City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

🎵 🎵

Thank you.

So,

Thank you.

So,

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

you

So, you So,

Thank you.

Bye.

so

June 2nd, 2026 City Council work session meeting. Our meetings are public and you are welcome to join us in person or by watching from the Council agenda page, Zoom or YouTube. We hope you continue to join us whichever manner you feel the most comfortable. This is a work session meeting during which there is not public comment. Please join us tonight during the 7 p.m. formal meeting to share your comments. We, of course, welcome feedback from you anytime. You can mail it to us at PO Box 145476, Salt Lake City, Utah, 84114. You can also email it to us at council.comments at slc.gov, or you can call our 24-hour phone line, 801-535-7654. Every comment that we receive on agenda topics are shared with council members and posted on our website. You can visit that at slc.gov slash council. Our first agenda item is an informational update from the administration, and we welcome Western Clark, Director of Community Outreach, and Andrew Johnston, Director of Homeless Policy and Outreach to the table. It's your time now, thank you.

Good afternoon. We will jump right into some engagement updates. Next slide. The regular reminder to go check out SHAPE SLC, which is a great place to engage in a lot of city projects and is more being added every day. So go check it out. And you can sign up to follow certain projects and be alerted when there's any changes. It's really a great way to stay engaged. Next slide. Our planning team is working hard on a number of things that are in need of community feedback. The 45-day public input started in April for the Avenues Community Plan update. The first public hearing with the Planning Commission was held in May, but there is another public hearing that will be held in July and a community engagement event is being held in Memory Grove from 530 to 7. You can head to SHAPE SLC for details and to follow that project. The city's expanding housing options effort initiated by the City Council following the review of the R1 zoning study will be presented to the Planning Commission to recap the identified issues on June 10th with the hopes of getting some direction from the Planning Commission and suggest some options to address the issues that were identified. The initial public engagement phase of updating the central community plan will begin with presenting the existing conditions report to the community and getting initial feedback on how they view their community in light of the existing conditions. This project is also, of course, on SHAPE SLC if you'd like to follow. Next slide. Public Lands has a lot of things moving on their projects, so here are a few updates on some of those beloved public spaces that folks might be curious about. Jefferson Park's preferred concept was identified through public engagement, and Public Lands is now working through more specific schematic design. Over at Miller Park, the CIP-funded repairs to the historic double stone staircase, hillside stabilization, and some minor infrastructure repair funded by public lands dollars begin in mid-May and should be completed by the middle of this month. The CIP project for trail maintenance and historic wall protection is currently out for bid, with construction planned for later this summer. The Glendale Regional Park team has some exciting news. They received a $1 million grant from Utah Outdoor Recreation that will go toward the skate park and pump tracks. Meanwhile, phase two design continues meaningfully on track for gold certification, which continues to show the team is implementing some of the best environmental practices in its design. At Fairmont Park, the contract for design work is signed and will begin early this month. Donner Trail Park construction is slated to begin this month as well. The fleet block project team is working through the engagement results from phase two and refining the concept, and they will very soon be able to make some final versions available to the public. And finally, the long-awaited Liberty Park playground is making some great progress. The splash pad concrete is nearly all installed. Several amenities and site furnishings have been installed, including shade structures, benches, and tables. The playground equipment is being installed as it arrives. And while some of the equipment arrives from overseas, the contractor is doing what they can to prep the site. Some of the irrigation and plantings have been installed as well. So hopefully that will be done soon. And that's it for me.

Council members, any, Council Member Pietro.

I'd love to know more about the bridge at Cottonwood Dog Park when available. I was at another meeting last night and issues from ADA accessibility to public safety were raised because of the continued closure of that.

Okay.

Thank you.

I can check on that. Thank you. Andrew.

Next slide please. YOU CAN SEE AT THE TOP FOR OUR YOU CAN SEE AT THE TOP FOR OUR HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER HOMELESS RESOURCE CENTER UTILIZATION I PUT FUNCTIONALLY UTILIZATION I PUT FUNCTIONALLY UTILIZATION I PUT FUNCTIONALLY FULL FOR MAY. FULL FOR MAY. FULL FOR MAY. THE REASON IS BECAUSE THE NUMBER THE REASON IS BECAUSE THE NUMBER THE REASON IS BECAUSE THE NUMBER IS A LITTLE FUNKY IN THE IS A LITTLE FUNKY IN THE IS A LITTLE FUNKY IN THE TRANSITION FROM WINTER TO SUMMER TRANSITION FROM WINTER TO SUMMER TRANSITION FROM WINTER TO SUMMER IN THAT THEY RUN AT ABOUT 133 IN THAT THEY RUN AT ABOUT 133 IN THAT THEY RUN AT ABOUT 133 PERCENT CAP ALTHOUGH I THINK MAJORITY OF THE BEDS ARE BEING MAINTAINED BEDS ARE BEING MAINTAINED BEDS ARE BEING MAINTAINED THROUGH THE SUMMERTIME. THROUGH THE SUMMERTIME. THROUGH THE SUMMERTIME. SO WE SHOULDN'T SEE A MASSIVE SO WE SHOULDN'T SEE A MASSIVE SO WE SHOULDN'T SEE A MASSIVE DECREASE IN CAPACITY AT THIS DECREASE IN CAPACITY AT THIS DECREASE IN CAPACITY AT THIS POINT. POINT. POINT. SOME OF THAT IS GOING TO BE SOME OF THAT IS GOING TO BE SOME OF THAT IS GOING TO BE MOVING TOWARDS HOUSING IN THE MOVING TOWARDS HOUSING IN THE MOVING TOWARDS HOUSING IN THE NEXT YEAR, WE BELIEVE. NEXT YE NEXT PIECE IS THAT WE TALKED BEFORE THAT THE EIM WORK AND RAPID RESPONSE TEAMS ARE CAUGHT UP ENOUGH WHERE THEY CAN ACTUALLY RESPOND DAY OF TO MANY THINGS OR THE DAY AFTER AND SO WE DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO PLAN OUT A FULL WEEK IN ADVANCE ANYMORE SO AS RESIDENTS OR OTHERS HAVE ISSUES OR REQUESTS FOR SERVICE WE ENCOURAGE EVERYONE TO PUT THEM INTO THE APP AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO THE APP AS SOON AS WE CAN EVEN THAT DAY SOMETIMES TO DO SOME CLEANUP SO IF YOU HAVE THINGS TO BRING UP PUT THEM IN THE APP IMMEDIATELY WE CAN GET THERE VERY QUICKLY THAT WEEK. Next slide. We had a resource fair on May 8th at Library Square. If you were around, it looked sort of like a mini version of a festival. It's that large at this point. You can see that we had a number of metrics from there, co-hosted by Odyssey House this time. 16 housing applications were completed for 16 individuals. 48 people had 154 cases heard by our justice court there. And then we had seven dental evaluations and 26 tooth extractions. THESE ARE THINGS THAT PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE HAPPENING WITHOUT THE WOULDN'T BE HAPPENING WITHOUT THE WOULDN'T BE HAPPENING WITHOUT THE RESOURCE FAIR. RESOURCE FAIR. RESOURCE FAIR. REALLY GOOD RESOURCE FOR THE REALLY GOOD RESOURCE FOR THE REALLY GOOD RESOURCE FOR THE COMMUNITY. COMMUNITY. COMMUNITY. THE SECOND PIECE IS THE NEXT THE SECOND PIECE IS THE NEXT THE SECOND PIECE IS THE NEXT FAIR WILL BE JUNE 12th COHOSTED FAIR WILL BE JUNE 12th COHOSTED FAIR WILL BE JUNE 12th COHOSTED BY THE HAVEN WHICH IS A BY THE HAVEN WHICH IS A BY THE HAVEN WHICH IS A RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAM RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT PROGRAM RESIDENTIAL TREAT AND THE OTHER THING IS COMMUNITY CORNER HAS RESTARTED AGAIN. WE DID A PILOT LAST FALL. IT WENT WELL BY THE COMMUNITY INPUT AND THE PROVIDERS AND THE CLIENTS. AND SO HEART IS AGAIN FACILITATING THAT AT SECOND SOUTH AND SEVENTH WEST. MONDAYS AND TUESDAYS FROM 9 TO 1, BOTH OF THOSE DAYS. AND THERE'S A REVOLVING GROUP OF PROVIDERS COMING IN ON DIFFERENT DAYS. AND WE CAN SHARE THAT INFORMATION FOR YOU EVERY WEEK SO YOU'LL KNOW WHO'S THERE AND WHEN. THE LAST PIECE IS THE JUSTICE COURT WILL BE DOING MOBILE COURT COURT WILL BE DOING MOBILE COURT COURT WILL BE DOING MOBILE COURT AT THE WORKFORCE SERVICES THIS AT THE WORKFORCE SERVICES THIS AT THE WORKFORCE SERVICES THIS JUNE 5TH, THIS FRIDAY AT 9 AM. JUNE 5TH, THIS FRIDAY AT 9 AM. JUNE 5TH, THIS FRIDAY AT 9 AM. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE. CHAIR? CHAIR? CHAIR? COUNCIL MEMBERS? COUNCIL MEMBERS? COUNCIL MEMBERS? IT SAYS COMMUNITY CORNER IS IT SAYS COMMUNITY CORNER IS IT SAYS COMMUNITY CORNER IS MONDAY AND TUESDAYS ONLY.

MONDAY AND TUESDAY

How will you summarize? How is it going? Is it having a positive impact, you know, the people showing up? Is it doing some good?

Sure. So we just started, I think last week, LAST FALL WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE NUMBERS FOR THE SUMMER PARKS NUMBERS FOR THE SUMMER PARKS NUMBERS FOR THE SUMMER PARKS REPORTED A DECREASE IN THE REPORTED A DECREASE IN THE REPORTED A DECREASE IN THE NUMBER OF PROVIDERS GOING INTO NUMBER OF PROVIDERS GOING INTO NUMBER OF PROVIDERS GOING INTO PUBLIC PARKS TO OFFER THOSE PUBLIC PARKS TO OFFER THOSE PUBLIC PARKS TO OFFER THOSE SERVICES PARTIALLY BECAUSE THEY'RE SERVICES PARTIALLY BECAUSE THEY'RE SERVICES PARTIALLY BECAUSE THEY'RE COMING TO COMMUNITY CORNER AND COMING TO COMMUNITY CORNER AND COMING TO COMMUNITY CORNER AND THAT WAS PART OF THE ISSUE AND THE THAT WAS PART OF THE ISSUE AND THE THAT WAS PART OF THE ISS THAT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL FROM THE PARKS DEPARTMENT THAT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL FROM THE PARKS DEPARTMENT PERSPECTIVE. PERSPECTIVE. HARDEST TRACKING THE METRICS OF HARDEST TRACKING THE METRICS OF NUMBER OF CLIENTS SERVED. NUMBER OF CLIENTS SERVED. IT'S NOT AS BIG AS A RESOURCE IT'S NOT AS BIG AS A RESOURCE FAIR. FAIR. IT'S MORE FREQUENT OBVIOUSLY AND IT'S MORE FREQUENT OBVIOUSLY AND IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE THAT IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE THAT LARGE. LARGE. BUT IT'S BEEN VERY POSITIVE TO BUT IT'S BEEN VERY POSITIVE TO GET OTHER PROVIDERS, SPECIFICALLY GET OTHER PROVIDERS, SPECIFICALLY SMALL IT'S CLEANED UP EVERY DAY AND IT'S REPETITIVE FOR THE CLIENTS SO IT'S CLEANED UP EVERY DAY AND IT'S REPETITIVE FOR THE CLIENTS SO THEY KNOW WHERE TO COME THEY KNOW WHERE TO COME CONSISTENTLY. CONSISTENTLY. SO IT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL SO IT'S BEEN VERY SUCCESSFUL THAT WAY. THAT WAY. THE LAST METRIC WAS ANY IMPACT ON THE LAST METRIC WAS ANY IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORS AND FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE NEIGHBORS AND FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AND INTERACTING WITH THEM LAST AND INTERACTING WITH THEM LAST FALL, A LOT OF THEM DIDN'T KNOW FALL, A LOT OF THEM DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS THERE, PERIOD, NUMBER ONE, IT WAS THERE, PERIOD, NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS A GOOD

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU, MR.

CHAIR. ANGIE, COULD YOU GIVE US AN ANGIE, COULD YOU GIVE US AN ANGIE, COULD YOU GIVE US AN UPDATE ON THE MICROSHELTERS AND UPDATE ON THE MICROSHELTERS AND UPDATE ON THE MICROSHELTERS AND CONSTRUCTION? CONSTRUCTION? CONSTRUCTION? I THINK EITHER REPRESENTATIVE I THINK EITHER REPRESENTATIVE I THINK EITHER REPRESENTATIVE CLANCY OR NICK HAD AN UPDATE ON CLANCY OR NICK HAD AN UPDATE ON CLANCY OR NICK HAD AN UPDATE ON FUNDING, BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER FUNDING, BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER FUNDING, BUT I CAN'T REMEMBER WHERE WE STAND ON THE

TWO WEEKS AGO, MAYBE A WEEK AND A HALF AGO. THEY ASKED FOR A RELEASE OF $30 MILLION TOWARDS A VARIETY OF PROGRAMS, ONE OF WHICH WAS SECOND PHASE OF THE MICROSHELTER COMMUNITY. FROM MY UNDERSTANDING THEY GOT THE FULL AMOUNT THEY NEED AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE MOVING FORWARD TO COMPLETE THE SECOND PHASE WHICH WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 50 UNITS ON THE SAME SITE.

OKAY.

SEEMS LIKE I APPRECIATE THE UPDATE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. Number two on the agenda is an ordinance for the landscaping and buffer chapter and text amendments update. We're going to welcome to the table Brian Fulmer, Council Policy Analyst, and Micaela Bell, Deputy Planning Director.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a proposed text amendment related to landscaping and landscape buffers. A major element of the proposal would expand where artificial turf would be allowed. You may recall in fall of 2025, the council asked the administration to review artificial turf use and propose some changes to it. OTHER CHANGES WOULD MODIFY PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, WOULD BRING THE ORDINANCE INTO COMPLIANCE WITH STATE CODE, AND ALLOW SOME CHANGES TO LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS. IT'S WORTH NOTING THAT PLANNING STAFF RECOMMENDED THE PLANNING COMMISSION FORWARD A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNCIL, BUT THE COMMISSION FORWARDED A UNANIMOUS NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATION ON THE PROPOSED CHANGES. NOW I'LL TURN IT OVER TO

Hello, I'm back to talk about landscaping. This will be a short presentation. Thank you, Brian, so much. Next slide, please. We're just making a couple updates. I'm just going to hit it off with the artificial turf topic right now. So the proposal right now would be permitting artificial turf. Now, artificial turf right now is allowed in rear and side yards. Before, we did not allow it in front and corner side yards. The 33% required vegetation in those yards still is intact. We will have vegetation and we're continuing to prohibit artificial turf and park strips because of stormwater runoff and water loss. and we are adding standards for artificial turf the best that we could do in our research a to protect tree root systems and vegetation and for other aesthetic reasons permeability because that's a key issue when it comes to artificial turf and just the quality of that entire product next slide please OK, this is just a quick and dirty right here. The green is where we were prohibiting artificial turf. Those are those required front and corner side yards, those landscape yards. Now we would be allowing artificial turf in those yards. with 33% vegetation. And just to recall, the vegetation can be shrubs, it can be flowers, or it could be tree canopy. Next slide. This slide and it's in your transmittal as well and was discussed at the Planning Commission really gets to the pros and the cons of artificial turf. Yes, there are some advantages when it comes to artificial turf right with water consumption. REDUCED LIKE CHEMICALS, MOWING, ALL OF THAT. HOWEVER, THERE ARE DISADVANTAGES AS WELL WHICH ARE ON THE SLIDE AS WELL WHEN IT COMES TO URBAN HEAT ISLAND, YOU KNOW, UPFRONT COSTS, MAINTENANCE, THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. AND YES, RIGHT THERE FOR YOU. NEXT SLIDE. The other proposed changes really are quite minor, but we did identify that public infrastructure projects, we didn't really speak to those in that chapter rewrite. So we made sure to do that this time, that they are going to endeavor to follow the landscaping requirements. OF COURSE THEY CAN WORK WITH ENGINEERING OR THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR IF THERE'S SOME SORT OF MONETARY REASON OR TOPOGRAPHICAL KIND OF SITUATION THAT THEY HAVE GOING ON TO VARY THAT. IT CLARIFIES THAT THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR IS ABLE TO MODIFY THOSE. AND IT ELIMINATES PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS, ABUTTING BUILDINGS. Now that's basically in the last rewrite we had this like five foot landscaping buffer outside of a store like think of where you would generally see like at a Smith's you would see flowers. We were requiring like a five foot landscaping. AREA RIGHT THERE LANDSCAPING AREA WE HAVE REMOVED THAT BECAUSE SOME LOTS ARE SMALLER AND THAT WOULD PERHAPS REDUCE THE AREA FOR A SMALL A SMALL BUSINESS BUT ALSO THEY WOULD HAVE TO LANDSCAPE IT BUT THEY MAY WANT TO HAVE OUTSIDE DISPLAY AS WELL OVER LANDSCAPING SO WE DID GET RID OF THAT AFTER SOME COMMENTS. AND ANOTHER PROPOSED CHANGE WAS THAT THERE ARE NO LANDSCAPE PLANS REQUIRED FOR SINGLE FAMILY AND TWO FAMILY DWELLINGS OR FOR A BUILDING PERMIT AND THAT IS STATE CODE. SO WE DID ALIGN THIS WITH SOME NEW CODE THAT WAS PASSED LAST LEGISLATIVE SESSION. NEXT SLIDE.

It's just when you're finished.

This is just a quick graphic to show you right in front of a primary structure where now it's not cross-hatched, that five-foot strip that I was speaking to that we got rid of in this proposal. Next slide. That's it, that's all I got. I do have one other thing, but please, I had a couple, actually about 15 minutes before this briefing, I found two other very super minor changes for clarification, and I printed them off in haste and brought those down here too, but if you'll entertain me for a moment.

Thank you.

