Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Transmittal - 4/27/2022
n ERIN MENDENHALL MAYOR DEPARTMENT of PUBLIC LANDS OFFICE of the DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL racn tto(Apr27,20220a02MOT) Date Received: 04/27/2022 Rachel Otto,Chief of staff Date sent to Council: 04/27/2022 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: April 26, 2022 Dan Dugan,Chair FROM: Kristin Riker, Director Public Lands Department SUBJECT: Adoption of Reimagine Nature—SLC Public Lands 20-Year Master Plan STAFF CONTACT: Kristin Riker Public Lands Director Kristin.Riker@slcgov.com COUNCIL SPONSOR: Not applicable DOCUMENT TYPE: Informational RECOMMENDATION: Approval of GO Bond BUDGET IMPACT: $8o,000,000. This general obligation bond,or GO bond, is a municipal bond that will be voted on by Salt Lake City residents in November 2022 to repay the entire funded amount in 20 years through a tax on residential properties and business owners. Even though the proposed authorization amount is $8o,000,000,the bond might be issued in more than one tranche. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: In 201.9, Salt Lake City's Public Lands Department met with the Trust for Public Lands (TPL), a nonprofit organization whose mission is"to create parks and protect land for people,ensuring healthy,livable communities for generations to come". Salt Lake City Public Lands requested TPL to conduct and do research for the development of a funding strategy to improve and expand Salt Lake City's public green spaces. In May of 202o, at the onset of the pandemic, Mayor Mendenhall approved this collaboration to explore public funding options for Salt Lake City to protect natural areas and provide recreational opportunities for residents and visitors. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION WWW.SLCGOV.COM 451 SOUTH STATE,ROOM 138 TEL:801-535-7922 P.O.BOX 145470,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84114-5470 Page 1 of 7 Given the substantial investment of time and resources required for a successful land protection finance measure,preliminary research was essential to determine the feasibility of such an effort.This study presented several viable local public options for funding to protect lands in Salt Lake City and provided an analysis of which local options and funding levels were feasible, economically prudent, and likely to be publicly acceptable.This non legal research study is attached for your reference. The study confirmed the city's bond capacity and alignment between Mayor Mendenhall's conservation and recreation priorities and the constituents of Salt Lake City. Should a measure be referred by Council,TPL will continue their work in collaboration with Salt Lake City on next steps for bond acquisition. Concurrently to the feasibility study, Public Lands conducted a robust public outreach campaign in 2019 and 2020,to develop its first comprehensive master plan. Priorities identified by the public in the Reimagine Nature Master Plan are reflected in selected projects below. Committing to public input and expressed priorities in the plan also means developing a funding source to implement the transformative projects identified. PUBLIC SURVEYS: In the spring of 2021,Salt Lake City's Resident Survey,parks were rated fifth in the City's highest rated services. Other findings related to public lands include: • 87%believe their neighborhoods have access to parks and public lands • 71%think funding parks trail and open spaces is a high priority • 63%think increasing the amount of parks,trails and open spaces is a high priority • 42%of residents state they visit a park or natural land at least once a week, and 85% say they visit a minimum of several times a month • 55%report using a bike lane or urban trail • go% of residents polled report being excited to use a park or natural land in the future, 63%bike lane or urban trail In the fall of 2021.the City's Budget Survey was conducted and found that 42% of residents felt that the environment was the"most important"priority to their quality of life. • Recreation and outdoor amenities rated 5th in how residents want to use city tax dollars • When asked about various growth initiatives,residents said that providing services and recreation was both most important to their quality of life and needed the most improvement from the City. • Developing trails and trailheads to improve amenities and accessibility is a high priority for 54%overall • 65%think planting trees throughout city is a high environmental priority In April 2022,TPL and Public Lands jointly hired FM3 Research to conduct a Bond Opinion Poll Survey to assess views of a bond measure to invest in local public lands. The statistically valid survey found that Salt Lake City voters broadly support a measure Page 2 of 7 to invest in parks,trails and public lands, and that they especially value investments in air quality,water quality and preservation of open space. Key findings include: • Seven in ten support a potential ballot measure to conserve open space, protect water quality and natural areas, and improve parks and trails. Support is broad across key demographic and geographic subgroups,including: • 78% of voters under 5o and 6o% of voters ages 5o and older; • 65% of men and 74% of women; • 76% of Protestant voters, 69% of Catholic voters, 49% of Latter-Day Saint voters and 77% of those without a religious affiliation; • 84% of Democrats, 57% independents, and 45% of Republicans; and • Support ranging from 56% "yes" in City Council District 1 to 79% in City Council District 4. • The same share supports the measure knowing the tax impact on the average household. Upon hearing that it would cost the average homeowner an additional $6o per year for 20 years, seven in ten (70%) polled say they would vote "yes," and of that 70%,41% said"definitely"yes. Top priorities for measure investment have to do with air and water quality, habitat, and natural areas.The figure below shows the potential projects that at least three-quarters of Salt Lake City voters said were "extremely" or'very important"to them.Water quality is critical, and more than four in five value both conserving trees and planting them to protect and improve air quality. • Broad majorities have confidence that the City will spend the money properly. Nearly three in five (59%) say they have either "a great deal" or a "fair amount" of confidence that funds raised by a measure would be used wisely. By contrast,just 11%have "no confidence"that money will be spent wisely. • Three in five voters "frequently" visit public lands. As shown in Figure 3 below, more than four in five (84%) visit public parks, trails and natural areas in Salt Lake City at least "occasionally" -- and a broad majority visits frequently. The pollsters conclude that "Salt Lake City voters broadly support a measure to invest in the city's parks, trails, and open spaces -- a trend that holds across age, gender, geography, religious affiliation, and party. Voters trust the City government to spend money wisely,and they place the highest priority on using funds from such a measure to address air quality,water quality, and habitat and conservation." The surveys are available upon request. Page 3 of 7 BOND PROJECTS The GO Bond funds will provide Salt Lake City with the opportunity to build on our existing investments to expand and enhance our public lands system in line with the goals of the Reimagine Nature Master Plan and the Mayor's 2022 Plan.These projects will work to improve our air quality and water quality by increasing biodiversity and planting more trees and vegetation,while many projects also focus on improving water quality and streamside restoration.In addition,these projects work to improve access to trails and green space throughout the city which will only increase in importance as our communities continue to grow.The measure will create new parks, inclusive playgrounds and trails in areas of Salt Lake City that currently have few places to play and low levels of service.It will ensure that underserved communities,kids,low-income families,seniors and west side communities and communities of color have equal access to safe, accessible places for recreation close to home. The following projects were selected for funding based on these priorities: 1. Alignment with the Transformative Projects identified in the Reimagine Nature Master Plan and the Mayor's 2022 Plan 2. Geographic distribution and equity in level of service across the city 3. Community identified priorities through preliminary polling in improving quality of life, specifically air quality,water quality, and access to open space Glendale Water Park This Reimagine Nature Master Plan identified project,will improve access to green space to underserved communities,increase water quality of the Jordan River and improve air quality through vegetation additions. Community goals can be accomplished with a full $30MM, (3.2 already allocated in impact fees and $27MM in bond funding). The project will construct community prioritized amenities,including • Hiking/biking trails • Overlook • Sports court • Food truck access • Skateboarding features • Community plaza,pavilion, and concessions • Boardwalk • Water feature This project will add 1.7 acres to the level of service to this community,helping fulfill the goal of adding 94 acres of public lands to the City's inventory in the next decade. Jordan River Corridor Improvements —Based on recent polling results, reviving our river is of extremely high importance to meet community stated desires, Mayor 2022 Plan and Public Lands'master plan. This project will improve air quality and water quality by improving the tree canopy and plant biodiversity and adding an irrigation system that is sensitive to our and climate. Park spaces along the Jordan River will receive additional amenities which improves access and activation. In addition,the Jordan River touches some of the most Page 4 of 7 underserved communities in the city and improvements can work towards achieving better distribution of services.In addition to planting trees with irrigation along the river,this project will include: • Jordan River Paddle Share program • Asphalt Bike Pump Track • Modesto Park-Nature playground • Jordan River Peace Labyrinth-Matching funding for a community effort to re- envision the 1700 South River Park. Community gathering space, riparian corridor improvements and restoration of existing public Allen Park—This project will focus on preservation and rehabilitation of this highly historic and cultural site.Waterwise native plantings and trees will improve air quality and lower temperatures of the surrounding urban area. Stream restoration and rehabilitation, as well as removal of potentially hazardous infrastructure can improve stream and environmental quality. Public benefits include: • Stream stabilization and corridor improvements • Renovation and restoration of the main Allen Lodge,which will be open for public use • Preservation of all art • Irrigation and native plantings and trees. Reimagine Seven Neighborhood Parks- Reimagine Neighborhood Parks was one of the most important transformative projects identified by the community in the Master Plan.Investing in these parks throughout the city will improve access and activation while also weaving in elements of community identity offering higher-quality park experience for users. Neighborhood Parks selected for improvements will be distributed throughout the City in each council district and prioritized based on community engagement and Public Lands asset conditions data. Data includes information about distribution of previous investment and overall condition of the assets within the parks. SLC Public Lands is committed to including all-ability/adaptive amenities in all newly constructed playgrounds. Potential parks identified for improvements will include one per Council district and may include: Di: Madsen Park D2: Poplar Grove D3:Warm Springs Park D4: Reservoir Park D5:Jefferson Park D6: Donner Trail Park/Rotary Glen Park D7: Fairmont Park N. Entry/McClelland Trail Fleet Block—The Central Community Master planning area,where Fleet Block is located, is one of the City's highest needs areas and has the least access to parks and trails yet is slated to receive the highest levels of residential growth.It also has no direct Page 5 of 7 access to public natural lands, and is underserved by multipurpose fields, baseball/softball fields and trails. Salt Lake City has some of the worst air quality in the nation, and in particular the Granary District is a greenspace desert.Integration of a green park space would improve air quality with plantings and trees, reduce temperatures and the effects of urban heat island in the heart of the City, and begin to fulfill the need for access to open space in this area. Currently CAN has an RFI out for the Fleet Block to ensure that the City is considering concepts from the community when formalizing plans for the development of the property. Public space to promote gatherings,free expression, safety,comfort and well- being of the community is expressed as a guiding principle.The City is committed to placemaking and community expression to communicate community values, establish a unique identity for the property and heighten awareness of social issues. The City also recognizes that equitable development is important to marginalized residents and that access to open space,walkability and connectivity are important. The Fleet Block park size,location and amenities have not been confirmed. A new green space in this location will create a park with priorities identified in recent public engagement: • Play area • Pathways • Public art • Sport courts • Green space Liberty Park Playground— Salt Lake City's largest most utilized park has an aging playground that despite being out of date and well worn, is still heavily used by the public. This project will improve safety for users and give Salt Lake City the opportunity to incorporate a unique playground that stands out in the state. Funding will fully replace the existing playground with a state of the art playground that will have a regional draw. Folsom Trail Completion—Identified in the Reimagine Nature Master Plan,this project will provide key walking and biking opportunities. Connecting our City and creating greater park and trail access helps us reach our goals to reduce air offering active transportation. Planting native and drought tolerant species will improve air quality while conserving water. The project will complete: • Paved walking/biking path from i000 West to the Jordan River Parkway (approximately.5 miles) • Phase i landscaping along street intersections at 600 W, Soo W,Jeremy, goo W and i000 W along the trail. *All improvements will include multilingual signage. RELATION TO REVENUE BOND: The GO Bond is proposed along side the city's proposed revenue bond. The revenue bond,backed by existing city revenues, does not require a public vote, and is focused on less inspiring yet, essential projects that are necessary to City functions. Stabilization of historic landscapes and buildings, infrastructure replacement and upgrades are all Page 6 of 7 included in the revenue bond. Neither the Salt Lake City Cemetery,nor the Fisher Mansion or the Warm Springs Plunge building are eligible for impact fees. The historic Pioneer Park also has significant infrastructure needs that prohibits full use of impact fees to complete the project.The revenue bond provides an avenue to make upgrades and repairs to these historic spaces while the GO Bond focuses on bringing new infrastructure, new parks and trails and amenities to neighborhoods. NEXT STEPS; Public Engagement: Public engagement will focus on City-wide understanding of the purpose and guiding principles of the bond that will bring tangible community benefits. Engagement is intended to clarify bond intent how the funds will be expended. Engagement by Salt Lake City and its staff will be of an educational nature rather than advocacy. It may include an online survey,project web page, Facebook Live videos, Community