Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01/09/2025 - Meeting Minutes PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY Formal Meeting Thursday,January 9,2025 5:00 P.M.-9:00 P.M. Join via zoom:https://us02web.zoom.us4i/82874782240?12wd=hFlySiAHQM-il2Nhsz5nnCGVS5XISFX8.1 Or Join at the Fisher Mansion,1206 W 200 S,Salt Lake City,UT 84104 Join by phone Phone:+1 346 248 7799 Webinar ID:828 7478 2240 Access code:011342 APPROVED MINUTES 1. Convening the Meeting 5:00 PM A. Call to order — Aaron Wiley — Melanie Pehrson — Talula Pontuti — Clayton Scrivner — Brianna Binnebose — Samantha Finch — Ginger Cannon — Jenny Hewson — Steve Bloch — Kerri Nakamura B. Chair Comments 5 mins Ms. Pehrson had no comments as the Board waited for Mr. Scrivner to arrive.The Board came back to Chair comments as Mr.Scrivner arrived late. Mr.Scrivner shared that he's been invited to sit on the committee for the Public Lands Director position.They meet next Thursday for the initial screening. He invited any thoughts or feedback from Board members. Ms.Cannon asked if he could keep the board up to date and if there was an opportunity for the board to have a say. Mr.Scrivner said depending on HR rules and what he can share. 2. Approval of Minutes 5:05 PM — Approve December 5,2024, meeting minutes 5 mins Ms. Finch motioned to approve the December meeting minutes. Ms. Nakamura seconded.The Board unanimously voted to approve the December meeting minutes. 3. Public Comment 5:10 PM — Verbal comments are limited to no more than 3 minutes; 15 minutes total.Written comments are welcome. No public comment. PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY 4. Mayor's Office 5:25 PM PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY A. Homelessness&Crime-Jill Love 10 mins Ms. Love shared that she has questions she wants to ask the Board for feedback.She said the Board may have seen the newspaper that on December 131h,Governor Spencer Cox,Speaker Shultz,and President Adams sent the Mayor a letter asking her to put together a plan on homelessness by January 171h to have the plan complete. Ms. Love shared that if the plan is not satisfactory or complete,they would intervene in terms of public safety.She said that some State leadership thinks Salt Lake City isn't doing enough in arresting.The focus of this plan is very much public safety.She said that doesn't mean there won't be recommendations around housing, mental health treatment,and wraparound services, but there will be a series of recommendations around public safety. Some of the components that the State directed the City to include are maps of key touch points in law enforcement in the criminal justice process,quantitative data on arrest rates, load diagrams on the pathways from street level to counts, narratives from a diverse set of people(police officers,social workers,judges),and then actions and recommendations.She shared that the staff has come together to complete this. Ms. Love said there are many plans out there. Lots of groups have plans, including the County,the State,and other cities,and Ms. Love said their team has been working on gathering all these plans and reconciling them. As the deadline is nearing,the Mayor,Rachel Otto(Chief of Staff),and Ms. Love have been visiting the advisory boards they feel are impacted and asking questions to obtain feedback. Ms. Love said a portal for all frontline employees has also been set up so employees can provide feedback. Ms. Love asked what specific actions or strategies PNUT believes the City should be taking to address public safety and homelessness,specifically in public spaces. Ms.Binnebose said she was reading that somewhere around Arizona,they were addressing their unhoused population and helping them get back on their feet by employing cash employees.They would also have sources on-site for education.She said one of the issues they found was that if any unhoused had criminal records,it was challenging to find work, making it difficult to find housing and other necessities. Ms. Binnebose said she liked how the solutions-oriented approach allowed them to be in those public spaces and gave them something to do for money and resources to help them transition into housing or other employment. Ms. Nakamura talked about the most recent Supreme Court ruling,the anti-camping,and her experience in San Fransisco.She said that since that ruling,when San Francisco has done something that seems dramatic, there isn't camping in public spaces. She asked if the City knew what San Francisco did because they still have unsheltered, but it doesn't seem like public spaces are being taken up by camping the way they were 18 months ago. Ms. Love said she doesn't know what they've done, but it's something the City can look into and report back. Ms. Love said that camping is illegal in Salt Lake. If they're making arrests, it's usually for something else like drug possession,outstanding warrants,or disorderly content.They arrest people for camping,but other offenses will likely get better sentencing or hold results than camping.The Board and staff continued to discuss homelessness and crime. Ms. Cannon said she's seen in other cities where designated areas exist within a public park.The entire public supports the idea that the unhoused population is living in the park,and it seems the community understands that the public safety issues are concentrated. Ms. Love asked what resources are needed to effectively address public safety and homelessness issues in SLC. Ms. Pehrson said mental health services expanded. Ms.Cannon said there is less time for state legislatures to demand plans and more money to be spent. Ms.Nakamura noted in her mind that the public safety with the unsheltered population isn't that they're unsheltered, but the drugs and the drug deals who come down and prey on the population.She suggested some enhanced systems to help prevent that. Ms. Binnebose suggested reducing the barriers to bring more housing online. If you have more housing,it will naturally bring the prices down.Ms.Binnebose said a lot of people go back and forth on whether it's a mental health or housing issue, but that shouldn't matter. Build more houses and make mental health services less taboo and more accessible.She said SLC should address it as a whole,so why should the Avenues,Yalecrest,or other neighborhoods block increased affordable housing options when it's all of SLC's problems?The Board and staff continued to discuss homelessness and crime. PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY Ms. Love asked the Board if there are solutions that they believe the City could be taking to improve the criminal justice system for those experiencing homelessness.She shared that it's very frustrating for police officers because they will arrest someone,and even the judges will say before they have sentenced them, they're out of jail,and they begin to have repeat offenders.It's not unusual to have someone be arrested half a dozen times, but there isn't space in the jail,judges are being overworked in their caseloads,and so sentencing happens on the fly.The City will be making recommendations aboutjail space.The prosecutors have a series of recommendations that would help them with more mandatory holds for repeat offenders, and the judges have recommendations even as simple as how they receive the information on the individual. Ms. Pehrson added that it's important to remember how difficult it is to get housing for any criminal offense. Background checks can squash any opportunity for these people to get housing,even for minor or non-violent offenses.She shared that she likes the Kayak Court on the Jordan River and its power. Ms. Binnebose asked if there could be other options besides just jail,such as being sentenced to a facility, especially if it's a substance abuse, because they truly need more time than just that 48-72 hour hold even to begin feeling the withdrawal symptoms to help them start on the path to that. Ms. Love said the DA recommends something like that where some of the sentencing will take some offenders to specific courts to address the issue,whether it's drugs or something else,and that the sentences will reflect those needs. The Board and staff continued to discuss homelessness and crime. Ms. Love said their goal is to have a draft plan early next week,and they'll start meeting with stakeholders. By the end of next week,the Mayor will release the plan to be shared.She said in the comments from frontline employees,it's clear this is burning out employees.She shared that firefighters are getting called out every hour.A 911 call was made because someone was intoxicated.She shared that some of the Public Lands employees'comments are they're going out on a Monday to fix a sprinkler head,and it's broken again by Tuesday intentionally because the unsheltered population doesn't want to get wet at night when they sleep. She said they welcome the opportunity to look at the whole system holistically. Ms. Cannon thanked Ms. Love for all the hard work. Ms. Love said they'd be sharing the report. Ms. Love included that the Public Lands Director position has been closed,and they've received 60 applicants undergoing screening.There is a group reviewing those applications,including Mr. Scrivner from PNUT,to decide how many to interview.They are still on track to hopefully have a decision by the end of the month, maybe early February.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Public Lands Director position. 5. City Attorney 5:35 PM PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY A. Review Board's Powers&Duties-Cameron Johnson 10 mins Mr.Johnson introduced himself as the newest City attorney employee,and today is his third official day. He's been an SLC resident for 16 years,and his previous job was with the Department of the Interior Office, where he represented the Bureau of Land Management for almost 11 years. He attended law school at the University of Utah and started as a career public servant in the State AG's office. In addition to advising Public Lands, he also will be advising Public Services.The Board and staff continued to discuss Mr.Johnson's background. Mr.Johnson said he's had three days to familiarize himself with what the Board can and cannot do,and it breaks down into three buckets. His role is to advise the Board on their jurisdiction, power and duties,the acquisition of any lands,and conflicts. He said Board members are voluntary public servants,which comes with none of the benefits or responsibilities,meaning they cannot participate in any self-interested dealing. They are spokespeople for the City as they are representatives of the City.As a Board,they are also subject to the Open Meetings Laws of the state,which means,among other things,they are required to take an annual training video,which is available online on the State auditor's website,or he could come back and present later.Additionally, meetings must be open to the public,and notice must be given in advance, specifically agendas and meeting records.When the Board makes agendas,they cannot make any final decisions unless the item has been on one previous agenda.All discussions,deliberations,and actions should be open to the public unless the Board feels a closed meeting is needed. Mr.Johnson said they could talk about how to do that and what the outcomes would be. Ms. Nakamura asked for clarity on taking action on an item that needed to be on the agenda in a previous meeting. Mr.Johnson said any action items must first have been on a prior agenda so the public can either know about it or weigh in. Mr.Scrivner asked when a closed meeting may be necessary. Mr.Johnson said, in a hypothetical situation, as part of the Board's role of managing the open space lands program,there was a parcel that you were interested in acquiring on behalf of the City or wanted to debate.There may be some sensitivity around the price,various bidders, etc.,that could be a closed-session topic. Mr.Scrivner brought up that the Board has been discussing donations centered around monuments,etc.,which can be a very sensitive discussion. He wonders if a situation like that might invoke a closed session. Mr. Bloch added they have been reviewing donations for monuments that want to be put in the Peace Gardens. Mr.Johnson said if the Board feels they need a closed session, he will review that process. He added the Board also has Bylaws,and it's his understanding they don't go into great depth about when a closed session should invoked.The Board and staff continued to discuss their powers and duties. Mr.Johnson said the Board's job is primarily to advise the Mayor,City Council,and staff,and the Board has no final decisions and no supervisory or directional authority over public lands.The Board does have more authority in the open space lands program, in addition to acquisitions in which the Board can have greater involvement.The Board is also tasked with keeping a map and inventory of the City's open space lands. He opened it to questions. Ms. Binnebose asked about the maps. Mr.Johnson said they wouldn't do this individually but with the Public Lands Department to keep a map and inventory of all open space. Ms. Finch asked if there's something,at minimum,the Board should be doing to meet their powers and duties.She wondered if there was anything the Board could be negligent of. Mr.Johnson said he doesn't know if there's anything they would call negligent. Still, as it's a long list of powers and duties,the Board can prioritize these opportunities and responsibilities.The Board and staff continued to discuss their powers and duties. 