Loading...
02/05/2024 - Meeting Minutes MINUTES FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT & CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS BOARD MEETING(CDCIP) Monday, February 5, 2024 S:00pm 1. Board Members Board Members Not Present Jenny Bonk, Chair Mia Cask Brad Christensen, Vice-Chair Jake Skog Heidi Steed Devon Schechinger Teresa Gregori Andrea Schaefer Joseph Murphy Staff Present Bret Montgomery, Rachel Molinari, Mike Atkinson, Jordan Smith, Aaron Price, and Mary Beth Thompson—Department of Finance Ben Luedtke, Salt Lake City Council Staff Marti Woolford and Elizabeth Buehler—Information Management Services (IMS) Department 2. Staff Updates There were no staff updates. 3. Business A. Welcome & Introductions Mrs. Molinari welcomed the CDCIP Board members and City staff then opened the meeting on February 5, 2024, at 5:05 p.m. The staff offered individual introductions. Ms. Bonk then started the introduction of the CDCIP Board, and each member introduced themselves. Mrs. Molinari stated that because there are currently nine Board members, that five people are required to attend the meeting to make up a quorum. She added that virtual attendance on Zoom could be used as a back-up for those members that cannot attend in-person. B. CDCIP Board Role & CIP Process Overview Mrs. Molinari shared a presentation outlining the Board's role and responsibilities, CIP timeline, Capital Asset Planning (CAP) overview, and a summary of the Fiscal Year 2024-2025 CIP applications. Mrs. Molinari placed an emphasis on the CDCIP Board responsibility to assure that the community development grant and capital improvement program goals are consistent with the strategic plans and goals of the city. The presentation slides are attached. Mrs. Molinari provided an explanation of the newly formed CAP Committee. She stated that their role is to work together to score and rank each of the submitted internal applications. Ms. Schaefer asked a clarifying question about the new CAP Committee and its role regarding internal and constituent applications. Mrs. Molinari explained that the Committee's role was to review internal applications only and to work together to rank the submissions to help the Board in the decision-making process. She stated that in the past, Departments and Divisions would submit separate project priority lists which made it difficult for the Board to understand the City's collaborative goals. Mr. Atkinson added that the CAP Committee is comprised of City Department and Division Directors or Deputy Directors to ensure a diverse mix of opinions and experiences and to achieve good buy-in of the process. He said that a complete ranking of the internal applications and a narrative of the process would be presented to the Board. C. Summary Application Review Mrs. Molinari provided a summary breakdown of all the CIP applications. Mr. Skog asked for clarification on the difference between an Engineering project versus a Transportation project. Mrs. Molinari explained that road-related projects often start within the Transportation Division and the Engineering Division would become involved later in the process when construction started. Mr. Atkinson added that there is a difference between a street reconstruction and an overlay, and that Engineering would be involved in both. While presenting the remaining meeting schedule and going over the homework responsibilities of the Board, Mrs. Molinari explained that all constituent applications could be found within ZoomGrants and the Dropbox folder that would be shared with the Board. She said that questions could be submitted via ZoomGrants or through e-mail and added that all questions should be submitted by 10 a.m. on the day of the meeting to ensure there is time to prepare a response. Mrs. Molinari said that a map showing each CIP project would be shared with the Board at a later date. Ms. Schaefer asked if the internal submission files would be located in ZoomGrants or Dropbox. Mrs. Molinari said that all internal applications and supporting material would be within the Dropbox folder. Ms. Schaefer then asked how the Board would complete the scoring for all projects. Mrs. Molinari stated that the Board will utilize Excel for all scoring and that her team has developed a great tool and matrix to complete the process and show the data. Mr. Murphy asked about the different funding sources and corresponding funding caps. Mrs. Molinari explained that the Finance Department has a rough estimate of the available funding for CIP and that the