Council presentations, event tabling,intercept surveys in parks,business group presentations, stakeholder meetings, op-eds,board and commissions messaging, signage,paint stencils,logo, and social media.The bond engagement will continue the Reimagine Nature public engagement process into implementation. If Council approves this measure,TPL will also participate in public engagement to support the bond measure in the following ways: • Outreach to national NGO stakeholders(e.g.,The Nature Conservancy,Natural Resources Defense Council, Outdoor Industry Association, etc.)to generate funding and media for a campaign; • Outreach with and coordination of local NGO stakeholders (e.g., Utah Open Lands,Visit Salt Lake, Latino Outdoors SLC,etc.)to support and engage with a "vote yes" advocacy campaign; • Per the discretion of TPL's Southwest Regional Office, a modest contribution to a "vote yes" advocacy campaign; • Ongoing technical assistance and advice as it relates to elements to ensure a successful ballot measure(e.g.,sitting on a"vote yes" advocacy campaign committee; making recommendations for campaign vendors,such as campaign managers, direct mail vendors, and digital and GOTV consultants, etc.) Due to the generous support of institutional donors,TPL's conservation finance staff and time is offered pro Bono to Salt Lake City until the point at which a measure is referred. If SLC City Council does refer a parks and conservation bond measure,TPL's conservation finance staff will utilize funding from the Trust for Public Land Action Fund to work with stakeholders in the SLC community on a"vote yes" advocacy campaign. ATTACHMENTS: Conservation Finance Feasibility Report for Salt Lake City,January 2021 Key Findings from FM3 Research Drafts of Bond Resolution and Ballot Proposition Language cc: Lisa Shaffer,Mary Beth Thompson Page 7 of 7 CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT • SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH rke 1 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 ERIN MENDENHALL OFFICE OF THE MAYOR Mayor it May 1.8,2020 Carrie Kasnicka,South West Program Manager Trust for Public Land 1410 Grant St,Suite 210 Denver,CO 80203 Conor Hall,Director of Conservation Finance—Intermountain West The Trust for Public Land 1410 Grant St.,Suite D210 Denver,CO 80203 Dear Ms.Kasnicka&Mr.Hall Salt Lake City Corporation requests technical advice and assistance from The Trust for Public Land in our efforts to develop sustainable and enduring sources of funding to grow,maintain and conserve land for public green spaces. I understand that this request may include but is not limited to feasibility research,a public opinion survey(for which I will endeavor to have Salt Lake City share the cost), recommendations for a ballot measure,lobbying the measure and,if the measure passes, conservation program design and evaluation recommendations. Salt Lake City will graciously accept all data analysis and recommendations from TPL on funding opportunities and strategies that may help us grow our city with resilience,equity and livability to benefit its residents.We are especially interested in matching our residents' interests and priorities with funding options that will be publicly supported and achieve the community's desired outcomes in these uncertain economic times. This request will continue in effect for your advice,presentations or work that TPL provides on behalf of Salt Lake City related to this matter. We are very excited to work with you and to find solutions that will preserve and protect Salt Lake City's parks and natural lands. Thank you for your willingness to consider Salt Lake City for your work. Sincerely, E"' Erin Mendenhall,Mayor P.O.BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 306 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM SALT LAKE CITY,UT 84114-5474 TEL 801-535-7704 2 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 Copyright©January 2021, The Trust for Public Land. THE All rights reserved. TRUST Cover photo: Benchmark property along the Bonneville Shoreline Trail FOR Area. Photo: Stephen Trimble PUBLIC LAND THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 3 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 Table of Contents Introduction 5 Executive Summary 6 Location, Demographics and Government 7 Employment, Economy and Parks under COVID-19..........................................10 Park Access and Equity ...................................................................................12 FiscalOverview..................................................................................................13 ParkImpact Fees ...............................................................................................15 Public Utilities Water Rights and Watershed Purchase Fund.............................16 Choosing a Local Funding Strategy 16 Local Conservation Finance Ballot Measures in Utah........................................17 General Obligation Bonds 17 Property Tax 21 Local Building Authority Bonds 23 Special Service District (SSD) 25 Entertainment Tax 28 Election Analysis 30 Voter Registration and Turnout ..........................................................................31 Appendices 32 Appendix A: Local Conservation Finance Measures..........................................33 Appendix B: Ballot Language Examples ............................................................35 4 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 INTRODUCTION The Trust for Public Land works to protect the places people care about and to create close-to-home parks. Our goal is to ensure that every child has easy access to a safe place to play in nature.We also conserve working farms,ranches, and forests; lands of historical and cultural importance; rivers, streams, coasts, and watersheds; and other special places where people can experience nature close at hand. Since 1972,the Trust for Public Land has protected more than 3.77 million acres and completed more than 4,600 park and conservation projects. In Utah,TPL has worked on 94 projects,protecting nearly 70,000 acres. The Trust for Public Land's Conservation Finance program helps state and local governments design, pass, and implement legislation and ballot measures that create new public funds for parks and land conservation.We have helped pass more than 600 ballot measures—with an 83 percent success rate— creating over$80 billion in voter approved funding for parks, land conservation, and restoration. Most recently in Utah,the Trust for Public Land helped pass measure a$20 million open space bond for the Snyderville Basin Recreation District in western Summit County. In 2020, TPL worked with the Town of Springdale (Washington County)on an open space bond measure that did not make it to the ballot. In 2003, TPL conducted feasibility research and assisted Salt Lake City with the passage of a$5.4 million bond for open space. It passed with 71 percent support. In 2006, TPL assisted Salt Lake County with research and polling on the passage of a$48 million bond for open space,parks and trails. The measure passed with 71 percent support. Overall,TPL has worked on ten measures in Utah and six have passed generating over$100 million in fund for parks and open space. The Trust for Public Land has undertaken feasibility research to explore public funding options for Salt Lake City to protect natural areas and provide recreational opportunities for residents and visitors alike. Given the substantial investment of time and resources required for a successful land protection finance measure,preliminary research is essential to determine the feasibility of such an effort.This study presents several viable local public options for funding to protect lands in Salt Lake City and provides analysis of which local options and funding levels are feasible, economically prudent, and likely to be publicly acceptable. This research provides a stand-alone, fact-based reference document that can be used to evaluate financing mechanisms from an objective vantage! 1 This feasibility study is not a legal document and should not be relied upon for legal purposes or a legal opinion.The contents of this report are based on the best available information at the time of research and drafting in September/October 2020. THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 5 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Trust for Public Land has undertaken feasibility research to explore the public funding options available to conserve land in Salt Lake City including the authority for their use and revenue raising capacity.As most revenue options require voter approval,this report provides pertinent election information, such as voter turnout history and election results from recent ballot measures. The finance mechanisms analyzed in this report include the following: • General Obligation Bonds: Salt Lake City has capacity to issue bonds for parks and conservation. Proceeds of such bonds could support capital projects and land acquisition projects,but not maintenance or operations.For example, a$50 million bond would add approximately$3.7 million to the city's annual debt service requirements and cost the typical household$26 per year over the life of the bond.Voter approval is required. • Propertax. The Salt Lake City Council may increase its city property tax to fund critical land protection and park operations. The City Council must adhere to specific public notice and public hearing requirements. Voter approval is not required for a property tax increase. A.00015 tax increase could generate over$4.6 million annually costing the average home about$33 annually. • Local Building Authority Bonds: The Local Building Authority may issue lease revenue bonds to finance the purchase of land for recreation and open space. An election could be petitioned for but not required by law to issues these bonds. • Special Service District: A county or a municipality may establish a special service district to provide additional services including recreation. Special districts can levy property taxes to pay for the services and issue bonds for the purpose of acquiring, constructing and equipping facilities. The proposition to levy the tax or to issue the bonds shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the service district at an election. • Entertainment Tax: A municipality may by ordinance raise revenue by levying a tax on"a public assembly facility in an amount that is less than or equal to$5 per ticket purchased from the public assembly facility. For example, assuming a$1 fee was added to each ticket sold for the Utah Jazz professional basketball team at Vivint Arena in a season,this funding source would generate almost$770,000. Basketball is one of the dozens of ticketed events at Vivint Arena, and other public facilities in Salt Lake City. The next steps for Salt Lake City should include evaluating these finance mechanisms in terms of political and fiscal viability to meet the city's expected needs. In addition, the Trust for Public Land recommends conducting a public opinion survey that tests funding mechanism,ballot language,tax tolerance, and program priorities of voters throughout the city. 6 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 LOCATION, DEMOGRAPHICS AND GOVERNMENT Salt Lake City is the county seat of Salt Lake County and Utah's state capital. With a population of roughly 200,500 residents,it is the largest city in the state, and is the core of the Salt Lake City metropolitan area,which has a population of 1,222,540(2018 estimate). Salt Lake City is situated within a larger metropolis known as the Salt Lake City—Ogden—Provo Combined Statistical Area,a corridor of contiguous urban and suburban development stretched along a 120-mile segment of the Wasatch Front, comprising a population of 2,606,548 (as of 2018 estimates), currently making it the 22nd largest in the nation. It is one of only two major urban areas in the Great Basin(the other being Reno,Nevada). The city's daytime population increases over 70 percent, as 20 percent of the state's total work force commutes to jobs located within the city limits.z The population of Salt Lake City has grown 7.6 percent from its 2010 population of 186,433 people.3 Though Salt Lake County has seen a 12.7 percent growth since 2010, it abuts some of the fastest growing counties in the state including Wasatch County which was the third fastest growing county(by percentage) in the nation from 2010-2019. Top 10 Counties in Percentage Growth.2010 to 2019 April 1,2010 Rank State Cou" (Estimates Base) July 1,2018 July 1,2019 Percent Growth 1 North Dakota Williams County 22.399 35 469 37 589 67 8% 2 Texas Hays County 157,103 222 706 230.191 46 5% 3 Utah Wasatch County 23 525 33 067 34 091 44 9% 4 Texas Comal County 108 520 148 141 156 209 43 9% 5 Texas Kendall County 33.384 45 603 47.431 42 1% 6 Florida Sumter County 93 420 128 719 132 420 41 7% 7 Iowa Dallas County 66.139 89 953 93.453 41 3% 8 Florida Osceola County 268,685 368 456 375.751 39 8% 9 Texas Williamson County 422.504 566 463 590.551 39 8% 10 Florida St Johns County 190 038 253,814 264.672 39 3% In addition, the Provo-Orem metropolitan area was the ninth fastest growing area by percentage over the same timeframe. St. George ranked fifth. Top 10 Metropolitan Areas in Percentage Growth 2010 to 2019 April 1.2010 Rnttlt McVopoihn Area (Estimates Base) July 1,2018 July 1,2019 Percent Growth 1 The Villages FL 93420 128.719 132420 ;' 1% 2 Mvrtle Beach Conway Norm Myrtle Beach SC NC 376 575 480.985 496 901 32 0% 3 Ausbn-Round Rock-Georgetown.TX 1716323 2.165,497 2 227 083 298% 4 Mrdand TX 141.671 178,186 182.603 28.9% 5 St George.UT 138.115 171,567 177 556 28.6% 8 Greeley,CO 252 827 314 815 324 492 28.3% 7 Bend,OR 157 728 191,905 197 692 25 3% 8 Cape Coral-Fort Myers,FL 618755 754.470 770.577 24.5% 9 Prwo- r UT 526.885 633.149 648.252 23.0% 10 PAw4pCay,NC 1,130,493 1,361,590 1,390,795 23.0% 2 http://www.slcdocs.com/Planning/Projects/PlanSaItLake/PSL Existing Conditions Report (FINAL).pdf, hftps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salt Lake City 3 https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/saltlakecitycityutah/PST120219#PST120219 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 7 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 Salt Lake City's unemployment rate during October 2020 decreased to 4.1 percent. (The state of Utah's unemployment rate was 4.3 percent,whereas the U.S rate was 6.7 percent.)4 The largest employers for the county are illustrated in the list provided below.' Rank Company Industry 4+ Average Annual Employment 1 University of Utah Higher Education 20,000+ 2 State of Utah State Government 20,000+ 3 Intermountain Health Care Health Care 15,000-19,999 4 United States Government Federal Government 10,000-14,999 5 Wal-Mart Warehouse Clubs/Supercenters 7,000-9,999 6 Granite School District Public Education 7,000-9,999 7 LDS Church Religious Agencies Religious Organizations 7,000-9,999 8 Zions Bank Financial Services 7,000-9,999 9 Salt Lake County Local Government 5,000-6,999 10 Jordan School District Public Education 5,000-6,999 11 Salt Lake County Local Government 5,000-6,999 Salt Lake City Demographics Salt Lake City Utah United States Population estimates,July 1,2019,(V2019) 200,567 3,205,958 328,239,523 Population Population,percent change-April 1,2010(estimates base)to July 1,2019,(V2019) 7.6% 16% 6.3% White alone,percent (a) 73.1% 90.6% 76.3% Black or African American alone,percent (a) 2.3% 1.5% 13.4% American Indian and Alaska Native alone,percent (a) 1.4% 1.6% 1.3% Race and Asian alone,percent (a) 5.4% 2 7% 5 9% Hispanic Origin Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone,percent (a) 1.5% 1.1% 0.2% Two or More Races,percent 3.4% 2 6% 2 8% Hispanic or Latino,percent (b) 21.6% 14.4% 18.5% White alone,not Hispanic or Latino,percent 65.4% 77.8% 60.1% Median value of owner-occupied housing units,2014-2018 $289,200 $256,700 $204,900 Housing Median gross rent,2014-2018 $938 $988 $1,023 Households,2014-2018 78,229 957,619 119,730,128 Language Language other than English spoken at