22 of 2024 - First Amendment to Interlocal Agreement, Utah Inland Port AuthorityRESOLUTION NO. OF 2024
A Resolution Approving the First Amendment to Interlocal Cooperation Agreement
Utah Inland Port Authority))
WHEREAS, on October 25, 2022, the Utah Inland Port Authority (“UIPA”), the
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (“RDA”), and Salt Lake City Corporation
City”, and collectively with the UIPA and RDA, the “Parties”) executed an Interlocal
Cooperation Agreement (“Interlocal Agreement”), setting forth a process for distribution
and expenditure of City Differential (as defined in the Interlocal Agreement).
WHEREAS, the Parties now desire to amend the Interlocal Agreement to address
the expenditure of the City Differential.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City that the
First Amendment to Interlocal Agreement, in the form attached to this resolution as Exhibit
A, is hereby approved.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of , 2024.
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
Victoria Petro, Chair
Attest:
Cindy Lou Trishman, City Recorder
Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved as to form:
Katherine Lewis, City Attorney
22
9th July
Katherine Lewis (Jul 11, 2024 15:25 MDT)
i t*ria etr* (Jul 1ц, 2024 10:00 MDT)
Victoria Petro
in 4 Trish(an (Jul 1ц, 2024 15:42 DT)
EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION
Attach First Amendment to Interlocal Agreement ]
1
FIRST AMENDMENT TO
INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO INTERLOCAL COOPERATION AGREEMENT
First Amendment”) is dated _____________, 2024, to be effective on the date the last keeper
of records for each Party attests and files the Agreement (“Effective Date”), by and between Salt
Lake City Corporation, a Utah municipal corporation (“City”), the Redevelopment Agency of Salt
Lake City, a Utah public entity (“RDA”), and the Utah Inland Port Authority (“UIPA”), a Utah
public entity. The City, RDA, and UIPA are sometimes referred to individually as “Party” and
collectively as the “Parties.”
R E C I T A L S
A. During the general 2022 Utah legislative session, the Utah Legislature enacted HB443,
which revised Utah Code §§ 11-58-102, et seq. (the “Inland Port Act”) to change, among
other things, the distribution from Salt Lake County to UIPA, the City and the RDA of
exempt area property tax differential, (defined in Utah law as the portion of property tax
differential generated by a property tax levied by Salt Lake City in the port authority
jurisdictional land (“City Differential”). Specifically, Utah Code Ann. § 58-11-604(4)
specifies how UIPA may spend portions of the City Differential.
B. On October 25, 2022, the Parties executed an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement (the
Agreement”) to comply with Utah law, to establish a contractual relationship creating
certainty on the 25-year distribution of the City Differential to UIPA and to commit to a
process for the expenditure of a portion of the City Differential and the efficient processing
of land use applications relating to authority jurisdictional land.
C. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Parties committed to spending a portion of the City
Differential defined in the Agreement as Environmental Differential as follows: (a) to
engage an outside firm with national expertise to prepare a health impact assessment
HIA”) analyzing the planned inland port development in the authority jurisdictional land
within the City; and (b) to engage an outside firm with national expertise to prepare a
traffic study using data-based analysis on best practices to mitigate environmental impacts
on communities related to logistics hubs, railyards, and truck traffic (“Traffic Study”).
D. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Parties committed to spending the first portion of the City
Differential defined in the Agreement as the Community Differential to engage an outside
firm with national expertise in community impact assessments to create a comprehensive
community impact assessment (“CIA”) for the planned inland port development in the
authority jurisdictional land and the impacts on the Westside Community (defined in the
Agreement).
2
E. The Parties agreed that the HIA, Traffic Study, and CIA would be complete by December
31, 2023.