budget would be finalized near the end of the CIP process. Mr. Murphy then asked if there were separate funding sources for constituent and internal applications. Mrs. Molinari explained that all applications compete for the same funding. She stated that some projects could be eligible for different funding sources (General Fund, Funding Our Future, Impact Fees, Quarter Cent, and Class C funds)within the overall CIP budget. Mrs. Schaefer requested the list of different funding sources be provided to the Board. She asked if there was a minimum or maximum amount of funding that could be requested. Mrs. Molinari replied that she would send out the list at the conclusion of the meeting and that $50,000 was the minimum funding required for all CIP projects. Mr. Murphy asked if funding was limited to the current fiscal year for each project. Mr. Atkinson explained that most projects take over a year to complete, but an attempt is made to complete all projects within three years. Mrs. Molinari added that sometimes projects request funding in a phased approach over multiple years. Ms. Gregori asked for clarification. Mr. Atkinson said the funding was for multiple fiscal years and the allocated funding would carry on for the life of the project. Mr. Christensen asked if the City had maps available showing various data(speed bumps, traffic calming measures, or City parks). He stated that having this information would be helpful when determining a project's prioritization. Mrs. Molinari said she would work with Department and Division staff to see what was available to share with the Board. Mrs. Schaefer requested that any document that would be reviewed in a meeting be shared with the Board before the meeting so that they have a chance to review and come prepared with questions. Mrs. Molinari confirmed that this could be done and that the team would do their best to supply all the information to the Board. Mr. Murphy asked for an overview of what the average Monday night meeting would be like. Mrs. Molinari explained that the Board would review a set number of applications each week. She said a spreadsheet would be shared and the group would go row by row for each project. She explained that if the Board did not have any questions, the constituents would have approximately two minutes to speak about their application. Mr. Murphy questioned if constituent application details had been vetted by the appropriate City Department or Division and if they were submitted as a joint City-backed application. Mrs. Molinari responded that constituents have worked closely with City staff to iron out all project details, scope, and cost estimates and clarified that it is not considered a joint application, it remains the constituent's original idea or plan. She added that internal staff have made sure that the project is feasible. 4. Approval of the Minutes There were no minutes to approve. 5. Approval of Bylaws Mr. Murphy made a motion to approve the updated language in the Bylaws. Mr. Skog seconded the motion. Upon roll call the bylaws were approved. 6. Adiournment There being no further business. Mrs. Schaefer made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Skog seconded the motion. The meeting was adjourned at 5:42 p.m. x Jenny Bonk(Feb 20,202417:04 MST) CDCIP Board Chair This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the CDCIP Board meeting held February 5, 2024. Community — Development & Capital Improvement Program Advisory Board FY2024-25 CIP Welcome Meeting February 5, 2024 AGENDA ❑ Welcome Board Chair ❑ Introductions All ❑ CDCIP Board Role & CIP Process Overview CAP Team ❑ Summary Application Review CAP Team ❑Approve CDCIP Minutes Board ❑Approve Updated Bylaws Board ❑Adjourn CDCIP BOARD ROLE 0 2.33.040: PURPOSE: The purpose of the board is to provide citizens with an ample opportunity to participate, in an advisory role, in the city's planning, assessment and allocation of its community development grants and capital improvement programs. Although board members serve in an advisory role only, their involvement is necessary in obtaining the opinions of persons who live and/or work in various neighborhoods to aid the city in identifying the needs within those areas and the programs and projects to be completed as part of the city's community development and capital improvement programs. (Ord. 67-13, 2013) CDCI P BOARD RESPONSIBILITIES 0 2.33.080: RESPONSIBILITIES: The board shall have the following responsibilities: A. To serve solely in an advisory role on decisions relating to the city's