home,percent of 26.4% 15.2% 21.5% persons age 5 years+,2014-2018 High school graduate or higher,percent of persons age 25 88 5% 92% 87 7% Education years+,2014-2018 Bachelor's degree or higher,percent of persons age 25 years+, 45.7% 33.3% 31.5% 2014-2018 Income Median household income(in 2018 dollars),2014-2018 $56,370 $68,374 $60,293 and Per capita income in past 12 months(in 2018 dollars),2014- Poverty 2018 $34,711 $28,239 $32,621 4 U.S.Department of Labor,"Local Area Unemployment Statistics,"https://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.ut_saltlakecity_msa.htm 5 Utah Department of Workforce Services,November 2020 8 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 Persons in poverty,percent 17.9% 9.0% 11.8% Notes (a)Includes persons reporting only one race. (b)Hispanics may be of any race,so also are included in applicable race categories. Source:US Census QuickFacts The city has a Council-Mayor form of government. The City Council consists of seven members,who are elected by voters within seven geographic districts of approximately equal population. The Mayor is elected at large by the voters of the city and is charged with the executive and administrative duties of the government. The seven-member,part-time City Council is charged with the responsibility of performing the legislative functions of the city. The City Council performs three primary functions: it passes laws for the city, adopts the city budget and provides administrative oversight by conducting management and operational audits of city departments. Term information concerning the Mayor and the members of the City Council is set forth below: Salt Lake City Council Name Seat Last Elected Next Election James Rogers District 1 November 2017 November 2021 Andrew Johnston, District 2 November 2019 November 2023 Vice Chair Chris Wharton, District 3 November 2017 November 2021 Chair Ana Valdemoros District 4 November 2019 November 2023 Darin Mano District 5 - November 2021 Dan Dugan District 61 November 2019 November 2023 Amy Fowler District 7 I November 2017 November 2021 The Mayor also serves a four-year term and is elected at large. All municipal elections in Utah are held during odd-numbered years. Every two years, approximately half of the City Council seats are up for election. The elections in Council districts 1, 3, 5, and 7 are held simultaneously(2021, 2025, etc.);these are followed two years later by elections for Mayor and Council districts 2,4,and 6 (2023,2027, etc.). Mayor Erin Mendenhall was elected with 58 percent of the vote in November 2019. She will be up for reelection in November 2023. THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 9 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 Employment, Economy and Parks under COVID-19 Despite national economic losses from the Utah's 2020 unemployment claims COVID-19 pandemic,Utah has been a leader in the employment rebound,reporting the fifth lowest unemployment in the country for 12OK November 2020. Utah's numbers slightly increased to a 4.3 percent unemployment in 100K November,up from 4.1 percent the month before, ongoing claims according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This Dec.5:27,133 is compared to the national average of 6.7 80K — percent.6 As the second wave of COVID-19 is First week that Utah's still taking hold,unemployment claims are 60K Self-Employed, Indepebeginning to rise again, as shown to the right. C ontradepe ctors g g g g ors and 'Gig 40K 'became Taxable retail sales have so far shown surprisingly strong numbers despite dim forecasts ek that Utahns to the contrary. These forecasts could rove to be e eligiblefar I1 20K ed — Newclaims true,however,in2021. The initial 2020 forecast, loyment benefits. Dec.5:4,758 in February,had retail sales increasing by around 0 ---------- 4 percent.The June forecast has retail sales Month J F M A M 1 1 A 5 o N D increasing by 8.1 percent to$39.8 billion in 2020, S-1' .u.S.DePvrtmemo'Labor $1.6 billion above the February forecast.' According to the Salt Lake City Downtown Alliance': • Only 23 percent of downtown office workers are back. • Hotel occupancy is 29 percent of the 2019 average. • Passenger travel at SLC International Airport is averaging 10,000 a day,up 1,000 from earlier this month. In 2019, it averaged 25,000 a day. • The Salt Palace has no conventions scheduled until October 2021. • 133 restaurants and bars have re-opened, offering some form of takeout or dine-in service. It's an increase of 68 percent since May 12,but restaurants that are open tell the Downtown Alliance sales are down on average 53 percent from this time last year. • 84 percent of downtown retailers are open with customers returning, according to the Downtown Alliance. Traffic is slower,but sales are closer to last year's figures. 'The Salt Lake Tribune,"Utah's new unemployment claims jump 35%as winter nears and COVID-19 worsens"December 2020 by Tony Semerad I https://gardner.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/C19-Econ-Forecast-Brief-July2O2O.pdf 'https://www.foxl3now.com/news/coronavirus/local-coronavirus-news/a-snapshot-of-downtown-slc-during-the-covid-19-pandemic 10 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 • Arts and entertainment venues remain largely closed. There are some events at The Gateway, while most county-owned venues like the Eccles Theatre,the Capitol Theatre,Abravanel Hall, etc.have no large gatherings scheduled.Vivint Smart Home Arena and Temple Square are closed. In response to the pandemic, Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall set forth several budget proposals, a "Winter Covid Plan" for funding to improve health care access, expand youth programs and aid people experiencing homelessness.' The proposed$11 million plan will include: • $9 million for a mortgage package to help in the housing crisis. • $1.6 million for youth programs that would be offered nine hours a day to help working parents. • $150,000 for the 4t1i Street Clinic which offers health care for the homeless. • $75,000 for the Wi-Fi station and services. • $50,000 for public health. • $25,000 for the Suazo Business Center—a business resource center for the Hispanic community. All the money will come from the city budget, except for some of the $9 million for mortgage assistance, which will come from the federal CARES Act. Finally, in a time of stay-at-home orders, many voters may be coming to understand in ways they did not before the importance of parks, natural areas, and trails for physical and mental health. Having close-to-home recreational opportunities, where they can get some fresh air and be safe, may be more important now than ever. Parks, trails, and natural lands are gaining new audiences as gyms, schools, and public places close. • From January through August 2020,Utah state parks visits were up 28.9 percent from the previous year, or by an additional 1.8 million visitors.10 • Since April 2020,many Utah rural counties have fared better than urban counties in transient room tax revenue collections and hotel occupancya reflection of Utah visitors traveling to less populated areas with lower positive COVID-19 cases. e https://ksltv.com/444527/slc-mayor-releases-11-million-winter-covid-plan/ 10 https://gardner.utah.edu/wp-content/uploads/C19-TravTour-RB-Oct2O2O.pdf THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 11 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 Park Access and Equity 11 3 /Q Q of residents live within a 10 minute walk of a park. The Trust for Public Land created a 10- minute Walk analysis to measure and evill Ilk A- f4kJ� �� rLanalyze current access to parks in cities J i 4 1 j� �� 4 . , towns, and communities nationwide. In Nationtil fires r"55% our analysis, Salt Lake City,the primary urbanized area,has 83 percent of its population living within a 10-minute walk of a park. The national average is 55 PERCENT OF RESIDENTS WITHIN A PERCENT OF RESIDENTS WITHIN A 10-MINUTE WALK OF A PARK BY AGE 10-MINUTE WALK OF A PARK BY INCOME Q percent. In addition, eight percent of city land is used for parks and recreation.The Children(0-19) 100 national median is 15 percent. am em 85% Q)O/O 83% 82% g Adults(20-64) Seniors(65+) High Income Middle lnmme Low I,- 05000 30000 Household Income Served 25000 Low income 30,116 `s20000 Middle income 12,268 815000 10000 High income 26,413 woo (Generated From Regional Median Incomes) 0 `45�°ma �WS Id"° H�rSCFoe M Race/Ethnicity Served 340000 White 120,763 120000 Black 5,700 100000 Asian 9,803 e0000 Native American 2.379 8 60000 Pacific Islander 3,784 a0000 Other Race 20,731 20000 Mixed Race 7,557 o ,��ar v�,aP ma„casa„ac�Pa��aPsp,�,� Hispanic' 42,768 'U.S.Census captures Hispanic Origin separate from race Demographic information is derived from ESRI 2019 Demographic Forecast Block Groups data. This report was created an September g,2020 using the Par Serve`inter rctiva mapping sde.It is for lormalionalpurposesonly.The providers ofthisrepon disclaim any and all the pee.expreae or mvlied,mpwdir.g elneaa for a particular purpose or merchantability,and make no representatlon that gte report is complete,accurate.or error hee. Use and reliance on this report is at Me sole risk of the party using same. C 2020 The Trust for Public Land, 11 ParkServe®https://www.tpl.org/city/salt-lake-city-utah 12 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 The following map shows areas of high park need in Salt Lake City, as well as urban heat island affected areas. Info X i Fatmngl:n _� .. ,/ • Parks with public access F I ./ 10minule walk park service area ` W Park need O■ kayo I raaearil! •� �� W AOptimized point, C Urban heat is1an48 ■Maaee e 9 - rA ■Se.a.e 1 [� Heat Island itdloanced I, • ` + r optimized poinb 8 - .. ' 0 Explore more map layers ♦ _ , �._ ,o�r 1 Use ParkEvaluatoro 1�.�41, OO ParkEvaluator'User Manual k „ '�'Q �' r e • 4 •r IIlIx O © ,yv� '—_ � "�'��� t�`_- .'- a .' dad r I � — • � y�Fw/�� •T i it,i � � I Fr A needs assessment conducted by the Salt Lake City Public Lands Department called attention to the impact that rapid growth will have on existing level of service(LOS). To maintain Salt Lake City's current LOS at 3.5 acres per 1,000 residents,the city would need to add 94 acres of new parkland in the next 20 years to maintain the current level of green space per resident.Another important point is that among all park users, 39 percent say that the primary reason they visit their most frequented park is because it is close to home. In fact, 97 percent of SLC residents think it's important to have a park within ten minutes walking distance of their home.12 Fiscal Overview City services and programs are funded through revenue that is derived from many different sources; however,the property tax and the sales tax are the primary means of generating revenue. While some revenues may be spent on any citywide service,many revenue sources are limited to a specific program or service. Additionally,there are restrictions that dictate which funds may receive certain revenues. The budget for Salt Lake City consists of many different funds. The General Fund was the second largest and most flexible of the various funds and is used for general government purposes. The Airport Fund used to be the largest until Covid-19 forced severe changes to air travel. 12 2019 Public Lands Annual Report THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 13 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 In June,the City Council approved a$326 million operating budget. The budget concentrates on public safety spending and future practices,continues road repair, and other basic essential services,plus support for people and businesses affected by the current Covid-19 pandemic. Property and sales taxes provide about 66 percent of the city's total General Fund revenue. Police(26 percent)and Public Services (20 percent)are the largest expenses for the city. Please reference the following charts that examine the budgeted revenues and expenditures for the General Fund in FY21.13 General Fund Revenues by Type - 2014-2021 FY 2014 FY 2015 FY 2016 FY 2017 FY 2018 FY 2019 FY 2020 Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Actuals Budget Property Taxes w/PILOT 77,407,225 79,844,219 85,025,403 89,071,896 90,414,308 94,654,243 97,085,506 99,012,929 Sales and Use Taxes 55,380,938 57,873,242 59,927,247 62,776,248 67,940,454 99,403,846 110,652,000 100,797,099 Franchise Taxes 27,881,251 28,132,535 27,972,665 28,418,423 28,418,423 27,238,435 27,547,500 26,812,125 Licenses&Permits 21,559,429.5 24,271,698 28,689,152 35,004,151 30,608,768 36,960,240 29,048,781 28,601,482 Fines&Forfeitures 6,846,232.38 7,482,483 6,477,606 6,728,836 5,567,814 3,316,215 5,503,465 3,938,848 Intergovernmental 5,207,625 5,732,098 5,453,584 6,855,998 5,791,774 6,066,496 5,056,652 4,444,400 Charges&Fees 4,820,246 5,562,367 4,063,532 5,358,872 5,671,710 5,573,679 4,709,756 4,428,069 Parking 3,018,080.48 3,155,436 3,324,616 3,436,592 3,404,582 3,509,898 3,927,617 3,347,986 Other Revenue 22,199,426.6 24,736,731 44,399,610 36,270,649 39,643,865 38,231,125 47,392,088 51,797,907 Total Operating Revenue 224,320,454 236,790,809 265,333,415 273,921,665 277,461,698 314,954,177 330,923,365 323,180,845 Sales tax revenue increased markedly for FY 2019 due to the recently implemented Funding Our Future .5 percent increase in Salt Lake City's sales tax rate. Because of the long-lasting effects of the Great Recession on city resources, competition with other priorities, and years of frugal budgeting, Salt Lake City had many unfunded critical needs. To address this, Salt Lake City considered all available financing options, and city officials determined two to be the most viable: 1)increasing the city's portion of sales tax and 2)asking voters to consider approving a General Obligation(GO)bond. Both were enacted in 2018. The two-part funding strategy,has helped to address identified critical needs: streets,housing, transit, and safety.14 Parks, Recreation and Public Property was budgeted at over$16.7 million in FY21.15 The budget remained flat due to COVID-19. This budget does not include support help from Public Services Department or other City Departments such as Finance,Attorney, Purchasing, etc. 13 Charts are from Mayor's Recommended Budget FY2021 14 Excerpted from www.fundingourfutureslc.com �a http://www.slcdocs.com/budget/bookFY21.pdf 14 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 FY 2018-19 FY 2019-20 FY 2020-21 FY 2020-21 FTE Actuals Adopted Recommended Budget Budget Special Events 2,318,275 375,746 409,431 Parks 2,895,636 1,695,594 1,638,125 80 Public Lands Admin 9,634,003 10,076,086 10,973,259 10 Trails & Natural Lands 1,037,347 1,297,357 861,926 5 Urban Forestry 2,314,177 2,870,986 2,793,437 15 TOTAL 18,199,438 16,315,769 16,676,178 110 Parks manages 170 unique parcels, including 1 regional park, 21 community parks, 22 neighborhood parks, 30 mini-parks, 15 miscellaneous sites, 11 green belts, and 73 islands and medians. The Regional Athletic Complex offers 16 natural grass,sand-based fields for local,regional, and national tournaments. The Cemetery is a beloved historical site with more than 124,000 gravesites and the capacity for 50,000 more burial plots. Parks contributes greenhouse and horticultural care, graffiti removal services, special events and reservations, event permitting, and historical preservation. Parks, Trails, and Open Space capital improvement proposed budget includes a total appropriation of $2,340,000 from various funding sources, including the general fund and"Funding our Future"funds. Projects include various improvements in Liberty Park, Pioneer Park,Warm Springs Park, Memory Grove Park, Poplar Park, Taufer Park, Cottonwood Park,Foothills trails, and Allen Park. Park Impact Fees Park impact fees are levied on single-family residential units at$5,173 per unit and at$3,078 per multi- family unit. As of July 2020,there was$2,790,842 in unallocated park impact fee revenues. Impact fees are one-time payments developers make to the city to offset the impact of new construction projects. Amid the city's growth, developers have been paying impact fees to the city to