This is so quick, but we didn't want to come back to fix that. OK. So in this table right here, it's under 21A-48-070, parking lot landscaping C. That's for the record. I FOUND THIS LITTLE PROVISION RIGHT HERE WHERE IT TALKED ABOUT BASICALLY WITHIN PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING YOU'LL HAVE LIKE A SHRUB AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE IT WAS SAYING THAT YOU HAD TO HAVE MULCH OR SOME OTHER GROUND COVERING. and i added our artificial turf to that as an option since that would be allowed so that that didn't conflict with what else we had in the proposal and if you turn the sheet around just one minor change is to delete that regulation which probably shouldn't be there anyway and the definition of turf which basically says artificial turf is prohibited in required landscape yards. So if you would please consider these as well.

Yeah, we probably want to make sure that this is noticed, you know, fully, you know, this piece of document as part of the record as it, you know, it wasn't until a few minutes ago. Yeah. But thank you for the clarification. Thanks. Yes. Thank you.

Can we go to the advantages and disadvantages slide and If it's possible to bring it back.

Would you like me to list them off? Read them off?

No. I mean, I think it's easier to see it. So has the sustainability department given input to this?

They have.

OK, I guess I will just reflect some surprise, because some of these are different than what was brought to us as a council as part of the conversation when we originally decided to eliminate turf from front yards so i'm just trying to figure out where that change in information came from like is that scientifically based is like help me understand where those shifts are because like the the first one stands out as different which was when we were asked to ban turf was that water consumption on turf is actually greater than potentially in a seated yard and that was actually one of the big factors for me in voting for that and so I'm trying to figure out the discrepancy.

I think the discrepancy is this. It's how it's used, right? If it's there and it's not dirty, it can really reduce water consumption in the sense that you're not watering live vegetation other than that 33%. but there can be other times too where dogs may do their thing on artificial turf or artificial turf gets dirty and where folks may throw detergent and use a lot of water to spray and clean artificial turf okay so we're saying both are true both could be true

Interesting. I guess the other thing that I'm struggling with in this conversation is we do have quite a lot of feedback about turf that has been installed in Salt Lake City School District right now and damages that it is causing to the neighboring properties, both visibly as well as you know like potential chemical runoff which they don't have tested yet but whatever could exist within that space um i'm trying to like bring those pieces together in the fact that we would be moving back towards allowing more turf when we're seeing negative implications on large-scale turf you know implementations that's already outside of the city jurisdiction do you have any thoughts or feedback on that

I mean, our standards, if you do allow artificial turf, do speak to aesthetics and maintenance if the turf is ripped. I don't know all of the issues that the school district has had.

It's mainly heat. And so we're seeing a lot of damage to the surrounding properties that don't have artificial turf just from the residual heat coming off of these properties, especially during summer months.

And that may happen. I don't necessarily have a better answer for that. It may.

If I may, I could add some context to the discussions that the administration had when we were looking at the revisions to this ordinance. One of the challenges is that it's difficult from a community awareness point of view for residents to know that artificial turf is not allowed through zoning codes. So there were quite a few enforcement cases that were BEING BROUGHT TO THE CITY'S ATTENTION. ATTENTION. AND SO WE REALLY LOOKED AT THE AND SO WE REALLY LOOKED AT THE POLICY AND BALANCING THE MULTIPLE POLICY AND BALANCING THE MULTIPLE INTERESTS. INTERESTS. THIS ISN'T REALLY JUST DRIVEN BY THIS ISN'T REALLY JUST DRIVEN BY CAN. CAN. IT WAS A CITYWIDE DISCUSSION WITH IT WAS A CITYWIDE DISCUSSION WITH SUSTAINABILITY AND ALSO PUBLIC AND IN SPEAKING WITH DIRECTOR BRIEFER ABOUT THIS, THE PREFERENCE WOULD BE NO ARTIFICIAL TURF BUT HOMEOWNERS AND RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS ARE INTERESTED IN ARTIFICIAL TURF SO WE TRIED TO TAKE A BALANCED APPROACH ALLOWING A PORTION OF THE YARD TO BE ARTIFICIAL TURF BUT NOT IN THE PARK STRIP BECAUSE THERE ARE RUNOFF ISSUES WITH ARTIFICIAL TURF IN THE PARK STRIP. THERE ARE POTENTIALLY LIKE DIRECTOR BRIEFER BROUGHT UP TO ME LIKE PFAS AND OTHER CHEMICALS THAT COULD GET INTO THE GROUNDWATER SYSTEM. BUT IT REALLY IS TRYING TO TAKE A BALANCED APPROACH WITH WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS. the sustainability and water utilization aspects of landscaping. It's important to note that we can really only regulate what is seen from the public realm, so front yards, so people can have artificial turf in their backyards regardless of our ordinance. And so we took a balanced approach to allow a limited amount in front yards as well. through this proposal.

Yeah. And I appreciate the background. I will say personally, it is so frustrating to see this. I just like I was I remember the conversations about we have existing turf that is in the front yard and are there opportunities to grandfather it in and the answer was not really like from an administrative burden kind of standpoint so it was like this is what makes the best sense from an environmental perspective about what makes sense for the city and what we can control and And so to shift back to say, well, now we're reconsidering that, especially when there are outstanding cases, at least in District 7, where we're seeing a large implementation of artificial turf negatively impacting other property owners within the neighborhood. I am really trying to wrap my head around this in terms of understanding why

WE DID LOOK AT THE CASES, THE ENFORCEMENT CASES THAT THE CITY ENFORCEMENT CASES THAT THE CITY PROCESSED AND THE VAST MAJORITY PROCESSED AND THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE CASES THAT WE DID PROCESS OF THE CASES THAT WE DID PROCESS STILL WOULD NOT BE COMPLIANT STILL WOULD NOT BE COMPLIANT WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE WITH THE CURRENT ORDINANCE BECAUSE THEY WERE TYPICALLY THE BECAUSE THEY WERE TYPICALLY THE FULL ENTIRE FRONT YARD OR THE SO WE DID DO SOME ANALYSIS AND SOME REVIEW OF THIS BEFORE BRINGING THIS PROPOSAL FORWARD.

Thank you. And I'm going to piggyback on Council Member Young's comments. If I had it my way, of course, there would be no artificial turf in the front yard or the back yard. And I have the same concerns. And I have the same concerns that the commission brought up, partly because I see this also being difficult to enforce on this 33%. It can be in this area. It has to be four feet from a tree. It has to be this many feet from a shrub. because that in itself is a difficult thing to enforce. And I also look at the idea that, you know, the runoff of the chemicals from the rain or from your sprinkler systems on top of that goes on top of the artificial turf as you're trying to sprinkle everything else or even drip it. HAS AN IMPACT. THE TREE ROOT SYSTEMS ARE NOT THE TREE ROOT SYSTEMS ARE NOT WITHIN FOUR YARDS OF A TREE. WITHIN FOUR YARDS OF A TREE. THEY TALK ABOUT THE ROOTS GO AS THEY TALK ABOUT THE ROOTS GO AS FAR OUT AS THE CANOPY OF THE TREE FAR OUT AS THE CANOPY OF THE TREE AND THAT COULD COVER A MAJOR AND THAT COULD COVER A MAJOR PORTION OF THAT YARD AND NOW PORTION OF THAT YARD AND NOW THOSE CHEMICALS ARE THROUGHOUT. MORE LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING THAT IT WOULD BE KIND OF FIRM ON THE ARTIFICIAL TURF IN THE FRONT BECAUSE IT IS SO DETRIMENTAL. YES, I UNDERSTAND THE AESTHETIC SIDE OF THE ALICE ON SOME PEOPLE, BUT JUST LIKE NON-USABLE TURF, WHAT'S THAT CALLED? NOT USABLE TURF, BUT TURF THAT YOU'RE NOT PLAYING ON. is you know is uh we need to reduce that too because of the water use i'm looking at this is saying we're not really reducing our water use we're increasing our heat island effect and probably even damaging our water getting into our ground so i i'm really uh torn on THIS PORTION OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES, THE REST OF THEM, I'M OKAY WITH. THIS IS THE ONE I'M VERY TORN WITH.

CAN I PROVIDE A LITTLE MORE CONTEXT ON THE CHEMICAL QUESTION BECAUSE WE DID TALK THAT THROUGH WITH DIRECTOR BRIEFER AND IT IS CONCERNING THAT CHEMICALS DO LEACH INTO THE GROUNDWATER BUT IN LOOKING AT ARTIFICIAL TURF, THERE'S LANDSCAPE FABRIC, THERE'S SYNTHETIC PAVERS, THERE'S SYNTHETIC PAVERS, THERE'S SYNTHETIC PAVERS, THERE'S ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT THERE'S ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT THERE'S ALL SORTS OF THINGS THAT PEOPLE CAN PUT IN YARDS THAT PEOPLE CAN PUT IN YARDS THAT PEOPLE CAN PUT IN YARDS THAT ARE PRODUCTS THAT ARE SOLD AT ARE PRODUCTS THAT ARE SOLD AT ARE PRODUCTS THAT ARE SOLD AT HARDWARE STORES THAT DO THE SAME HARDWARE STORES THAT DO THE SAME HARDWARE STORES THAT DO THE SAME THINGS. THINGS. THINGS. SO WE WERE, I MEAN, IT'S AN SO WE WERE, I MEAN, IT'S AN SO WE WERE, I MEAN, IT'S AN UNFORTUNATE REAL

AND I THINK IT WILL BE JUST AS HARD TO GET THIS OUT AS IT WAS HARD TO GET THIS OUT AS IT WAS FOR THE OTHER PORTION OF IT FOR THE OTHER PORTION OF IT TOO. TOO. UNDERNEATH THE ROCKS THERE'S UNDERNEATH THE ROCKS THERE'S PLASTIC DRAPING SO YOU DON'T PLASTIC DRAPING SO YOU DON'T HAVE WEEDS. HAVE WEEDS. MY CONCERN HERE IS A LOT ACROSS MY CONCERN HERE IS A LOT ACROSS THE BOARD WE'RE MAKING SOME THE BOARD WE'RE MAKING SOME CHANGES THAT I FEEL LIKE WE'RE CHANGES THAT I FEEL LIKE WE'RE BACKTRACKING COMPARED TO WHAT BACKTRACKING COMPARED TO WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN THE PRIOR WE'RE LOOKING FOR IN THE PRIOR DISCUSSION.

I APPRECIATE THIS LIST OF ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES BUT I I APPRECIATE THIS LIST OF ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES BUT I I APPRECIATE THIS LIST OF ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES BUT I THINK IT'S A STEP AHEAD OF THINK IT'S A STEP AHEAD OF THINK IT'S A STEP AHEAD OF WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE IT ASSUMES WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE IT ASSUMES WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE IT ASSUMES THAT TURF, THAT ARTIFICIAL TURF THAT TURF, THAT ARTIFICIAL TURF THAT TURF, THAT ARTIFICIAL TURF IS NECESSARY WHICH I FEEL LIKE WE IS NECESSARY WHICH I FEEL LIKE WE IS NECESSARY WHICH I FEEL LIKE WE ALL T So can I ask, what's the motivation for us even considering allowing this? Is it aesthetic? Because I see heat island isn't mitigated. I see dogs cannot urinate there, from what I heard. So what's our motivation for including this? Is it purely aesthetic?

from my perspective it's not that the city is advocating for people to install artificial turf it's it's balancing private property owners interest in what they can install in their yards while still protecting the public good in in certain aspects like that's why WE'RE NOT PROPOSING TO ALLOW ARTIFICIAL TURF IN THE PARK ARTIFICIAL TURF IN THE PARK STRIPS WHERE THERE'S RUNOFF STRIPS WHERE THERE'S RUNOFF ISSUES AND GROUNDWATER ISSUES ISSUES AND GROUNDWATER ISSUES WITH THE STREET. WITH THE STREET. SO IT'S NOT REALLY THE CITY SO IT'S NOT REALLY THE CITY PROMOTING IT OR SUPPORTING THE IT'S REALLY JUST PROVIDING THAT ABILITY FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO ABILITY FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO ABILITY FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO DO THAT IN A LIMITED WAY. DO THAT IN A LIMITED WAY. DO THAT IN A LIMITED WAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT THANK YOU FOR THAT THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. CLARIFICATION.

CLARIFICATION. THE PEOPLE WHO ARE REQUESTING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE REQUESTING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE REQUESTING THIS OUT OF A CODE, THEY'RE THIS OUT OF A CODE, THEY'RE THIS OUT OF A CODE, THEY'RE REQUESTING ON THE BASIS OF AN REQUESTING ON THE BASIS OF AN

I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR EVERYONE, BUT I THINK IT'S PROBABLY MORE OF A MAINTENANCE AND EASE OF MAINTENANCE OF THE YARD POSSIBLY.

SO I JUST DON'T MAINTAIN MY YARD AND I JUST LOOK LIKE I HAVE HAY IN MY FRONT YARD. I KNOW THAT YOU CANNOT MAINTAIN GRASS AND BE JUST FINE. I'M A LITTLE WORRIED BECAUSE If there was a functional use for this that was enhancing to the experience, then I would go fine. But what it feels like is we're conceding. This is a high intensity, high cost thing, especially if we do it the right way like you were talking about with the barriers. So it feels like we're pandering to a particular demographic for a particular aesthetic when the potential risks don't match any universal payouts for it. I am trending with my co-counselors here to say that this is an unnecessary concession that we're making. I mean, I would like to put tents in my front yard for people to be able to live in. We agree that that's not something I do in my yard. There are people who wanted to put in mutual aid refrigerators in their front yards. And I was accused of political violence when I told them that didn't comport with our code. When you live in a city and you share space and you share watershed and you share, there are just by virtue of sharing that space, sometimes that we say theoretically that is a freedom, but practically it's not an implementation that we need. And I think that this might be one of those moments where UNLESS THERE'S A BIGGER HAMMER COMING DOWN ON US FROM ANOTHER LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT THAT WOULD FORCE US INTO SOMETHING LIKE THIS, I DON'T FIND THIS COMPELLING. AND IT MAY BE THAT MY CONSTITUENTS ARE NOT THE ONES CALLING FOR IT, I CONCEDE.

OH, SORRY. JUST TO FOLLOW UP TO THAT, WE CAN GET YOU THE EXACT NUMBERS, BUT A HIGH PERCENTAGE OF THE ENFORCEMENT CASES THAT CAME TO THE CITY WERE ACTUALLY ON THE WEST SIDE.

Yeah, and I will illustrate that point that there's a lot of neighbors that have the perception to use artificial turf in a way of saving water. And we have received, certainly I have, and I know that some of the comments came to the general comment email over the last year when we passed the ordinance, certainly some adamant neighbors about, you know, why are we doing this, you know, when we want to save water at the same time. And the explanation from the administration last year was quite, you know, strong about, you know, that it didn't fit and it wasn't the right tool. SO I APPRECIATE THE UPDATE HERE. I THINK THAT WE HAVE TWO MORE COMMENTS AND THEN WE MIGHT HAVE SOME MORE QUESTIONS BUT RACHEL YOU JOIN US AT THE TABLE SO I'M SURE YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY TO US.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SORRY. THANK YOU. THIS IS VERY COMPLEX AND I KNOW WE ALL SAT, WE ALL EXPERIENCED A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS AROUND THIS WHEN WE AMENDED THE ORDINANCE A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO. we almost as soon as you passed the ordinance we obviously received a lot of feedback the council received a lot of feedback we also received a couple of ada related complaints regarding the need for artificial turf so between the ada complaints about the need for certain residents with ada with mobility issues and their desire to be able to put some artificial turf in their yards to be able to resolve some of their maintenance concerns between that and a lot of feedback we were getting regarding enforcement regarding some of the issues that Tammy and Michaela brought up with you know, this is Impervious surfaces versus impervious surfaces, you know, it's really difficult to decide this impervious surface is Fine for the environment and this impervious surface is less fine for the environment we I think I think we I THOUGHT WE HAD YOUR SUPPORT TO RELOOK AT SOME OF THESE THINGS ALMOST AS SOON AS WE PASSED THE ORDINANCE, UNFORTUNATELY. SO THAT'S WHY WE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT ALL OF THESE DIFFERENT CONSIDERATIONS, TRYING TO REACH THIS BALANCED APPROACH. BUT AGAIN, I THINK ALL OF THE POINTS YOU GUYS ARE BRINGING UP ARE VERY VALID. WE'RE STILL TRYING TO FIND THE RIGHT BALANCE. SO DEFINITELY WANT YOUR FEEDBACK AS WE CONTINUE TO TRY TO REFINE THIS.

Thank you, Rachel, for that. Carlson is online for the next comment, and then Wharton.

I'M NEW TO THIS CONVERSATION. I WASN'T HERE WHEN THIS WAS PASSED. SOUNDS LIKE LAST YEAR. I JUST WANT TO SHARE MY CONCERNS WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION, POSSIBLE ALLOWING OF ARTIFICIAL TURF IN FRONT YARDS. THOSE CONCERNS ARE ROOTED IN, YES, I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SOME ADVANTAGES RELATED TO WATER CONSUMPTION. And the disadvantages that exist not only to human life, but to all of the animals and critters and bugs that we share our ecosystem with are also very real. And I feel a sense of responsibility to those as well because they enrich our well-being. I also know that there are other ways to care for your yard that are natural ground covers that reduce maintenance, reduce water consumption, but are of a natural origin and don't produce greenhouse gases to the same effect or have runoff chemicals to the same effect. Relatedly, when you tell somebody, well, you need to have 33% live vegetation, I think the average person, who probably is not tuning in to watch this right now, would say, what does that mean? And I don't think that that helps to solve the enforcement problem or even communication problem about what might be solved. So being newer to this conversation, I think, The disadvantages related to putting in artificial turf are not just disadvantages for us, but also disadvantages for the broader ecosystem. And I'm holding that very heavily in my mind.