F. Since executing the Agreement, the Parties have engaged in collaborative discussions with
each other and with community stakeholders. The Parties agree that, rather than
conducting an HIA, Traffic Study, and CIA, a portion of the Community Differential and
Environmental Differential would be more productively spent to establish a baseline
evaluation of current development trends and potential outcomes in the port authority
jurisdictional land and the Northwest Quadrant. After establishing the baseline evaluation,
the Parties desire to establish a mutually agreed upon preferred scenario for future
development in the port authority jurisdictional land and the Northwest Quadrant. This
preferred scenario would be intended to establish policies and metrics that could serve as
an evaluation tool for allocating future resources from the Parties and could also identify
potential changes, if any, to the City’s adopted Northwest Quadrant Plan. All parties
recognize that the UIPA is not responsible for the development trends or any conclusions
reached in the baseline scenario.
G. The Parties desire to amend the Agreement to reflect this new agreement.
For good and valuable consideration, the Parties agree to amend the Agreement as follows.
Any sections of the Agreement that are not specifically amended in this First Amendment shall
remain in full force in effect. To the extent there is a conflict between the Agreement and this First
Amendment, this First Amendment will control.
1. Expenditure of the City Generated Differential. During the term of the Agreement,
within a week of receiving the 25% Set Percentage and the Decreasing Percentage (defined
in the Agreement, and collectively, the “City Generated Differential”), UIPA will notify
the City of the amount of City Generated Differential it received. UIPA shall spend the
City Generated Differential as follows and pursuant to the process set forth in Section 1(e),
below:
a. Baseline and Preferred Scenario Studies. The Parties agree that a portion of the
City Generated Differential (both the Environmental Differential and the
Community Differential, defined below and in the Agreement) will be initially
spent on the following:
i. Baseline Study. After engaging in a competitive process in which the
Parties will, at a minimum, have an equal role on the selection committee,
the Parties will select and the UIPA will engage a mutually agreed-upon
outside firm (which may subcontract with other firms for subject-matter
expertise) to analyze the current development trends in the port authority
jurisdictional land and the broader Northwest Quadrant, including by
3
studying current traffic trends, possible health impacts of current
development, and possible community and environmental impacts related
to current development in these areas (“Baseline Study”). The Baseline
Study will consider current development trends in the port authority
jurisdictional land based on current zoning and the broader Northwest
Quadrant, using existing data related to building permit
issuance/applications and requests for increased capacity in public
infrastructure. The Baseline Study will also rely on existing
environmental, traffic, emissions, and demographic data and plans
compiled by Salt Lake City department experts. The purpose of the
Baseline Study will be to identify the potential impacts on the community,
environment (including air quality, water quality, water resources, habitat,
wetlands and the ecosystem), residents, economic development, including
job creation (types and number of jobs) and Salt Lake City if development
continues on pace with the trends identified in the Baseline Study.
ii. Preferred Scenario. Upon completion of the Baseline Study, after
engaging in a competitive process in which the Parties will, at a minimum,
have an equal role on the selection committee, the Parties will select and
the UIPA will engage a mutually agreed-upon outside firm (which may
subcontract with other firms for subject-matter expertise) to identify a
preferred development scenario for the Northwest Quadrant; the port
authority jurisdictional land; the property adjacent to the Salt Lake City
International Airport; and property directly affected by development in
the port authority jurisdictional land, including the Great Salt Lake
shoreline heritage area. The preferred development scenario will take into
account the trends identified by the UIPA Logistics Study, UIPA
Sustainability Study, Baseline Study, as well as the Parties and
stakeholders’ objectives related to optimal economic growth, optimal
logistics strategies, community mitigation, environmental preservation,
water consumption and water quality, air quality and related human health
impacts, sustainable transportation, job creation (both types of jobs and
numbers of jobs) and economic development (“Preferred Scenario”).
