HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Provided Information - 6/11/2026CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY
451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 www.slc.gov/council
OUNCIL UDGET
STAFF REPORT
CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY
link.slc.com/SLCFY27
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Jennifer Bruno, Lehua Weaver, Austin Kimmel, Kate Werrett Allison Rowland, Sylvia Richards, and Michael Sanders
DATE: June 11, 2026
RE: UNRESOLVED BUDGET ISSUES – Follow-up on Council Questions
NEW INFORMATION
Because we have not yet received final property tax new growth numbers, the Chair has asked that Council
Members come prepared to the meeting to discuss:
- Any desired cuts or adds to the proposed budget, including whether they are from the property tax
increase proposal
- Hypothetical: Additional $1 million in new growth over the MRB
- Hypothetical: Reduction of $1 million in new growth from the MRB
- Other items
New Growth – Council Staff has not yet received final new growth numbers from the State Tax Commission
(state law now requires them to finalize by June 12). Currently the Mayor’s Recommended budget projects
$2,581,287 in new growth, however, the City can only collect what is approved by the tax commission. Therefore,
if new growth comes in higher or lower than the recommended number, the Council will have to re-balance the
budget. The following are some options for illustrative purposes only:
- If property tax new growth is higher than the Mayor’s Recommended Budget:
o Reduce property tax increase proposal
o Contribute to fund balance (reduce amount used from fund balance)
o Increase funding for CIP/Streets/Fleet Fuel (or other uses highlighted by the Council)
- If property tax new growth is lower than the Mayor’s Recommended Budget:
o Use more fund balance
o Cut some proposed additions to the budget (if they are part of the property tax increase proposal,
the Council will need to identify other uses for the property tax increase proposal)
o Note: in previous years the Council could add to the property tax increase proposal. However
because of new noticing requirements that is no longer possible. Staff is confirming with the
Attorney’s office that it may be possible if the Council decides to increase beyond the Mayor’s
recommendation by June 13 (June 11 being the last opportunity). We noted that the City will
not know final new growth numbers at that time.
Project Timeline:
Briefing: June 9, 2026
Budget Hearing: May 19 & June
2, 2026
Potential Action: June 16
2
Clarification on Consolidated Fee Schedule (CFS) – Staff wanted to make sure Council Members know
that some limited fees in the CFS do not necessarily follow the Consumer Price Index (CPI). Reasons include
either updated cost justification studies or enterprise funds that need to periodically adjust fees to cover
operations and capital costs. Please see attached list of fees that fall into that category.
The following information was provided for the June 9 work session discussion. It is provided again for
reference, and where updates are available that information is shared in blue.
ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE
Staff has kept a list of items that one or more Council Members have raised as potential changes to the Mayor’s
Recommended Budget, or items that might need further Council discussion. It should be noted that this is a
staff-generated draft, reflecting Council questions and discussions as of the date of its printing. It may be
updated prior to the work session discussion, and Council Members may have changes or corrections to
individual items, and Council Members may add items.
If a budget impact is apparent (revenue, FTE and/or expense changes), that amount has been listed, or noted as
“to be determined.” Depending on Council feedback, adjustments can be made to the overall key changes
document, so that the Council can track the net effect of these decisions on the overall budget an appropriate
noticing measures can be taken for the August truth in taxation hearing.
Changes to the overall City budget or property tax increase proposal may cause it to be out of balance (increase
or decrease expenses and revenues). As these changes occur, the Council would need to identify offsetting
revenue enhancements or expense reductions to bring the budget back in balance. Once initial Council interest
in various items can be determined, staff will plan to have a live tracking of additions to or subtractions from the
Mayor’s Recommended Budget, to ensure the final budget adopted by the Council is balanced and the Council’s
version of the property tax impact schedule as required by state law. New growth is not required to be posted by
the State tax commission until June 12th per recent state law and the Council is tentatively scheduled to vote on
the final budget on June 16.
(Note: this list is not comprehensive – please let staff know if there are other items to add)
Ongoing discussion items
1. Property tax increase proposal – several Council Members have expressed an interest in re-
evaluating the Mayor’s proposed property tax increase. While the charts below have been discussed in
prior work sessions they are provided again for reference and/or further discussion. As a reminder,
current state law requires the Council to identify what, if anything, will be funded by a property tax
increase, and what the budget would look like if a property tax increase is not approved.