community development grants and capital improvement programs; B. To coordinate with the housing stability division of the city on review and evaluation of current strategic plans, goals and policies of the community development and capital improvement programs; C. To review all eligible annual project proposals submitted by various individuals, neighborhood groups, community organizations and city departments, and make recommendations to the mayor on such request for funds; D. To discuss program and project monitoring information prepared by the city to ensure that the projects are implemented as planned; E. To assure that the community development grants and capital improvement program goals are consistent with the strategic plans and goals of the city; F. To evaluate the overall effectiveness of the community development and capital improvement program activities; G. To be responsible for establishing and maintaining communications with the Salt Lake City community councils. (Ord. 21-22, 2022: Ord. 67-13, 2013) CI P PROCESS SALT LAKE CITY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) Y E A R L Y T I M E L I N E JAN FEB MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE JULY AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC FUNDING ✓///SMS05-1/////Jk - PROCESS Board reviews and Mayorreviewsand Creation of Mayor's City Council approves Applications due at recommends Recommended City Council reviews and allocates funds for projects proect-specific budgets the end of the recommends projects projects Budget g month Requests due a monthth t Constituents work with a City Division the end on their Constituent Request CITY City Divisi.s City Divisions DIVISIONSDesign and construction work for approved and active projects City Divisions work with Constituents on the Constituent Request CAP COMMITT- r 0 • Established in 2023 to evaluate Salt Lake City department CIP proposals and make recommendations to the CDCIP Board and aid in the creation of SLC's 10- Year Capital Asset Plan • Aligning with the Mayor's goal of One City, committee members represent major departments and/or divisions in Salt Lake City government • Directors or deputy directors from: Finance, Engineering, Transportation, Public Services, Community & Neighborhoods, Parks & Public Lands, Police, Fire, Equity & Inclusion, Community Outreach, Information Management Services, Public Utilities, City Attorney, Redevelopment Agency, Economic Development, and Sustainability • The CAP Committee reviewed, scored, and ranked a total of 32 department applications FY24-25 Constituent Applications Requested Requested Funding Engineering 6 $1,335,000 kept/Div Art focused 3 $650,000 Public Lands 21 $7,790,496 Transportation 11 $8,521,000 TOTAL 41 $18,296,496 Council District 9 8 6 6 ■Engineering ■Art focused 5 4 ■Public Lands Transportation 3 2 1 A 0 9 1 0 ti ti 3 5 (0 otC�` \ae FY24-25 Internal Applications 0 Dept/Div #of Projects Requested Funding Econ Dev/Arts 1 $500,000 Requested Funding Engineering 6 $17,750,000 Fire 2 $2,269,100 Police 3 $300,000* Public Lands 8 $27,891,700* Public Services 5 $7,732,800 Transportation 7 $15,500,000 TOTAL 32 $72,343,600 Council District ■Econ Dev/Arts Council■Engineering ■Fire ■Police 20 ■Public Lands ■Public Services 15 ■Transportation 10 s .0 *$300,000 for Police does not include funding for Training Center *$27,891,700 includes$10M for Green Loop(combined Dept efforts) ae �bAKFCi N • /847 Monday, February 121h Constituent Transportation/Art Applications Monday, February 261h Constituent Engineering/Public Lands (First Half) Applications Monday March 4th Constituent Public Lands Applications (Remaining half) Monday March 11th Internal Applications Monday March 18th Internal Applications Monday March 25th Internal Applications Monday April 1st Funding Meeting Minutes 02.05.2024 Final Audit Report 2024-02-21 Created: 2024-02-13 By: Rachel Molinari(rachel.molinari@slcgov.com) Status: Signed Transaction ID: CBJCHBCAABAAILhjbiYFmeJ9gW7C1Ez_mhkte53gTru4 "Minutes 02.05.2024" History Document created by Rachel Molinari (rachel.molinari@slcgov.com) 2024-02-13-4:14:00 PM GMT Document emailed to Jenny Bonk Qpbonk@gmail.com)for signature 2024-02-13-4:14:50 PM GMT Email viewed by Jenny Bonk Qpbonk@gmail.com) 2024-02-21 -0:03:17 AM GMT New document URL requested by Jenny Bonk Qpbonk@gmail.com) 2024-02-21 -0:03:27 AM GMT 6o Document e-signed by Jenny Bonk Qpbonk@gmail.com) Signature Date:2024-02-21 -0:04:17 AM GMT-Time Source:server Agreement completed. 2024-02-21 -0:04:17 AM GMT Powered by F Adobe Acrobat Sign