The outside firm will establish the preferred scenario by engaging with
the community, Salt Lake City Corporation, property owners, developers,
Northwest Quadrant jurisdiction businesses, and the UIPA Board, and
taking into consideration the priorities of each entity. Such engagement
will include conducting a robust and equitable community engagement
process using various means of engagement, including, but not limited to
public hearings, multiple-language meetings, and small group meetings
with key stakeholders and leaders within the community. The outside
firm may compensate these community members and stakeholders for
their participation in the engagement process, consistent with current city
4
policies and prior precedent. This engagement will be to effectuate the
objective of creating new policies and matrices to guide future decisions
related to the expenditure of the Environmental Differential, and
Community Differential. The Preferred Scenario will include a list of
potential projects or investments the Parties could make to effectuate the
Preferred Scenario (“Preferred Projects”), which will help the Parties
prioritize the expenditure of the Environmental Differential and the
Community Differential, pursuant to Utah law. In addition, the Preferred
Scenario will establish policies and metrics to serve as an evaluation tool
for allocating future resources from the Parties, a plan for regular status
reviews and long-term accountability to ensure the policies and matrices
continue to achieve the Parties’ objectives under the Preferred Scenario.
The Preferred Scenario will identify which policies and metrics are within
the scope of authority of UIPA, the City, and/or other entities. The
Preferred Scenario could also identify potential changes, if any, to the
City’s adopted Northwest Quadrant Plan. The UIPA Board has the
authority to make all final funding determinations consistent with this
First Amendment and State law. The preferred scenario will provide
guidance where any conflicts occur, except in cases where there are cross-
cutting regulatory or legal obligations that the parties are required to meet
future plans. In such an instance, the Parties will work towards
maintaining the intent of the Preferred Scenario while meeting regulatory
and legal obligations.
b. Upon completion of the Preferred Scenario, the outside firm will present the
findings and recommendations to the Salt Lake City Council and the UIPA Board,
in public meetings, which include public comment opportunities, for potential
formal adoption.
c. Environmental Mitigation Projects within the Authority Jurisdictional Land: Under
Utah law, UIPA will spend 40% of the City Generated Differential on
environmental mitigation projects in the authority jurisdictional land within the
City (“Environmental Differential”) according to the following:
i. A portion of the Environmental Differential will be used by the City and
UIPA to engage the mutually agreed upon and selected outside firm to
create the Baseline Study and Preferred Scenario in a timely manner. Any
additional Environmental Differential will be spent on either UIPA’s
Community Enrichment Grants or other projects, to be mutually agreed
upon by the Parties under the terms of this First Amendment.
ii. While the Baseline Study and Preferred Scenario are being established,
any unspent Environmental Differential may fund UIPA’s Community
5
Enrichment Grants, particularly grants that mitigate the environmental
impacts on Salt Lake City related to the development of the authority
jurisdictional land. Such environmental mitigation projects may include,
but are not limited to, net zero, electric, or equivalent building; mitigation
of truck traffic; protection of wetlands and other areas important to the
function of the Great Salt Lake and habitat; construction that supports
migratory bird patterns in and around the jurisdictional land; low water
usage; solar or renewable energy and/or transportation electrification,
including rail, trucks, vans, transit and non-road vehicles and projects
related to rail and clean air. The Parties agree that the City and UIPA will
establish mutually agreed upon standards for the Community Enrichment
Grant applications, prior to releasing any grant applications, to ensure that
the Environmental Differential is being allocated pursuant to Utah law.
iii. Expenditure of the Environmental Differential for Community
Enrichment Grants will only occur after the City and UIPA follow the
process described in Section 1(e) below. After the establishment of the
Baseline Study and Preferred Scenario, the Environmental Differential
may fund the Preferred Projects, which will be prioritized pursuant to the
process described in Section 1(e) below. So long as it is consistent with
this First Amendment and State law, the UIPA board will maintain final
approval of any expenditure for Environmental Differential.
d. Mitigation Projects for Communities within the City. UIPA will spend 40% of the
City Generated Differential (“Community Differential”) on mitigation projects
for communities that are within the City; are adjacent to the authority jurisdictional
land; and are west of the east boundary of the right of way of commuter rail used
by the City (“Westside Community”) according to the following:
i. A portion of the Community Differential will be used by the City and
UIPA to engage the mutually agreed upon and selected outside firm to
create the Baseline Study and Preferred Scenario in a timely manner. Any
additional Community Differential will be spent on either UIPA’s
Community Enrichment Grants or other projects, to be mutually agreed
upon by the Parties under the terms of this First Amendment.