make up for the cost of projects needed to accommodate new structures or services.The city has six years to spend that money before timelines expire and it has returned$3.2 million in unspent impact fees to the original owners of the properties,per Utah law and City Code, since 2016. A 2016 analysis showed the city anticipates over 28,000 new residents and 7,610 residential units,by 2026. Cities throughout the state have seen 23,279 new residential units built in 2020 through September, and the state is expected to either match or exceed the nearly 27,000 built in 2019, according to data from the Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute.16 In 2016 a moratorium on impact fees was put in place due to some challenges the city was facing with spending impact fee revenue. In addition,there were prominent developers that questioned the validity of the way the city was assessing impact fees, specifically transportation impact fees.The Council opted to put a moratorium in place until these issues could be resolved. The moratorium was lifted by the end of 2016 resulting in the park and other impact fees increasing. The issues with spending impact fee revenue could be a result of the prioritization and funding challenges within the city's CIP process and approval. In addition,the need for matching general funds on many projects influences the expenditure of impact fees. Many of the projects the city contemplates are funded �s"Utahns trust city over state government in planning for growth,group says"by Ashley Imlay December 7,2020 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 15 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 by a combination of impact fee revenues and other funds. The availability of"other funds"influences the expenditure of impact fee revenues. Finally, changing priorities from the Council's perspective can and do influence what gets funded in the CIP process. A new dedicated source of park funding could alleviate some of these challenges. Public Utilities Water Rights and Watershed Purchase Fund In 1989,the city created the Public Utilities Water Rights and Watershed Purchase Fund. The Fund uses a surcharge on water customers' monthly bills to purchase critical watershed lands and conservation easements from willing sellers. Over the years,the surcharge has grown from 25 cents a month to$1.50, providing about$1.5 million each year to protect the watershed lands from development."Over 1,500 acres have been acquired.18 Much of the water supply comes from melting snow in mountains of the Wasatch Front making it especially vulnerable to changing climate. Lakes and streams within this watershed provide nearly 60 percent of drinking water to approximately 360,000 people in Salt Lake City and the cities of Cottonwood Heights, Holladay, Millcreek and parts of unincorporated Salt Lake County. In 2016,the city combined Watershed Funds and 2003 voter approved open space bond funds for the purchase of 305 acres of open lands near City Creek Canyon, showing the importance of multiple sources of local funding.19 It was the final purchase using the 2003 bond. CHOOSING A LOCAL FUNDING STRATEGY Generally,there are three broad-based types of revenue sources available to local governments to pay for conservation of rural and agricultural lands, open space, and outdoor recreational amenities: discretionary annual spending(i.e.,budget appropriation), creation of dedicated funding streams such as voter- approved special taxes, and the issuance of bonds.The financing options utilized by a community will depend on a variety of factors such as taxing capacity,budgetary resources,voter preferences, and political will. While most local governments can create funding for land protection through their budgetary process,this either happens infrequently or does not yield adequate funding. In the Trust for Public Land's experience,local governments that create funding via the budget process provide substantially less funding than those that create dedicated funding through ballot measures. As elected officials make critical budgetary decisions, funding for open space lags behind other public purposes and behind what voters would usually support. It is often quite difficult to raise taxes without an indisputable public mandate for the intended purpose. Nationwide,a range of public financing options has been utilized by local jurisdictions to fund land conservation,including bonds, sales taxes,and property taxes. Other mechanisms have included special assessment districts,real estate transfer taxes, impact fees, and income taxes. The ability of local governments to establish dedicated funding sources depends upon state enabling authority. 11 Carpe Diem West,"Health Headwaters Success Stories—Salt Lake,UT,"2011, hftp://www.carped iemwest.org/sites/carped iemwest.org/files/Salt%20Lake°/u20City%20Success°/`20Story_O.pdf a Carpe Diem West 9 https://archive.sltrib.com/article.php?id=4168835&itype=CMSID 16 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 Conservation finance measures are not right for every local government, or they might not be the best approach at the time. Budget appropriations and other revenue mechanisms that can be implemented by the local government may well serve as short-term funding options while land protection proponents develop a strategy and cultivate broad support for longer-term financing options. Sometimes a combination of funding options is needed to address the jurisdiction's varied needs. Local Conservation Finance Ballot Measures in Utah The Trust for Public Land's LandVote Database tracks ballot measures that include funding for parks and land conservation. Local governments in Utah have several options for funding capital purchases and improvements, such as the conservation of land for parks,trails,and open space or construction of new playgrounds or recreational areas. Common funding sources outlined in this report include general obligation bonds and the property tax. Bond propositions for parks and open space have enjoyed widespread support at the ballot. Since 1996, 22 finance measures for parks and open space have been considered by voters in local jurisdictions around Utah, 16 of which were approved for a 73 percent success rate at the ballot20 See the Appendices for a list of measures in Utah's counties and municipalities. Utah Local LandVote Measures, 1996-2020 Finance Number of Number % Parks and Mechanism Measures Passed Passed Conservation Funds Approved Sales tax 2 2 100% $23,900,000 Bond 22 16 73% $260,570,000 Total 24 18 75% $284,470,000 Source:The Trust for Public Land's LandVote Database 'Does not include Recreation,Art and Parks Tax Measures GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS In Utah, local governments have the authority to issue general obligation(GO)bonds for a variety of purposes, including for recreational facilities of every kind without limitation.21 Property or facilities acquired with bond funds need not lie within the limits of the local political subdivision.22 For the most part, general obligation bond proceeds are limited to capital projects and may not be used for operations or maintenance purposes.2'A bond rating is a grade given to bonds that indicates their credit quality. Private independent rating services such as Fitch,Moody's, and Standard and Poor's provide these evaluations of a bond issuer's financial strength or its ability to pay a bond's principal and interest in a timely fashion. As of August 2020,both Fitch and Moody's have given Salt Lake City a AAA bond 21 Trust for Public Land,LandVote database. 21§11-14-103(1)(b)(v). 22§11-14-103(2)and§10-8-2(1)(iii)A municipal legislative body may...purchase,receive,hold... real and personal property for the benefit of the municipality,whether the property is within or without the municipality's corporate boundaries,if the action is in the public interest and complies with other law.For example,Salt Lake City actively acquires watershed lands in the Wasatch Mountains. 23 Federal regulations governing the issuance of tax-exempt bonds limit the use of proceeds to capital purposes such that only a small fraction(up to five percent)of bond funds may be used for operation and maintenance directly related to the funded facilities. Treasury Reg. 1.148-6(d)(3)(ii)(A)(5). Utah Statutes further limit the use of bond funds for maintenance and operations to a period of one year.State and local laws may further limit the use of bond proceeds. §§11-14-103(4)a. THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 17 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 rating. The stable outlook reflects the expectation that the city's operating profile will remain structurally balanced and continue to support a healthy financial position. The AAA rating also reflects the city's large and growing tax base bolstered by a considerable local institutional presence that also serves as a regional economic center. Further,the rating reflects the city's healthy operating performance solid reserve levels and manageable long-term liabilities. The coronavirus crisis Salt Lake City's Bond Rating for GO Debt is not a key driver for this rating action. However,the Rating Agency 2020 Rating city remains vulnerable to declines in sales tax revenue Moody's Aaa Fitch Aaa as a result of the general economic slowdown. 4 Source:August 2020 Fitch and Moody's Press Releases GO bonds in Salt Lake City Based on the 2020 total property value of$41.8 billion,the Salt Lake City total debt capacity is Salt Lake City Legal Debt Margin Calculation approximately$1.5 billion. The city currently 2020 Total Market Value $41,783,344,219 has about$120 million in general obligation debt25 Debt Limit 4%of TV $1,671,333,769 Outstanding applicable debt $119,790,000 Additional debt capacity $1,551,543,769 Issuing GO bonds for conservation The table to the below illustrates the estimated annual debt service,required property tax rate and annual household cost of various general obligation bond issue amounts for open space and trails purposes. For example, a$50 million bond would add approximately$3.7 million to the city's annual debt service and would cost the typical homeowner an average of$26 per year over the life of the bond(20 years). For the purposes of the ballot language and tax impact, an estimated amount of tax on business must be Salt Lake City Bond Financing Costs Assumes a 20-year bond issue at 4.0'lo Interest Rate 2020 Net Taxable Valuation=$31,827,671,801 Annual Tax Increase Cost/ Ave./ Cost/Ave/Busi ness Bond Issue Debt Svice Household* $ 10,000,000 $ 735,818 0.000025 $5 $10 $ 20,000,000 $ 1,471,635 0.000050 $10 $19 $ 30,000,000 $ 2,207,453 0.000076 $16 $29 $ 40,000,000 $ 2,943,270 0.000101 $21 $38 $ 50,000,000 $ 3,679,088 0.000126 $26 $48 $ 75,000,000 $ 5,518,631 0.000173 $39 $71 $ 100,000,000 1 $ 7,358,175 0.000231 $52 $95 Taxable value data provided by Salt Lake County Auditor and City Finance *Based on 2020 average estimated sale price of$411,500(Salt Lake County Auditor)with 45%exemption=$226,325 24 https://finance.yahoo.com/news/salt-lake-city-city-ut-193505819.html 25 September 2020 Official Bond Statement 18 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 calculated as well based upon the average residential price,but for commercial property in Utah, it is assessed at 100 percent of the market value. Effective May 24, 2019,bonds approved by the voters may not be issued more than 10 years after the day on which the election is held. The ten years applies to the date of issuance and not when the bond proceeds are spent down.26 For the purposes of the ballot language and tax impact, an estimated amount of tax on business must be calculated as well,based upon the average residential price,but for commercial property in Utah, it is assessed at 100 percent of the market value. The following was taken from the ballot language in Midway,UT which passed an opens space bond in 2018. "debt service on the Bonds will be required over a period of twenty-one(21)years in the estimated amount of$110.76 per year on a$440,000 residence and in the estimated amount of $201.39 per year on a business property having the same value." The Trust for Public Land's bond cost calculations provide an estimate of debt service,tax increase, and cost to the average homeowner in the community of potential bond issuance for land conservation. Assumptions include the following: the entire debt amount is issued in the first year and payments are equal until maturity; 20-year maturity; and 4 percent interest rate. Property tax estimates assume that the county would raise property taxes to pay the debt service on bonds,however other revenue streams may be used. The cost per household represents the average annual impact of increased property taxes levied to pay the debt service.The estimates do not take into account growth in the tax base due to new construction and annexation over the life of the bonds. The jurisdiction's officials,financial advisors, bond counsel and underwriters would establish the actual terms of any bond. Process for implementation Pursuant to the Local Government Bonding Act,the issue of general obligation bonds must be authorized by resolution of the local governing body and approved by a majority of voters in an election.27 In no event may any municipality become indebted to an amount exceeding 4 percent of the value of the taxable property in the jurisdiction.zs 29 A proposition for the issuance of bonds or debt may be submitted to voters at a regular general election, municipal general election, or at a special election called by and adopted by two-thirds majority of the County Commission or City Council through an ordinance or resolution designating the date and purpose of the local special election.30 A municipal general election may be held on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November of each odd-numbered year31 and a special election may be held only on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.32 At least 75 days before the date of election(August 19, 2021 for the 2021 general election),the governing body must approve a resolution submitting the question of the issuance of the bonds to the voters of that local political subdivision and must provide a copy of the resolution to the lieutenant governor and the 21 11-14-301. Issuance of bonds by governing body--Computation of indebtedness under constitutional and statutory limitations. 27§§11-14-201 to-208. 28 Const.Art.XIV,§4. The debt limit is 4%for cities,towns,school district,and other municipal corporations. 29§§11-14-201 to-208. 30§20A-1-203(5)(a)and(c);§11-14-203(2)(a). 31§20A-1-202(1). 