6. Board Action Items 5:45 PM A. Chair Elections 5 mins Ms. Cannon said she would like to withdraw her nomination for Chair as she would like to focus her time on committees this year. Mr. Scrivner asked for a refresher on who's been nominated. Ms. Larsen said Ms. Nakamura has been nominated for Chair,and Mr.Wiley and Ms. Cannon have been nominated for Vice- Chair.The election process is when the Board selects two non-nominated members to count the votes. Ms. Larsen said the Board still needs to have an official vote for Ms. Nakamura to be Chair. Mr.Scrivner PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY motioned to approve Ms. Nakamura as Chair. Ms. Pontuti seconded.The Board unanimously voted to approve Ms.Nakamura as Chair. B. Vice-Chair Elections 5 mins Ms. Larsen passed outvoting forms for Vice-Chair. Ms. Pehrson and Ms. Binnebose tallied up the votes. Ms. Cannon was voted as Vice-Chair. C. SCAAMP 10 mins Ms. Larsen reminded the Board that SCAAMP was put on as an action item to discuss the Board making it an official committee or appointing a Board member to assist staff with the plan. Ms.Cannon said she hasn't been able to connect with staff,but she read the scope and is interested in helping Ms.Andra.She said her assumption from the last conversation was that Ms.Andra was looking for a few people to help with certain key touchpoints,and Ms.Cannon would like to volunteer for that. Mr. Murdock said this is an exciting,overdue project for Public Lands.This plan will primarily focus on how staff adequately implements the Reimagine Nature Master Plan.SCAAMP will identify projects outlined on a 5-10-year basis so that staff knows what they'll apply for CIP each year.An asset management plan is a component of SCAAMP.Staff is collecting a lot of data in cartography to understand every asset in the Public Lands inventory.This asset management plan will help guide staff on the anticipated lifecycle of each asset and how it will be analyzed, documented,and inspected yearly. It will help staff identify the annual cost for each amenity that needs to be replaced.Another plan component is related to the Board's responsibilities regarding open space.This is an exciting component to look at the development of a new open space acquisition plan.The Board and staff continued to discuss SCAAMP. Ms.Cannon motioned that the Board assigns a representative to work with staff on SCAAMP. Mr. Bloch seconded the motion.The Board unanimously voted to take action to assign a Board representative to SCAAMP. Mr.Scrivner asked what the next steps are. Ms.Cannon's following action is to determine which board member will work with the staff. Ms.Cannon will contact Ms.Andra for more information on what's expected. Ms. Nakamura suggested to staff that playground replacement doesn't have to be a CIP but rather ongoing maintenance,and she wonders if there's a strategy there to start educating the Council and saying this is ongoing maintenance money, not capital project money. Mr. Murdock said that's the reason for this plan. Mr. Murdock said the CIP process is inefficient in allocating general fund dollars for playground replacement.The Council has been reluctant to give staff a lump sum asset replacement to the Department until staff has more accurate information.The Board and staff continued to discuss SCAAMP. D. Foothills Committee:Working Group 10 mins Mr.Bloch would like to leverage the provision in the Bylaws to establish a Foothills working group.He said the Bylaws say that any Board member may make a motion to ask the Department to form a working group with stakeholders external to the Department approved by the Board.The request must be a letter from the Board to the Department requesting this participation and describing the working group.The Department must propose members of the working group. Mr. Bloch is asking the Board to ask the Department to form a working group. Mr.Bloch said he had conversations with other Boards about bringing non-board members onto the Foothills Committee instead of creating a separate working group. Mr. Bloch said the Bylaws envision that happening through this separate working group.The working group would report to the Department, not the Foothills Committee.After talking to staff, Mr.Bloch thinks the time is right to establish this group as the Department starts to work on the Foothills Open Space Zone. Mr. Murdock shared that Mr. Bloch has been meeting with staff to ensure the establishment or recommendation of a working group that aligns with the Board responsibilities and responsibilities of the Foothills Committee but also meets the needs within the implementation of the Foothills Trails Master Plan. Mr. Murdock said a working group gives the staff of the Foothills Committee a chance to identify the responsibility of the Foothills Committee,which could be created again,and then the recommendation of a working group. He said staff sees the working group as being critical to the future implementation of any trail and all improvements in the Foothills.Staff is finalizing a contract with the Environmental Dispute Resolution(EDR).They are currently conducting assessments of all the landowners in the Foothills,five agencies,and when that's done,the staff hopes to have a management agreement with those landowners. PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY Then,they'll help staff establish that group and identify who will be on it and their responsibilities.The Board and staff continued to discuss the Foothills Committee working group. Mr. Bloch motioned that the Board ask the Department to form a working group; if approved,the Board will draft a letter. He said he's happy to draft a letter with Mr.Murdock and share it with the Board for review. Ms.Cannon said the Board needs to form some letter to the Department,and she's unsure if a vote is necessary to establish. Ms.Cannon said she seconds the first half of Mr. Bloch's motion. Mr.Scrivner asked what the working group's scope is and