3
FY 2027 Property Tax Increase Items
Fire Item Total Department Total
Fire Department Contractual Increases 84,000$
Fire MOU Contractual Increases - Uniform Allowances 40,600$
Civilian Supervisor / Fire Inspector (10 Months)119,600$
Firefighters for Truck 3 - 9 FTE (10 Months)1,431,054$
Fuel & Maintenance for Reserve Truck 75,000$ 1,750,254$
Public Lands
Wildland Fire Interface Mitigation 200,000$
New Properties: Operations Costs 396,518$
New Properties: Seasonal Staff Salaries 311,600$ 908,118$
Justice Courts
Judicial Assistants (4) (10 Months)320,000$
Justice Court Manager (10 Months)112,011$ 432,011$
Attorney
Prosecutor's Office - 2 Legal Assistants (10 Months)127,722$ 127,722$
CAN
Youth and Family Programming 800,000$ 800,000$
Non Departmental
Street Lighting (GF owned properties)95,000$ -$
Street Lighting GF Grant 20,000$ -$
Street Lighting in Enhanced Service Areas (GF owned properties)115,915$ 230,915$
Transfer to Capital Improvement Projects Fund 6,463,036$ 6,463,036$
Vehicles for New FTE's (Police, Fire, Public Lands, Public Services)264,774$ -$
Fleet - Centralized Fleet Maintenance 1,061,827$ 1,326,601$
Transfer to E&E fund - operation funding 500,000$ 500,000$
Legal Defenders 961,343$ 961,343$
Total 13,500,000$ 13,500,000$
FY 2027 CIP Projects proposed to be funded with Property Tax Increase
Amount Notes
Street Reconstruction 627,915$
Total $8.3m. Prop tax combined with
$4.7m in class C funds and $3m in County
transpo funds
Sugar House Park 50/50 Match 1,000,000$
Jordan Park Sewer/Stormwater
Infrastructure Improvements 300,000$
Vision Zero Safety Improvements
Citywide 1,948,500$
combined with $121,500 in FOF and
$230,000 in Impact fees
Urban Trails 450,000$
City Facilities Replacement &
Renewal 1,136,621$
Combined with $1.6m from GF. Total
$2.7m
Washington Park Septic Expansion 950,000$
Bike Racks 50,000$
Total 6,463,036$
4
2. Items to consider adding to the budget. Some Council Members have expressed interest in
adding/adjusting the following items to the budget. Because exact revenue numbers will not be known
at the time of the main unresolved issues discussion, Council Members may wish to discuss how to
prioritize these or other additional items, should extra revenue become available through new growth
(which won’t be official until June 12):
a. Hive Pass – Some Council Members have expressed interest in restoring a cut from the
Mayor’s recommended budget to the Hive pass. Currently there is no income-qualification and
it costs the City a net of $382,900 per year for around 400 users. As a reminder, the Mayor’s
recommended budget does not propose eliminating the SLC School district student/parent
transit pass. The Council could also adopt a legislative intent asking the Administration to work
with UTA on a more robust discounted-or-free pass program for income-qualified SLC
residents.
b. The Council decided to remove this item - Fleet Fuel – Some Council Members
expressed concern that the current budget for fuel costs for City fleet vehicles, including for the
Police Department, don’t accurately reflect the current and expected fuel costs for the upcoming
fiscal year. The budget proposal essentially holds the Fleet budget flat on that item. While
conservation is a possibility to meet this budget, the department indicates they will come back to
the Council for a budget amendment if additional fuel budget is needed. Given the current
status of fund balance, this may be a more risky proposition than is typical.
c. Street maintenance – Some Council Members have expressed interest in funding street
maintenance beyond what is recommended in the FY 27 budget, based on the long lead time for
roads to be repaired in the City.
3. Evaluate All Positions – in recent fiscal years, some Council Members expressed an interest in
considering all proposed new FTEs in more detail, potentially straw polling each. FY 27 includes fewer
new FTEs and several FTE eliminations, in addition to several positions proposed to be held vacant.