32§20A-1-204(1)(d). THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 19 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 appropriate election officer.33 Persons within the county may also submit a general obligation bond measure to the voters via the initiative34 or referendum process. The ballot proposition must include the maximum principal amount of the bonds the maximum number of years from the issuance of the bonds to final maturity, and the general purpose for which the bonds are to be issued.The purpose of the bonds may be stated in general terms. The proposition does not need to specify the particular projects for which the bonds are to be issued or the specific amount of bond proceeds to be used for each project. If the bonds are to be paid in part using tax proceeds and in part using operating revenues of the local political subdivision, or from any combination of tax proceeds and operating revenues,the bond proposition shall indicate those payment sources,but does not need to specify how payment will be divided between those sources.35 If issuing the bonds will require increase of the property tax imposed upon the average value of a residence by$15 or more per year,the following information must be included in similar format: PROPERTY TAX COST OF BONDS: If the bonds are issued as planned, an annual property tax to pay debt service on the bonds will be required over a period of years in the estimated amount of$ on a(insert the average value of a residence in the taxing entity rounded to the nearest thousand dollars)residence and in the estimated amount of$ on a business property having the same value. [If applicable] If there are other outstanding bonds, an otherwise scheduled tax decrease may not occur if these bonds are issued. The foregoing information is only an estimate and is not a limit on the amount of taxes that the governing body may be required to levy in order to pay debt service on the bonds. The governing body is obligated to levy taxes to the extent provided by law in order to pay the bonds. Finally,the bond proposition shall be followed by the words, "For the issuance of bonds" and "Against the issuance of bonds," with boxes in which the voter may indicate his choice. Election Notice When the debt service on the bonds to be issued will increase the property tax imposed upon the average value of a residence by$15 or more per year,the governing body shall prepare and mail a voter information pamphlet at least 15 days but not more than 45 days before the bond election to each household containing a registered voter who is eligible to vote on the bonds. Notice must include the date of the election,the title and text of the proposition, an explanation of the property tax impact, and a description of the purpose,plus the remaining principal balance and maturity date of any outstanding general obligation bonds of the issue, and any additional information that the governing body determines may be useful to explain the property tax impact of issuance of the bonds." 33§11-14-201. 34 Art.VI,§1,UT Const.;§§20A-7-102,105,402,501-511. 35§11-14-206. 36§11-14-202.Local governments should contact bond counsel for precise requirements. 20 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 PROPERTY TAX Property taxes are a significant revenue source for local governments, including school districts,which have independent tax raising authority. On average, schools receive about 55 percent of local property tax revenue and,therefore, constitute the largest portion of an individual's property tax bill. County assessors establish taxable values for most properties within their counties.All taxable property is appraised on an annual basis. The taxable value of a property is 100 percent of its fair market value, less any exemptions that may be permitted.Most notably,45 percent of the fair market value of primary residential properties is exempt from property taxation.37 For example, a primary residence with a fair market value of$100,000 would be valued for property tax purposes at$55,000. Rental properties are eligible for this exemption while secondary homes and business properties are not eligible. Exemptions for veterans,the indigent, and the blind are also provided in Utah. Property tax revenues are limited by Utah's Truth-in-Taxation law. Truth-in-Taxation is a revenue-driven system,not a tax rate cap.Generally, as property valuations increase,property tax rates decrease. This automatic reduction in property tax rates, called the certified tax rate,prevents governments from collecting a windfall when market values increase. Truth-in-Taxation does not prevent local governments from raising taxes. Once the certified tax rate has been calculated by the Utah State Tax Commission, local governments have the option of exceeding the certified tax rate.When local governments decide to exceed the certified tax rate,they must go through the Truth-in-Taxation notification and hearing process.Annually, about half of school districts increase their rates above the certified tax rate, and about 20 percent of counties and 10 percent of cities increase their rates above the certified tax rate. In 2019, Salt Lake City had an average tax increase of$12.86 on the average home value(a 1.6 percent increase).38 The property tax in Salt Lake City The approved tax rate for the 2019 city budget was 0.003205 (for general operations)per taxable dollar of property value.Anticipated revenue from the property tax was$86 million.39 Using the property tax for conservation Salt Lake City could create a revenue stream for open space and trails by raising the property tax for that purpose. The table below illustrates the estimated revenue that could be generated from various property tax levies and the cost to the average homeowner for each levy rate.For example, a tax of 0.00025 per taxable dollar of property value would generate approximately$8 million annually and cost the average homeowner in the city about$57 a year. 31 Utah Const.Art.XIII,§2;§59-2-103. 38 https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2019/10/29/property-taxes-went-up/ 39 https://propertytax.utah.gov/tax-rates/approved-rates/budgetratesbyentity20l9.pdf THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 21 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 Salt Lake City Estimated Revenue & Cost of Property Tax Levy Tax Taxable Annual Cost/Year/ Increase Valuation Revenue Avg. Home 0.00015 $31,827,671,801 $4,646,840 $33 0.00020 $31,827,671,801 $6,505,735 $46 0.00025 $31,827,671,801 $7,956,918 $57 0.00030 $31,827,671,801 $9,548,302 $68 Taxable value data provided by Salt Lake County Auditor 'Based on 2020 average estimated sale price of$411,500(226,325)with 45%exemption. Process for implementing a property tax increase Voter approval is not required to increase the property tax. In order to increase property taxes for land conservation the Salt Lake City must follow Utah's"Truth in Taxation"law,passed in 1985. This law imposes specific public notice and public hearing requirements that are triggered when a taxing entity proposes to increase its property tax revenues above those collected in the previous year(tax revenues generated by"new growth" in an entity's tax base are exempt from the disclosure requirements). The public hearings are required to allow elected officials to explain the reasons for the proposed increase and allow citizens to comment. Two forms of public notice are required when an entity proposes a tax increase.First,the county auditor must send a"Notice of Property Valuation&Tax Change"to every property owner.The notice discloses the property's current year's and previous year's market values,the potential tax impact of the proposed revenue increase, instructions for appealing the property market value, and the date,time, and place of any public hearings where proposed increases will be discussed. In addition, a taxing entity must advertise any proposed increase.The form and content of the advertisement are specified in the law. Taxpayers during the public hearings can make their cases for no property tax increases and can sway local officials into lowering some proposed increases. In 2019, one of every nine proposed tax hikes in Utah were lowered after required Truth in Taxation hearings. A proposed increase must be advertised in each of the two weeks preceding the public hearing,with the first publication being at least seven days in advance of the hearing. The advertisement must contain information about the impact of the proposed increase on an average home and business,the amount and percentage change in the entity's property tax revenues and the date,time and place of the public hearing. The form and content of the advertisement is set forth in Sections 59-2-918 and 59-2-919 of the Utah Code. In 2019, about one of every 7 local governments in Utah 83 of about 520 proposed property tax increases, according to data compiled by the Utah Tax Commission 40 In 2020,the same analysis showed 58 communities raising taxes. Salt Lake County had tax increase both on the larger and smaller side of 40 https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2019/10/29/property-taxes-went-up/ 22 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 this analysis,including$27 on the average home for countywide services, 68 cents for library services, and 36 cents in the Unified Fire Service Area in the county.41 Biggest property tax hikes in Utah,2020 58 local governments raised taxes this year.Here are the largest by dollar amount on a typical home Toxhikeby dollaramount STOCKTON on typical home LYAKINMEQUflul $209.61 CARBON COUNTY MUNICIPAL SERVICES DISTRICT $181.03 SOUTH SANPETE SCHOOL DISTRICT $139.63 NEBO SCHOOL DISTRICT $122.10 SNYDERVILLE BASIN RECREATION DISTRICT $103.37 PROVO CRY SCHOOL DISTRICT $90.90 TO UERVILLE $89.26 SUMMIT COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO.3 $74.97 WOODLAND HILLS �lllllllllllllllllll$73.24 TOOELE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT $71.91 5 wrcr.Umh Tax ComMss7on GRAPHIC BY CHRISTOPHER CHERRINGTON I The Salt Lake Tribune LOCAL BUILDING AUTHORITY BONDS State law normally requires cities and counties to pay for capital improvements and acquisitions within a single budget year, or to issue general obligation bonds for projects that will require payments over a longer term. Some governmental subdivisions have used a different approach by forming nonprofit corporations called municipal building authorities(MBAs) or local building authorities(LBA). MBAs are technically independent of counties or cities but are governed by the counties and cities that establish them. Under the Municipal Building Authority Act, cities, counties, and school districts may acquire or construct public projects by issuing revenue bonds through the building authorities and using proceeds to pay for construction of public facilities.42 It is important to note,however,that these public projects must be determined before bonds may be issued. (This is different from General Obligation bonds,wherein bonds may be issued for programs.) The public facilities are then leased by the MBA back to the entity that created the authority and the rents paid are used to retire the bonds. When the bonds are retired,title to the project vests in the entity that created the building authority. Often,this avoids the need to have voters approve general obligation bonds to fund separate public projects. LBA Bonds in Salt Lake City The governing body of the Authority is the Board of Trustees. The Board of Trustees consists of the seven members of the City Council. Whenever a Board Member ceases to be a member of the elected local government,the successor,upon election and qualifying for office,will become a Trustee of the Authority. Within the Board of Trustees,members elect officers in accordance with the By-Laws of the 41 https://www.sltrib.com/news/politics/2020/11/02/has-another-surprise/ 42 Utah Code 17A-3-909. THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 23 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 Authority provisions. Currently,the Chair and Vice-Chair of the City Council hold the same positions on the Board of Trustees. As of FY 2020, Salt Lake City had roughly$25.4 million of LBA Bonds outstanding. This debt was issued in four separate series.: • In 2017,the Local Building Authority issued$8,115,000 to finance the acquisition,construction, and improvement of Fire Station#3.The outstanding balance of the bonds on June 30, 2019 was $8,115,000. • In 2016,the Local Building Authority issued$6,755,000 to finance the acquisition, construction, and improvement of Fire Station#14.The outstanding balance of the bonds on June 30, 2019 was $6,265,000. • In 2014,the Local Building Authority issued$7,095,000 to be used to acquire and construct a new branch Library in the Marmalade area of Salt Lake City.The outstanding balance of the bonds on June 30, 2019 was $6,080,000. • In 2013,the Local Building Authority issued$7,180,000 is used to construct a new branch Library in the Glendale area of Salt Lake City.The outstanding balance of the bonds on June 30, 2019 was $6,090,000. In 1999, Series 1999A and 1999B LBA bonds financed the purchase and renovation of city buildings and public parks,the purchase city equipment, and the acquisition and renovation of land and facilities for a public park. Using MBA Bonds for Land Conservation As described above, LBA may issue lease revenue bonds to finance the purchase of land for recreation and open space. In order to initiate this process,the building authority must submit plans and the estimated costs of the project to the governing body of the public body. The plans shall include a certificate of the architect or engineer responsible for planning and designing the project that sets forth the estimated life of the project. The plans, specifications,and estimated costs need be approved by the governing body prior to the execution of the leasing contract.as The contract(and subsequently,the payment on bonds)is limited to 40 years.as Before the issuance of any bonds,the Authority's board must give public notice of its intent to issue bonds. The notice must be published in a newspaper that has general circulation in the public body, and must include: -the name of the building authority,the purpose of the issue. -the maximum principal amount which may be issued. -the maximum number of years over which the bonds may mature. 43 Utah Code 17A-3-904. 44 Detailed specifics concerning the drafting and approval of contracts can be referenced in Utah Code 17A-3-906 and 17A-3-907. 24 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 -the maximum interest rate which the bonds may bear. -the maximum discount from par, expressed as a percentage of principal amount,at which the bonds may be sold, and any deposit to be required in connection with the sale and; -the time and place where a copy of the resolution or other proceedings authorizing the issuance of the bonds may be examined,which shall be at an office of the building authority, during regular business hours, and for a period of at least 30 days after the publication of the notice. If a written petition, signed by 20 percent of the registered voters in the public body, is filed requesting an election within 30 days of the notice,the Board of Trustees need submit the question of whether or not to issue any bonds to the voters.as If no such petition is filed,the city may make lease payments, essentially paying rent on the property, building, or open space in question. Collateral from the bond holders is the property or building. Like general obligation bonds, LBA debt(lease payment)is typically financed through property tax revenues, although impact fees and sales tax revenues are potential sources of debt payment. Unlike general obligation debt,taxes used to repay lease-revenue bonds are not guaranteed. A city council potentially could elect not to appropriate the incremental tax necessary to make debt payments(this is written into the contract, although this is unlikely to occur),therefore interest rates are often higher than those paid for general obligation debt. SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT (SSD) A county or a municipality may establish a special service district to provide additional services including recreation. Special districts can levy property taxes to pay for the services and issue bonds for the purpose of acquiring, constructing and equipping facilities.A special service district established by a county may contain all or a part of any municipality or of an existing improvement district that provides the same service proposed to be provided by the special service district,but only with the consent of the governing authority as provided in a resolution or ordinance adopted by the governing authority. Districts may be established by resolution of the governing body or by petition of the owners of 10 percent of the property value of the proposed district or 10 percent of voters.46 The governing authority of a county or municipality which has established a service district may levy a tax on all taxable property within the service area and may also issue bonds payable in whole or in part from these taxes.No limit is defined in statute of the tax. No tax may be levied, and no bonds or guaranteed bonds shall be issued,however,unless authorized by a majority of the qualified electors of the service district voting at an election held for that purpose. Bonds of a service district which by their terms are payable in whole or in part from taxes may not be issued in an amount which,when added to the then outstanding bonds of the service district similarly payable from taxes, exceeds 12 percent of the fair market value. The proposition to levy the tax or to issue the bonds shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the service district at an election. The proposition shall state the purpose or purposes for which the taxes are to be levied or the bonds are to be issued. In addition, a proposition for the issuance of bonds shall state the maximum amount of bonds to be issued,the maximum number of years from their respective dates for which the bonds may run, and, if the bonds are to be payable in whole or in part from taxes,that fact and that taxes may be levied on all taxable property in the service district to pay the principal of and interest on the bonds.The purpose or purposes may be stated in general terms. If bonds are to be payable in part 45 Utah Code 17A-3-909. 