where that's articulated. Mr. Murdock said they need a recommendation from the EDR group to establish a scope.A letter can be a way to identify the important needs that the Board sees to be included in that scope. Mr.Scrivner wants the scope to be realistic. He supports the working group and wants to avoid pitfalls. Ms.Cannon said they could rescind the current motion and second and make the motion to establish a working group with the scope and duties outlined in a letter review by PNUT. Ms. Binnebose asked them to consider the types of stakeholders they would see and recommend seeing on PNUT for consideration. Ms. Larsen asked for the Board to restate the new motion.Ms.Cannon motioned for the Board to ask the Department to establish a working group in the Foothills and bring to PNUT a letter outlining that working group's scope. Ms. Hewson seconded the motion.The Board unanimously voted to approve the motion. Mr. Bloch said,as a preview to the budget,that if there's a working group,they can talk about GIS and a letter from the Board asking for some GIS funding so they can accurately map. Ms. Nakamura said it would also be nice to map the urban trails.The Board broke for dinner and had an open discussion. 7. Dinner Break(30 minutes) 6:15 PM 8. Director's Report 6:45 PM - Summary of current high-priority department items.-Tyler Murdock 5 mins Mr. Murdock welcomed the Board to the Fisher Carriage House.The City acquired the Carriage House in 2010,and it sat vacant until 2019 when funding was allocated to renovate the Carriage House. He shared some of the history of the Fisher Mansion and the Carriage House.Currently,the Carriage House is used by the Park Ranger team. Mr. Murdock said interviews for the Public Lands Director will begin in late January or early February.Tyler Fonarow will be the Public Lands Division Director on the search committee.Staff anticipates completing the 2024 annual report in the next few weeks,and staff will share that with the Board. Mr. Murdock said last year,staff started tying the annual report to the strategies and actions in the Reimagine Nature Plan to track how the staff is slowly achieving that Master Plan. Mr. Murdock shared that Ms.McCain,the Communications Manager, has taken another role in the City,working for Communications on the IMS team. Her old position is open,and he invited the board to share it with their networks. He told the Board that Mr. Fonarow is the new Trails and Natural Lands(TNL)Division Director.The staff has reclassified Mr. Fonarow's old job to focus on operations support for TNL.The job was posted this week.They will be working in the Foothills and other natural areas and directing the work in a way similar to how Park's structure works with operations managers.The Board and staff continued to discuss staff updates. Mr. Murdock said they appreciate the Mayor's team for looking into Public Land's operations and some of the impacts their teams are currently facing.Staff shared with the Mayor's office that Public Lands has been using an operational budget not dedicated to security or enhanced park security in key areas throughout the city.They have contracted with CBI to do security patrols at Liberty Park, Fairmont Park,and Allen Parks. One of the biggest concerns is that it's not done equitably.One of the key recommendations Public Lands submitted as part of this plan is to implement a more robust security detail that would utilize the City's new contract with All Pro Security and have a West Side and East Side Security Detail focused on key parks. Mr. Murdock continued to discuss security in parks. Mr. Murdock said the Mayor's team is looking at potentially how the Park Ranger program may be tasked with more compliance responsibility.When the Park Ranger program began,there was no enforcement capacity because that's how the Council wanted it. More enforcement capability is being explored. Ms. Nakamura asked what things the Park Rangers would have compliance with. Mr. Murdock said it's tricky and PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY something staff could return to do a more prominent presentation on.Right now,what that would look like has a pretty limited scope.Unlike the Compliance Division,which is ticketing vehicles, Park Rangers interact with people,and there's a very different post-certification that may be required if we're trying to work on enforcement with individuals. Mr. Murdock said last year's staff was funded for increased spring surge.This is what the staff calls it,so they can use contract work to target many of the staff's significant needs in the spring.This brings in contract workers to help with trash removal and mowing during this high-demand period.This will begin in April and go through June.This will help alleviate the burden that's placed on staff. It's about$250,000 allocated. Ms.Cannon asked if this included any ballfield work. Mr. Murdock said they used funding for that last year,and it could consist of some of that, but he doesn't think it does this year. Ms. Bailey said this money would help when the staff is most impacted.The more skilled work will remain with the ballfields and whatnot,and the contracted workers will do the more basic tasks. Per the Board's request, Mr. Murdock said the Director's Update could be an excellent opportunity to inform the Board of upcoming controversial items.One problem the Department has is sycamore trees in the City and Yalecrest neighborhood.A group in Yalecrest,Save Our Sycamores,wants the City to take more action on treating sycamores for anthracnose and several other diseases that infect sycamores.This year,the staff is proposing targeted treatments in the heavier old-growth sycamore areas to determine the effectiveness of the treatment. Mr.Scrivner asked if it was a beetle infection. Mr. Murdock said it's a fungus.One of the trickiest parts is that it's a full-year application to be most effective.Treating 200-foot trees by spraying insecticide is not feasible over a large city area.Staff is experimenting with targeted injections, pruning,or larger sycamores to gauge the benefits.There are 4,551 sycamores in the City,and treatment is anticipated to be around $1,000 per tree and done on a one to two-year cycle.This isn't the total number of sycamores in the city, not the total impacted.There are probably around 2,500 in old-growth or larger areas.Staff doesn't know how many they're planning on targeting this year.The Department is exploring three different treatment options for about 50 trees.The Board and staff