Note that in the chart below, positions in blue are proposed to be paid for via the property tax increase:
Property tax increase/reduction - Impact
Residential Commercial
Mayor's Recommendation
13,500,000.00$ 118.38$ 344.93$ annual
9.87$ 28.74$ monthly
Reduction Proposal Impacts
1,000,000$ 8.77$ 25.55$ annual
0.73$ 2.13$ monthly
500,000$ 4.38$ 12.78$ annual
0.37$ 1.06$ monthly
Residential Value 624,000$
Commercial Value 1,000,000$
5
4. Existing or proposed programs – the Council may wish to discuss whether to reduce or eliminate
any existing programs offered by the City. Some options raised by the Council in recent discussions
include:
a. Park Ranger program – some Council Members have flagged this program as something to
re-evaluate. The department has provided information including metrics that staff has provided
to the Council in email. It should also be noted the Mayor’s recommended budget includes
eliminating 3 Park Ranger FTEs for a savings of $285,000.
b. IMS Innovation Initiative – some Council Members questioned the timing of this program
given the expense ($200,000). Note: this item is funded through repurposing existing IMS
funds. If the Council wants to pursue this reduction it could elect to increase the “cut scenario”
line item in Non-Departmental, which would essentially reduce the operations budget for IMS
for the department to absorb.
c. Reduction in Council Office operating budget – Some Council Members have expressed
an interest in reducing the Council’s operating budget by 5%, as many other departments have
done. This would not impact the personnel budget to support liaison work for Council districts.
5. Overall impact to rate and property tax changes – some Council members have asked about the
overall impact of water/sewer/stormwater/refuse and property tax changes on residents. Staff has
attached a document from the Administration for the Council to review. In total, an average residential
home with medium water usage would see approximately $437 increase per year, or $36 per month
(note: this assumes the residential user has a 90 gallon garbage can and does not switch to a smaller
one).
FY 2027 Proposed FTE Changes by General Fund Department
Department
Adopted FY
2026
Positions
Budget
Amendment
Positions
FTE
Changes
for FY 27
Total
(note: Total does
not reflect grant
positions, as they
are refected in the
grant fund)Change
New Position Notes/Other Notes (new FTEs in bold, FTEs
subject to property tax increase approval in blue,
proposed eliminations in red)
Attorney 68.50 4.00 2 74.50 6 2 FTEs - Prosecutor Legal Assistance (Subject to Property Tax)
Community and
Neighborhoods
244 244 0
Council 39 0 0 39 0
Economic Development 14.5 0 0 14.5 0
Finance 86.7 0 -2 84.7 -2 1 FTE - Financial Analyst II (6 months)
Eliminate 3 FTEs - City Accounts Payable, Contract
Development, Data Systems Team Lead - Workday,
Procurement, IMS efficiencies
911 100 0 0 100 0
Fire 406 0 10 416 10 9 FTEs - Firefighters for Truck 3 (Subject to Property Tax)
1 FTE - Civilian Supervisor/Inspector (Subject to Property Tax)
Human Resources 34.4 0 -2 32.4 -2 Eliminate 1 FTE- Vacant HR Tech
Eliminate 1 FTE - Senior Learning & Dev Specialist
Justice Court 44 4 5 53 9 BA #4 - Positions added including a 6th judge
4 FTEs - Judicial Assistance (Subject to Property Tax)
1 FTE - Justice Court Manager (Subject to Property tax)
Mayor 31 0 0 31 0 Note: 2 FTEs added for FY 2026 base FTEs due to workday trueup
Police 779 14 4 797 18 BA #2 - Communications Director split into 2 Comms
Coordinators
BA #5 - Officers for UIPA - 12 sworn, 1 civilian
1 FTE - Drone Pilot (Real Time Crime Center)
1 FTE - Data Analyst (Real Time Crime Center)
Public Lands 159.85 0 -1 158.85 -1.00 2 FTEs - Convert Seasonal to Full Time
Eliminate 3 Park Ranger FTEs
Public Services 254.00 0 1 255.00 1
Total 2,260.95 22.00 17.00 2,299.95 39.00
Proposed FY 2027
6
6. Follow-up questions – Staff has been providing Council Members with follow up information
relating to questions raised at department briefings. Those have been shared with Council Members in
email as staff has received them, and several are still pending. Recent information received includes
Public Lands/Park Rangers, Police Department, Fleet, and Sustainability. Please let staff know about
any additional questions that arise.