Warden. Yeah, thank you. I am also, yeah, concerned about, I feel like it's already difficult enough to explain and for residents to understand how do we communicate since we can't regulate the businesses that are putting in the artificial turf, which I feel like is a huge piece of this problem that we just will never be able to have control over. I SAY THIS KNOWING THAT MY CONSTITUENTS ARE SOME OF THE CONSTITUENTS WHO HAVE REACHED OUT AND CARED VERY MUCH AND HAVE VERY COMPELLING STORIES ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS ABOUT WHY WE SHOULD CHANGE THIS. But I guess my concern is that it does seem like we're sending a lot of mixed messaging. I know that a lot of residents that I talked with were really THE CITY WAS ANNOYED AND FELT LIKE THE CITY WAS SENDING MIXED LIKE THE CITY WAS SENDING MIXED MESSAGES BECAUSE WE SAID THAT WE MESSAGES BECAUSE WE SAID THAT WE CAN'T REALLY REGULATE IT IN THE CAN'T REALLY REGULATE IT IN THE BACK OR THE SIDES OF YOUR YARD. BACK OR THE SIDES OF YOUR YARD. AND THAT IF IT WAS REALLY, IF AND THAT IF IT WAS REALLY, IF ARTIFICIAL TURF WAS AS BAD FOR ALL ARTIFICIAL TURF WAS AS BAD FOR ALL THE REASONS LISTED IN THE THE REASONS LISTED IN THE DISADVANTAGE COLUMN AS WE WERE that should be enough to regulate it on the sides and the back and not understanding that it's just a fundamentally different situation. So yeah, it's difficult because I have gone to some residents' homes that, for one reason or another, have tried these other alternatives. I can see why they wouldn't work for their particular situation, but it is really difficult to find a way to, it's like spot zoning, but on a hyper, hyper local level. And I think that it would be impractical for us to have some kind of a waiver program where if you have like an ADA issue or some other individually compelling reason, because how do we make sure that that doesn't pass to the next owner? And just administratively, that seems like it could snowball really quickly. So, yeah, I guess all that is to say that I was open to having the conversation to talk about these changes again, even though I'm kind of regretting it right now in this moment, because it is just a difficult issue. I think what I'm trying to say is that from a policy standpoint, I think it is easiest for us to have a brighter line and that the best chance that we have of ensuring compliance is to make uh the rules as easy to understand as possible and in this sense i worry that in trying to do the right thing and to be accommodating that we're going to really tip the scale because people are going to think it's now legal like i feel like the message of this whole discussion is going to be and this is what happened last time was that companies actually went to people and advertised, like, hurry and get your artificial turf in now before the city bans it, when it was always banned. Now I feel like the message is going to be artificial turf is legal now. Let us come do your whole yard. And we're going to get more of those stories again. the problem that I actually want to solve for are some of the residents that do have a really compelling personal reason or like for one reason or another because of the way that their lot is and all these other factors it's like okay that wouldn't seem to be a problem in this instance, all of these things we're trying to prevent. So I still really feel conflicted about this. I am open to having more discussions and I hope that those residents that have reached out to me on this are listening to this so that they can hear the multiple things that we're trying to assess to get this right. So, but that's where I am right now.

Thank you for the discussion. I share some of the concerns. I understand the position of the city in trying to balance the feedback from the community. I felt like last time we discussed this, we asked these questions and I was convinced by the administration and by the experts I know I'm trying to be unconvinced about, you know, allowing it, and I am really struggling with where, you know, what that change is. So I think there may be some opportunity to refine it or discuss it more. So I feel like maybe we should delay the hearing date so we don't have it set so we have a little more time to work on it. If that's okay, I think that will, for the feedback and try to see if there is a method to allow for specific instances, you know, but without the potential abuse or the misuse of this thing, artificial turf. Thank you so much for the update. Thank you.

oh can i ask another question sorry mr chair it's a brief one yeah sure what about um other cities in utah or the mountain west and like what are there can we get did you look at that and if so is there a way to just like cut and paste some of that into a document for me because i i'm just curious to know what

THINK WE HAVE RESEARCH. I'M COVERING FOR NOAH ELMORE I'M COVERING FOR NOAH ELMORE I'M COVERING FOR NOAH ELMORE RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW. RIGHT NOW. I'LL SEE WHAT RESEARCH HE HAD I'LL SEE WHAT RESEARCH HE HAD I'LL SEE WHAT RESEARCH HE HAD AND WE'LL ABSOLUTELY GET YOU AND WE'LL ABSOLUTELY GET YOU AND WE'LL ABSOLUTELY GET YOU THAT INFORMATION.

THAT INFORMATION. THAT INFORMATION. YEAH. YEAH. YEAH.

I'M JUST INTERESTED IN A COUPLE I'M JUST INTERESTED IN A COUPLE I'M JUST INTERESTED IN A COUPLE EXAMPLES OF WHAT OTHER CITIES EXAMPLES OF WHAT OTHER CITIES EXAMPLES OF WHAT OTHER CITIES HAVE DONE. HAVE DONE. HAVE DONE TO CREATE AWARENESS WE SENT A MAILER TO ALL LANDSCAPING COMPANIES AND UNFORTUNATELY THE LANDSCAPING COMPANIES WERE STILL INSTALLING ARTIFICIAL TURF WITHIN SALT LAKE CITY AND THE OTHER POINT IS WE HAD A FEELING THAT THIS COULD BE CONTROVERSIAL SO COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOODS WE'VE UPDATED AN FAQ WITH INFORMATION THAT WE CAN SEND THE COUNCIL ON THIS PROPOSED ORDINANCE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. THANK YOU, EVERYONE. WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON WITH THE WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON WITH THE WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON WITH THE AGENDA STILL NUMBER THREE. AGENDA STILL NUMBER THREE. AGENDA STILL NUMBER THREE. THIS IS AN ORDINANCE FOR AN ALI THIS IS AN ORDINANCE FOR AN ALI THIS IS AN ORDINANCE FOR AN ALI VACATION AT APPROXIMATELY 567 VACATION AT APPROXIMATELY 567 VACATION AT APPROXIMATELY 567 EAST WARNOCK AVENUE. EAST WARNOCK AVENUE. EAST WARNOCK AVENUE. WE'RE GOING TO WELCOME AT THE WE'RE GOING TO WELCOME AT THE WE'RE GOING TO WELCOME AT THE TA

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a proposal to vacate or give up city ownership of an alley approximately 567 East between Warnock Avenue and the Interstate 80 right of way. The alley was blocked when the freeway was constructed and does not currently serve its original purpose. If adopted, the property would be divided in half and given to the two abutting property owners. The alley is only 80 feet long and There are just two properties that are next to it. The applicant is with us and would appreciate an opportunity to address the council after Aaron gives his presentation.

And I will keep this brief for the sake of time. Next slide, please. yeah like um brian said this is the commission agreed with staff's recommendation to recommend approval to this this body next slide please so let's for the sake of time to kind of go through those photos pretty quick this is just the the site in question. You'll notice that there is a power line going through this alley here. The applicant has indicated that they have already worked out easements with both UDOT and Rocky Mountain Power at this location. There's also alternative ways to access the retaining wall for the freeway from 600 East. This property was originally owned by UDOT as part of the, you know, WHERE THEY KEPT MACHINERY DURING I-80 UPDATES. KEEP MOVING THROUGH THESE SLIDES. JUST ONE MOVE QUICKLY THROUGH THOSE. JUST FOR SOME CONTEXT. AS FAR AS STANDARDS, THIS MEETS TWO OF THE POLICY CONSIDERATIONS. WE DID RECEIVE COMMENTS FROM ENGINEERING WHO RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT THOSE EASEMENTS WHICH HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT. KEEP GOING. THERE'S THAT ACCESS FROM 600 EAST THERE. And this meets both the lack of use and urban design. Let's keep going. So, yeah, we keep going through there. It's only ever functioned as a driveway. IAD cut through this neighborhood and eliminated any functionality of this alley. There's only a single property from the original subdivision, and it functioned as a driveway for the property in question, 567 East Warnock. Keep moving. And so Planning Commission has recommended approval for this request, and I'll pass the time over to the applicant.

I, Council Members, is there any questions about this? Okay. Do you want to take time? Do you want to hear the applicant first? Let's do it.

Thank you so much, ladies and gentlemen of the Council. I'm Phil Winston with Altus Development Group. We purchased the piece of property from UDOT because we are constructing the townhomes located at this site as an additional townhome site. we were contacted by council staff before we started the project if we wanted to re-evaluate our project and add more units to it because housing stock was an issue at the time we um we passed because our design was complete but then this piece of property came available from udot We contacted UDOT and went through a two-year process to purchase the piece of property and have purchased it. The alleyway that splits in between our house and the house of Daniel Fleming, who is the only house on the block other than us, she has given us the right to sign away her rights. She is willing to give the alleyway to us because we did the application. and we would like to construct another four town homes there. These town homes are larger than most town homes. We are the lowest price per square foot. We did this in conjunction with the city when we met last time to get it from 18 to 28 units, and then we stopped at the 28. This will take us to 32. The starting prices on these are as low as 609, and they are 2,200 square feet with two-car garages and a beautiful site. It is a gated community, so it will be gated and it will be something that the city could be proud of.

Council Member Young.

Yeah, thank you so much. I just had a quick question. So originally, when I was reviewing the paperwork, I think that there was a piece in there about this being for like a community gathering space. And then since then, there's been an application to rezone to be able to allow for the additional townhomes. I just wanted to make sure I was clear on like the intended use and if that had been communicated as well to your neighbor.

YOU, THAT IS NOT THE CASE. WE, WHEN WE DID THE ORIGINAL PAPERWORK, WE HAVE THE SPACE ON THE END OF BUILDING 5, WHICH IS THE LAST BUILDING THAT'S THERE RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS 44 FEET. THAT IS THE COMMUNITY AREA THAT WILL REMAIN THE COMMUNITY AREA. THIS PIECE WAS PURCHASED AFTER ALL OF THIS WAS DONE.

SO IT WILL BE ON THE OTHER SIDE?

yes the building will be on the very end of that in the alleyway per se you know within the the setback requirement and then the um the piece in the middle between the two units will be the community gathering area perfect i appreciate the clarification i was just having trouble following and so wanted the opportunity to clarify i'd have more than you mad at me if i took it away sounds good thank you that was my only question

THANK YOU. I THINK THAT WE'RE GOOD. I THINK THAT WE'RE GOOD. I THINK THAT WE'RE GOOD. IT SEEMS LIKE THE HEARING DATE IT SEEMS LIKE THE HEARING DATE IT SEEMS LIKE THE HEARING DATE IS SET FOR JUNE 9. IS SET FOR JUNE 9. IS SET FOR JUNE 9. SO YES, IT'S HAPPENING SOON. SO YES, IT'S HAPPENING SOON. SO YES, IT'S HAPPENING SOON. SO THANK YOU. SO THANK YOU.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THAT WAS EASY. THAT WAS EASY. THAT WAS EASY. MOVING ON ON THE AGENDA, I MOVING ON ON THE AGENDA, I OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO SHIFT THE AGENDA ITEMS SO WE ALLOW THE ELECTORAL OFFICIALS, DISTRICT ATTORNEYS THAT ARE HERE SO THEY CAN PRESENT. SO MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 6 WHICH IS THE FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027, THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. MICHAEL SANDERS, COUNCIL POLICY ANALYST IS GOING TO GIVE US A BRIEF INTRODUCTION. MARKET TRAIL FROM CITY ATTORNEYS.

GOING TO JOIN AT THE TABLE ALLISON PARKS, DEPUTY CITY GOING TO JOIN AT THE TABLE ALLISON PARKS, DEPUTY CITY GOING TO JOIN AT THE TABLE ALLISON PARKS, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY AND CINDY LUTRICHMAN, ALLISON PARKS, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY AND CINDY LUTRICHMAN, ALLISON PARKS, DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY AND CINDY LUTRICHMAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS ATTORNEY AND CINDY LUTRICHMAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS ATTORNEY AND CINDY LUTRICHMAN, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION WILL JOIN US AT DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION WILL JOIN US AT DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS AND ADMINISTRATION WILL JOIN US The FY27 proposed budget increases the general fund portion of the Office of the City Attorney by 1.62% or by about $211,000. The budget proposal includes general fund funding for 74 1⁄2 FTEs and this includes continued funding for four FTEs from FY26 budget amendment number four and proposes an additional two FTEs. The proposed funding for the new FTEs will cover 10 months of expenses for two legal assistants in the prosecutor's office and will cost $127,000. The new positions are proposed to be paid for through the proposed property tax increase. And with that, I'll hand it over to Mark.

Thank you, Michael. Good afternoon. I want to give thanks to the council for your time today and working with us. I also want to thank the mayor's office and the finance team for really working with us into the numbers as we develop the proposed budget. And a special thanks to our deputy of operations, Cindy Lou Trishman, who rolled up the sleeves and really dove into the numbers in what I think is one of the trickier budgets, given all the funds that fund the attorney's office. So because of her specific knowledge, I may be turning to her at various points to address any slides or any specific questions that you may have as we go through this. Here today, thanks for shifting our time up. I just want to acknowledge those in our division leadership who are in attendance. We have our district attorney, Sim Gill, who is our city prosecutor. Thank you, Sim, for being here. And his team, Scott Fisher, Paige Williamson, Paul Fuller. We also want to recognize that our Ledge Affairs Director, Angela Price, is not here today. She wishes she could be here. She's on a medical leave, but she is represented by Michelle Huynh, the Deputy Director. We have a recorder back in the corner there, Keith. Everyone knows Keith. And our Risk Division, Laurie Roberts, is here, our Risk Manager. And finally, the Civil Attorney's Office, Allison Parks and Cindy Lutrichman. So, we can go to the next slide. ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, WE SERVE BOTH BRANCHES OF THE CITY. WE SEE OURSELVES AS ADVOCATES, PROBLEM SOLVERS, GUARDIANS, HISTORIANS, AND NAVIGATORS IN HELPING TO ACCOMPLISH THE CITY'S GOALS. NEXT SLIDE. OUR GOAL IS TO CONTINUE TO SERVE IN THOSE ROLES WHILE FINDING WAYS TO BE LEANER TO HELP THE CITY ACHIEVE ITS BUDGET GOALS THIS YEAR. HIGHLIGHTED IN OUR LIST OF INCLUDES THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TWO SOFTWARE SYSTEMS TO IMPROVE REPORTING, LEGAL SUPPORT FOR THE CITY'S COMPLIANCE WITH A GOVERNMENTAL DATA PRIVACY ACT, AND IN FACT, ONE OF OUR ATTORNEYS, BETSY HAWS, IS NOW BEING RECOGNIZED AS AN EXPERT AT THE STATE LEVEL SERVING ON STATE PANELS ADVISING ABOUT VARIOUS ASPECTS OF DATA PRIVACY AND LEGAL COMPLIANCE. And also, we see ourselves recovering funds through affirmative litigation, defending the city, and through subrogation. Next slide. Our general fund budget listed in this table reinforces the point made in Michael's staff report. Funding for our office is based primarily on our personnel. Although technically listed as an increase, the necessary vacancy savings will impact the operations budget for each division. So the increase in the operating and maintenance line is offset by the reduction in charges and services and illustrates the need for appropriate categorization, which is an ongoing project for the department. And it's one that Cindy Liu has really worked so your wizardry in finding. Overall, the department is tightening up, removing the use of funds to reach the necessary vacancy savings posted in the recommended budget. This includes aspects of professional development, meaning memberships, travel, education, cell phone allowance, basic office expenses like stationary supplies, copier costs, and other in-office offerings, and the public noticing budget, fewer required in newspaper ads due to state code adjustments. So just being leaner and nimbler in our operations. Next slide. This information is a comprehensive view of the City Attorney Department budget, and it includes the risk class and government immunity funds, the various funds that fund the City Attorney Department. Next slide. These are just some highlights to note. Two positions in the prosecutor's office are proposed with a proposed property tax increase. Those positions align with the needs of a sixth justice court judge. If we don't obtain those positions, it's likely to create workflow disruptions and assignment overlap. And I think we notice here operational expenses are being reduced, as mentioned earlier, and through found efficiencies in software. And next slide. That might be it, actually. Thank you. So those are a big, broad overview. I don't know if council has questions. We certainly have representation from the various divisions who are here who can help answer some of those questions as well. Council members? Council member?

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MARK. THANK YOU, MARK. THANK YOU, MARK. BECAUSE OF THE INCREASE OF ONE BECAUSE OF THE INCREASE OF ONE BECAUSE OF THE INCREASE OF ONE MORE JUDGE, WE'RE ADDING TWO MORE JUDGE, WE'RE ADDING TWO MORE JUDGE, WE'RE ADDING TWO MORE ATTORNEYS. ATTORNEYS. ATTORNEYS. IS THAT NECESSARY? IS THAT NECESSARY? IS THAT NECESSARY?

SORRY, WE ADDED THREE SORRY, WE ADDED THREE SORRY, WE ADDED THREE ATTORNEYS IN BUDGET AMENDMENT ATTORNEYS IN BUDGET AMENDMENT ATTORNEYS IN BUDGET AMENDMENT NUMBER FOUR WITH ONE PARALEGAL. NUMBER FOUR WITH ONE PARALEGAL. NUMBER FOUR WITH ONE PARALEGAL.

Okay. Is that the right balance of three attorneys, the two legal assistants for the one judge? We don't need any more than that to fill the necessary time for the judge?

I could certainly point to the prosecutor's office here. I think that's sort of what we landed on. And also as an FYI, on the other side of the coin, there will be additional funding for LDA as well under non-departmental.

So all the balances of the one judge, all this flowing out, we're well balanced for that one judge to fill their time and to make sure we're still reducing the load on all the attorneys on both sides. We're still not where we need to be, but we've reduced it to a point that's MORE MANAGEABLE.

ON A PER ATTORNEY BASIS I BELIEVE ON A PER ATTORNEY BASIS I BELIEVE IT SHOULD MAKE CASELOADS MORE IT SHOULD MAKE CASELOADS MORE MANAGEABLE. MANAGEABLE. CERTAINLY LEAN ON THOSE WHO ARE CERTAINLY LEAN ON THOSE WHO ARE HERE WITH SPECIFICS. HERE WITH SPECIFICS.