ii. While the Baseline Study and Preferred Scenario are being established,
any unspent Community Differential may fund UIPA’s Community
Enrichment Grants, particularly grants that mitigate the impacts of
development of the port authority jurisdictional land on the Westside
Community, including but not limited to, projects that address
community-identified priorities, including creating quiet zones, railroad
crossings, new infrastructure to benefit adjacent communities,
6
apprenticeship programs, career and youth development, and scholarships
for certain careers associated with UIPA, and clean air opportunities
related to rail. The Parties agree that the City and UIPA will establish
mutually agreed upon standards for the Community Enrichment Grant
applications, prior to releasing any grant applications, to ensure that the
Community Differential is being allocated pursuant to Utah law.
iii. Expenditure of the Community Differential for Community Enrichment
Grants will only occur after the City and UIPA follow the process
described in Section 1(e) below. After the establishment of the Baseline
Study and Preferred Scenario, the Community Differential will fund the
Preferred Projects, which will be prioritized pursuant to the process
described in Section 1(e) below. So long as it is consistent with this First
Amendment and State law, the UIPA board will maintain final approval
of any expenditure for Community Differential.
iv.
Process to Review and Identify Expenditures for the Environmental Differential and
Community Differential. During each fiscal year, within 30 days after receiving the amount
of City Differential from the County, the UIPA executive team will first allocate sufficient
Environmental Differential and Community Differential to complete the Baseline Study
and Preferred Scenario in a timely manner. If Environmental Differential and Community
Differential remain unallocated, the UIPA executive team will develop a list of priority
projects to spend the Environmental Differential and Community Differential (collectively,
the “Mitigation Money”), in conformance with the priorities of this First Amendment. By
April 15 of each year, the UIPA executive team will submit any proposed use of Mitigation
Money to the City’s advisory group of experts, via the Mayor’s office, which will be
comprised of members of City departments, including but not limited to, the
Redevelopment Agency, Community and Neighborhoods, Public Utilities, and
Sustainability, Mayor’s Office and Council Office, and stakeholders invested in the City’s
Northwest Quadrant including the Audubon Society and community leaders from westside
neighborhoods (“NWQ Review Group”). The NWQ Review Group may develop a
separate list of priority projects to spend the Mitigation Money. If the NWQ Review Group
develops a separate list of priority projects, the NWQ Review Group will share this list
with the UIPA executive team no later than May 1 of each year.
e. The UIPA team and representatives of the NWQ Review Group will seek to
develop a joint recommendation to be presented to UIPA’s board no later than June
15 of each year. The Parties anticipate that there will always be more ways to spend
the Mitigation Money than there is money available. If there is no agreement on a
joint recommendation, the NWQ Review Group’s identified projects and the UIPA
executive team’s identified projects will both be submitted to the UIPA Board.
Upon completion of the Preferred Scenario, the Parties agree that the list of priority
projects will either be the Preferred Projects identified in the Preferred Scenario or
7
will be identified using the policies and matrices established in the Preferred
Scenario and within the scope of authority of the City and/or the UIPA. In all
events, UIPA’s board shall consider the budget requests and approve a budget after
a public hearing at a public meeting located within Salt Lake City boundaries, and
such budget will include line-item approval of projects for the expenditure of the
Mitigation Money. The UIPA board may approve a multi-year option for
significant projects, so long as such projects are consistent with this First
Amendment and State law.
f. Economic Development Activities. UIPA will spend the remaining 20% of the
City’s Property Tax on economic development projects within the authority
jurisdictional land in Salt Lake City. UIPA will use commercially reasonable efforts
to incentivize economic development projects that align with Preferred Scenario,
the City’s Northwest Quadrant Master Plan, and/or the UIPA Northwest Quadrant
Project Area Plan.