46 U.C.A[17D-1-203]. THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 25 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 from tax proceeds and in part from the operating revenues of the service district or from any combination of them,the proposition shall so indicate but need not specify how the bonds are to be divided as to source of payment.A proposition for the levy of taxes and for the issuance of bonds may be combined as a single proposition 47 Any scenario would require a Truth in Taxation hearing,described above. In 2018, Lewis Young Robertson and Burningham("LYRB"),a financial advisory and consulting firm looked at the possible establishment of a Local District or a Special Service District in Salt Lake City for parks and public lands.48 The findings and recommendations were as follows: `Due to the truly independent nature of a Local District, the creation ofsuch a district may add unnecessary complexity to P&PL's current operations in exchange for a revenue stream that itself is limited by legislation.An SSD may provide an appropriate level of inclusion and autonomy with the City. However, the requirement of voter approval would require excellent communication with the public to ensure support of the district. In both cases, LYRB recommends the City's legal counsel review all applicable legislation to determine feasibility of creating a local or SSD unique to Salt Lake City Parks and Public Lands jurisdiction." Advantages An SSD does not require a vote to initiate creation. Further there is no limit on the tax levy the SSD may propose to the voters. However, the proposed tax levy requires voter approval regardless of the levy amount. Similar to a Local District, the revenue from a voter approved property tax levy is a dedicated revenue stream to provide park services. Property taxes may be complemented with park use fees, impact fees, grants, etc.An SSD is an independent political body which is governed by the legislative body creating the district. The City may delegate power to an administrative control board while maintaining control of levying taxes and issuing debt. Disadvantages By creating a dedicated revenue stream through a property tax, the City would no longer be able to utilize sales tax or general fund monies to offset costs. Further, the City's capital improvement plan may no longer include parks if they are an independent political body. Revenue sufficiency would be dependent on voter approval of a property tax levy. Without a supplemental fee, the property tax levy would have to exceed the limitations of the Local District to fund the park needs.Districts are often used to provide services not already being provided by a municipality or to serve multiple municipalities. Creation of an SSD would require an additional level ofgovernance as compared with the City's existing structure. Further, if an administrative board were utilized to govern the SSD, it would still require approval of the City to levy a tax. Unknowns The City's legal counsel opinion would be required to identify the legality and feasibly of transferring existing park lands to an SSD or determining an interlocal agreement to allow the SSD to maintain the City's park lands. The transition of employees is unknown as the City may elect to govern the SSD or 47 U.C.A[17D-1-502,17D-1-105(2),11-14-206]. 48 July 2018 SALT LAKE CITY PARKS AND PUBLIC LANDS LOCAL AND SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT REVIEW by Lewis Young Robertson and Burningham. 26 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 appoint a governing hoard of directors. Further, the start-up costs for the SSD may vary depending on how the City chooses to govern the SSD, as well as any agreements with the City regarding SSD Scenario The following scenario for a Special Service District was presented in the LYRB report. It assumes $36 million was needed by P&PL for maintenance and operations in 2019. It uses a tax rate of.001400 which would generate over$35 million. The revenue would represent a large portion(35 percent)of general fund property tax revenue.It would also impose a park fee to supplement funding needs. Based on the updated property tax charts above this tax rate would cost the average home in Salt Lake City, several hundred dollars per year,which would likely be unfeasible. SCENARIO 2:REMOVE GF ALLOCATION—SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH PARK FEE This scenario removes the historic general fund appropriation of $14.3 million as a revenue. The total additional revenue needed to fund the P&PL maintenance and operations is$36.0 million in 2019. Based on the 2018 assessed value of Salt Lake City at$25.0 billion,the SSD with a tax levy of.001400 would produce$35.1 million in revenue.This levy is contingent on voter approval.This represents 35 percent of the general fund levy. By comparison, the current general fund allocation to P&PL is 14 percent.A park fee would be required to fund the additional$880,000 of expense. Salt Lake City has 37,366 single family units and 39,309 multi-family units. The fee per person is $5. Assuming a household size of 2.99 for single family units and 1.90 for multi-family units,the annual park fee is$14 for single family units and$9 for multi-family units. TABLE 4.7:SCENARIO 2:REMOVE GF ALLOCATION—SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT WITH PARK FEE Max District Revenue Percent of General Park Fee Revenue Annual Fee Monthly Fee from Property TAL Fund Levy Needed In 2019 Single Family $14.05 Multi-Family $35,109,824 35% $879,124 $893 $0.74 SSD Examples Snyderville Basin Special Recreation District (Western Summit County) Established in 1986, Basin Recreation owns and manages nearly 2,300 acres of open space,has built and/or maintains 170 miles of trails and works with Summit County and state and local organizations on planning and conservation issues. July 16, 1986,the Board of Commissioners of Summit County adopted a Resolution(#4-86A)declaring that the public health, convenience and necessity require the establishment of a Special Service District, to be called Park City- Snyderville Recreation Service District for the purpose of providing recreational services within the boundaries of said Service District.It was determined that the Recreation Service District would have boundaries coterminous with the Snyderville Basin Sewer Improvement District,the Park City School District and the Park City Fire Service District. In 1996,there was a debt service tax of.000450.Then in 1997,there was a combined tax rate of.001173 (.0006 Operations and.000573 Debt Service).49 The 2020 tax rate is a combined.000974 (.000587 Operations and.000387 Debt Service).so 49 Both tax rates were approved in the 1995 bond election. so Personal communication with Snyderville Basin Recreation District,November 2020 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 27 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 Since its establishment,voters in the District have approved a total of five bonds (1995, 2001, 2004, 2010, and 2014) for open space,parks,recreation, and trails totaling over$73 million." Wasatch County Parks and Recreation Special Service District Wasatch County established a recreation district in 1996. County voters approved a$2.25 million bond issue and tax authority for the district which provides funding for parks and recreation services throughout the county. At its start the District imposed a levy of.000356 for debt service and operations. Upper Community Recreation Special Service District (Duchesne County) In November 2020, 55 percent of voters in northern Duchesne County approved the Upper Community Recreation District, (UCRD), a special service district that will serve Altonah,Altamont,Arcadia, Boneta, Bluebell,Mountain Home, Mt. Emmons and Talmage.52 The District includes a.0004 levy which equates to a$32 per year property tax increase on the average value of a residence in the district and would fund parks in Altamont and Bluebell,the Altamont rodeo grounds,the annual Longhorn Days celebration and various youth programs. ENTERTAINMENT TAX53 Utah State Code 10-1-203, Subsection(5) (a), states that a municipality may by ordinance raise revenue by levying a tax on"a public assembly facility in an amount that is less than or equal to$5 per ticket purchased from the public assembly facility." For the purposes of this tax,a"public assembly or other related facility"means an assembly facility that: (A)is wholly or partially funded by public moneys; (B)is operated by a business; and (C)requires a person attending an event at the assembly facility to purchase a ticket. NOTE: Nothing in this Subsection (5)(a) may be construed to authorize a municipality to levy or collect a tax on a public assembly or other related facility owned and operated by another political subdivision other than a community development and renewal agency without the written consent of the other political subdivision. 51 The Trust for Public Land assisted with the 2010 measure which was approved with 72 percent support. 12 https://ubmedia.biz/news/17219/service-district-seeks-parks-and-recreation-levy-for-north-duchesne-county/ as The following section is taken from research done by Salt Lake City looking at a possible tax on ticket prices or per ticket to fund specific city services 28 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY JANUARY 2021 The following is a list of cities currently utilizing an admission, entertainment or amusement tax(terms used interchangeably)to raise city revenue: City Rate Portland, Oregon 6% Seattle, Washington 5% Santa Cruz, California 5% Phoenix, Arizona 2% Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 5% Baltimore, Maryland 10% Chicago, Illinois 9% Richmond, Virginia 7% Norfolk, Virginia 10% The tax rates listed above vary widely in terms of breadth and exemptions. This list is not meant to represent a complete listing of all cities currently using such a tax;however,the above list does illustrate the rather widespread use of the tax as a revenue-generating source. In accordance with the Utah State Code and the tax rates employed by the cities listed above,the city could levy an Entertainment Tax equal to$1.00 per ticket. The tax could be levied against the business sponsoring the event, or the benefactor of the ticket revenue. The tax would be due to the city no later than 45 days after the month in which the event is held and would be monitored by the Finance Division. A public assembly event, for purposes of this tax,could be defined as any event held in a facility that was funded by public moneys including but not limited to: Vivint Arena, Smith's Ball Park, Rice-Eccles Stadium, Huntsman Center, Salt Palace, etc. The tax would,therefore, apply to sporting events, fairs, festivals, antique shows, gun shows, food shows, art shows, exhibits, auctions,performances etc. Events that are held in facilities funded with private moneys(e.g.,theatres,private clubs, etc.)or produced by tax-exempt organizations(government, including public schools, and charitable organizations), could be exempt from the tax. By enacting such a tax,the city could generate significant dedicated revenue depending on the methodology. Vivint Smart Home Arena is the largest of the facilities listed above. This is the home to the National Basketball Association's Utah Jazz. In a typical season with 42 home games, 18,306 tickets sold constitutes a sellout. The Jazz sold out all of their games in 2018/19,prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.sa Assuming a$1 tax was added to each ticket sold,revenue from this funding source would generate almost $770,000. This would be just one of the dozens of ticketed events at Vivint Arena, and public facilities in Salt Lake City. Two major drawbacks to this source would be its unreliability,particularly post-pandemic. In addition, ticket sellers and chambers of commerce may see the ticket increase as an added burden to already economically hard-hit families and businesses. An entertainment tax has not been used as dedicated funding source for conservation. ea https://www.ksl.com/article/46529068/why-the-2018-19 jazz-were-able-to-sell-out-an-entire-season-for-the-first-time-in-26-years THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 29 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 ELECTION ANALYSIS Salt Lake City will be holding their next municipal election in November 2021,to elect four City Council members for four-year terms. These seats are presently held by Council Members,James Rogers, Chris Wharton, Darin Mano and Amy Fowler. Election History In 2020 the city supported President-Elect Joe Biden with 76 percent support. Over the past fifteen years, Salt Lake City voters have decided several city and county referenda by which to gauge their support for public spending. hi November 2018, city voters approved a$87 million streets reconstruction bond with 68 percent. hi November 2016, county voters supported a$90 million parks and recreation bond with 57 percent support. It passed citywide with a broader 68 percent support. Salt Lake City Election Results Election Description Result %City Yes %County Yes Date Nov-18 Salt Lake City$87 million streets reconstruction bond Passed 68% N/A Nov-16 Salt Lake County$90 million parks and recreation bond Passed 68% 57% Nov-15 Salt Lake County.25 cent sales tax for transportation Failed 62% 49% Nov-14 Salt Lake County.1 cent"ZAP"sales tax for zoos,arts,and parks Passed 45% 77% Nov-12 Salt Lake County$47 million bond for parks and recreation Passed Awaiting response 56% Nov-10 Salt Lake County$15 million bond for museum Passed Awaiting response 57% Nov-09 Salt Lake City$125 million public safety bond Passed 66% N/A Nov-08 Salt Lake County$65 million bond for the Hogle Zoo Passed Awaiting response 73% Nov-08 Salt Lake County$19.3 million bond for the Tracy Aviary Passed Awaiting response 68% Failed Nov-07 Salt Lake City$192 million public safety bond (by 263 50% N/A votes Nov-06 Salt Lake County$65 million in bonds funded by"ZAP"sales tax Passed Awaiting response 69% for zoos,arts,and parks Nov-06 Salt Lake County$48 million bond for open space,parks and Passed Awaiting response 71% recreation Nov-06 Sale Lake County advisory.25 cent sales tax to fund Passed Awaiting response 63% transportation Nov-04 Salt Lake County.1 cent"ZAP"sales tax for zoos,arts,and parks I Passed Awaiting response 71% The only recent citywide effort to fail was a November 2007 public safety bond,which lost by 263 votes. 