DURING THE BUDGET AMENDMENT IT DURING THE BUDGET AMENDMENT IT WAS PRESENTED TO US THAT THE Well, you know, the ideal probably is a higher amount. This is, it seems like sufficient. I think, I wish we could do more, but it seems like our understanding that this will improve this as a system, you know, from the judge, the prosecuting side, and the defense side, the indigent defense side. So, are there other questions, council members? THERE'S TWO THINGS ON THE REPORT THAT I'M CURIOUS TO KNOW A LITTLE MORE ABOUT. THIS IS LIKE COUNCIL STAFF REPORT. ONE HIGHLIGHTS NUMBER TWO PROSECUTION RETENTION AND THEN NUMBER FIVE TALKS ABOUT VICTIM ADVOCATE GRANT FUNDING AND THE SHIFTING OF THE POTENTIAL SHIFT OF GRANTS AND IF THEY ARE SAFEGUARDS THE PLANS IN CASE SOME OF THAT GOES AWAY. I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW A LITTLE MORE ABOUT THOSE BUT I THINK THAT FALLS INTO OUR ESTIMATE DISTRICT ATTORNEY HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S A CHANCE FOR YOU TO ADDRESS THOSE QUESTIONS IF YOU WANT TO. YOU CAN ALSO NOT HAVE TO. Thank you, Sam, for joining us today.

Thank you. Thank you for giving us an opportunity. Sorry. So as to question number two, I think that is always an ongoing challenge. But my understanding is that the HR is working on creating a career ladder support to help increase that retention. So that's my understanding is a work in progress in terms of new classifications that can actually help with MAYBE LONGER TERM RETENTION. ONE THING TO KEEP IN MIND THAT THE CITY OFTEN IS A FIRST JOB FOR MANY OF THE ATTORNEYS WHO ARE COMING IN. SO YOU WILL HAVE A NATURAL ATTRITION IN TERMS OF MOVEMENT TOWARDS AS THEY GET MORE EXPERIENCE. BUT MY UNDERSTANDING IS WITH THE LOOK BY HR TOWARDS A CAREER LATTER COMPONENTS THAT SHOULD HELP WITH THE LONGER TERM RETENTION CONCERNS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

And I heard that your office has done a huge improvement on that, working very hard to attract and retain, including with wage updates, you know, I think that was last year or so, to try to retain more attorneys. So I appreciate the efforts on that.

And also I think there's good symmetry in terms of the increase in wages as well as it's attractive for the training that we provide for beginning as well as the continuation of their growth. So we make no differentiation in terms of the access to training and resources within the district attorney's office and the staff. So that I think helps bring people in. The other thing to keep in mind that we have been very fortunate is that as the district attorney, We've been able to create a very comprehensive clerkship program with 1L, 2L, 3L, post-graduation, and even also keeping them as clerks while they're studying for the bar. And often 100% of those individuals are the ones who will go to the city first before they come to the district attorney's office. So even though we may have a three to four year relation with them, that relationship really is towards their hiring at the city prosecutor's office. And so that's really helped us with a lot of clerks who look at as a means to start their careers starting at the city.

Thank you. The second question related to the victim advocate grant funding.

Yes, that's a great question. And as you know, that we've been very lucky to have federal support for victim advocates. Those victim advocates are crucial. They have been essential, especially in the context of domestic violence cases specifically. And they have supplemented and supported and eased work for prosecutors by being able to make that contact to have that updates that are there. So the question is that if that grant funding goes away, that will have a cascading impact in terms of the work that would be picked up by most likely by the attorneys. So they are a critical part in that space because they develop that rapport with victims. They have continuity of contact with them. They will follow up and keep them informed and engaged. But if that is not happening, then attorneys have to fill up. Just before today, I was talking with Mr. Fisher, who indicated, for example, we had a call, a reach in from a person for a U visa application. They were victims. And under the federal guidelines, they're entitled to change their immigration status as a victim. And they had reached out, but that information had not been updated. So then it was the ability of the victim advocate to be able to go in and gather that information, know that it's been set for trial, And all of that other work would have been done by an attorney if that victim advocate was not there. So one of the policy decisions that you will eventually have to make is if we find ourselves in a situation where that money is going away, whether we want to have the continuity of that service. And if that continuity of service is disrupted, it will have an impact on the overall functioning of the attorneys themselves. I think that's something we can discuss when it's more ripe. But that's a great question. Thank you.

Okay, council members. Okay, I appreciate you, Sam, for coming in here and, you know, taking time from ABC's schedule. I appreciate that, Chris Wharton.

THANKS FOR MAKING A SHOUT OUT TO THANKS FOR MAKING A SHOUT OUT TO THE 3L PROGRAM. THE 3L PROGRAM. THAT'S WHERE I FIRST WASN'T MY THAT'S WHERE I FIRST WASN'T MY FIRST LEGAL JOB. FIRST LEGAL JOB. IT WAS THE FIRST ONE I LIKED. IT WAS THE FIRST ONE I LIKED. IN THE CITY PROSECUTOR'S IN THE CITY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE. OFFICE. THANKS FOR DOING THAT PROGRAM. THANKS FOR DOING THAT PROGRAM. I THINK IT IS A GREAT WAY FOR I THINK IT IS A GREAT WAY FOR PEOPLE TO GET INVOLVED AND TO PEOPLE TO GET INVOLVED AND TO HOPEFULLY HAVE A LONG PROSPEROUS HOPEFULLY HAVE A LONG PROSPEROUS CAREER WITH THE CITY LET'S SAY IT WAS A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT AND LEAVE IT LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT AND LEAVE IT LEVEL OF GOVERNMENT AND LEAVE IT AT THAT. AT THAT.

AT THAT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING ANY OTHER QUESTIONS REGARDING THE CITY ATTORNEY'S BUDGET THE CITY ATTORNEY'S BUDGET THE CITY ATTORNEY'S BUDGET OVERALL?

OVERALL? OVERALL? OKAY. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THANK YOU, MR.

Okay, I'll just give a little introduction to this one real quick.

Do we have everyone?

What the hell was that?

All right, so it looks like everyone's here, so I'll just give a quick introduction, and then they're going to do musical chair style for their presentation. Okay, so the insurance and the risk management fund accounts for costs associated with employee health, dental, disability, and life insurance, unemployment compensation, as well as property insurance, workers' comp, and a variety of other liabilities and coverages. The FY27 proposed budget increases the insurance and risk fund by 2.87%, or approximately $2 million. There are three departments that receive funds from the insurance and risk management fund, namely human resources, the attorney's office, and finance. And with that, I'll pass it to the administration to further presentation.

And one second. So in item number seven, which is the insurance and risk management, and we're going to go back eventually after this one to item number five. So... YEAH, AND THE OPPORTUNITY IS ON ONE, TOO. SO WE HAVE A FEW TO GO BACK TO. BUT JUST TO CLARIFY, YES, THAT LITTLE JUMP. YES, YOUR TURN. THANK YOU.

SO MICHAEL TOOK MY THUNDER. BUT I JUST KIND OF WANTED TO EXPLAIN THE RISK FUND AS IT IS SEVERAL DEPARTMENTS. SO WE HAVE DECIDED TO DO THIS AS ONE BUDGET PRESENTATION AND EACH DEPARTMENT PRESENTING BECAUSE THERE'S NOT MUCH FOR US TO PRESENT. MUCH FOR US TO PRESENT. MUCH FOR US TO PRESENT. BASICALLY WE HAVE A PARTIAL FTE BASICALLY WE HAVE A PARTIAL FTE BASICALLY WE HAVE A PARTIAL FTE IN THERE AND WE DO THE IN THERE AND WE DO THE IN THERE AND WE DO THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES FROM THE ADMINISTRATIVE FEES FROM THE GENERAL FUND. GENERAL FUND. GENERAL FUND. THAT'S ALL FINANCE IS OVER BUT THAT'S ALL FINANCE IS OVER BUT THAT'S ALL FINANCE IS OVER BUT THE REST OF THIS COVERS HEALTH THE REST OF THIS COVERS HEALTH THE REST OF THIS COVERS HEALTH INSURANCE, ALL EMPLOYEE INSURANCE, ALL EMPLOYEE INS

I'm Laurie Gaten. I'm the benefit manager. I recognize a lot of you from open enrollment recently, so we can get started. Next slide. All right, so these were the key accomplishments we made. A lot of them were by request. We launched a comprehensive wellness program with WebMD in January, so a lot of employees are participating in that now. We just started yesterday a walking program, an incentive that pays $50 and a gift card to employees for joining. And so far, I'm not winning. So that's not helpful. But yeah, it's been really helpful. It's been a great program. It coincides with our... EAP program. So it's been a really successful plan. The enhancements we made this year were mostly to the life insurance. We changed from PHP for our optional life insurance. We kept our basic life there. And we went to Hartford, which also manages our SDI and our LTD plans. And they were able to give us a guaranteed issue for our life insurance this year that we haven't had availability for many years, up to $300,000 without an employee having to do a medical exam. And so we had a huge success with that enrollment. And also adding their spouse up to $100,000 again without an EOI process. And child life went to 15,000, and huge success. So that was a really good change from the PHP benefit to the Hartford. The other thing that we did this year, and this was a task that we were given, was to work with retirees, potential retirees. What does that look like? What are our succession planning? And what do our retirees know about what it looks like to retire from the city? We hosted a retirement insights. We invited those that were eligible to retire within the next three years. We had about 300 that showed up. There's about 600 city employees that are eligible currently, and it was very useful. We think that they got a lot of information that will help them to make decisions in the future. So next slide, please. So my found efficiencies are really just my team. We administer and manage 28 benefit programs within my department. I have five full-time and one part-time employee. And the biggest thing we were finding was getting experts in those divisions and making sure there was somebody that knew everything about that benefit, could train their fellow employees. When they take leave, they're able to enjoy their leave time, have a good work-life balance. come back without a lot of work while somebody was covering for them in the end, but still maintain that person we can go to with the needs. And so we called it, you know, our clusters. We did retirement. We did life and other voluntary benefits that affect, you know, employees' health and benefits outside of our insurance plans. Retirement, of course, your health and your finance, and then our leave and disability. And then we just cross-trained. So we have experts in those fields, and we have found it to be really helpful for employees to feel comfortable not coming back to work overloaded. So that was our efficiency. You can go to the next one. So this is the only change we had, and of course there's always this change. I bring this every year, and that's our PEHP health plan. So these were the changes that we made this year. You can go to the next one. We'll explain a little bit more in detail what we came with. So we started at a 14.3% rate increase this year, which was huge for the city. And so the benefit committee got together. We asked PEHP for a lot of help in, you know, where do we go from here? We can keep the one plan that we offer. And in that plan, it would mean that, you know, we'd have to make some big changes to get where we needed to get. We could offer maybe a second plan for those employees who maybe have different needs in their family. And we presented two packages to the budget committee and the mayor, and we settled on the package two. And that was where the city paid straight across the board for both plans the same amount of money. So if you stayed in the star plan, which is the current plan, The only change that you saw this year was the 10% change to 20% in your coinsurance. The reason we felt comfortable making that change is if you look at the deductible, the 48.1, that is how many employees met deductible last year. So about half of our employees meet deductible. And then if you look at the maximum out-of-pocket or the out-of-pocket total, it's about almost 10%. That is how many people meet their maximum out-of-pocket. In years past, that's been around six and seven. So what we're finding is some years you just have a bad year, right? We've all had them or we've had surgery, we've had a baby, and we've met our deductibles. But about 6% of our employees are meeting their maximum out-of-pocket every single year, and they need to make sure that they can afford their healthcare. And so that's where we came up with those numbers by not changing anything in the plan, not changing anything that was covered. We kept it the same straight across the board. And we just changed the coinsurance. So just a quick how that works. When you meet your deductible, you go into coinsurance. In the past, you've met it at 10% up until your maximum. Or now you're going to meet it at 20%. So some employees might meet it a little bit faster than they have in the past. The other benefit that we offered is a second plan. And that's the Star 2 plan. And that has higher out-of-pocket costs, but much lower premiums. So if you look over on the column where the impact to employee You'll see in the Star 1 plan the premium rates that went up slightly for the employees that stayed in the current plan. And then you have the Star 2 plan where the premiums actually went below the premiums that you're paying today. So those were choices that employees made during open enrollment. And we thought it was really well received. Employees, I think, felt great about being able to choose where their health coverage was. Any questions on the health?

Do you have a sense of the percentages? Like how many are in each? I'm just curious.

Yeah. So I had it in my other notes. But we had, do you have it? Yep.

It was about 25% chose the Star 2 and 75% chose Star 1. So it was pretty good. For a first year?

Yeah. And what that reflects is really people took a look at it and decided where they needed to be. And so we were happy to see that.

The next slide, please.

The other changes that impact employees is URS. So URS, if you're a Tier 2 hybrid employee, You've been paying into your pension for a few years now. Those rates went up a little bit. Same with public safety and public firefighters. Also, the city picks up 4.03% of the firefighters and the public safety's contribution. The dental changes for 2027 went up slightly. It wasn't a huge increase, but again, there was some increase to employees that they're paying for out of pocket. And that is all I have.

Okay, thank you.

I just want to add one plug for Lori's team. This year saw more changes to our healthcare than we've seen in a number of years with the new plans and a lot of differences. And their team went out and did, I think, over 40 in-person open enrollment meetings with employees, which we saw in the numbers where we saw a lot of people making good choices in what they wanted to do with their healthcare this year. I think we only saw 6% of people just do nothing. But consider that that's probably employees who could be on their parents' insurance and don't really need to do anything and those type of people. So overall, this was a really successful open enrollment period, especially with the changes that happened in our benefits. And so I think a real congratulations to Lori's team and the hard work that they did.

I'll just chime in from the council office experience perspective. HR was super helpful with our employees and met with our team and offered their expertise and information. And I got lots of great feedback from our staff about it. So thank you very much for that kind of individualized attention. I know it's sometimes intimidating for people to feel like they can reach out for questions, but it was really helpful.

Thank you.

A quick question. This year we saw some potential legislation at the state level that would have probably removed individuals from coverage. I believe that the legislation didn't pass. But what are obligations, and I think it was aimed towards the public, you know, the PHP, right? Like, preventing PHP from offering service to some individuals. And I think that it was sort of an attack to some of our, you know, employees, transgender employees and whatnot. So what are our obligations about staying within PHP? If something like that were to

really happen and you know, we are in a pickle where we are Are we locked in into something like that and we can we can find other services that I'm sure we every year we kind of research that we Go out to bid we're in the process of getting a benefit broker Which will also help us with that process to kind of tell us what the market looks like out there Can we do better than PE HP? What would the race look like we own our plan? We're self-funded so the one benefit that PEHP does have is their not-for-profit. So that does keep our rates quite low with them. But I think what you might be speaking to is some of the benefits that they were looking to take away. We still can choose to have those benefits included in our plan because we own our plan.

Oh, okay. That's an interesting point.

Unless it's a federal law that says we can't offer it.

So at least it allows our discretion and potentially we'll have additional funds.

and maybe this is more just information sharing it's been several years since i participated on the selection committee when the city went out to bid for insurance programs i i was legitimately shocked at the uh price differential between some of the other plans that um responded to the city's request for proposals and i think that that's a good gut check for the city to be able to go out to bid to make sure php is this still the best value for the taxpayers but I mean, it was on the order of, like, double the price. So it was a good kind of gut check several years ago, and it's good to know that we're doing that again.

Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. Thank you. Oh, one more thing? No? Oh, Council Member Young. Sorry, I didn't see you.

No, no worries. Yeah, so I appreciate this. I appreciate you finding options, you know, to be able to balance the costs. I think the one thing that I'll just articulate because I think it's good for everyone to remember especially like members of the public who are watching and considering the budget piece when we talk about any increase to those insurance components normally and in previous years we've been able to have it in relationship to a conversation about also doing a standard increase related to like you know across the board salary piece because because that is not on the table financially this year, those costs are things that employees are taking on in addition to all of the other existing economic uncertainty. So I'm very grateful for the additional effort to be able to find solutions in that space. and just want to note that when we're considering like i said the larger budgetary issues you know our our employees are certainly trying to contribute to a balanced budget here in the city um and the the one-year solution won't be able to be an ongoing solution because i'm assuming like everything we expect prices like to continue on an upward trend in the future So we have to have solutions around being able to make sure the people who work for Salt Lake City aren't necessarily shouldering the burden in a way that we're not seeing necessarily in all of the other private industries.

Some of the things that we reminded employees at open enrollment for sure this year, was we have a clinic. We own our own clinic. And we have some great providers. They do some great services over there. It does cost us less to use the clinic. And just consumerism, being better about our making decisions. But I think the first step of offering a plan with a higher out-of-pocket might help employees to kind of maybe become more better consumers.

And we're going to look at this year to see how it plays out because 75% of people still chose to pay more this year, which we were kind of surprised at. It's interesting. We're going to see how that plays out with the amount of people that actually hit their deductible this year so that we can continue to customize our communication and help people make choices that are in their best interest. But I think it was a good year. We'll keep that in mind.

ONE THING I DIDN'T MENTION IS THE CITY IS GOING TO FUND THE HSA AGAIN THIS YEAR THE SAME AS THEY HAVE IN YEARS PAST SO THAT 2000-1000 JULY 1ST WILL BE FUNDED SO THAT HELPS A LOT OKAY THANK YOU EVERYONE UH APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION THANK YOU THANK YOU MOVING ON TO MOVING BACK TO

Oh, yes, you're right. There is one more. Yes, yes, yes, yes. And this is one that's an important one, too.

Sorry, yeah, this is one of those funds that has many tentacles. So we had the HR tentacle, and now we will have the attorney's office.

You know, the attorney's office is a tentacle. It's an interesting picture in my head. Exactly.

So there are a few slides on the presentation, Scott, if you want to bring that back up. It's the same presentation.

Yes, I just needed to remember. We do this every year. Do you want me to take it?

And I'm going to lead out on this one. It's pretty succinct. We're not going to spend too much time beyond the questions that we want to offer you the opportunity to ask of us. First, I just wanted to share that these slides are combined, as Mary Beth mentioned. And if you could go to the next slide. Thank you, Scott. These are some of the accomplishments. I'm not going to read through each of them, but I do think they all speak to the championship that Larry has run with the city in championing She has been the champion for safety. and working to improve a culture of safety around the city, including the safe driving training program. There is an ongoing training right now for safety for the month of safety this year, an incident review board with the police department to help us facilitate trainings and analysis on how we can improve things. And then also annual trainings on workers' compensations procedures. Risk also continues to mitigate claims and submit for subrogation opportunities. Go ahead to the next slide.