7. Funding options - Staff has identified the following potential funding sources for Council
discussion/consideration, potentially to address some of the above ideas:
a. Potential additional revenue (pending information from Tax Commission and follow up from
the Administration – due by June 12 per state law)
i. Actual New Growth
ii. Actual Judgement Levy
iii. Note: increasing the property tax levy beyond the Mayor’s recommended budget is not
an option for FY 27 due to noticing requirements required by new state law.
b. Adopt a more aggressive forecast for Sales Tax revenue (not necessarily recommended due to
the volatility of this line item and economic uncertainty).
c. Adopt additional cost justified fee increases.
8. Budget “clean up” items – these are items that either the Staff or Administration have flagged as
potential corrections to the budget to ensure expectations are met:
a. Negotiated compensation agreements – the administration indicated they will provide a
department-by-department update on any changes based on recent negotiated compensation
agreements and any impacts to future budgets. Staff will include this in the key changes
documents for both the general and other funds.
b. SLC School District student/guardian passes – the Mayor’s recommended budget inadvertently
provides $20,000 less than is required to fully fund the SLC School district student/guardian
passes. The Department of Community and Neighborhoods has volunteered to add this to their
operational reduction in order to fully fund the passes.
c. CRA Budget item – One Council Member has raised the option of funding for the former
Coachmen’s Restaurant neon sign in order to remove and store the sign with the goal of
preserving it. If the Board is supportive, the Board could make a motion upon budget adoption
to use State Street project area “strategic intervention” funds for this purpose. Staff is working
with the Administration and the community to identify the most appropriate place and manner
of storage.
d. Staff will continue to work with the Administration to address any other clean up items
identified in either the Key Changes or staffing document.
Potential Legislative Intents –
Updated information – the Council will be having a stand-alone discussion on legislative intents at
this work session meeting. Please reference that staff report for an updated version of each legislative
intent.
Potential Conditional Appropriations
1. Continued Contingency for All Funding Our Future -- Sales Tax Funds (this has been
adopted each year since the City implemented the sales tax). The Council approves Funding
Our Future sales tax revenue appropriations with the following conditions:
a. Expenditure of Funding Our Future Sales Tax Funds. Funding our Future funds may not be
expended unless the department or division expending the funds complies with:
7
i. Utah Fiscal Procedures Act
ii. The City’s Procurement Code and Rules
iii. Written verification from the City Attorney and City Finance Director that proper
legal and financial procedures have been followed.
b. Other Funding Our Future Budget Contingencies:
i. The Administration providing a written semiannual spending, implementation and
outcomes report on each of the critical need areas.
ii. Tracking funding for Fleet provided through the Funding our Future tax separately
to ensure it is spent only on public safety (police, fire, dispatch).
iii. The Administration spending funds in the critical need areas as adopted in the
attached key changes spreadsheet.
iv. The Administration bringing back to the Council any proposed adjustments to the
adopted budget in a budget amendment for re-appropriation before changes are made.
v. The Administration maintaining and regularly updating a publicly available
dashboard reflecting revenues received and actual uses.
vi. In FY21 and all future funding requests, providing a label denoting which line items
are funded with this Funding Our Future sales tax funds.
vii. For all positions added, the Administration shall submit an annual written review
along with the Mayor’s Recommended Budget to ensure that each position continues to serve
the critical need areas and, if a Council work session briefing is scheduled, provide a
presentation of the report.
Budget Glossary (not all terms are necessarily in
this report)
American Federation of State, County and
Municipal Employees - AFSCME
Budget Amendment - BA
Capital Improvement Program – CIP
Community and Neighborhoods – CAN
Community Land Trust – CLT
Community Reinvestment Agency - CRA
Economic Development Corporation of Utah -
EDCU
Funding Our Future - FoF
Frequent Transit Network – FTN
Fiscal Year – FY
Full-Time Employee – FTE
Housing and Neighborhood Development – HAND
Human Rights Commission – HRC
Homeless Resource Centers – HRCs
Housing Trust Fund - HTF
Interlocal Agreement – ILA
International Association of Chiefs of Police – IACP
Mayor’s Recommended Budget - MRB
Salt Lake City School District – SLCSD
Salt Lake City Fire Department - SLCFD
Request for Proposal - RFP
TBD – To Be Determined
Transit Master Plan – TMP
United Nations – UN
Utah League of Cities and Towns
Utah Transit Authority – UTA
Volunteers of America - VOA
Wasatch Community Gardens - WCG
Unresolved Issues
6.11.26
Adds and Cuts
Hive Pass – Approx $400k
Ideas for
Additions
Street Maintenance - TBD
Ideas for
Cuts
IMS Innovation - $200k
Park Rangers - TBD
Council Office 5%
Operational Reduction -
$34,121
Funding from where?