continued to discuss sycamore trees. Mr. Murdock said there's a lot of conversation going around public spaces in the Fairpark area.Cottonwood and Madsen Park are targeted for bond funding to reimagine and invest in those parks.As part of the deal the City has done with the State,the City owns a tiny sliver of land immediately on the other side of the bridge where the Jordan River Parkway connects to North Temple.As part of that agreement,the City has agreed to transfer ownership of that trail and land to a public entity,which is yet to be named but most likely the State.This is new,and the staff is unsure of the total acreage.The City has restrictions placed upon it to remain open for public access.This space disposition process started this week and will be a 6-month process with multiple public hearings.Staff will share when there are more updates and if the Board has further questions.The Board and staff continued to discuss this space. Mr. Murdock said they've received updates from the Events team about upcoming events this year. Mr. Murdock thinks this could be a significant agenda item next month.The Events team is increasing the number of events throughout the City.The Ballpark area will be targeted.Staff learned much about what worked and didn't work with events last year. He thinks this would be a good discussion for the Board to figure out how staff can activate spaces and how the Board can support in promoting those events.The Board and staff continued to discuss Director updates. 9. Staff Presentations&Updates 6:50 PM A. Staff Budget FY25/26 Presentation-Tyler Murdock 30 mins Ms. Larsen shared her screen to display the Staff Budget FY25/26 Presentation.Mr.Murdock explained the City's budget process.The process begins in December,and departments work on updated primary goals and budget insights they'll request that year.Tonight's discussion will be focused on budget insights.Budget insight is when staff requests new funding to add capacity to Public Lands. Last year,staff submitted a handful of budget insights,such as the Trails and Natural Lands Division Director position request. Mr. Murdock said the staff is open to the Board's feedback regarding these budget insight requests.This year's budget will be tighter throughout the City,and next month,staff anticipates receiving more direction on what the administration is looking for in terms of how flat the budget needs to be.Mr. Bloch asked if the PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY insight requests were only for staffing or equipment. Mr. Murdock said both of those can be included in the budget insights. Mr. Murdock said that the staff looked at General Fund revenue budget projections in January and used that information to revise the budget insights. Department reviews begin in March,with Finance reviewing existing budgets. Staff will present to the Mayor in April,and the Mayor will finalize budget decisions in mid-April, released in May.The City Council reviews budgets in May and June,and the new fiscal year starts in July. Mr. Murdock highlighted the existing staff structure from Administrative(18.85 FT&4.91 FT, Parks 84.85 FT&53 PT, Urban Forestry 18 FT,Trails&Natural Lands 11.15 FT&9.35 PT, Planning&Design 10 FT,and Park Rangers 21 FT). Mr. Murdock highlighted the six budget insights Public Lands is looking at: 1. Inflationary&Contractual (0 FT; FY26 General Fund Request: $1,400,000; FY24 FOF(Budget Transfer: $0) 2. New Property Maintenance(1 FT; FY26 General Fund Request: $0; FY24 FOF(Budget Transfer): $600,000) 3. After Hours Park Maintenance Crews(3 FT; FY26 General Fund Request: $458,000; FY24 FOF (Budget Transfer):$0) 4. Assistant Supervisor Park Operations(6FT; FY26 General Fund Request:$579,700; FY24 FOF (Budget Transfer):$0) 5. Seasonal Salary Replacement(1 FT; FY26 General Fund Request: $694,000; FY24 FOF(Budget Transfer):$0) 6. Contracted Park Security(0 FT; FY26 General Fund Request: $550,000; FY24 FOF(Budget Transfer): $0) There are a lot more needs than just these six. Mr. Murdock said he's unsure how it's been handled in the past, but he knows that some Board members may be interested in the Department to consider other insights. He thinks this is something the Board can discuss,decide,and potentially recommend for the Department to include in the form of a letter. Mr. Murdock highlighted the budget numbers and explained these are rough estimates.The Board and staff continued to discuss budget insights. Inflationary&Contractual Increases Mr. Murdock said Inflationary&Contractual Increases are always the department's top priority as they must meet contractual obligations.This year,the biggest impact was on water. Staff is anticipating a 10%increase this year. He said Public Utilities has implemented a new water structure fee to help compensate for the increase.Staff is looking at a $1 M water increase. Mr. Bloch asked if the department pays the market rate. Mr. Murdock said yes. Mr. Murdock highlighted the Event Increase in the contractual services budget to supplement existing events and expand the drone shows for the 4th and 24th of July.The Board and staff continued to discuss Inflationary&Contractual Increases. New Properties&Growth Mr. Murdock said they deliver new projects every year,and oftentimes,those don't add increased capacity to their teams; sometimes,they do.Glendale Park is a good example,where budget insight covered a portion of the budget.This is one of the department's most significant challenges on the operational side. The department is handed new projects every year to maintain,and oftentimes,they don't get adequate funding. Last year,the department had 10 projects funded at one time,so staff has no ongoing funding for maintaining key parcels. Mr. Murdock said the Capital Asset Planning Committee,a new committee in the city, is looking at improving this structure.As the department grows in its capital delivery, its capital maintenance is not happening at the same level.The finance team anticipates having a full report and recommendation by the end of this year for how the City can change the process and improve how we're funding maintenance alongside a project.The Department wants to focus on the operational side and return employees to their core responsibilities: maintaining parks and public spaces.The Department is requesting contractual funding for all right-of-way maintenance and medians.The Board and staff continued to discuss New Properties&Growth. Seasonal Salary Replacement Mr. Murdock said that Public Lands received a budget