30 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY JANUARY 2021 Voter Registration and Turnout Salt Lake City has 106,504 active registered voters. Salt Lake City Voter Turnout 100% - 80% 60% 40% 20% — 0% Nov-12 Nov-13 Nov-14 Nov-15 Nov-16 Nov-17 Nov-18 Nov-19 Nov-20 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 31 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 APPENDICES 32 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 Appendix A: Local Conservation Finance Measures Utah Local Conservation Finance Measures, 1996-present Finance Conservation Total Funds Jurisdiction Name Date Mechanism Description Status %Yes Funds Approved Approved Bountiful 11/3/2020 Bond Bond for a new park and trails Pass 59.00% $5,500,000 $8,000,00 Bond for land preservation including conservation Midway 11/6/18 Bond easements Pass 54.68% $5,000,000 $5,000,000 Bond for the acquisition of two Park City 11/6/18 Bond conservation properties Pass 78.10% $48,000,000 $48,000,000 Wasatch County 11/6/18 Bond Bond for land preservation Pass 57.80% $10,000,000 $10,000,000 Bond for parks and open Lehi 11/8/16 Bond space Fail 39.22% Bond for the preservation of land in area known as Park City 11/8/16 Bond Bonanza Flats Pass 70.44% $25,000,000 $25,000,000 Bond for parks,open space, South Salt Lake City 11/3/15 Bond trails,and recreational facilities Fail 48.59% Snyderville Basin Special Recreation Bond for open space,trails District 11/4/14 Bond and recreational facilities Pass 71.76% $15,000,000 $25,000,000 .5 percent Resort Communities Sales and Use Tax increase to fund open space acquisitions and capital- Park City 11/6/12 Sales tax improvement projects Pass 58.65% $20,000,000 $64,000,000 Bond for regional parks and Salt Lake Count 11/6/12 Bond trails Pass 56.14% $5,000,000 $47,000,000 Snyderville Basin Special Recreation Bond for the preservation of District 11/2/10 Bond open space and trails Pass 72.25% $20,000,000 $20,000,000 Bond for parks and open West Valley 11/2/10 Bond space Fail 43.20% Bond for open space,parks American Fork 11/4/08 Bond and trails Fail 28.86% Bond for the protection of farmland,recreational lands, watersheds,wildlife habitat Cache County 11/4/08 Bond and trails Fail 41.34% Bond for the purchase of open Park City 11/7/06 Bond space and recreational lands Pass 81.98% $20,000,000 $20,000,000 Bond for the purchase of open Salt Lake County 11/7/06 Bond space, parks,and trails Pass 71.20% $48,000,000 $48,000,000 Bond for open space,wildlife habitat,and watershed Alpine City 11/8/05 Bond protection Fail 24.93% Draper 11/2/04 Bond Bond for watershed protection Pass 58.98% $7,000,000 $7,000,000 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 33 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 Snyderville Basin Proposition 2,Bond issued for Special Recreation the purchase of open space in District 11/2/04 Bond western Summit County Pass 67.36% $10,000,000 $10,000,000 Bond for open space,park, West Jordan 5/4/04 Bond and recreational lands Pass 50.50% $4,170,000 $4,170,000 City Proposition No.4,Bond for open spaces,parks, Salt Lake City 11/4/03 Bond recreational lands Pass 71.21% $5,400,000 $5,400,000 Parks and Open Space;Bond measure for parks,open Park City 11/5/02 Bond space Pass 79.52% $10,000,000 $10,000,000 Park City 11/3/98 Bond Bond for Parks,Recreation Pass 77.59% $10,000,000 $10,000,000 County Proposal 1,1/10 Cent Sales Tax Increase for Parks, Recreation,Open Space, Salt Lake County 11/5/96 Sales tax Trails Pass 57.87% $3,900,000 $13,000,000 St.George 4/30/96 Bond Bond for Open Space Pass 68.70% $18,000,000 $18,000,000 Source:The Trust for Public Land's LandVote database 34 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY I JANUARY 2021 Appendix B: Ballot Language Examples Utah Local Conservation Finance Ballot Language Examples Jurisdiction Date Status % Ballot Language Name Yes City of Bountiful Park and Trails Bond Shall Bountiful City be authorized to issue General Obligation Bonds("Bonds")in an amount not to exceed Eight Million Dollars($8,000,000)to purchase the former Washington Elementary School site and improve it as a City park that could include a variety of recreation fields and sports uses,and to expand the Bountiful Trail System? PROPERTY TAX COST OF BONDS: Bountiful 11/3/2020 Pass 59% If the Bonds are issued,a property tax increase would be necessary to pay debt service on the Bonds over a period of 20 years.The estimated property tax increase would be $32.57 per year on a$371,000 primary residence and$59.22 per year on a business property having the same value. The foregoing information is only an estimate and is not a limit on the amount of taxes that the City may be required to levy in order to pay debt service on the Bonds.The City is obligated to levy taxes to the extent provided by law in order to pay the Bonds. _For the Issuance of Bonds Against the Issuance of Bonds PROPOSITION Shall Midway City, Utah(the"City"), be authorized to issue General Obligation Bonds in an amount not to exceed Five Million Dollars($5,000,000)(the'Bonds")for the purposes of partnering with willing landowners, private organizations, land preservation foundations,governmental agencies and private donors,all at the discretion of the City Council,to pay all or a portion of the costs to preserve open space(as open space is defined and is consistent with the Midway City General Plan and as permitted by the laws of the State of Utah)and related improvements,within the proposed annexation boundaries of the City as established in the land use map of the City dated December 13,2017,including but not limited to acquisition of land,development rights, conservation easements,maintenance of use agreements,or related start-up expenses;said Bonds to be due and payable in not to exceed twenty-one(21)years from the date of issuance of the Bonds? Midway 11/6/2018 Pass 55% Property Tax Cost of Bonds: if the Bonds are issued all at once an annual property tax to pay debt service on the Bonds will be required over a period of twenty-one(21)years in the estimated amount of$110.76 per year on a$440,000 residence and in the estimated amount of$201.39 per year on a business property having the same value. The foregoing information is only an estimate and is not a limit on the amount of taxes that the City may be required to levy in order to pay debt service on the Bonds.The City is obligated to levy taxes to the extent provided by law in order to pay the Bonds.The amounts are based on various assumptions and estimates, including estimated debt service on the Bonds and current taxable values of property in the City. Voting Options: FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS(YES) AGAINST THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS NO PARK CITY OPEN SPACE BOND Shall Park City, Utah be authorized to issue general obligation bonds to acquire, improve and forever preserve open space, park and recreational land located in Treasure Hill and Armstrong/Snow Ranch Pasture in order to protect the conservation values thereof,to eliminate any future commercial or residential development, and to make limited improvements for public access,trailhead parking and use, in an amount not to exceed$48,000,000 and to mature in no more than 16 years from the date or dates of such bonds? Park City 11/6/2018 Pass 78% PROPERTY TAX COST OF BONDS If the bonds are issued as planned,an annual property tax to pay debt service on the bonds will be required over a period of 16 years in the estimated amount of$194 on a primary residence with an assessed value of$800,000,and in the estimated amount of$353 on a business property having the same assessed value. The foregoing is only an estimate and is not a limit on the amount of taxes that the governing body may be required to levy in order to pay debt service on the bonds.The governing body is obligated to levy taxes to the extent provided by law in order to pay the bonds. FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 35 SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY REPORT I JANUARY 2021 AGAINST THE ISSUANCE OF BOND WASATCH COUNTY OPEN SPACE BOND PROPOSITION Shall Wasatch County,Utah(the"County"),be authorized to issue General Obligation Open Space Bonds in the amount not to exceed Ten Million Dollars($10,000,000)for the purpose of paying all or a portion of the costs to acquire,preserve,or protect the permanent protection of open space within the County using all available land preservation tools,including but not limited to acquisition of land,development rights, conservation easements,maintenance of use agreements,or related operation, maintenance or start-up expenses;said Bonds to be due and payable in not to exceed thirty-one(31)years from the date of issuance of the Bonds? Property Tax Cost of Bonds: If the bonds are issued(without regard to the currently Wasatch 11/6/2018 Pass 58% planned issuance of Bonds in phases over time),an annual property tax to pay debt service on the Bonds will be required over a period of thirty-one(31)years in the estimated amount of$19.97 per year on a$300,000 residence and in the estimated amount of$36.30 per year on a business property having the same value. The foregoing information is only an estimate and is not a limit on the amount of taxes that the County may be required to levy in order to pay debt service on the Bonds.The County is obligated to levy taxes to the extent provided by law in order to pay the Bonds.The amounts are based on various assumptions and estimates,including estimated debt service on the Bonds and taxable values of property in the County. Voting Options: FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS(YES) AGAINST THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS NO 36 THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH I CONSERVATION FINANCE FEASIBILITY STUDY JANUARY 2021 With any questions or for more information please contact: Conor Hall Director of Conservation Strategies& Policy Advocacy—Interior West The Trust for Public Land (512)557-2850 Conor.Hall@tpl.org Or Andrew du Moulin Director, Center for Conservation Finance Research The Trust for Public Land 617-371-0557 Andrew.duMoulin@tpl.org www,W orq THE TRUST FOR PUBLIC LAND::CONSERVATION FINANCE DEPARTMENT 37 FM3 OPINION RESEARCH RESEARCH & STRATEGY TO Salt Lake City Council and Mayor FROM Dave Metz and Miranda Everitt FM3 Research RE: Salt Lake City Voter Views of a Potential Public Lands Measure DATE April 18, 2022 Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz&Associates (FM3) recently conducted a survey' of Salt Lake City voters to assess views of a measure to invest in local public lands. The study found that Salt Lake City voters broadly support a measure to invest in parks,trails and public lands--and that they especially value investments in air quality,water quality, and preservation of open space. Key findings include: • Seven in ten support a potential ballot measure to conserve open space, protect water quality and natural areas, and improve parks and trails. Figure 1 shows the potential measure language tested. Fully 70% said they would vote "yes," and nearly two in five (37%)were sure of their vote.Just one in five (21%) oppose it. Figure 1: Support for a Potential Measure Shall Salt Lake City, Utah (the "City"), be authorized to issue General Obligation Bonds in an amount not to exceed$80,000,000 to conserve open space, protect water quality and natural areas, and improve existing parks and trails?Property Tax Cost of Bonds:If the bonds are issued, an annual property tax to pay debt service on the bonds will be required over a period of 20 years in the estimated amount of$60.26 on a$582,858 residence and in the estimated amount of$109.57 on a business property having the some value. Definitely yes 37% Total Yes Probably yes 33% 70% Probably no 9% Total No Definitely no - 11% 21% Undecided 4 10% 12100 Wilshire Boulevard,Suite 350 1 Los Angeles,CA 90025 1999 Harrison St.,Suite 2020 1 Oakland,CA 94612 Phone: (310)828-1183 1 Fax: (310)453-6562 Phone: (510)451-9521 1 Fax: (510)451-0384 FM3 RESEARCH Support is broad across key demographic and geographic subgroups, including: • 78%of voters under 50 and 60%of voters ages 50 and older; • 65%of men and 74%of women; • 76%of Protestant voters, 69%of Catholic voters,49%of Latter-Day Saint voters and 77%of those without a religious affiliation; • 84%of Democrats, 57% independents, and 45%of Republicans; and • Support ranging from 56% "yes" in City Council District 1 to 79% in City Council District 4. • The same share supports the measure knowing the tax impact on the average household. Upon hearing that it would cost the average homeowner an additional $60 per year for 20 years, seven in ten (70%) say they would vote "yes," and 41%say they would "definitely"vote yes. • Top priorities for measure investment have to do with air and water quality, habitat,and natural areas.The figure below shows the potential projects that at least three-quarters of Salt Lake City voters said were "extremely" or "very important" to them. Water quality is critical, and more than four in five value both conserving trees and planting them to protect and improve air quality. Figure 2: Priorities for Measure Funding 1 am going to read you a list of specific projects that might be funded by this measure. As 1 read each one, please tell me how important it is to you that each project be funded: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not important. ImportantPriority % Extremely or Very Protecting drinking water sources 95% Protecting water quality of rivers, lakes and streams 90% Conserving trees that help to protect and improve air quality 88% Planting trees that help to protect and improve air quality 86% Protecting natural areas 85% Protecting pollinator habitat 81% Protecting water quality of the Jordan River 79% Conserving open space 77% Page 2 FM3 RESEARCH • Broad majorities have confidence that the City will spend the money properly. Nearly three in five(59%) say they have either"a great deal"or a "fair amount"of confidence that funds raised by a measure would be used wisely. By contrast,just 11% have "no confidence" that money will be spent wisely. • Three in five voters "frequently" visit public lands. As shown in Figure 3 below, more than four in five (84%) visit public parks, trails and natural areas in Salt Lake City at least "occasionally" --and a broad majority visits frequently. Figure 3: Frequency of Public Land Use How often do you visit Salt Lake City public lands like a park, trail, or natural area? Frequently 62% Freq./Occ. 84% Occasionally M 22% Sometimes 7% Rarely 9% In sum, Salt Lake City voters broadly support a measure to invest in the city's parks, trails, and open spaces -- a trend that holds across age, gender, geography, religious affiliation, and party. Voters trust the City government to spend money wisely, and they place the highest priority on using funds from such a measure to address air quality, water quality, and habitat and conservation. ' Methodology: Fairbank, Maslin, Maullin, Metz & Associates (FM3) conducted a survey April 7-14, 2022, among 662 registered voters in Salt Lake City likely to cast ballots in the November 2022 general election. The dual-mode survey was conducted online and by telephone--both cellular and landline.The margin of error for the full sample is+/-4.0%with a 95% confidence interval. Some percentages may not sum to 100%due to rounding. Page 3 iv �r p O O M Ul) o O O CDO O OO LO O 00 �t LO r EA EA Cf? Cf? d? O O O CM r O LI LI U O Il- N O Ul) CO 00 6q} I- coEf} 64 GQ? EF? O 00 O O O � M C O� OM C (0 N Cl) Ef) EA Efl Et} 00 N Oo CD00 00 O N N 00 00 07 N LO L r fA m ER ER ro 00 co N In Cb r— 00 N _ 00 N N a) O 0N0 (D QCV (ND L6 2 LO N m to) V) ell U), N O W L r 00 O w a) U) Iq O LO r 1- O CD O w r- 0 0 0 CD CD CD .q O O O O C CD CD � cn O O C CD CD CD O Q O r r EA N V r r W- M 64 .. .. .. _ 0 U O N O o V CD (] O CD CD E U CDQ ~ O E a) _ O In L O fl U Lo a) 609 ca N J a) > C m 7 �_ O J o Q CC fC �3 m C V V o m > 7 O O O O_ O m m o CU C L m (Q �+ CC Q Q U N v) ca f° a) x m °' >, E U) x H w cu o J fA O Z H m Q- K = a Z O O m O H O O o ca O O N QZ O E Qa) H to a O ~ Q mm Q 0 LO co D d N V .5 J U U m� N a U d r '� a) _ L a a � a� H_ a D o O O � J a a o N IL cn o f rn * a L a U O a o U a 0 9 Y � o 0 O M U 0 W U W w a o a N °) m Q Q �� a J Z Z p > H N co O c t a) d E } m X J Z — Z EA N J X X w .FD X a5 Q O Q O • • • • Q a o a � < fA ma Ica I z m N m ><v M om`O c `Oo°Joo�O'���`r° � �� - N ¢ N In E w pl~CL O N N N N N N N N N N M V.. U N °N O IO O O O ° E w Corr° v v —� � O O I I I O O I I O O O I I O O O I I O O O I I O O Vi �0 H �0 M ° a �.