I just want to highlight last year the efforts we that quarter million dollar recovery I think was pretty important and the subrogation demands are I mean while we're not getting everything we're demanding we are getting some money back and

Thank you, Mark. We do like to be proactive in the opportunity to get funds back to the city. This is just the breakdown of the attorney department risk class funds. There's no FTE change in our proposal. The most significant change you'll see here is actually more, it was discussed in budget amendment number five with relation to the 1.7 million adjustment for the workers' compensation premium. Next slide. That's it.

I'm pretty quick.

Any questions?

Questions? I don't have any. Thank you.

Thank you.

maybe just by way of sharing information for council members, especially New York council member. Several years ago, the city shifted how it funds a lot of our governmental immunity risk settlement claims in its own property tax land. So it's a quirk in state law that they allow us to charge a separate property tax to fund that. So it used to be fully general funded.

THANK YOU. WE'RE GOING TO GO BACK TO ITEM NUMBER FOUR, WHICH IS AN ORDINANCE REGARDING THE MOBILE BUSINESS TEXT AMENDMENT. NICK TARVETT, COUNCIL DEPUTY DIRECTOR AND OWNER OF MULTIPLE HATS. SETH RIOS, PRINCIPAL PLANNER,

OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS IS A AS YOU MENTIONED, THIS IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT AMENDMENTS TO DISCUSSION ABOUT AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S MOBILE BUSINESS THE CITY'S MOBILE BUSINESS ORDINANCES. ORDINANCES. THESE PROPOSED UPDATES ARE THESE PROPOSED UPDATES ARE REQUIRED PER LEGISLATIVE CHANGES I DO NEED TO NOTE THAT A MISTAKE WAS MADE I ACCIDENTALLY SENT AN OLD STAFF REPORT SO THERE WAS BAD INFORMATION IN THE PACKET FOR THE WEEKEND THAT HAS BEEN UPDATED THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT NOTHING WAS MISSING THERE WAS JUST EXTRA INFORMATION THAT IS NO LONGER VALID SO I'M TRYING TO LIKE PAINT A ROSY PICTURE THERE UM BUT WITH THAT I'LL TURN THE TIME OVER TO PLANNING STAFF TO RUN THROUGH THE CHANGES

Yeah, so I'm here to talk about proposed changes to mobile business ordinances. Mobile business refers to anything like a food truck, food trailer, vending cart, anything like that. Next slide, please. So the reason we're proposing changes to this ordinance is because state code was updated in 2017 and 2023. And so since then, our code has kind of been out of date and it hasn't complied with state code. I do want to clarify the changes that I'm talking about today. They will affect the zoning ordinance, which means that they will affect regulations on private property. It doesn't have to do with mobile businesses in the private right-of-way. So anything, I'm sorry, in the public right-of-way. So anything like in the sidewalk or on the street. That's regulated by business licensing and real estate services. They will update their ordinance in the future, but for today we're just focusing on mobile businesses operating on private property.

Next slide, please.

So here I just want to talk about some of the biggest changes that happened with those state code updates. With this update, we now have to allow mobile businesses in zones where restaurants are allowed. We used to prohibit mobile businesses within 100 feet of a restaurant or another mobile business. We're no longer allowed to do that by state code. And then mobile businesses are allowed to only have one license now. So those are the biggest changes. And this proposal will just update our code to comply with that. Next slide, please. So under our current code, we have different definitions for all of these different uses. But under state code, they now fall under one definition. So we're updating our ordinance to basically consolidate these all into one mobile business definition. They're all still going to be regulated the same. They'll still have to meet all the design requirements and things like that. But it'll just be under one mobile business definition now. Next slide. So a mobile food court refers to when multiple mobile businesses operate on the same property. Our current code requires a conditional use permit, a minimum lot size, and a site plan in order to do this. State code does not allow this language, so we're proposing to remove this chapter, and we're adding provision that allows multiple mobile businesses to operate on one private property as long as it meets all of the applicable regulations and it's in the right zone. Next slide, please. So I just wanted to go over some of the things that are not changing with this proposal. People will still need a business license to operate. They'll still have to comply with our mobile business regulations. Our code already regulates where they can put their mobile business. You can't block pedestrian and vehicle traffic. You can't. be within a certain distance of a fire hydrant and site distance triangle and all those safety things. So that's not changing. They're still going to have to meet those requirements. And they'll still have to get county health department approval, which has its own long list of things that they have to meet, such as a fire safety inspection, a commissary agreement, a restroom agreement, a food safety inspection. So that's also required. This is mainly just an update to kind of clean up the code, update the definitions, and make sure that we comply with state code. So, excellent. That's all I have. If y'all have any questions, I'm happy to answer.

Councilmembers?

Councilmember Pietro.

Is this exclusively for food businesses or are like mobile dog groomers and those sorts of mobile businesses?

It's any mobile business. State code updated these regulations and that definition encompasses all mobile businesses, not just food businesses.

Yeah, because it makes sense to me to combine the mobile food business, mobile food court, mobile food trailer, mobile food truck, but a vending cart could be the thing that's selling those little wands to our kids when we go to the events. So that, to me, seemed like a material departure.

If they're like parked in one spot and operating on private property, then these rules will apply. If they're walking in the street and selling things, that's gonna be part of business licenses update in the future. But these rules don't apply to those just because there's a separation between private and public regulations.

I'd be interested just in us tracking if it feels a little bit like this is another example of the state intending well, but probably using a hammer where it might not have, and maybe it doesn't matter, but it feels like they meant to talk specifically about food, and they may have bit off more than they could chew. So I'd love to track if we have any concerns over the years we implement this just with those other style of businesses.

Oh, consumer young.

So just a quick question. Do you have any off-the-top examples of this used to not be allowed, but now it will be allowed?

Like locations where mobile businesses?

Sure, like locations or like, hey, we used to not see this, but now that could be possible.

um that's not really changing as part of this update um they're still going to be allowed in the mixed use zones downtown zones i think that's already where you see them it's not going to allow them in residential zones or anything like that they'll still have to meet all the same regulations so i can't think of anything off the top of my head okay yeah thank you

We have, the council has received comments from brick and mortar businesses in the past, especially brick and mortar restaurants in the past when mobile vendors set up regularly kind of nearby. So I wouldn't be surprised if maybe we see an uptick in comments from those businesses. I think obviously with state law being what it is, we don't have a huge tool to address that, but I could foresee us receiving comments from brick and mortar restaurants.

And in that case, under this update, it's that that property owner said that was fine. You can operate here. And then so it's really more so a discussion between property owner and local business more so than through the city. Yes, maybe?

I think the property owner would need to allow them to operate on their site. I mean, this does remove those distance regulations that were in place before, though. So there's potential to have them in more locations. Thank you.

Yeah, and I can also anticipate a lot of, you know, brick and mortar businesses reaching out to the city to find out why this change. And my question relates to what are we doing to contact, you know, the businesses proactively just to make sure that they know that this is not Is this too much to state law to ensure that they all understand that? So I wonder.

So we met with the business advisory board as part of this whole proposal. And that was a big concern that they had. We did pass along that information that it's coming directly from state code. So we don't have much room with what we can do. But they talked about the possibility of

creating flyers and passing out flyers to people when they register for these mobile businesses just so they're aware of the rules and changes um but that hasn't been implemented yet that's what we've talked about for the future so because we're trying to update our code to bring it and be consistent with state law mobile businesses have been operating under state law for several years now already and so we're not really you know we're really just ELIMINATING THAT CONFLICT. WE'VE HAD TO FOLLOW STATE CODE WE'VE HAD TO FOLLOW STATE CODE WE'VE HAD TO FOLLOW STATE CODE ANYWAY SO THESE ARE JUST ANYWAY SO THESE ARE JUST ANYWAY SO THESE ARE JUST OUTDATED PROVISIONS IN OUR ZONING OUTDATED PROVISIONS IN OUR ZONING OUTDATED PROVISIONS IN OUR ZONING CODE AND THEN WE HAVE SIMILAR CODE AND THEN WE HAVE SIMILAR CODE AND THEN WE HAVE SIMILAR OUTDATED PROVISIONS IN OUR THE MOBILE OUTDATED PROVISIONS IN OUR THE MOBILE OUTDATED PROVISIONS IN OUR THE MOBILE BUSINESSES ON PUBLIC SPACES WHICH BUSINESSES ON PUBLIC SPACES WHICH BUSINESSES ON PUBLIC SPACES WHICH

THIS IS AN INFORMATIONAL ITEM REGARDING OPPORTUNITY ZONE PROGRAMS UPDATE. WE'RE GOING TO WELCOME AT THE TABLE, OR KEEP AT THE TABLE, NICK NORRIS, PLANNING DIRECTOR. DONNY WALTS, I DON'T THINK SO. COLVIN GIVES, BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.

Good afternoon.

Hello.

We're here to brief you on Opportunity Zones. We have been working with the administration, community and neighborhoods, and the community reinvestment agency. And we really thank them for their work and time, and my team members, Colin Gibbs and Liz Ward, for their work on this as well. As you may all know, Opportunity Zones are part of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Job Acts to encourage investment in low-income neighborhoods by giving tax breaks to investors. Investors could defer capital gains taxed by rolling gains into qualified opportunity fund benefits, basically holding the investment for 5 to 7 or 10 years plus. And the funds had to keep 90% of assets in zone property and meet tests like the substantial improvement. Because there has been some criticism in terms of the rules and administration in the federal government, Opportunity Zone 20, NOW HAS NARROWED AND TIGHTENED THOSE RULES TO FOCUS IN LOW INCOME TRACKS, REWARD LONG-TERM INVESTMENT IN REAL BUSINESSES, REQUIRE LOCAL HIRING AND ANTI-DISPLACEMENT MEASURES, SETS UNTO ABUSE CHECKS AND IMPROVE PUBLIC REPORTING. THE ADMINISTRATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE DEPARTMENTS THAT I JUST MENTIONED, WE HAVE RANKED TRACKS FOR NOMINATION TO THE GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Now we come before you to provide information regarding the ranking. The deadline to submit the nomination to the Governor's Office of Economic Development is June 10. And now Colin Gipps will describe the process that we follow to basically provide the ranking in terms of the Opportunity Zones. Thank you.

Lorena Rifford-Jensen, Director of Economic Development. Sorry I didn't introduce you. Thank you. We all know you.

Did I just jump in? I am so sorry. I was so excited to talk about this topic.

No, no. Who are you? Why are you here? Thank you so much.

Thank you. Yeah, it's a fun topic. So economic development has been tasked with submitting these nominations by June 10, as Lorena mentioned. We are allowed to nominate one tract per area for a total of seven nominations. Ultimately, Governor Cox will make the decision taking our NOMINATIONS INTO ACCOUNT DURING THE PROCESS AND HE WILL MAKE THE OFFICIAL OPPORTUNITY ZONE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM JULY TO SEPTEMBER OF 2026. NEW ZONES WILL TAKE EFFECT JANUARY 1ST, 2027 AND LAST THROUGH DECEMBER 31ST OF 2036. As part of our decision-making process, we have used the state criteria of the opportunity for incentive stacking among targeted industries such as tech, aerospace and defense, fintech, life sciences, energy and minerals. Also, we're looking for opportunity for long-term commitment from developers in the areas. ALIGNMENT WITH THE 2034 OLYMPICS AND INDUSTRIES IN PROXIMITY TO THE VENUES ALSO TRANSIT CORRIDORS AND HOSPITALITY HUBS. AND ADDITIONALLY COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOODS ALSO APPLIED THE CITY'S FUTURE LAND USE GOALS CURRENT ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL FOR PRIORITY INDUSTRIES. In addition to working with the different departments, we also reached out to the Wasatch Front Regional Council and Salt Lake County to discuss the different tracks and get their input. We also put together a survey for developers, which we have been sending out and receiving information from them. The census tracts are available on page three of the transmittal. Our recommendations are ranked by priority, beginning with Ballpark, Poplar Grove North, including the Power District, the Northwest Quadrant, Glendale, Fair Park, Rose Park, and Central City Northwest. Today we also have NIC NORRIS WHO CAN HELP FIELD SOME PARTICULAR QUESTIONS WITH REGARD TO THE DIFFERENT TRACTS. THANKS. AND DENNY WALSH IS HERE AS WELL. EXCUSE ME.

ANY QUESTIONS? NIC IS FAR AWAY FROM THE TABLE. IF HE DOESN'T WANT TO HELP US IN ANY WAY, UNDERSTAND THIS.

JUST A QUESTION. WAS THERE A SIZE LIMIT ON THE ZONES THEMSELVES BECAUSE THEY SEEM TO BE THERE DIFFERENT SIZES IN THE ZONES. WAS IT ACREAGE, DENSITY, HOW DO YOU DO THE MATRIX?

THE INDIVIDUAL POTENTIAL THE INDIVIDUAL POTENTIAL OPPORTUNITY ZONES ARE ALL INDIVIDUAL OPPORTUNITY ZONES ARE ALL INDIVIDUAL CENSUS TRACKS. CENSUS TRACKS. THEY ARE CREATED BASED ON THEY ARE CREATED BASED ON POPULATION. POPULATION. THAT IS WHY THE NORTHWEST THAT IS WHY THE NORTHWEST QUADRANT LOOKS MASSIVE.

QUADRANT LOOKS MASSIVE. SENSOR TRACKS. SENSOR TRACKS. SENSOR TRACKS.

SOME OF THOSE DOWNTOWN ONLY SOME OF THOSE DOWNTOWN ONLY HAVE SIX BLOCKS. HAVE SIX BLOCKS.

OKAY.

COUPLE QUESTIONS. FIRST, CAN YOU REMIND ME WHERE THE OPPORTUNITY ZONES WERE IN 2017, THE AREAS OF THE CITY? SORRY IF I MISSED THIS IN THE TRANSMITTAL.

There were actually seven of them. And I actually have them listed here. Salt Lake City, Magna, Glendale area, Fair Park, Poplar Grove, Granary in downtown. And we've seen the development that has happened there, the depot in downtown. And Salt Lake City and West Valley, south of the airport.

THANK YOU. I KNEW YOU WOULD HAVE THEM I KNEW YOU WOULD HAVE THEM I KNEW YOU WOULD HAVE THEM READY. READY. READY. SECOND, I JUST HAVE TO SAY IN SECOND, I JUST HAVE TO SAY IN SECOND, I JUST HAVE TO SAY IN THE DISTRICT I RESIDE IN THE THE DISTRICT I RESIDE IN THE THE DISTRICT I RESIDE IN THE BALLPARK PART OF THE DISTRICT BALLPARK PART OF THE DISTRICT BALLPARK PART OF THE DISTRICT AND ALL OF THE REASONS THAT AND ALL OF THE REASONS THAT AND ALL OF THE REASONS THAT ARE OUTLINED HERE IS PART OF WHY ARE OUTLINED HERE IS PART OF WHY ARE OUTLINED HERE IS PART OF WHY IT'S A PRIME SPACE FOR GREATER IT'S A PRIME SPACE FOR I'm excited to see if this moves forward a greater economic development and investment into that part of the city.

Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. I, you know, it's mostly most of the west side, you know, and certainly most of my district. So I appreciate the administration bringing it up to us and updating us on this. So that means a lot to us. So Council Member Petro.

Actually just thought how does this interact with the authority because I noticed that we put the Fair Park and the North Temple Power District area Since we're preempted from everything there. Is it just additional tax benefit? That's gonna bypass us

So the developers will get essentially an income tax benefit. So it's an additional tax benefit that doesn't necessarily impact our local taxes because it's income-based.

So there's no additional preemption. Is this a gift that we're giving to them to offer this to them? Or are we receiving pressure to consider that?

I APOLOGIZE. I COULDN'T HEAR YOU. SO IF YOU COULD REPEAT IT, I WOULD APPRECIATE IT.

ARE WE BEING REQUESTED TO CONSIDER THAT THAT AREA IS ALREADY REALLY THE POWER DISTRICT AND THE FAIR PARK DUE TO THE NATURE OF THE AUTHORITY IS ALREADY REALLY, REALLY DENSE IN TAX INCENTIVE FOR DEVELOPMENT. SO WHILE COUNCILMEMBER PUGH VERY RIGHTFULLY NOTED THAT THE WEST SIDE IS HIGHLY TARGETED WITH THESE AND SUPER THANKFUL FOR THAT. I'm just wondering if this is our best use of this when we could allow the existing state taxation structure to handle the benefits to those developers and maybe we pay attention to other areas that we would like to see things that will return the benefit directly to our city.

No, that's a really excellent question and as part of the process and I felt to thank Rachel Otto who led this process and help us and guide us, I would say You have an excellent point in thinking. We thought about that as well. And yet, I have to say that one of the things that we looked at is, within the next 10 years, where can we really maximize the development and benefit the communities? And that's why we kind of did the stakeholder process. And we talked to Neighborhood Works. And we talked to Suazo Center. trying to figure out the best way. And I think I'm going to defer my time to Rachel.

Thanks, Lorena. You got to actually what I was about to say, which is that we were encouraged by GOEO to make this kind of an interactive process with our state and county partners and local developers. So there's obviously a lot of energy in making sure that these areas receive development potential. And yeah, so that factored into our analysis and our ranking. But great question.

Yeah. Thank you for the update, I appreciate it. On the non-recommended list of tracks, there is a portion of Glendale. So I was wondering what made one and the other portion, how do you pick one over the other one and the reasoning? I'm not challenging the thought, I'm just curious.

some of the things that we talked about and we did spend time in terms of Glendale, I would say that's probably one of the last places in our city where there will be opportunity for development. Having said that, we need more community input in terms of you know how fast they want to grow do they really want this and there were other areas from an economic development perspective that they were ready for development so we took that into the analysis i would say maybe a next round those things can be considered but i think that getting the feedback from the community is essential thank you thank you for the update i appreciate the information thank you

Council members, we are in the break portion of the almost to the minute. So we're going to take a little break. We're going to be back at 425, 420 for item number nine.

Thank you.