cut of$200,000 for seasonal staff,so teams cannot hire as many seasonal employees as they did last year,and it's a big concern.Staff is requesting that $200,000 be brought back into the budget in addition to an increase of$250,000,about 13,020 hours of seasonal time.They are also looking into providing a cost-of-living increase for seasonal and part-time PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY employees at 5.8%.The last time this was provided to seasonal staff was FY23.This request will help improve the retention of seasonal staff and be more competitive with the changing seasonal market. Mr. Murdock said he thinks the seasonal budget was targeted for reduction last year as the department went through several years where hiring seasonal staff was hard to do.Since then,the market has changed significantly,and staff can employ seasonal staff more effectively now.They also want to ensure they pay them fairly and get returning seasonals. Ms. Nakamura asked if the staff would rather have the$250,000 surge contract in the spring or the seasonal. Mr. Murdock said while the contractual work is great,staff doesn't have a sound system for internally overseeing the contractual work,and the City's procurement limitations are often challenging for them to have contractors do work quickly.The Board and staff continued to discuss Seasonal Salary Replacement. Operations Assistant Supervisors Mr. Murdock said they are seeking six full-time parks assistant supervisors who would be assigned to each district.A lot more work has been put on our park supervisors, making it more challenging for them to be out in the field with their employees.Staff believes this has led to inefficiencies in their operations.The park assistant supervisors would provide field full-time field supervision, park inspections and asset tracking, park condition assessment(Cartegraph),field training,and safety committee representation. Mr. Murdock said when a supervisor is out, no structure in place allows for good continuity of supervision.This would provide more organization in the structure and opportunity for growth.The Board and staff continued to discuss Operations Assistant Supervisors. After-Hours Park Maintenance Mr. Murdock said this budget insight request would greatly help the department's current operational needs.Teams are done at 2:30 PM; no operations teams fill the gap when the parks are busiest. Staff is proposing two after-hours dedicated teams to target high-use parks,such as Liberty Park and Sherwood Park.This would alleviate the burden on daytime operations because,on most Mondays,teams deal with the weekend's impacts. Ms. Hewson asked if this insight had been asked for before. Mr. Murdock said yes. He added this request could also support special events.These after-hours teams would help with prep and clean-up support of special events.The Board and staff continued to discuss After-Hours Park Maintenance. Contracted Park Security Mr. Murdock said that Public Lands currently has a $250,000 Homeless Budget.The staff has this budget to help them with the impact of people experiencing homelessness in parks.The majority of this budget is being used on contractual security.About$200,000 is going to security at Liberty, Fairmont,and Allen Park; the rest is used on park bathroom closures.The staff has contractors go out to 29 park bathrooms,and staff has 57 to close them at night and ensure no one is living in those bathrooms.Staff is proposing to have dedicated funding for park security so that the existing operational budget cannot be used and to free up $250,000 that could be used for targeted cleanups.When they closed the restrooms, Ms. Nakamura asked if they cleaned them at night. Mr. Murdock said no, but it's something they can explore.The Board and staff continued to discuss Contracted Park Security. Staff is looking at a budget request of$3,631,700 and $600,000 to Fund our future maintenance needs. Ms. Cannon asked what the whole budget for Public Lands is. Mr. Murdock said about$29M. Ms. Nakamura brought up many of the studies staff has going on (restrooms,shade). She asked if the playground shade structure was funded. Mr. Murdock said it wasn't a study but an implementation of shade structures throughout playgrounds. She wondered if there needed to be any review to decide how or where these shade structures go. Mr. Murdock said no and thinks it identified the playgrounds that would be funded for shade structures. Ms. Nakamura said it would be nice to know what studies the department has and where the staff is in those processes,if not in this budget,then in a coming budget so the Board knows what's on the horizon. Mr. Murdock said they could do that.The Board and staff continued to discuss budget insights. Mr. Bloch said he'd repeatedly raised the issue of having a GIS analyst with people. He thinks the department needs several GIS positions and that staff is walking blindfolded with their hands behind their backs,so they do not have an industry GIS analyst. Mr. Bloch would like the Board to consider this for an insight request. He wants to know how the Board can help move the Department's budget priorities forward. He suggested a letter from the Board. Mr. Murdock said the staff does have employees in the PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY office who are GIS competent and do some of that work for them, but it's minimal and not their job.This is a need the Department has.The Department has access to one Citywide GIS analyst in the past. Mr. Murdock shared an example of a signage request.The staff has asked for a signage position multiple times. The direction they received was to use the City signage and graphic designer.The staff has been unsuccessful in doing this for the last two years,and the department has been told their needs cannot be met.This is similar to what's happening with the Cityside GIS position.This model is not the best practice for Public Lands.The Board and staff continued to discuss budget insights. Ms. Binnebose suggested that the Board write a letter prioritizing the Department's budget insights requests while also listing out the needs that the city can't meet. Mr. Murdock liked this idea,and he brought up that they've asked for a signage position for the last years and haven't received it,so they did not submit for one previous year and made an effort to request more from the Citywide graphic designer, and it was just this week staff heard back saying they can't meet the demand.That approach is something they can do with