947,759$
Beginning Fund Balance Percent 39.57%30.50%31.66%33.59%22.96%24.19%
Year End ACFR Adjustments
Revenue Changes
Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) (3,188,435) (3,188,435) (15,024) (15,024)
Fund Balance w/ ACFR Changes 24,294,859 124,602,304 148,897,163 19,731,675 104,186,036 123,932,735
Final Fund Balance Percent 39.57% 29.74% 30.99% 33.59% 22.96% 24.18%
Budgeted Change in Fund Balance (4,162,906) (36,664,442) (40,827,348) - (26,864,250) (26,864,250)
Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance
BA#1 Revenue Adjustment 469,408 469,408
BA#1 Expense Adjustment (2,468,933) (2,468,933) (358,000) (358,000)
BA#2 Revenue Adjustment 102,000 102,000
BA#2 Expense Adjustment (3,407,524) (3,407,524) (913,000) (913,000)
BA#3 Revenue Adjustment 3,904,861 3,904,861
BA#3 Expense Adjustment (3,959,861) (3,959,861)
BA#4 Revenue Adjustment - -
BA#4 Expense Adjustment - - (8,700,923) (8,700,923)
BA#5 Revenue Adjustment 1,013,067 1,013,067 46,941,604 46,941,604
BA#5 Expense Adjustment (5,200,000) (4,736,688) (9,936,688) (49,574,961) (49,574,961)
BA#6 Revenue Adjustment -
BA#6 Expense Adjustment
Change in Revenue
Change in Expense
Fund Balance Budgeted Increase
Adjusted Fund Balance 19,731,675 104,201,060 123,932,735 19,731,675 64,716,506 84,463,205
Adjusted Fund Balance Percent 32.14% 24.87% 25.80% 33.59% 14.26% 16.48%
Projected Revenue 61,397,384 419,006,975 480,404,359 58,749,999 453,745,525 512,495,524
FY2026 BudgetFY2025 Budget
Salt Lake City
General Fund
TOTAL
Fund Balance Projections
The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $46,941,604 in revenue and
$49,547,961 in expenses in the General Fund. The amendment proposes changes in eleven (11)
funds, with a total revenue increase of $104,313,768 and a corresponding expenditure increase of
$112,259,130. The proposal includes the addition of thirteen (13) general fund-funded positions.
A summary spreadsheet outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The Administration
requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council.
The budget amendment is separated in eight different categories:
A. New Budget Items
B. Grants for Existing Staff Resources
C. Grants for New Staff Resources
D. Housekeeping Items
E. Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources
F. Donations
G. Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards
I. Council Added Items
PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing
This page has intentionally been left blank
SALT LAKE CITY BOARD MEMBER TRANSMITTAL
To:
Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date:
04/23/2026
Date Sent To Council:
04/27/2026
From:
Otto, Rachel
Subject: Board appointment Recommendation: Housing Authority of Salt Lake City
Recommendation:
The Administration recommends the Council approve the appointment of Turner Bitton to the Housing Authority of Salt Lake City for a 4 year
term starting on the date of City Council advice and consent .
Turner Bitton currently lives in District 2.
Approved:*
Otto, Rachel
SALT LAKE CITY BOARD MEMBER TRANSMITTAL
To:
Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date:
05/05/2026
Date Sent To Council:
05/06/2026
From:
Otto, Rachel
Subject: Board appointment Recommendation: Planning Commission
Recommendation:
The Administration recommends the Council approve the appointment of Kevin Chung to the Planning Commission for a 4 year term starting
on the date of City Council advice and consent .
Kevin Chung currently lives in District 7.
Approved:*
Otto, Rachel
SALT LAKE CITY BOARD MEMBER TRANSMITTAL
To:
Salt Lake City Council Chair Submission Date:
05/05/2026
Date Sent To Council:
05/06/2026
From:
Otto, Rachel
Subject: Board appointment Recommendation: Historic Landmark Commission
Recommendation:
The Administration recommends the Council approve the appointment of Rosemary Stum to the Historic Landmark Commission for a 4 year
term starting on the date of City Council advice and consent .
Rosemary Stum currently lives in District 5.