WE ARE BACK ONLINE NOW TO DISCUSS ON THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER NINE, WHICH IS THE FISCAL YEAR 2026-2027 BUDGET FOR THE SUSTAINABILITY DEPARTMENT AND THE REFUSE FUND. WE'RE GOING TO WELCOME AT THE TABLE KATE WERRITT, DEBBIE LYON, SUSTAINABILITY DIRECTOR, SOFIA NICOLAS, SUSTAINABILITY DEPUTY DIRECTOR. KATE, IT'S YOUR TIME.

GREAT. THANK YOU. The sustainability department has two divisions, the waste and recycling division and the environmental and energy division, or E&E. Overall, the proposed sustainability budget is $24.2 million this year. That includes a 17.2% decrease over fiscal year 26. An additional item in this budget is that as part of a multi-year strategy, they are proposing a 9% increase to the waste collection fee and a 2.4% increase to the voluntary glass recycling service fee. After this year, they plan on going to keeping up with inflation with that increase for waste. A few policy considerations for you. Over the past few years, the council has been considering Title II updates for all departments. However, it was taking significant time and collaboration between council and administration staff and it stalled. For the sustainability department, the proposed updates included updating the purpose and role of sustainability. It would be helpful if council could provide direction regarding sustainability's Title II updates. Also, another policy consideration, The council may also wish to request an informational update on the pros and cons of treating the E&E fund as an enterprise fund, given the long-term revenue planning and the general fund subsidy. There are models of having the primary fund department in the general fund and managing the enterprise fund as its own division. With that, I'll turn it over to sustainability. Thank you.

Thank you, and thanks for this opportunity to present our fiscal year budget. I want to thank everyone who contributed to this, especially Mary Beth and her team. I know that they helped us a lot this year, and the mayor's office for their support, and Sophia, who also helped put this budget together. And I want to recognize my amazing department employees. I'm extremely proud of them, and collectively, I think we expect a lot of them. And we try and set the bar high, and our employees are always meeting and exceeding expectations on a daily basis. As you know, our department is diverse. We pick up the garbage. We get rid of the old couch. We show up at community events to answer questions. And it also feels like we're moving mountains when it comes to shifting our entire electrical grid to clean energy. And couldn't do it without the amazing employees and support that we have. We get a lot of thanks and support from the community for programs like the Yard Equipment Exchange and the Micro Food Grants. Those are programs that have direct impact on residents' lives and their own budgets. And I want to thank you, the council members, for your continued support for our department. One of the most rewarding things I tell people is that I get to work for the city that I live in, and I get to work on things that make a difference every day for my community, my family, and future generations. So I feel very fortunate that I'm able to do what I do. Next slide. First of all, I'll highlight just a few accomplishments from last year. We launched an update to the city's climate plan, Climate Forward SLC, and we just transmitted the existing conditions report for that. We successfully worked with partners to submit the Utah Renewable Communities application to the Public Service Commission and received approval for that. And thank you again to Councilmember Dugan for your leadership. and the city council for adopting that ordinance a few weeks ago. And now we're busy at work working on the program implementation. We ran two landscaping equipment exchanges and it resulted in nearly 5,000 pounds of pollution reduction annually. We distributed community food micro grants to 110 individuals and 10 organizations and we installed four new public EV chargers on city property and eight new chargers for our light duty waste and recycling vehicles. Next slide. So our department is one enterprise fund, which means it's not part of the general fund and we budget for both the revenue and the expenses. So overall, we're proposing an expense budget of just over 24 million for the department, which is an 18% reduction from fiscal year 26. That includes one-time reductions as well as ongoing reductions. The revenue budget proposed is also reduced by 10% compared to fiscal year 26. And I'll get into the details of the specific reasons for both reductions of the revenue budget and the expense budget in a few slides We operate with a total of 65 full-time staff and several part-time staff And we're not proposing any changes to our services or new positions next slide So we have two divisions in the sustainability department. First, I'm going into more detail about the waste and recycling division, and then I'll talk about the environment and energy division. The waste and recycling division is responsible for operating waste and recycling services for about 42,000 households in Salt Lake City. On the expense side, the waste and recycling division makes up about 90% of the department expense budget, so about 21.7 million. And you can see there's an overall reduction of 19 percent in that expense budget and a lower decrease in expected revenue of 10 percent. We're expecting a minor net loss of 377 thousand which will be covered by cash balance. And you can see that after several years of rate increases including one proposed this year we're projecting to have a healthy cash balance. There are a few reasons for this healthy cash balance. First, we've delayed some capital projects that we expect that we'll have to start funding next year. And second, we have an abnormal year where we're not needing to replace as many of our garbage and recycling trucks. We've caught up with our replacements. And finally, the rate increases that we've had over the past couple of years have finally allowed us to make up for drawing significantly on cash balance to cover inflationary costs where we went through a period of six years where we did not raise fees at all. Next slide, please. This is our revenue outlook in more detail. So we're proposing a fee increase for our services that will result in an additional $1.4 million. And we have an additional $18,000 increase from vehicle sales because we're replacing a few light duty vehicles A significant reduction in revenue comes from the financing proceeds that we use to purchase heavy equipment. We usually finance those. And so we're not doing that next year. And that's why you see the decrease. We typically replace our garbage trucks on a six-year replacement schedule. And there's only one kind of large vehicle that we're replacing next year for the call to haul program. So that has resulted in an overall reduction of nearly $4 million in financing proceeds that are usually booked as revenue. Next slide. This slide just provides that detail of what I just talked about, but it's included in the deck for your reference. Next slide. So this is the table of the proposed fees. Generally a 9% increase for most services except curbside glass. Curbside glass is a voluntary program provided through a third party contract and this is a pass through. from the provider they've requested an inflationary increase of 2.4 percent in accordance with with what their contract allows and For our city services residents can subscribe for the size of garbage container that they need and then that fee also pays to access weekly recycling and compost and composting and then annually the call to haul program extra leaf bins in the fall for no additional charge and curbside collection of holiday trees and And residents can mitigate the impact of the fee increase by subscribing to a smaller garbage container if they don't already subscribe to that smallest can. There are about 1,000 customers that we provide curbside, just curbside recycling to. Some small multi-family that are not on garbage service, a few small businesses, and that fee is proposed to go up by 9% as well.

chime in really quickly mr chair sorry this is um something i think we should be sure to highlight um for any members of the public that are tuning in um i think we discussed it briefly during the review of the public utilities bill last week this is one way that residents could choose to reduce their kind of monthly monthly outlay of expenditures um i think people often don't think about the size of garbage can they have it's just sort of like what they've always had but salt lake city does offer several options for smaller garbage cans with a lower cost and this is i just thanks for explaining that because i always kind of wondered why we offered the smaller one i'm just like you don't have to fill it up like but okay thank you thanks for flagging it too jen yeah when and when residents call us or are

get in touch with us and ask about the fees. We always point out that they can get a smaller can.

Would you highlight for me, just for program reference, which one is the one that is the most commonly used? Is it a 60-gallon? That's the regular one.

Most people actually still use the 90-gallon. The 90-gallon? Yeah.

So that's the one that most houses have?

Yep.

Okay, 90-gallon. So there is a 61 and a 40.

You have a 40, wow, you don't make any garbage. Is the 40 one like the size of my glass recycling one? Is that?

The glass is a little bit smaller.

Okay, but it's about that size.

It's about that size, yeah.

Wow, you also don't make a lot of garbage.

I think it's one of those things that, and I don't know if you guys are like this, maybe there's a little anxiety as a household thinking, you know, how much garbage am I going to make? Especially if you have children, exactly. And, you know, you don't want to run out of space. And I've definitely had to kind of, you know, keep... You know garbage sacks for the next week or whatever, but it is and especially as like household sizes change I've noticed people on my block whose kids have you know grown up and moved out of the house and it's now that they're you know a family of two instead of Four people or five people living in a house. It really is an option for a lot of people to consider especially if they're on fixed incomes

Yeah, and in addition, people can subscribe to additional recycling bins and yard waste bins for no additional charge. So if they have extra boxes or other recyclables, they can get those extra cans. I have an extra yard waste can for that.

I do too. OK, that is interesting. I was looking at my bill recently, and I was like, I'm not getting charged for the second one, and I was confused about why, but that makes sense. 40 gallons, like that is incredible. I'm still in shock.

The exact measurement is actually 48 gallons, so it's a little bit larger.

Yeah. Chris, which one do you have? I have the regular ones. So apparently we're doing it wrong. I guess, all this time. So maybe the challenge for us is to go into a smaller garbage can for this year, see if I can make it. Sorry for this.

All right. Next.

Side note.

Next slide. This is just the overview of the expenses for waste and recycling. I'll get into the details in another slide. So next slide.

QUICK QUESTION. SORRY, GOING BACK. SINCE THE WASTE AND RECYCLING, WE ARE ALLOWED TO CHARGE, YOU KNOW, FEES FOR SERVICE. THESE ARE NOT TAXES THAT ARE LIKE, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO CANCEL THE COST. WHY WOULDN'T THE CITY CHARGE SOME LEVEL OF COST, YOU KNOW, GOING BACK TO MY EXAMPLE, FOR ADDITIONAL GARBAGE BUCKETS FOR RECYCLING OR FOR YARD WASTE?

That is something that we could do.

And that would be, if you're interested in that, that's something we could... To me, I'm curious about what, you know, how many, I'm sure you have the data, how many of those exist and how much revenue we could make out of that. And my question goes back to potentially minimizing the impact on the garbage, which... Yeah. you know, everybody's really doing it. I mean, most, you know, there's little options if you don't have, you know, a main garbage can. But to try to offset some of this cost instead of necessarily increasing the one, but like at the same time, maybe the other argument is charging for something that we're actually doing, which is the whole purpose of these fees, you know.

Yeah. Charging extra fees for recycling or the yard waste then introduces the ability potentially the ability to not subscribe to those and then that would reduce our

diversion rates I think yeah I think that was the policy choice that was made when the council first actually when the council first voted to kind of dramatically expand the recycling program so even before the yard waste program I think the council was just really hopeful that people would do it at all and so I think they were trying to make it as low barrier entry as possible obviously society and the culture has shifted a little bit where maybe that's worth it to reevaluate

Yeah, I will personally be interested in finding what those numbers could be. It seems like a low-hanging fruit right there, and it's widely used, and I think there'd be a lot of service from our city. I appreciate the work that we do to how it never fails. It's actually incredible.

Can I stay on that same subject? I appreciate why we're there. I was going to wait to the end, but I thought this is the right time. On the larger apartment buildings and stuff, we have dumpsters. And my question here is that, you know, we're also wanting people to use recycling so we don't put it in the landfill. And I know we're not using the recycling as a revenue because it's so volatile and there's really nothing you can use on it. So we don't even look at the recycling as a revenue source because it's too unreliable, I would say. BUT ON THE LARGER DUMPSTER SIZE ARE WE INCENTIVIZING THEM BUT ON THE LARGER DUMPSTER SIZE ARE WE INCENTIVIZING THEM ENOUGH TO THAT THEIR RECYCLING ENOUGH TO THAT THEIR RECYCLING IS FULL AND THEIR DUMPSTER IS IS FULL AND THEIR DUMPSTER IS BEING JUST FOR WASTE AND NOT BEING JUST FOR WASTE AND NOT ACTUALLY STUFF THAT COULD BE ACTUALLY STUFF THAT COULD BE RECYCLED. RECYCLED. SO THERE'S AN INCENTIVE FOR THEM SO THERE'S AN INCENTIVE FOR THEM TO SEPARATE THEIR WASTE. TO SEPARATE THEIR WASTE. HOW DO WE LOOK AT THAT AND HOW HOW DO WE LOOK AT THAT AND HOW DO WE PRICE THAT SIZE? ON THE LARGER DUMPSTER SIZE GARBAGE.

SO OUR SERVICES DON'T INCLUDE, SO OUR SERVICES DON'T INCLUDE, WE DO NOT SERVICE THOSE WE DO NOT SERVICE THOSE DUMPSTERS. DUMPSTERS. THOSE ARE ALL PRIVATELY THOSE ARE ALL PRIVATELY OPERATED.

OPERATED. I'VE SEEN. I'VE SEEN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT WE WERE

And I've seen a lot of, I mean, former council member Mano, you know, was a victim of this, you know, service being gone from one of his buildings where, like, they took away recycling. They, you know, he couldn't, you know, recycle anymore. So to me, it seems like I wonder if there is a, A WAY TO REGULATE THE WORK. WE HAVE A LOT MORE OF THESE DENSE PLACES IN OUR CITY. I WONDER IF THERE IS A WAY TO YOUR POINT TO REQUIRE SOME LEVEL RECYCLING TO SOME OF THESE UNITS.

WE DO ACTUALLY HAVE A CITY ORDINANCE THAT REQUIRES CERTAIN Multi-family to offer recycling and we have one staff member that is in charge of enforcing that and and does Site visits spot visits and it's complaint based So if somebody calls in and says my apartment complex doesn't recycle then he'll so there's a required thing But we're you know, they might know it may not be followed by a lot of people a lot of and the piece may be needed on enforcement and

Was it maybe three or four years ago that the council, or was it longer than that?

It was during the code revision project. Okay. 2015, 2016, when we did a whole bunch.

I didn't know how long ago it was.

Yeah, code revisions, yeah. So, yes, it's complaint-based, and we have one person that's able to go out and help work with property owners, and that's what they do all day is go out to those properties and

And to me, you know, the idea of, you know, we have so many good neighbors across the city, you know, doing it, and then you have some of this, you know, multifamily places where people want to, but their landlords are not offering it. Councilman Wharton.

Um, around that same time, didn't the city also require businesses to provide recycling too? And is it the same like intrepid sustainability employee that's in charge of that?

He's also in charge of that. Okay.

Uh, yeah. Okay. And, and, but it's like per building or something or is it, it's based on the size of the dumpster they have in the back.

So if they have a four year dumpster or larger than that, it's, you know, that volume of trash, um, They're supposed to have a recycling bin as well. We also at the same time introduced another ordinance that in new buildings they're required to have space for recycling because that's a barrier with existing buildings is sometimes they don't have space even for a garbage can. Yeah. So in new buildings, we require space for both.

Well, just because I know some businesses that have recycling bins, and then they just throw them away. They don't what? They just put them in the dumpster with the garbage.

So, yeah.

I know. I've got some reporting to do.

And we'll put it on the list. Maybe there's a way of creating a revenue source from some of the other things that we are not charging, potentially, to like... helping on the enforcement side. So it seems like there might be some opportunity for better enforcement there. The garbage police, you know, different kind. So thank you, sorry. Do you have more presentation?

Yes, I do. Okay, next slide please. So that is probably way too small for you to see, I'm sorry. So the first line on this slide is the reduction in personal services, and that's just based on the mayor's budget for all departments. And the rest of the items listed on that slide are increases. So we see some increases in lease payments. Those are based on the payment schedules that we have in place for large equipment, and that fluctuates year to year based on when those agreements, where they are in their agreement schedule. IMS fees are projected to increase by 25,000. The glass recycling contract is expected to increase related to inflation. There are some miscellaneous operational expenses projected to increase by 73,000. That's mostly inflationary. It's for things like safety supplies and mailers and other things. Perhaps the most important thing to know is that we're asking for $250,000 for a capital improvement project so that we can construct a building at the DeLong Street yard to protect our employees from the weather as they build and repair collection containers. So right now, they're just doing it out in the open. And that can be challenging, especially when it's raining or when it's hot. So we just want a basic shelter to cover their heads.

And that will cost $250,000?

Uh-huh. There's no electrical, no plumbing. We have porta-potties on site. Just like a shed with doors. Oh. The porta-potties are... It's right across the street from our permanent... Our offices, the waste and recycling offices. But they go over there and they put the wheels on the containers and they attach the lids and... Next slide. SO THIS SLIDE COVERS MOST OF THE DECREASES IN THE BUDGET. SO CAPITAL EQUIPMENT, THERE'S GENERALLY A DECREASE FROM LAST YEAR BECAUSE WE'RE NOT REPLACING THOSE LARGE, A LOT OF HEAVY EQUIPMENT.

COUNCILMEMBER DEWEY, I'M SORRY.

ON THAT LINE THERE, SO NEXT YEAR, ARE WE GOING TO HIT, DO WE NEED TWO GARBAGE TRUCKS? DO WE NEED ONE? I MEAN, THAT'S A BIG DROP, $4 MILLION.

or we have to purchase one next year we're on a pretty regular schedule okay so next year i don't think we're not going to see four okay we're not going to see four maybe one or two okay um i don't know exactly what's coming up but okay it's not like next year now we have to do eight because we we're not delaying any procurements okay okay all right thank you But this year we are we are budgeting to purchase with cash one rear load truck for call to haul program and then for light duty vehicles for our education team There is a reduction in one-time funding. We funded a waste characterization study and that has been finalized now with the pubs billing system they are Upgrading their existing billing system and we share in that cost last year We had about two years worth of funding budgeted because there was a delay in the project. So now we're Reducing that back to the last year of that project And then also in addition we pay public utilities. We reimburse them for just our routine billing for them collecting our fees for us and they have adjusted that downward based on our portion of the cost to maintain all of their billing and Tipping fees are related to the garbage that we tip at the landfill. The cost per ton we expect to be stable. The tons we expect to be stable. What we looked at was what our assumptions on tonnage were, and they were a little bit over what we think is reality. So we fine-tuned those tonnage estimates. And with fuel, kind of the same story. Fuel expenses are going up, and we expect them to go up. We looked closer at our actual fuel usage over the past few years and fine tuned that number so we feel like this is, we were able to reduce that budget, that line item for fuel. And then fleet maintenance is going down a bit because we've caught up on our fleet replacements. We have good operating trucks and we're doing well with preventative maintenance and so our maintenance costs have gone down slightly for that. That is it for waste and recycling. And I will shift to the environment and energy division if you don't have any more questions about that.

I have one question on waste and recycling. It talks about glass. And I would like to know how widely used that is offered. How widely used it is. I worried. Well, I love recycling. I worried about... I'm the only one in my area that has it, because I know, because they come once a month. And I wanted to balance how environmental that is in my mind, sending a gigantic truck to pick up my own thing. So I wonder if there is a way to get some information and maybe potentially more education to get people to use it. There are more data points there that will be awesome.