the GIS position as well. Ms. Binnebose said it like a wish list to demonstrate why they couldn't get it to us. Ms. Pontuti suggested using graduate students. Mr. Bloch said it would be nice to have a person on staff who could then leverage and supervise those people.The Board and staff continued to discuss budget insights. Mr.Scrivner said there are many"TBDs"in the budget presentation. He asked what was needed from the Board. Mr. Murdock said last year,the Board did not provide a letter about budget insights. He thinks it's up to the Board to decide if they want staff to return next month with more final numbers. Mr.Scrivner said that's the reality when those TBD's are determined. Ms. Binnebose said that for FY23 and FY24,staff provided a list of budget insights, and the Board prioritized them in a process similar to CIP.The Board can set up a similar process. Mr. Murdock said staff will get more direction on where the budget is in February or later this month.There are still a lot of questions about the new properties and the scope. It will be tough to ask for six full-time positions, and that one might fall off the list depending on budget direction.The Board provided suggestions on how to reframe the Operations Assistant Supervisors. Mr. Murdock said their focus is on field staff this year.The Board and staff continued to discuss budget insights. Ms. Pehrson asked for an overview of the budget schedule and when staff should submit it to the mayor. Mr. Murdock said March.The Board would like staff to come back with final numbers in February. Ms. Larsen suggested that staff could share final numbers mid-month,which would give the Board part of January to review,type up a letter,and discuss, review,and approve the letter in February.The Board and staff continued to discuss the timeline. B. Staff Update. -Ashlyn Larsen 5 mins Ms. Larsen said the Board needs to complete OPMA everyyear. Previously,she shared the link for Board members to complete online,and they returned their certificates to her.She asked if the Board would like to take that approach again or have the City Attorney come and do a presentation.The online training takes 8-10 minutes to complete. Ms. Nakamura likes doing it in a board meeting;anyone who doesn't attend can do the online training.The Board discussed how they wanted to handle OPMA. Ms. Larsen said most Board members get her the certificate within the first six months,and she suggested a due date,such as the April meeting.The Board decided to do the online training and return the certificate to Ms. Larsen by the April meeting. She will send the link out. Ms. Larsen said that Ms. Finch's and Ms. Hewson's last official month as Board members is February.They are allowed to serve on the Board until a replacement is found. She asked Ms. Finch and Ms. Hewson to let her know how they'd like to proceed. Ms. Larsen said she did more research on Ms. Binnebose's official end date with the Recorder's office,and it is in September of this year. Ms. Larsen said that, as of today, Mr. Dodd has resigned from the Board, so a District 6 position is now open.She invited the Board to share the openings with their community members. Ms. Larsen is working with the Community Council Liaisons to spread the word.The Board and staff continued to discuss Board openings.The Board broke for a 10- minute break and had a general open discussion. PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRY AND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY 10. 10-minute break 7:25 PM 11. Board Discussion 7:35 PM PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY A. Review Board Goals 10 mins Ms. Larsen shared her screen to display the Board's goals they created last year. Establish new subcommittees Achieved. Advise on RFPs Ms. Nakamura asked about the goal of"Advise on RFP." If that's when the department issues an RFP,they'll involve a board member. Ms. Binnebose said yes. Ms. Nakamura asked if a Board member participated in an RFP. No one on the Board recalls serving on an RFP. Ms.Cannon suggested the Board revisit this goal at the rate at which RFPs go out. It's overwhelming and doesn't happen on the board's monthly meeting timelines. Ms.Cannon suggested that if the RFP is over a certain amount of scope,the Board could review it. The Board initially set this goal regarding the Foothills. Mr. Murdock said he thinks it could be challenging for the Board to keep up with the RFP. Ms. Binnebose suggested keeping it something that's a high-dollar item or controversial.The Board and staff continued to discuss the RFP goal. Mr. Murdock suggested that staff could do a presentation in the future to discuss their standard process for when and how they use consultants.The staff has internal criteria for determining when they use a formal RFP. Ms. Pehrson said that one of the biggest concerns the public has is with the execution done by the consultants. Ms. Hewson agreed it would be nice to have some talking points.The Board and staff continued to discuss the RFP goal. Recommendation to CAP about including disclaimer information Ms. Binnebose said this goal came from the discussion of the Constituent CIP applications,which are not very detailed.Constituents may perceive what's technically feasible and reasonable within the park's operations.This was a big talking point as constituents would submit CIP projects and expect them to be executed in the application they wrote. Still,once staff did a deeper dive, many of these engineer recommendations didn't coincide with the application.An example of this was Miller Park.She said the Board discussed if there was a better process at the beginning of the CIP process to help vet these applications. Ms. Binnebose said this is probably too much for their board to tackle as this is a sweeping problem all departments face with Constituent CIP applications.The Board and staff continued to discuss this goal. Mr. Murdock said this goal is solving the problems with the CIP process. For the last two years, staff have written a report on what they think the challenges are with the process and made recommendations. It hasn't changed,which continues to present staff every year with complex projects that may not align with the Master Plan goals. Miller Park is an excellent example of the amount of staff time that's gone into the Miller Park project and didn't align with anything professional experts recommended. Mr. Murdock said no other City does what Salt Lake City does with Constituent CIP projects.The Board and staff continued to