Approved:*
Otto, Rachel
Item I6 – I21
CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304
P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476
SLCCOUNCIL.COM
TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651
MOTION SHEET
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
link.slc.gov/slcfy27
TO:City Council Members
FROM:Council Staff
DATE:May 19, 2026
RE:Ordinances relating to Salt Lake City and the Library Budgets for Fiscal Year 2026-27
MOTION:
I move that the Council close the public hearing for items I6 – I21. An additional public hearing will be
scheduled for June 2, 2026.
Affected Department Proposed
Budget
Budget w/out
Tax Change
Budget
Change Impact of Tax Increase
Fire Department $59,302,822 $57,552,568 $1,800,218 Sugar House has seen extensive growth including the development of new
highrise buildings. This increase will fund 9 firefighters to staff a newly purchased
fire truck and allow for fuel and maintenance of the old apparatus for use as a
reserve. Continued increase in requests for permits, along with statutory changes
to the Wildland Fire Interface (WUI) requirements have created the need for one
new Fire Inspector. This increase will also cover a new vehicle for the Fire
Inspector, contractual and uniform allowance increases.
Salt Lake City’s current property tax rate 0.00213
Salt Lake City’s current property revenue $108,006,905
Proposed revenue with tax changes $121,506,905
New Property Tax Revenue to Salt Lake City $13,500,000
Estimated increase to Salt Lake City’s property tax revenue 12.50%
Estimated increase to a primary residence valued at $624,000 $118.38
Estimated increase to a commercial property valued at $1 M $344.93
105/05/2026
FY26-27 Proposed Property Tax
Impact Schedule
Salt Lake City will consider an increase to the property tax rate from .00213 To .00248
to generate an additional $13,500,000.
The following information is intended to provide decision makers and the public with
an explanation of how the City’s operations would be affected if the property tax
remains the same.
Affected Department Proposed
Budget
Budget w/out
Tax Change
Budget
Change Impact of Tax Increase
Public Lands $34,321,961 $33,199,033 $1,122,928 Public Lands is responsible for maintaining 23 new properties, parks and
amenities, this increase includes additional seasonal staff, equipment and
operational costs related to maintaining these properties. This budget change will
also pay for Wildland Fire Interface mitigation covering 30 miles of high risk areas.
Justice Court $7,538,063 $7,106,052 $432,011 Caseload at the Justice Court has increased significantly. To provide for more
effective adjudication of cases and allow better access to justice, this increase
includes the addition of four Judicial Assistants and one Justice Court Manager.
Attorney $13,274,426 $13,146,702 $127,722 To provide for continued implementation of Diversion Programs, the Public Safety
Plan and accommodate a new Judge at the Justice Court, this increase includes the
addition of two Prosecutorial Assistants.
Community & Neighborhoods $41,407,546 $ 40,607,546 $800,000 This increase will maintain current Youth and Family programming following the
loss of several major grant funding sources.
Street Lighting Fund Transfer $401,315 $170,400 $230,915 This increase will pay for the maintenance and repair of General Fund owned
street lighting and fund a $20,000 grant program to supplement property owners
who wish to add privately owned streetlights.
Sustainability Fund Transfer $1,170,900 $670,900 $500,000 This increase will support the Environment & Energy Division as they develop
strategies that protect our natural resources and reduce pollution.
Capital Improvement Projects Fund
Transfer
$10,100,000 $3,636,964 $6,463,036 Funds from this increase will used to pay for the following Capital Improvement
projects: Vision Zero Corridors and Safety Improvements, Facilities Replacement
and Renewal, Sugar House Park Waterline Replacement, Washington Park Septic
Expansion, Urban Trails, Jordan Park Sewer Improvements, Bike Racks, and
additional Street Reconstruction.
Fleet Centralized Maintenance Fund $12,788,795 $11,726,968 $1,061,827 Continued increases to the cost of parts, fuel and labor to maintain and repair Salt
Lake City’s fleet of vehicles.
NonDepartment/Legal Defender
Association
$2,755,153 $1,793,810 $961,343 In response to increased caseload at the Justice Court, the Legal Defender contract
has been increased to allow for new staff to provide indigent defense.
Totals $183,060,981 $169,610,943 $13,500,000
205/05/2026