2. Interlocal Cooperation Act. In satisfaction of the requirements of the Interlocal
Cooperation Act, and in connection with this Agreement, the Parties agree as follows:
a) This Agreement shall be approved by each Party pursuant to Utah Code §11-13-
202.5 of the Interlocal Cooperation Act, including by the Board of the RDA, the
Salt Lake City Council, and the UIPA Board of Directors.
b) This Agreement shall be reviewed as to proper form and compliance with
applicable law by a duly authorized attorney on behalf of each Party, pursuant to
Utah Code §11-13-202.5 of the Interlocal Cooperation Act.
c) A duly executed original counterpart of this Agreement shall be filed with keeper
of records of each Party, pursuant to Utah Code §11-13-209 of the Interlocal
Cooperation Act.
d) Except as otherwise specifically provided herein, each Party shall be responsible
for its own costs of any action taken pursuant to this Agreement, and for any
financing of such costs.
e) Any Party may withdraw from the joint or cooperative undertaking described in
this Agreement only upon the termination of this Agreement.
f) No real or personal property shall be acquired jointly by the Parties as a result of this
Agreement. To the extent that a Party acquires, holds, or disposes of any real or
personal property for use in the joint or cooperative undertaking contemplated by this
Agreement, such Party shall do so in the same manner that it deals with other
property of such Party.
g) No joint board or entity is created through this Agreement.
8
h)The functions to be performed by the joint or cooperative undertaking are those
described in this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties are executing this First Amendment to Interlocal
Agreement to be effective as of the Effective Date.
Utah Inland Port Authority, a Utah public
entity
Name:__________________________
Title:___________________________
Approved as to Proper Form and
Compliance with Applicable Law:
Attorney for Utah Inland
Port Authority
Salt Lake City Corporation, a Utah
municipal corporation
Erin Mendenhall, Mayor
Approved as to Proper Form and Compliance
with Applicable Law:
Katherine Lewis, City Attorney
Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City,
a Utah public entity
Erin Mendenhall, Executive Director
Approved as to Proper Form and
Compliance with Applicable Law:
Katherine Lewis, City Attorney
Attest:
Cindy Lou Trishman, City Recorder
Ben Hart
Executive Director
Adopted July 7, 2024 - Resolution 22 of 2024
First Amendment to Interlocal with Utah Inland
Port
Final Audit Report 2024-07-17
Created:2024-07-11
By:DeeDee Robinson (deedee.robinson@slcgov.com)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAJ0drMjFDYG8-JhIFO5o9GC0ewEgApVIm
"Adopted July 7, 2024 - Resolution 22 of 2024 First Amendment
to Interlocal with Utah Inland Port" History
Document created by DeeDee Robinson (deedee.robinson@slcgov.com)
2024-07-11 - 9:13:11 PM GMT
Document emailed to Katherine Lewis (katherine.lewis@slcgov.com) for signature
2024-07-11 - 9:14:17 PM GMT
Email viewed by Katherine Lewis (katherine.lewis@slcgov.com)
2024-07-11 - 9:24:19 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Katherine Lewis (katherine.lewis@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2024-07-11 - 9:25:49 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to victoria.petro@slcgov.com for signature
2024-07-11 - 9:25:53 PM GMT
Email viewed by victoria.petro@slcgov.com
2024-07-12 - 4:45:42 AM GMT
Email viewed by victoria.petro@slcgov.com
2024-07-15 - 10:54:32 PM GMT
Email viewed by victoria.petro@slcgov.com
2024-07-17 - 4:47:10 AM GMT
Signer victoria.petro@slcgov.com entered name at signing as Victoria Petro
2024-07-17 - 4:00:21 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Victoria Petro (victoria.petro@slcgov.com)
Signature Date: 2024-07-17 - 4:00:23 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Document emailed to Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com) for signature
2024-07-17 - 4:00:27 PM GMT
Document e-signed by Cindy Trishman (cindy.trishman@slcgov.com)
E-signature obtained using URL retrieved through the Adobe Acrobat Sign API
Signature Date: 2024-07-17 - 7:42:12 PM GMT - Time Source: server
Agreement completed.
2024-07-17 - 7:42:12 PM GMT