Fund Balance
Property tax new growth
Funding goes where?
Fund Balance
Reduce Property tax
proposal - ID items
HOMEWORK
Priorities if you had an extra
million?
HOMEWORK
Priorities if you had a million less?
FY 27 Property Tax Proposal
FY 2027 Property Tax Increase Items
Fire Item Total Department Total
Fire Department Contractual Increases 84,000$
Fire MOU Contractual Increases - Uniform Allowances 40,600$
Civilian Supervisor / Fire Inspector (10 Months)119,600$
Firefighters for Truck 3 - 9 FTE (10 Months)1,431,054$
Fuel & Maintenance for Reserve Truck 75,000$ 1,750,254$
Public Lands
Wildland Fire Interface Mitigation 200,000$
New Properties: Operations Costs 396,518$
New Properties: Seasonal Staff Salaries 311,600$ 908,118$
Justice Courts
Judicial Assistants (4) (10 Months)320,000$
Justice Court Manager (10 Months)112,011$ 432,011$
Attorney
Prosecutor's Office - 2 Legal Assistants (10 Months)127,722$ 127,722$
CAN
Youth and Family Programming 800,000$ 800,000$
Non Departmental
Street Lighting (GF owned properties)95,000$ -$
Street Lighting GF Grant 20,000$ -$
Street Lighting in Enhanced Service Areas (GF owned properties)115,915$ 230,915$
Transfer to Capital Improvement Projects Fund 6,463,036$ 6,463,036$
Vehicles for New FTE's (Police, Fire, Public Lands, Public Services)264,774$ -$
Fleet - Centralized Fleet Maintenance 1,061,827$ 1,326,601$
Transfer to E&E fund - operation funding 500,000$ 500,000$
Legal Defenders 961,343$ 961,343$
Total 13,500,000$ 13,500,000$
FY 27 Property Tax Proposal
FY 2027 CIP Projects proposed to be funded with Property Tax Increase
Amount Notes
Total $8.3m. Prop tax combined with
$4.7m in class C funds and $3m in County
transpo funds
Jordan Park Sewer/Stormwater
300,000$
Vision Zero Safety Improvements
1,948,500$
combined with $121,500 in FOF and
$230,000 in Impact fees
City Facilities Replacement &
1,136,621$
Combined with $1.6m from GF. Total
$2.7m
Bike Racks 50,000$
Total 6,463,036$
Property Tax Impact Scenarios
CommercialResidential
Mayor’s
Recommended
$13,500,000
$ 344.93$ 118.38Annual
$ 28.74$ 9.87Monthly
CommercialResidential$ 1,000,000
$ 25.55$ 8.77Annual
$ 2.13$ 0.73Monthly
Reduction Impact
CommercialResidential$ 500,000
$ 12,78$ 4.38Annual
$ 1.06$ 0.37Monthly
Changes to the Property Tax Proposal
New State law requires the Council to adopt
exactly what any property tax increase is paying for
Any change to the Mayor’s proposal is required to
be adopted and advertised
Hypothetical
Do you want to reduce the property tax increase but fund all of the things?
Move item from
Property tax
increase
Fund item in
general fund
Cut item from
General Fund in
same amount
Decrease property
tax total amount
Hypothetical
Do you want to cut something from the general fund?
Frees up money to
move item from
property tax
increase
Fund item in
general fund
Cut item from
general fund
Decrease property
tax total amount
Increase amount to
fund balance
OR
Hypothetical
More property tax revenue than proposed?
Increase amount to
fund balance
Increase amount to street
maintenance/CIP/Other
Decide which items
will be in the
property tax
increase
Decrease property
tax increase
amount
Option Option Option
Hypothetical
Less property tax revenue than proposed?
Spend more from
fund balance
Increase property
tax
Cut items from the
budget
Option Option Option
If cut items are part
of the property tax
increase proposal
identify what will
replace
Note: Staff is
clarifying with
attorneys - this may
be an option but
only if the Council
decides to increase
the property tax
proposal before
June 13.