Yeah. We have about a little over 5,000 residents that subscribe to that curbside service. In addition, that contractor also services the drop-off recycling centers, and they can oftentimes use the same truck to service the drop-offs as the residential.

Okay. Yeah, Councilman Carlson.

I will just say that that contractor is also very effective with Instagram ads. And I just got pulled into the food waste program that they offer because of their Instagram ads. So they are advertising their services.

Well, now that you said it, I'm sure I'm next. They're listening.

They're listening. Thank you. All right. Next slide, please. So the Environment and Energy Division is part of the Enterprise Fund. We account for it separately, and we account for the revenue and expenses separately. In years past, we've been talking about the eventual transition of the E&E Fund into the General Fund. and due to the challenges of the budget this year, we've not proposed that transition when we feel like we can go another year. But revenues have been adjusted slightly based on interest and we're requesting a reduction of 9% reduction in our expense budget from nearly 2.7 million in fiscal year 26 to 2.5 million in fiscal year 27. Next slide. This is the detail of the revenue side. We continue to expect to get revenue as a joint owner of the landfill. And we're requesting a transfer from the general fund at the same level as years past, nearly $1.2 million. So same request. And we've adjusted the miscellaneous revenue slightly. And that's just related to some interest. So next slide. This is the overview of the expenses proposed for the E&E division. One thing I'll note here is that there's a slight reduction in personal services and that's related to the mayor's overall proposed budget citywide and we're not proposing any new services or programs or employees in that division either. Next slide. And this is the detail of all the changes proposed in the E&E division. So IMS fees are going up by $38,000. The biggest change is the admin fee. Last year we carried over the same budget number as the year before and the general fund actually adjusted their fees downward in fiscal year 26. So this is just bringing up in line with what we expect them to be in fiscal year 27. And then there are some miscellaneous contractual and other operational line items that we looked into to find reductions resulting in a net decrease of over $8,000. As Mary Beth likes to say, we shook the couch cushions and went line by line to see what we could take out. So next slide. So in summary, our department budget proposal for fiscal year 27 is an 18% reduction compared to fiscal year 26. We're not proposing any changes to service levels or programs and not requesting any changes in staffing. We are requesting the fee increase for waste and recycling services, and we're recommending a delay of one more year before we fully transition the E&E division into the general fund. But look forward to having conversations with you about whether that is a good policy decision, whether you want to do that, or how. But for this year, we're asking for the same general fund transfer as last year.

Yes, go ahead. Just one note that I've been making with most departments that are relating to the property tax increase proposal, $500,000 of the property tax increase proposal is proposed to go to the E&E fund. So just so that council members are aware that that's part of it.

Any questions, council members?

I would like to dig in a little more about the EE and learn a little more about the programs that we are offering and just try to balance the impact. I agree with all the amazing things that we're doing, and I wish we could do more and bigger. We're just like, potentially many of us are talking about like, is this the year for all of these amazing things to keep on going while we are you know, making an argument to our neighbors about a tax increase. And I felt like it would be appropriate for all of us to say maybe there is a pause on some of these things just because of how challenging the cost of living is and with an additional potential tax increase presented. So I am generally asking in most of these presentations about specific things, and so I would love to dig in a little more about some of those specific programs. Thank you. Any other questions?

Sort of related, I'll just add that we are doing the climate plan, and that's where we're really digging into some of that policy discussion about Title II and what we're doing as a city to address climate change. So I think there's a lot of opportunity to have more conversation around what the city's role is and the priorities of you all and the administration on what we ought to be doing.

I would love to learn more about how you're approaching it. Certainly, this is not about not believing in climate change or not supporting climate change. I just need to really be able to, like, look at my neighbors in the face and say, you know, for those that are in fixed incomes and say, you know, but we're doing this other amazing thing, but you need to pay more for that, right? And I'm not sure I can fully verbalize all those things yet. So I feel like it's on me and all of us to really also shake all the, you know, couch cushions and say we did our best to squeeze this budget to make it FAIR FOR ALL. SO I APPRECIATE THE WORK THAT YOUR DEPARTMENT DOES.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. OKAY. I THINK WE'RE DONE WITH UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER. OKAY. THANK YOU. APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU.

NUMBER 10. This is an ordinance for fiscal year 2026, 2027 for the budget. And this is the public utilities update and the consolidated fee schedule. We're going to welcome Austin Kimmel, Council Policy Analyst, Laura Briefer, Director of Public Utilities, and Lisa Taruffelli, Finance Administrator for Public Utilities, to the table. Austin.

Thanks, council members. Public utilities is here for a follow-up briefing on its proposed FY27 budget. Today's discussion will focus on the proposed changes in the Consolidated Fee Schedule, or CFS, and related Title 17 ordinance amendments. The changes are necessary to implement the FY27 rate changes, which public utilities overviewed during its May 5th briefing. Other changes are intended to clarify fees or language written in the ordinance. Public Utilities has a brief presentation highlighting a few key CFS changes that they'll go over today. Page one of the staff report also details some of those changes. We've reserved some time at the end for any questions, and with that, I will turn it over to Laura.

great thank you um we also have uh our financial analyst um jacob jorgensen here who might be able to answer some really really detailed cost of service questions if any come up so yes so this agenda item has to do with uh proposed changes to uh just a few different sections of salt lake city's ordinance under title 17. that basically governs water and wastewater and stormwater utilities. And so I'll go through the key changes in the ordinance and then the key changes that correspond in the consolidated fee schedule. So next slide, please. So just a refresher, each year the city updates and adopts a consolidated fee schedule by ordinance and the major driver of the CFS is to establish fees charged to offset regulatory and service costs. Our fees and rates are included in the CFS for all four of the enterprise utilities that we are charged with managing. And the authority for the fees and rates is found in our ordinance, which is why when we make changes to the CFS, sometimes we have to make changes to the ordinance. And then just a subsection here is that we do have fees that are required under state and federal laws. Those aren't necessarily required to be in the CFS, but they are included in the CFS and some of the changes that we have today include some of those fees and we thought it was best to have those in the CFS so that they're completely transparent. Next slide, please. So as far as the ordinance changes, they fall under four major categories. One is to clarify ordinance language for monthly sewer rates for new single family residential accounts. The second is to clarify definitions contained in the ordinance of what a single family residence is, a duplex, a triplex. multifamily residential and non-residential uses. We received feedback from constituents that the language in those definitions was somewhat confusing because it was focused on buildings, whereas many duplex, triplexes, and multifamily residential customers served by a single connection are more than the buildings themselves. And then there's ordinance language changes to implement the new fixed sewer rate for the multifamily class. And then we just have, as we were going through there, there were some minor ordinance cleanups to remove some outdated language in the ordinance that these ordinances have been in place for a long time. So when we find outdated language, we like to clean those up as well. Next slide, please. And so then the correlated changes in the consolidated fee schedule, first of all, you'll see changes in the CFS, not related to the ordinances, but those are really just the monthly rate increases for each of the utilities that we're proposing for this budget year. There's a change in the structural, in the structure of the sewer rates for multifamily uses, that's that fixed fee per dwelling unit. The CFS reestablishes a minimum monthly sewer charge that is primarily charged to single family residents, correct? Yeah. And then we update fees that have been in place for things like development plan reviews, inspections, non-compliance violations. Those are more of those state and federal requirements. in all of the water related utilities. In development plan reviews and inspections, those have always been in the CFS, but we broke them out even further by service based on a cost of service study. Then this one we heard a lot about last year, the monthly fire line charge. We changed the CFS to clarify that it's based on the size of connection. So rather than say per inch of connection, which was a little bit confusing and had always been in the ordinance, and I'm not sure why, we just changed it to the actual size of the connection on the system. And then you'll notice in the consolidated fee schedule, when we went through our legal review, we found areas where we needed to update where in the ordinance the authority lies for the different charges in the consolidated fee schedule. And I think that's my final slide. Let's see, maybe the next slide, just in case. Yeah, there we go. Okay.

Council Members?

HOW ARE YOU? SO YOU KNOW THIS IS A HOT TOPIC IN DISTRICT ONE. AND SO LAST NIGHT WE HAD A MEETING WITH SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS AND KIND OF TOLD THEM, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN ENTERPRISE FUND. WE HAVE TO GENERATE ENOUGH MONEY TO DO WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. YOU KNOW, WE'VE MADE THE CASE. SO MY NEIGHBORS HAVE SWITCHED TO ASKING FOR MAKING SURE THAT WHEN THEY PAY INCREASED FEES, THEY'RE SEEING OUTCOMES AND RETURN ON INVESTMENT, ESSENTIALLY. AND ONE OF THE THINGS THEY WERE ASKING IS, THEY'RE REALLY TIRED OF FEELING LIKE THEY'RE DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO CONTROL THEIR WATER USAGE, THEIR SEWER USAGE. to try to maximize everything and then watching institutional users like stores in the area or churches or businesses have like those geysers always running. They're tired of people watering during the day and doing all of the negative things. I couldn't answer any questions for them about enforcement or options. Can you maybe clarify for us a little bit, and maybe if this drought declaration from both the state and the city changes anything about if and how we enforce?

Yeah, we receive a lot of those calls from constituents too. And it's wonderful that we have so many people in our community that are really watching out for our water use. I'm really glad to hear that people are really focusing on saving water and watching their water use. When we receive calls around institutional and commercial customers who appear to be watering inappropriately, we follow up on those. In fact, I'm one of those people that make the calls to our water conservation manager when I see that happening as well. And when we can make contact, it's very educational for the people that we call and for us. Sometimes we learn that they were watering that one day because they were testing their sprinkler system. Or we get a lot of calls for like park properties, our own and other park properties within our service area. It turns out that their cycle of watering takes more than 24 hours, and they're trying to water their trees. So sometimes there's an explanation, and sometimes it's clear that there's a lot more education and outreach and engagement to do. In terms of enforcement, our city ordinance does authorize us to enforce when we have drought conditions. And if we were to go into stage three of our water shortage contingency plan, that's where the requirement would be for mandatory reductions for both residential and non-residential customers. Right now, government entities are mandatory enforcement. So I think there is the option for us to do that. I think we want to be really thoughtful about how that's done. And we have the ability to do fines. We have all of that ability. It will take a lot more work to get there as well. Sure.

I wanted to highlight on that train of thought about how I feel like many of our neighbors are doing so good on trying to make a difference on how they're using water. But then we have multifamily, you know, I would say, I don't know what the threshold is, but like probably about 20 units, you know, those larger places where the grass is lush and green and, you know, it's almost like it turns blue how green it is, right? And it's frustrating to see how, you know, and I understand that many of those communities Places need some green space because they share some green space with you know, but there is obviously a You know a completely different view of what green space is from from some of them And I would love to explore some either carrots or sticks to match the effort that the other residents are doing. And I would love to have more tools to look at them specifically. And even if it creates additional, if it costs us more, but it may actually allow us to create more revenue sources to curve that use, I would love to explore that with you.

Yeah, and we agree, and we have started that exploration. One of the outcomes of our rate changes last year was that we were connected to some of the advocacy groups related to multifamily housing, like the Rental Housing Association, for instance. We've been having very good conversations with them around water rates and sewer rates and conservation. I've also talked to the Central Utah Water Conservancy District and there are incentive programs that can be specific to multifamily, so we're trying to connect those dots as well. So definitely some incentives and this year when we embark on an update to our rate study, we actually have representatives from the multi-housing sector now participating and again from the Rental Housing Association. So I think we'll get a lot more opportunity for both feedback for our rates but also an opportunity to talk about what are the barriers to conservation and water management and see if we can actually come up with some really great solutions.

I will definitely love to really focus on this. And even if it takes, as I was mentioning in our conversations, maybe it takes to educate some of the neighbors that live in those places to ask their landlord to make a difference. Because it really feels like they're living under a different rules and in a different world where water, we have no issue here with water. And I would love for them to actually make a difference as well.

Thank you so much. That's great.

Any other thoughts, questions? Okay. Thank you. Thank you for the presentation. Appreciate it. We're going now to item 11, which is fiscal year 2026, 2027 budget discussion related to unresolved issues, follow up. Jennifer Bruno, council executive director.

Thanks so much, Mr. Chair. We have a bunch of information that has just come in via email in the last 48 hours even. I've bumped up several of those emails for you guys in your inbox. Staff is going through a lot of those responses. Thank you to the departments who've been so quick to respond to a lot of those follow up questions. So I think staff may have follow up questions to those answers. And if you do, please share them. And we'll kind of keep sharing information by email just so that we can keep that flowing. And then we'll plan on covering it to the extent that we need to follow up on Tuesday. Lehua just let you guys know the Thursday meeting for this week. We've shifted all those items to Tuesday's meeting. So Tuesday is when we'll talk about unresolved issues next. The main information in the email is follow up information on fleet, on sustainability, on public lands, and on the police department. If you want to talk about any of those items now, we can or we can just kind of leave it at that and staff hasn't had an opportunity to really absorb and read all the things and so we can learn together but let us know if you have any questions also i wanted to raise several council members have reached out about a scenario for the council office budget to be evaluated in terms of contributing to the sort of overall operational cuts that other departments are seeing so I'm working with Lehua and Nick to come up with some scenarios for leadership to consider, for you guys to consider. Obviously, our priority will be maintaining service to the constituents. And so that is kind of at least the starting point that I'm using. Let me know if that's not the right starting point. So we're looking at kind of the other things that maybe would not affect constituent services since I think it sounds like that, you know, that has been a core value of your guys's. So, okay. We'll probably come back with more information and email on that later this week. So just be on the lookout for that. One other piece of information several conversations have Asked about well if we you know reduce the property tax impact proposal reduce the property tax increase proposal by a million dollars You know, what does it actually amount to? For an average resident or an average commercial property and so I'm gonna send this information out an email as well but THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION OF THE $13.5 MILLION PROPERTY TAX THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDATION OF THE $13.5 MILLION PROPERTY TAX INCREASE WOULD INCREASE AN AVERAGE INCREASE AN AVERAGE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WHICH THIS IS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY WHICH THIS IS KIND OF BANANAS THAT THIS IS THE KIND OF BANANAS THAT THIS IS THE AVERAGE IS $624,000 IN SALT LAKE AVERAGE IS $624,000 IN SALT LAKE CITY. CITY. IS $118.38 PER YEAR WHICH IS IS $118.38 PER YEAR WHICH IS $9.87 PER MONTH. And the average commercial for a million dollar commercial property is $344 per year or $28.74 per month. If you reduce that $13.5 million by one million, I just kind of picked a million just because it's easy math. INCREASE BY $8.77 PER YEAR FOR A INCREASE BY $8.77 PER YEAR FOR A RESIDENTIAL OR $25.55 PER YEAR FOR A RESIDENTIAL OR $25.55 PER YEAR FOR A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. SO YOU DON'T NEED TO REMEMBER SO YOU DON'T NEED TO REMEMBER THOSE NUMBERS. THOSE NUMBERS. I'LL SEND THEM OUT IN EMAIL AND I'LL SEND THEM OUT IN EMAIL AND INCLUDE THEM IN THE NEXT You're kind of thinking through Adjustments you might want to make to the mayor's proposal. I think it's helpful to know like what?

Those impacts you're talking about mean to you know an average resident or things like that One million nine about nine dollars nine bucks a year. Yeah, I can't remember Petra I

Can we get, and I probably should do this myself, I feel a little guilty asking, can we get a tracking of the proposed increases that our constituents will see across this? I'd like to know, I KNOW THERE'S PUBLIC UTILITIES, I KNOW THERE'S THIS, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE SUSTAINABILITY. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE ONE CONCISE PLACE WHERE ALL PROPOSED INCREASES ARE TRACKED.

I THINK WE ACTUALLY RECEIVED THAT INFORMATION FROM FINANCE AS PART OF THE GIANT FIREHOUSE OF INFORMATION WE GOT FROM THEM THAT FIRST WEEK IN THE BUDGET. SO I WILL FIND IT AND MAKE SURE WE BUBBLE IT UP FOR YOU GUYS. SO, YES, THANKS TO FINANCE FOR THAT. IT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT NECESSARILY OR THE DISTRICT NECESSARILY OR THE COUNTY'S PROPOSAL. COUNTY'S PROPOSAL. OBVIOUSLY CONSTITUENTS WILL SEE OBVIOUSLY CONSTITUENTS WILL SEE THOSE AS WELL.

Okay. Thank you so much for that update. Now we're going to item number 12, which is board appointments. So we're going to have several board appointments, discussions. And so the first one will be the Metropolitan Water District Board, Christopher Schupp, who is supposed to be online. I'm getting it.

We can skip to, I believe, Daryl McCall is here for, hi there. Maybe we can skip to that item and then go back to the others. We are running a little ahead of time.

Daryl McCall.

Okay, great, great. Let's move to item number 14, the Board Appointment for Racial Equity in Policing Commission. Daryl McCall is here, so come join us here at the table. There is a microphone. Push the button so it's green and tell us briefly why do you want to join and volunteer to the Racial Equity in Policing Commission. Daryl, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Your microphone.

Since I'm a little nervous, do you mind if I read a statement?

Yes, sir.

Thank you. My name is Jerome McCall. I'm wondering where you're from. Thank you. I'm a proud veteran of the United States Army, where among many duties I served as an intelligence officer. I am the father of two daughters and the grandfather of three granddaughters. Five years ago, I relocated to Utah, and during this time, I've lived in American Fort, Provo, and for the last three years here in Salt Lake City. I'm a member of the Fraternal Order of Eagles, Chapter 67, and a past master of High Marine Masonic Lodge Number 12 here in Salt Lake City, under the jurisdiction of the most worshipful Prince Hall Grand Lodge of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming, where I also have the privilege of serving as a Grand Lodge officer. Professionally, I currently serve as a technical services manager with Metropolitan Telecommunications, METTEL, here in the Salt Lake City area. Throughout my life, I've been guided by the fundamental principles of brotherly love, truth, and relief. I've consistently sought opportunities to serve others and contribute to my community. It is my sincere hope that serving on this commission will allow me to continue that commitment to serve and further contribute to the betterment of those around me. Thank you for your consideration.

Council Members? Yes, Council Member Young.