- vein in a oo�o om uu'iv vv vv vv v°r'my � a OK cOlnln vvvvvvvvM O m + (7~ Oo Oo 000 0 00 00 0 m m � M m m V M Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill N a � � c°In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In In � m a � E NI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I T I O O O O I I I O O I I O O O I I O O O I I O O O I I O I Z 0 mx ° O Q E E M N N m M W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W V W O d K N N { N M M m W IIJ V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V m W nx N « -O L6Mooc"iIoIoLoLoLoLoLoLoLooLoLoLou5u5u5u5u5u5u5u5om� g m x > N M M I ° a N �V W M W _ f=.) N 30 a N N O N W Q } X O N �() -N- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -�N t0 U w H [f1 l� d 1 � N N N N M M M M M M M M M M M M W V FL \ O M Ol 6 O V 66666 1 O O O 1 1 O O O O O O O �N M ° M V V M M N N V tW M O V MM- N, W M ~ = OJ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - co 9 C a In N N N N O W In N N W N O W M V ul O W - GU mrn�V�N m°om� "o�Vm E _—'j N N V N O co O V M N V N V-77 O-V O N O Q - N ` Cl - -Cl co co - -Cl Cl Cl - -Cl m m - -Cl - W L J N N a `o L Z '� y � oo • �vN^w rn mm ��IIl M M V In V ro mr, mw i - (/) a` o •o y _ n O co co MMM ��� ��M co co Il ao N Z y N Q � J N W V W N N O O E a N V V O Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill Ill ° 2 O C`O V N y m (n � 'm t F o C) Q �a v x _ Z o 0 0 0 W y O CO f— co Y E o ul MM°l No MIN zrn INi w - - I I c Z o�mM uio o ui vl Q Co �' N N N M .e M V V M - V Cl - - - - - � - - M N - [f1 W p Z N N a J '0 N Lu 0 W z N 0 M Q N N V�Il N M V�Il t0 N V Ill � 2 O M¢(l m m O)O r Y p 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N M M M M M M M M M M V V V V V V O NO NO Q W N N N N N N N N N N N N N N II N N N N N N N N N N N N N N O N N N N N N N N C ¢ wwwwwwww E wwwwwwww a` J w ii a w w w w w w w w U) O Q z Draft 4/1/22 RESOLUTION OF 2022 A RESOLUTION providing for the holding of a local special bond election in Salt Lake City,Utah for the purpose of submitting to the qualified electors of the city the question of the issuance and sale of $ General Obligation Bonds; providing for the holding of a public hearing and the publication of a Notice of Public Hearing; and providing for related matters. WHEREAS, there is an immediate and pressing need of raising money for the purpose of [acquiring, improving, renovating and upgrading various parks, trails, open space and related facilities and recreational amenities] throughout Salt Lake City, Utah(the "City"); WHEREAS, Section 11-14-318 of the Local Government Bonding Act, Chapter 14, Title 11 of the Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended (the "Utah Code"), requires that a public hearing be held with respect to the issuance of such bonds for said purposes and that notice of such public hearing be given as provided by law; WHEREAS, Sections 59-1-1604 and 59-1-1605 of the Transparency of Ballot Propositions Act, Chapter 1, Title 59 of the Utah Code require or provide for (a) preparing and posting arguments and rebuttals in favor of and against a ballot proposition and (b) holding a public meeting for presentation of arguments in favor of and against a ballot proposition; WHEREAS, the City does not publish a newsletter or other periodical that will be published prior to the Election Day (as defined below); WHEREAS, the City desires to (a)hold a local special bond election at the same time as the statewide regular general election to submit to the qualified electors of the City the question of the issuance of such bonds for said purposes, (b) provide for the holding of a public hearing and a public meeting, (c) establish procedures for the submittal of arguments in favor of and against the below described ballot proposition and (d) to direct the publication and posting of a Notice of Public Hearing (the "Notice of Public Hearing") and a Notice of Public Meeting (the "Notice of Public Meeting"); Now,THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,as follows: Section 1. In the judgment of the City Council of the City (the "City Council"), it is advisable that a local special bond election(the "Local Special Bond Election")be called and held in the City at the same time as the statewide regular general election on Tuesday, November 8, 2022 (the "Election Day"), to submit to the qualified electors of the City the question of whether bonds of the City to the amount of$ shall be issued and sold for the purpose of raising money for paying all or a portion of the costs of [acquiring, improving, renovating and SLC 2022 Special Bond Election Resolution Q /RDB/mo upgrading various parks, trails, open space and related facilities and recreational amenities] (collectively, the `Project"). Section 2. The question shall be submitted to the qualified electors of the City at the Local Special Bond Election and such Local Special Bond Election is hereby called to be held in the City on the Election Day. The question shall be submitted in substantially the form set out in the form of ballot appearing in Section 3 hereof Section 3. The ballots to be used at the Local Special Bond Election shall comply in all respects with the requirements of Sections 11-14-206, Title 20A, Chapter 6, Part 1 and Part 3 and Section 20A-6-303 of the Utah Code, and shall be in substantially the following form: - 2 - Special Bond Election Resolution OFFICIAL BALLOT FOR SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH SPECIAL BOND ELECTION PARKS,TRAILS AND OPEN SPACE BOND Shall Salt Lake City,Utah,be authorized to issue General Obligation Bonds in a principal amount not to exceed $ and to mature in no more than 21 years from the date or dates of issuance; such bonds will be issued in accordance with Utah law solely to pay all or a portion of the costs to [acquire, improve, renovate and upgrade various parks, trails, open space and related facilities and recreational amenities]? Property Tax Cost of Bonds: If the bonds are issued as planned, without regard to the taxes currently levied to pay outstanding bonds that will decrease over time, an annual property tax to pay debt service on the proposed bonds will be required over a period of 20 years in the estimated amount of$ per year on a primary residence with the Salt Lake City average value of $ and in the estimated amount of$ per year on a business or secondary residence having the same value. The City currently levies property taxes to pay debt service on other outstanding general obligation bonds that have been issued to finance voter approved projects. The incremental property taxes would decrease upon the repayment of the currently outstanding bonds, but the decrease will not occur if the proposed bonds are issued. [Taking into account the repayment of the outstanding bonds,the City expects that the issuance of the proposed bonds, in the manner currently expected, will result in no net increase to current annual property tax levels for the repayment of bonds.] To vote in favor of the proposed bonds, select the box immediately adjacent to the words "FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS." To vote against the proposed bonds, select the box immediately adjacent to the words"AGAINST THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS." FOR THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS AGAINST THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS The foregoing information is only an estimate and not a limit on the amount of taxes that the City may be required to levy to pay debt service on the bonds. The City is obligated to levy taxes to the extent provided by law in order to pay the bonds. The amounts are based on various assumptions and estimates, including debt service on the bonds and taxable values of property in the City. - 3 - Special Bond Election Resolution Section 4. In satisfaction of the requirements of Section 11-14-318 of the Code, a public hearing shall be held by the City Council on , 2022, during the City Council meeting that begins at 7:00 p.m. at the regular meeting place of the City Council in the City Council Chambers, Room 315 in the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, in Salt Lake City, Utah, with respect to the issuance by the City of general obligation bonds, if approved by eligible voters at the Local Special Bond Election, for the purposes set forth in Section 1 and the potential economic impact the Project will have on the private sector. Section 5. The City Recorder or any Deputy City Recorder(the "City Recorder") shall cause the "Notice of Public Hearing," in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit 1, to be published on the Utah Public Notice Website (as of the date of this Resolution, http://pmn.utah.gov)no less than 14 days before the date set for the public hearing. Section 6. After the adoption of this Resolution and at least 75 days before the Local Special Bond Election, a certified copy hereof, which includes the ballot title and the ballot proposition, shall be furnished on behalf of the City by Chapman and Cutler LLP, as bond counsel, to the Lieutenant Governor of the State of Utah and to the City Recorder, as election officer, and the County Clerk of Salt Lake County, as provider election officer (collectively, the "Election Officer"). Section 7. (a) In satisfaction of and in compliance with the requirements of Section 59-1-1604 of the Utah Code, the Chair of the City Council (the "Chair"), or her designee, on behalf of the City Council, shall prepare and submit to the City Recorder an argument in favor of the ballot proposition and the rebuttal to the argument against the ballot proposition, if necessary. (b) To facilitate compliance with the requirements of Section 59-1-1604 of the Utah Code, the argument in favor of the ballot proposition prepared by the Chair or her designee, and any argument in favor of the ballot proposed by an eligible voter of the City, the designated argument against the ballot proposition prepared by an eligible voter of the City, and any rebuttals thereto submitted by the respective drafters of the arguments in favor of and against the ballot proposition shall be submitted in accordance with the following schedule: (i) the argument in favor of the ballot proposition prepared by the Chair or the Chair's designee shall be submitted to the City Recorder no later than 5:00 p.m. MDT on [September 9], 2022; (ii) eligible voters wishing to submit an argument in favor of or an argument against the ballot proposition shall file a request with the City Recorder no later than 5:00 p.m. MDT on [September 5], 2022; if two or more eligible voters wish to submit an argument in favor of or against the ballot proposition the City Recorder will designate one of the eligible voters to submit the argument by 5:00 MDT on [September 6], 2022; any argument designated to be prepared by an eligible voter may be revised and resubmitted to the City Recorder no later than 5:00 p.m. MDT on [September 9], 2022; and (iii) any rebuttal arguments shall be submitted to the City Recorder no later than 5:00 p.m. MDT on [September 26], 2022. - 4 - Special Bond Election Resolution All arguments and rebuttal arguments shall comply with the provisions of Section 59-1-1604 of the Utah Code. (c) In accordance with the requirements of Section 59-1-1605 of the Utah Code, a public meeting shall be held by the City Council during the City Council meeting that begins at 7:00 p.m., on , 2022, at the regular meeting place of the City Council in the City Council Chambers, Room 315 in the City and County Building, 451 South State Street, in Salt Lake City, Utah, for the presentation of the arguments in favor of and against the ballot proposition. (d) As provided in Section 59-1-1604 of the Utah Code, the City Recorder, on behalf of the City, shall cause the Notice of Public Meeting, including the date, time and place of the public meeting, together with the arguments in favor of and against the ballot proposition and the rebuttals thereto, to be posted for 30 consecutive days before the Election Day on (i) the Statewide Electronic Voter Information Website (as of the date of this Resolution, vote.utah.gov) and (ii) a prominent place on the City's website (as of the date of this Resolution, slc.gov). Section 8. The officers and employees of the City are authorized to take such action as they may deem necessary in order to assure that the Local Special Bond Election does not violate any applicable state or federal law, including laws regarding the use of the electronic voting devices. Section 9. All acts and resolutions in conflict with this Resolution or any part thereof are hereby repealed. Section 10. It is hereby declared that all parts of this Resolution are severable, and if any section, clause or provision of this Resolution shall, for any reason, be held to be invalid and unenforceable, the invalidity or unenforceability of any such section, clause or provision shall not affect the remaining sections, clauses or provisions of this Resolution. Section 11. This Resolution shall take immediate effect. (Signature page follows.) - 5 - Special Bond Election Resolution ADOPTED AND APPROVED this day, 12022 SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH By Chair, City Council [SEAL] ATTEST: By City Recorder APPROVED: By Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: By 9&ylal rL Senigr City Attorney City Recorder CITY COUNCIL VOTE AS RECORDED: Chair Erin Mendenhall Vice Chair Chris Wharton Council Member Amy Fowler Council Member Andrew Johnston Council Member Derek Kitchen Council Member Charlie Luke Council Member James Rogers - 6 - Special Bond Election Resolution EXHIBIT I NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH PUBLIC NOTICE is HEREBY GIVEN that on ,2022,the City Council(the "City Council")of Salt Lake City,Utah(the "City") adopted a resolution(the "Resolution"),providing for a local special bond election to be held in the City on Tuesday, November 8, 2022, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified electors of the City the question of the issuance of general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed$ (the "Local Special Bond Election") and calling a public hearing to receive input from the public with respect to the issuance of general obligation bonds and the potential economic impact that the improvement, facility, or property for which the bonds pay all or part of the cost will have on the private sector, pursuant to the Section 11-14-318 of the Utah Code Annotated 1953, as amended. PURPOSE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS If approved by eligible voters at the Local Special Bond Election, the City intends to issue general obligation bonds solely for the purpose of raising money paying all or a portion of the costs of [acquiring, improving, renovating and upgrading various parks, trails, open space and related facilities and recreational amenities]. MAXIMUM PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF THE GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS If approved by eligible voters at the Local Special Bond Election, the City intends to issue general obligation bonds in an amount not to exceed $ , in one or more series at one or more times. THE TAXES,IF ANY,PROPOSED TO BE PLEDGED The City proposes to pledge the full faith and credit of the City for the payment of its general obligation bonds and will be obligated to levy and collect ad valorem taxes sufficient to pay the general obligation bonds, as provided by law. TIME,PLACE AND LOCATION OF PUBLIC HEARING The City will hold a public hearing during its City Council meeting which begins at 7:00 p.m. on , 2022. The public hearing will be held at the regular meeting place of the City Council in the City Council Chambers,Room 315 in the City and County Building,451 South State Street, in Salt Lake City,Utah. All members of the public are invited to attend and participate in the public hearing. Prior to the public hearing, written comments may be submitted to the City, to the attention of the City Recorder. Exhibit I - I Special Bond Election Resolution DATED this day of 12022. SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH By City Recorder [SEAL] Signature: A01-17 Fga9 V A 61 Patterson(Apr 27,2022 09:02 MDT) Email: april.patterson@slcgov.com Exhibit 1 - 2 Special Bond Election Resolution