Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout03/24/2025 - Meeting Minutes MINI 11 FS FROM I HF c't)�1\1I'NI1)' D1 \TI 011MUN I R ( APH At 1MP1?OVFMFN'1 PR0>.1F;.CTS IWAItI) MIT,I ING (c OCIP) Monday. March 24, 2025 S:001)nt l . Board Members Board Members Not Present Brad ('116stensen Jake `kog Jenny Bonk Heidi Steed Devon Schechinger Dallin Jones Andrea Schaefer Joseph Murphy Staff Present Bret Montgomery, Rachel Molinari, Mike Atkinson, Sherif Basta, Owen Reeder, and Ben Luedtke—Department of Finance Elizabeth Buehler— Information Management Services 2. Business A. Welcome & Introductions Ms. Molinari welcomed the CDCIP Board members and City staff then opened the meeting on March 24, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. She said that each person must state their name before commenting for the public record and reminded Board members to make sure their microphones were on while speaking. The staff offered individual introductions. Mr. Skog then started the introduction of the CDCIP Board, and each member introduced themselves. B. Overview of Funding Sources Ms. Molinari explained that the approach in the past had been for the Board to start with the most restrictive funding sources first and then work their way back to the most flexible sources. She described Impact Fees funding as a fee imposed on new development pr(�Iects in Salt Lake City to ensure existing levels of service would be maintained. Ms. Molinari continued to explain Class C funding, Funding our Future (FOF) Streets, FOF Other, FOF Transit, Quarter Cent Sales Tax, and the General Fund. C. Discussions and Funding Recommendations Spreadsheet Overview: Mr. Atkinson provided an overview of'the funding log spreadsheet, highlighting its resemblance to the one utilised in previous years, noting the eligibility details provided within. He explained that the sheet was in rank order by the Board member's scores and that he had created two distinct scenarios as a starting point fi)r discussions: one entailing full funding for each project based on ranking, prioritising the most restrictive funds first, and the other involving partial fun(il 12 again according to the hoard's ranking. Mr. Atkinson added that he also built a sunlnlai-\' tab to show the breakdown by various categories to assist the hoard in its understnndiilg of final decisions. The Board had a detailed discussion about funding scenarios, focusing on the adoption of the provided example (scenario two) which allowed for partial funding of projects. Some members asked for clarification on how partial funding worked, with examples provided by Mr. Skog and Mr. Atkinson. Mr. Skog recommended prioritising restricted funding sources and allocating remaining funds accordingly. Mr. Murphy praised Mr. Atkinson for his efforts in providing a starting point for project funding. Ms. Bonk questioned the funding log spreadsheet, which Mr. Atkinson explained was based on the Board's project rankings. After thorough discussion, Mr. Christensen moved to approve funding for the projects as listed in the current version of the attached funding log. Ms. Bonk seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion was unanimously approved. Mr. Christensen then introduced a contingency motion stating that if the City received additional funding, the funds should be allocated to projects according to the Board's ranking. Mr. Jones seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion was unanimously approved. Ms. Steed proposed a contingency motion specifying that if the City received less funding than anticipated, funds should be deducted from the lowest-ranking program until the budget is exhausted, ensuring no projects receive partial funding. Ms. Bonk seconded the motion. Upon roll call, the motion was unanimously approved. The spreadsheet and statistics summary are attached for reference. D. Staff Updates Ms. Molinari informed the Board of a potential restructuring that could divide it into two separate Advisory Boards—one under the Housing Stability Division focusing oil Community Development grants and the other under the Finance Department overseeing the Capital Improvement Program. She noted that the City Council may reach a decision this summer and assured the Board that she would provide ally updates as they become available. E. Overview of Next Steps Ms. Molinari outlined the remaining timeline for the CII' process, explaining that the Board's recommendations would be presented to the Mayor in early April 2025. The Mayor would then make budget recommendations to the Council in early May 2025. She noted that the Mayor's recommended CIP Budget Book would be published on the Finance Department's wehsite and subsequently shared with the Board. She further explained that the Council would have until September 1, 2025.to tinali7c tending allocations tier the('11 . Once adopted, the Council's CIP Budget Book would also be published on the Finance Department's website and shared with the Board. Ms. Molinari concluded by thanking the Board for their dedication to Salt Lake City and expressing appreciation for their time and effort in ensuring a successful CIP process. F. Approval of the Minutes Mr. Christensen made a motion to approve the minutes from March 10,2025, and March 17, 2025. Ms. Schaefer seconded the motion.The motion passed unanimously. G. Adjournment There being no further business,Mr. Skog declared the meeting adjourned at 7:21 PM. CD/OO Board.Ckn"ir This document along with the digital recording constitutes the official minutes of the CDCIP Board meeting held March 24,2025.