Alterations to FY 27 Key Changes
List of CFS items that don't necessarily follow the Consumer Price Index
Building Rental / Use: City and County Building
Painter
Carpenter
General Maintenance Worker
Police
No Trespass Sign
GRAMA Updated Cost Justification
Parks and Public Lands
Sod Replacement
Lawn Seed
Top Soil
Records and Elections
Employee Staff Time Updated Cost Justification
GRAMA Updated Cost Justification
Special Events
Sod Replacement
Lawn Seed
Top Soil
Waste and Recycling FT employee Enterprise Funds - cost of operations
Supervisor Enterprise Funds - cost of operations
Seasonal Employee Enterprise Funds - cost of operations
Affected Department Proposed
Budget
Budget w/out
Tax Change
Budget
Change Impact of Tax Increase
Fire Department $59,302,822 $57,552,568 $1,800,218 Sugar House has seen extensive growth including the development of new
highrise buildings. This increase will fund 9 firefighters to staff a newly purchased
fire truck and allow for fuel and maintenance of the old apparatus for use as a
reserve. Continued increase in requests for permits, along with statutory changes
to the Wildland Fire Interface (WUI) requirements have created the need for one
new Fire Inspector. This increase will also cover a new vehicle for the Fire
Inspector, contractual and uniform allowance increases.
Salt Lake City’s current property tax rate 0.00213
Salt Lake City’s current property revenue $108,006,905
Proposed revenue with tax changes $121,506,905
New Property Tax Revenue to Salt Lake City $13,500,000
Estimated increase to Salt Lake City’s property tax revenue 12.50%
Estimated increase to a primary residence valued at $624,000 $118.38
Estimated increase to a commercial property valued at $1 M $344.93
105/05/2026
FY26-27 Proposed Property Tax
Impact Schedule
Salt Lake City will consider an increase to the property tax rate from .00213 To .00248
to generate an additional $13,500,000.
The following information is intended to provide decision makers and the public with
an explanation of how the City’s operations would be affected if the property tax
remains the same.
Affected Department Proposed
Budget
Budget w/out
Tax Change
Budget
Change Impact of Tax Increase
Public Lands $34,321,961 $33,199,033 $1,122,928 Public Lands is responsible for maintaining 23 new properties, parks and
amenities, this increase includes additional seasonal staff, equipment and
operational costs related to maintaining these properties. This budget change will
also pay for Wildland Fire Interface mitigation covering 30 miles of high risk areas.
Justice Court $7,538,063 $7,106,052 $432,011 Caseload at the Justice Court has increased significantly. To provide for more
effective adjudication of cases and allow better access to justice, this increase
includes the addition of four Judicial Assistants and one Justice Court Manager.
Attorney $13,274,426 $13,146,702 $127,722 To provide for continued implementation of Diversion Programs, the Public Safety
Plan and accommodate a new Judge at the Justice Court, this increase includes the
addition of two Prosecutorial Assistants.
Community & Neighborhoods $41,407,546 $ 40,607,546 $800,000 This increase will maintain current Youth and Family programming following the
loss of several major grant funding sources.
Street Lighting Fund Transfer $401,315 $170,400 $230,915 This increase will pay for the maintenance and repair of General Fund owned
street lighting and fund a $20,000 grant program to supplement property owners
who wish to add privately owned streetlights.
Sustainability Fund Transfer $1,170,900 $670,900 $500,000 This increase will support the Environment & Energy Division as they develop
strategies that protect our natural resources and reduce pollution.
Capital Improvement Projects Fund
Transfer
$10,100,000 $3,636,964 $6,463,036 Funds from this increase will used to pay for the following Capital Improvement
projects: Vision Zero Corridors and Safety Improvements, Facilities Replacement
and Renewal, Sugar House Park Waterline Replacement, Washington Park Septic
Expansion, Urban Trails, Jordan Park Sewer Improvements, Bike Racks, and
additional Street Reconstruction.
Fleet Centralized Maintenance Fund $12,788,795 $11,726,968 $1,061,827 Continued increases to the cost of parts, fuel and labor to maintain and repair Salt
Lake City’s fleet of vehicles.
NonDepartment/Legal Defender
Association
$2,755,153 $1,793,810 $961,343 In response to increased caseload at the Justice Court, the Legal Defender contract
has been increased to allow for new staff to provide indigent defense.
Totals $183,060,981 $169,610,943 $13,500,000
205/05/2026