discuss this goal.The Board and staff compared the CIP process and the Love Your Block funding source. Ms. Cannon said that most cities set aside funds for development that any constituent can apply for. Mr. Wiley said he doesn't think it's needed as it's complicated and complex to measure.The Board is going to review all these applications anyway. Ms. Pehrson said when they submitted their last letter,the Board included suggestions for updating the application.The Board and staff continued to discuss this goal. Triage Hot Topics Mr.Scrivner asked if this goal was having staff bring hot topics to the Board earlier. Mr. Murdock doesn't like being in a director's report as it doesn't give staff a chance to give the board useful information to take back to the community. Mr.Scrivner asked where they'd get the information then. Ms. Nakamura said one of the things requested last year was communicating with the Board ahead of time if there's a significant issue, such as the trees that died.The Board learned about it in the local press,and it would've been nice to be PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY given that heads-up. Mr. Scrivner thinks being more proactive in things on the horizon,even if it's painful, would be good to know.The Board and staff continued to discuss triage hot topics. A. Committee Reporting 45 mins Communications Committee Mr.Scrivner and Ms. Binnebose said they did not meet this last month. Ms. Pontuti said no one has signed up for the stakeholder presentation platform or seen anything posted on Public Lands'socials. Ms. Larsen said she would follow up on that. Mr.Scrivner also suggested making it known and available for staff to share if constituents connect with them on topics to bring to the Board. Ms. Pontuti will share the S.M.A.R.T. goals form for committees to fill out and update. Urban Trails Committee Ms. Nakamura said the committee has picked a standing meeting date:the fourth Monday of every month. No other committee updates. B. Committee Review:Assign Membership 10 mins Ms. Larsen shared her screen to display the current committee membership list.The Board reviewed each committee to ensure Board members were assigned to a committee and updated the membership list. Ms. Cannon said she would need to step off the Urban Trails Committee to focus on SCAAMP.The Board will update and add SCAAMP after the meeting.The Board continued to review committee membership. Ms. Finch invited a Committee to give a more formal presentation about their work to the Board,and they're welcome to do so. C. Create new Board goals 10 mins The Board created the following goals for 2025: 1. Continue to triage hot topics—make sure that we are,as a Board,aware of big/controversial topics ahead of time to best serve the Department in communications. 2. Collectively support committees with goal execution. 3. Increase methods to support the Department more effectively through avenues such as the Reimagine Nature Master Plan. 4. Individually assess capacity of advocacy outside of Board and committee meetings. 5. Bring creative ideas for Board engagement in the community. The Board continued to discuss their goals for 2025. Ms. Cannon asked about advocacy outside of Board meetings.She mentioned that they work on their committees,and some members have gone to City Council meetings or Neighborhood Community Council meetings when asked.She wonders if this should be a Board goal. Ms. Hewson said they might do it independently but could report it more. Ms.Cannon says she sees a gap where staff are the only people advocating for parks.The Board and staff continued to discuss Board goals. Mr.Wiley suggested that the Board help the Department by identifying ways to support parks better.Such as the GIS position,connecting Master's students and projects,and a volunteer program to help with locking the bathrooms at night,as some examples. He brought up on the West Side,a lot of the community is assisting care and prep the fields for the sport's season. Maybe there are more ways the Board can help the department develop ideas.The Board and staff continued to discuss Board goals. D. Board comments and question period 5 mins Ms. Finch asked about the waterline going into Allen Park. Mr.Scrivner asked what it was for. Ms. Finch said it was to bring water into the park. Mr. Murdock said there's no water in Allen Park,so stewards help with watering. Mr. Murdock can work on getting an update. Ms. Pehrson asked if Glendale Park is scheduled to open next summer. Mr. Murdock said it's moving along nicely with no major issues. Ms. Nakamura asked for an update on Jefferson Park. Mr. Murdock said these are all construction project-related requests,and he thinks providing a more robust construction update could be beneficial.The staff lists 20 projects, 10 of which are Transportation and 10 of which are Public Lands. He thinks an overall update with what's PARKS,NATURAL LANDS,URBAN FORESTRYAND TRAILS ADVISORY BOARD of SALT LAKE CITY expected to be delivered in the next year or two.The Board and staff continued to discuss project construction. Ms. Cannon asked if there was any new stuff around SLCMobile. Mr. Murdock isn't aware of any. Ms. Pehrson said the app had changed. Mr. Bloch asked if Ms. Bailey would provide a Parks update in February. Ms. Larsen said she told Ms. Bailey today that the Board is still interested in an update. Mr. Bloch said he talked to Ms. Bailey about how to clean the air in Salt Lake.The board and staff continued with general board questions and comments. Mr.Scrivner asked about the donations and where that was to figure out and discuss. He would like it on the February agenda. Mr. Murdock said staff will meet with the Mayor's office to discuss. Mr. Scrivner suggested talking to the attorney's office to see if it warrants a closed session. Mr. Murdock said there were some revisions before the staff presented the policy in February. E. Next meeting: February 6,2025 F. Request for future agenda items Ms. Larsen said currently she has noted down the February agenda items: Overview of events Parks operations update Project Construction Timeline- Ms. Larsen suggested this as a written update Donations Mr. Bloch would like to see a Parks update as they haven't had anyone from Ms. Bailey's team for six to seven months.The Board and staff discussed providing more written updates in the packet moving forward. Ms. Nakamura motioned to adjourn the meeting. Mr. Bloch seconded the motion.The Board unanimously voted to adjourn the meeting. 12. Adjourn 9:00 PM