I just wanted to say thank you for being here and being willing to share your time, experience, and expertise. I love that you have such a diverse history of experiences, but that it starts with your high school. I personally come from K-12 education, and so it just really resonated with me, aside from being a huge fan of that movie. And...

THE ADMINISTRATIVE TACTICS IT IS SO ANYWAY THANK YOU SO MUCH JUST APPRECIATE YOUR WILLINGNESS TO SHARE THAT EXPERIENCE AND EXPERTISE WITH US HERE IN SALT LAKE CITY THANK YOU I I WILL YOU KNOW JUST HIGHLIGHT THE SAME AND THANK YOU FOR FOR YOUR WILLINGNESS TO TO VOLUNTEER YOUR TIME AND EXPERTISE AND and points of views to make our city better. I know that many cities have these many boards and that they impact key pieces of legislation in our city. So we're excited to have you. Thank you. Just to tell you the process, the... WE'RE GOING TO PUT YOU ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING AT 7 PM. YOU DON'T HAVE TO ATTEND FOR IT TO HAPPEN. IT'S A VERY BRIEF MOMENT WHERE WE GENERALLY APPROVE UNLESS SOMETHING CHANGES. GENERALLY APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. AFTER THAT THE ADMINISTRATION WILL REACH OUT TO YOU AND ON BOARD YOU ON TO THE COMMISSION.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR COMING.

THANK YOU, SIR. LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU. YES.

OH, OKAY. WE ARE GOING TO JUMP BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 12, BOARD APPOINTMENT FOR THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT BOARD, CHRISTOPHER SHOPP. ARE YOU HERE ONLINE?

HE'S HERE ONLINE. Yes, I am.

Oh, great. So tell us a little bit about, you know, you volunteering for the Metropolitan Water District Board.

Well, first, I very much appreciate the council taking the time to better understand my background and my interests. My background is that I have three degrees in hydrologic engineering. So I'm really water focused. I've worked with the USGS and I currently work with the Department of Environmental Quality. I serve as the Salt Lake City Public Utilities Advisory Council Chair. So I think it's similar to the METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SALT LAKE AND SANDY BOARD. AND I'M VERY INTERESTED IN THE BOARD ITSELF. PARTLY BECAUSE I'M PASSIONATE ABOUT HOW WATER MOVES IN THE SALT LAKE CITY REGION, ENSURING enough and efficient flow as well as high quality water. I'm particularly interested in the Metropolitan Water District because of the focus on the Little Cottonwood Treatment Plant and the Point of Mountain Treatment Plant as well as the Salt Lake Aqueduct. The Jordan Narrows facilities are important for the whole Jordan River. And so better understanding the maintenance and schedule involved around that. And then finally, I'm very interested in the effect that the board has on funding sources as well as Great Salt Lake distributions through water leases. So I'm happy to be in front of you. If you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer.

Council members. NOT QUALIFIED AT ALL. JUST TO, JUST TO, I, YOU KNOW, I, MOSTLY AND MYSELF, YOU KNOW, WENT THROUGH THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THE APPLICANTS AND WE HAD AMAZING APPLICANTS AND IT WAS GREAT TO SEE, YOU KNOW, YOU VOLUNTEERING AND BRINGING ALL OF THAT KNOWLEDGE AND EXPERTISE TO OUR CITY. Thank you for your service. You probably heard what the process is. We're going to put you on the consent agenda for the meeting tonight. And the administration, well, the Metropolitan Water District will reach out to you once this process is done today.

That's great. Thank you very much. And again, I want to apologize for sending my very long resume.

Thank you. We're moving to number 13, the Board Appointment for the Human Rights Commission. Emmanuel Ashitoy Jr. is here in person and can join us at the table. There's one chair right there waiting for you. And the microphone, if you put it close to you and push the button so the light turns green, tell us briefly why do you want to join the Human Rights Commission? Is the light on?

First off, all right. First off, I'm Emmanuel Oshito, Jr. A little bit about myself. I'm an Army officer, retired Lieutenant Colonel from the Army. I also was a US diplomat in Morocco. And basically, during that time, it really helped me with human rights, as far as going in, winning hearts and minds, making sure that people were taken care of. We did things such as, at the embassy, we did things such as going in, vaccinating animals, vaccinating people. to try to help stem some of the problems with food and making sure that they were taken care of and winning hearts and minds. That's pretty much what I also would like to do and see in Salt Lake. as far as people being taken care of, making sure that we're looking at both aspects. I also have a law background as far as police officer law enforcement. I did that for quite a number of years, many deployments. I think I did six deployments. Anyway, that's pretty much me.

Thank you. Also, you know, very small experience you bring to the table. And being physicians, obviously an amount of experience. We're very excited to have you. Any other questions?

I love that we have two retired Army gentlemen here. I grew up at DoD, civilian's daughter, stationed in Heidelberg and Livorno. So thanks for literally watching over my childhood and for now continuing to serve and be an example for all of us. So this is really exciting to see all of you standing up.

So thank you.

Don't bring that Navy stuff over here right now. It's the Army's turn. It's the Army's turn.

Don't. I'm the son of an Army. OFFICER. BUT I CHOSE THE OTHER PATH, THE NAVY. SO I DON'T HOLD IT AGAINST YOU GUYS. BUT NO.

UNTIL THE FOOTBALL GAME.

UNTIL THE FOOTBALL GAME. But I appreciate your service, and I also appreciate your background through the military and in Morocco and seeing different cultures and different perspectives and bringing it to Salt Lake City and allowing us to also see that and grow. And I appreciate you stepping up to the plate. So thank you for doing that. I'm very grateful for that, Phil. So thank you.

Also, just to let you know, I did do 10 years Air Force, then I did 21 years Army.

So we don't have to worry about the Air Force side of that.

Just stick with the Army, we're good.

Okay, so we can all agree on that one.

So thank you for your service. You were heard.

We're going to put you on. Just briefly, because you're applying to be on the Human Rights Commission, which is a commission, a board that I served on before joining the council. I really hope that you will, that commission is like very broad in terms of what they're charged with doing. And so I hope that you will come with ideas about where to take that group because it really, I think, has the potential to go into a lot of different areas and give us more advice and give more education to the public. I think you're, yes, very qualified for this position, and I hope that you won't hold back in coming up with ideas about how we can expand the activity on that group. THANKS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

WE ARE GOING TO PUT YOU ON THE WE ARE GOING TO PUT YOU ON THE WE ARE GOING TO PUT YOU ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR TONIGHT. CONSENT AGENDA FOR TONIGHT. CONSENT AGENDA FOR TONIGHT. AND YOU DON'T NEED TO BE THERE. AND YOU DON'T NEED TO BE THERE. AND YOU DON'T NEED TO BE THERE. AND OFTENTIMES WE APPROVE THE AND OFTENTIMES WE APPROVE THE AND OFTENTIMES WE APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA. CONSENT AGENDA. CONSENT AGENDA. SO ONCE THAT IS DONE, THE SO ONCE THAT IS DONE, THE SO ONCE THAT IS DONE, THE ADMINISTRATION WILL REACH OUT TO ADMINISTRATION WILL REACH OUT TO ADMINISTRATION WILL REACH OUT TO YOU TO ONBO ITEM NUMBER 15 IS ANOTHER BOARD APPOINTMENT FOR THE RACIAL EQUITY AND POLICING COMMISSION. I'M GOING TO BELIEVE THIS PERSON IS ONLINE. ATTIA APLEAN IS HERE. ARE YOU HERE?

YES, I AM.

PLEASE TELL US BRIEFLY WHY DO YOU WANT TO JOIN THE COMMISSION?

Yes, I'll be very brief. My name's Atiyah Appline and I just recently celebrated my one year here in Salt Lake City, Utah. I am deeply passionate about bridging the gap between community members and the institutions that serve them. My journey is very unique. I have my bachelor's in social work where I worked as a social worker for a couple of years. Then I went into corporate and worked with HR systems, working with financial institutions to bridge the gap between employees and people. And I just feel like we as residents should be very engaged, and I make sure to do that in my day-to-day work and my volunteer work as well. And since we're talking about military, I'm a proud military child of the two veterans in the Air Force. My mom served 21 years in the Air Force. My dad served 10 years before he passed away. So very passionate about making sure that we are very engaged with our communities.

Wow. Thank you. I'm so excited. Council Member Carlson.

JUST WANT TO, I'M SURE, ECHO WHAT MY FELLOW COUNCILMEMBERS WILL SAY OR JUST HOLD IN THEIR HEARTS, BUT JUST I FEEL SUCH A DEEP SENSE OF APPRECIATION TO YOU AND TO THE OTHERS WE SAW IN THE AUDIENCE WHO CAME FORTH TODAY AND SAID, YES, GIVE ME MORE WORK. YES, HELP ME. YES, I WANT TO TACKLE THESE BIG CHALLENGES IN OUR CITY. YES, I WANT TO BE OF SERVICE. AND SO THANK YOU SO MUCH. Even being here a year, I am just so inspired by your commitment to improving Salt Lake City. And I will put a special shout out. I love that you're a resident of District 5.

Well, now you're making a competition here. The previous one was from District 2. No, this is, it's actually impressive, you know, all of you, but, you know, certainly you too, and I am very excited to join you into the Racial Equity and Policing Commission, so thank you for your willingness to serve. You're going to be placed on the consent agenda for tonight, and you don't have to join, you know, the meeting to be approved, and the administration will reach out to you with onboarding.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you. I am, you know, council members, I think that, you know, getting so many incredible applicants to join our boards and commissions, it was, I wish we could have a bash so we can all like geek out and learn about them and get in to know them. MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING WE SHOULD DO IT ONE DAY BUT IT'S DO IT ONE DAY BUT IT'S DO IT ONE DAY BUT IT'S IMPRESSIVE HOW MANY PEOPLE IMPRESSIVE HOW MANY PEOPLE IMPRESSIVE HOW MANY PEOPLE VOLUNTEER THEIR TIME AND VOLUNTEER THEIR TIME AND VOLUNTEER THEIR TIME AND SACRIFICE FOR THE CITY. SACRIFICE FOR THE CITY. SACRIFICE FOR THE CITY. SO IT'S HUMBLING TO SEE THAT. SO IT'S HUMBLING TO SEE THAT. SO IT'S HUMBLING TO SEE THAT. MOVING ON TO ITEM 16 WHICH IS MOVING ON TO ITEM 16 WHICH IS MOVING ON TO ITEM 16 WHICH IS IT'S A WRITTEN BRIEFING. IT'S A WRITTEN BRIEFING. IT'S A WRITTEN BRIEFING. THIS IS F AND ITEM 17 IS POSTED ON THE AGENDA AS REQUIRED PER STATE LAW FISCAL YEAR 2026 2027 BUDGET DISCUSSION REGARDING THE PROPERTY TAX IMPACT SCHEDULE WHICH IS POSTED FOR EVERYBODY TO ACCESS THERE IS NO REPORTS FROM ME AND THERE'S NO REPORTS FROM THE VICE CHAIR AND OTHER REPORTS FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

mr chair um we have an update on the august 11th meeting which is our truth and taxation hearing night that we picked several months ago we've had some recent clarification from the state tax commission and county auditor that we cannot have any other city business on that day so no work session no other formal meeting SO WE WERE WONDERING IF YOU WOULD BE WILLING TO SET ASIDE ANOTHER DAY IN AUGUST. WE'VE ALREADY RESERVED THE TRUTH IN TAXATION NIGHT SO WE CAN'T CHANGE THAT DATE. BUT WE CAN HAVE ANOTHER COUNCIL MEETING TO HANDLE KIND OF THE OTHER NORMAL CITY BUSINESS. OBVIOUSLY AUGUST WE TRY AND MAKE IT A SOMEWHAT LIGHT MONTH ANYWAY. MAKING SURE WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO GET THROUGH CIP TO GET THROUGH CIP TO GET THROUGH CIP ALLOCATIONS. ALLOCATIONS. ALLOCATIONS. THAT'S REALLY THE BIG ONE THERE. THAT'S REALLY THE BIG ONE THERE. THAT'S REALLY THE BIG ONE THERE. I'M NOT SURE WE WOULD NEED A I'M NOT SURE WE WOULD NEED A I'M NOT SURE WE WOULD NEED A FULL FIVE-HOUR MEETING TIME SET FULL FIVE-HOUR MEETING TIME SET FULL FIVE-HOUR MEETING TIME SET ASIDE ON ONE OF THOSE ADDITIONAL ASIDE ON ONE OF THOSE ADDITIONAL ASIDE ON ONE OF THOSE ADDITIONAL DATES, BUT WE'VE LISTED SOME DATES, BUT WE'VE LISTED SOME DATES, BUT WE'VE LISTED SOME OPTIONS. OPTIONS. OPTION THE OPTION OF MEETING ON A THURSDAY IN AUGUST OR TUESDAY AUGUST 25TH WE DO HAVE TUESDAY AUGUST 18TH AS A TENTATIVE COUNCIL WORK SESSION AND FORMAL MEETING

It seems like Council Member Young has a favorite one, which is Thursday.

I would like to propose the Tuesday, August 25th. Tuesday, August 25th. No, I'm really sure. She said Tuesday.

Tuesday, August 25th. Does that work for other council members?

Can I additionally take the 20th off of any future consideration as I have an absolutely immovable work application? Great. 25th. I SECOND THE 25TH. SOUNDS LIKE WE'VE GOT SOME MOMENTUM THERE.

SOUNDS LIKE WE'VE GOT SOME MOMENTUM THERE.

SOUNDS LIKE WE'VE GOT SOME MOMENTUM THERE. IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE FOUR IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE FOUR IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE FOUR FOR THE 25TH.

FOR THE 25TH. FOR THE 25TH.

WE'LL PLAN ON THAT AND WE'LL WE'LL PLAN ON THAT AND WE'LL WE'LL PLAN ON THAT AND WE'LL SEND OUT AN UPDATED CALENDAR SEND OUT AN UPDATED CALENDAR SEND OUT AN UPDATED CALENDAR APPOINTMENT. APPOINTMENT. APPOINTMENT. QUESTION? QUESTION? QUESTION? YEAH. YEAH. YEAH.

SO THIS ADVICE THAT IT HAS TO SO THIS ADVICE THAT IT HAS TO SO THIS ADVICE THAT IT HAS TO BE A STAND-AL the advice from the tax commission has been that the statute needs to be followed to the letter of the law if you recall we as a city kind of complied with the law by having a special limited formal meeting and a work session earlier that day I specifically asked the tax commission representative that was at this meeting if that would be an acceptable plan, and that's the plan that we had followed for several years, and they said that now the answer is no, that that is not an acceptable plan. I think they're being very strict in their interpretations. I have flagged for our attorney team and our lobbying group that that is maybe a high priority to get changed, since stopping the business of the city is highly frustrating. I think that the intention is so that residents aren't confused. What he shared with me was that he didn't want people to show up at the work session thinking that they were showing up I SHARED THAT WE HAVE NOT EXPERIENCED THAT, THAT OUR EXPERIENCED THAT, THAT OUR COMMUNICATIONS GROUP IS COMMUNICATIONS GROUP IS EXCELLENT AT COMMUNICATING THE EXCELLENT AT COMMUNICATING THE APPROPRIATE TIMES AND PLACES TO APPROPRIATE TIMES AND PLACES TO SHOW UP TO RESIDENTS, BUT THE SHOW UP TO RESIDENTS, BUT THE INFORMATION WE GOT WAS THAT IT INFORMATION WE GOT WAS THAT IT NEEDS TO BE FOLLOWED MORE NEEDS TO BE FOLLOWED MORE STRICTLY THIS YEAR.

STRICTLY THIS YEAR. IS IT GENIUS CHANGE? IS IT GENIUS CHANGE?

YEAH. YEAH. I MEAN, IT'S, YEAH, IN ADDITION TO stopping potentially the work of government. You know, sometimes these truth and taxation hearings are not attended by anyone. Right. And so it would be a lot of effort of taxpayer money to have a meeting that no one comes to and then not be able to do any business at that meeting.

I raised a very similar point. And so I think that's one... THAT IS ANOTHER EXPERIENCE THAT WE WILL SHARE AS WE ATTEMPT TO HELP THE LAW BECOME BETTER NEXT YEAR. I THINK THERE ARE SOME ENTITIES THAT DON'T HAVE THE SAME EXPERIENCE WITH TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARINGS THAT WE DO. TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARINGS ARE VERY HIGHLY ATTENDED. SO IT DID NOT LAND THE WAY I HAVE EXPERIENCED OUR TRUTH IN TAXATION HEARINGS OVER THE LAST 20 WHATEVER YEARS. WE'LL WORK ON IT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR THANK YOU FOR YOUR THANK YOU FOR YOUR UNDERSTANDING. UNDERSTANDING. UNDERSTANDING.

YES. YES.

YES. THOSE ARE GREAT THINGS THAT THOSE ARE GREAT THINGS THAT THOSE ARE GREAT THINGS THAT HAPPEN AT THE LEGISLATURE. HAPPEN AT THE LEGISLATURE. HAPPEN AT THE LEGISLATURE. SO THERE'S NOTHING ELSE ON THE SO THERE'S NOTHING ELSE ON THE SO THERE'S NOTHING ELSE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE WORK SESSION AGENDA FOR THE WORK SESSION AGENDA FOR THE WORK SESSION TODAY. TODAY. TODAY. WE HAVE THE FORMAL MEETING AT WE HAVE THE FORMAL MEETING AT WE HAVE THE FORMAL MEETING AT 7 P.M. 7 P.M. 7 P.M. BUT WE DO

Mr. Chair, I move that we go into a closed meeting for the purpose of discussing collective bargaining and to receive advice of counsel.

Second.

I have a motion by Councilmember Wharton and a second by Councilmember Dugan. I'm going to roll call that. Councilmember Dugan? Aye. Councilmember Carlson?

Aye.

Councilmember Wharton? Aye. Councilmember Pietro?

Yes, aye.

Whoa. Council Member Young.

Aye.

And I'm a yes. This motion carries unanimously. Now we are in a closed meeting.

And just to clarify for the public and for the recorder, we will be adjourned at the conclusion of the closed meeting.

Yes, we're definitely going to be adjourned after that. Thank you.