City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

and welcome to this Tuesday, September 15th, 2026 formal meeting. We are happy to have you here, whether you're joining in person or online. We hope you'll continue to participate in whichever manner you feel most comfortable. Thank you for joining us. So first item of business is always the Pledge of Allegiance. Please stand and join us.

of the united states of america and to the republic for which it stands one nation under god indivisible with liberty and justice for all again welcome and uh now just to address the public meeting rules as we always do under the formal meaning

Before we move through the agenda, I want to quickly go through the registration information and share the reasoning about how and why we chair these meetings the way we do. We welcome everyone, regardless of your opinion or side on an issue, because we have people with varying opinions on important issues. The Council's goal is to make the meetings a place where people feel safe and comfortable participating. This is the most local level of government and it is a key value of ours to ensure that we have created a respectful and safe environment so that no one is intimidated out of free participation. This also allows us to ensure that the meeting can continue and we can conduct the schedule's city business. We invite each of you to contribute to this space, to speak your mind, and to welcome others to do the same. In order to create this welcoming and safe space, we will pause the meeting and any action that causes a disruption to our ability of conducting the meeting or any safety concerns involving threats or unprotected speech. If there are repeated actions or comments, it may result in removal from the meeting. To avoid intimidating others, please avoid the use of threatening and discriminatory languages. Do not insult others based on religion, ethnicity, race, color, gender, sexual orientation, or physical ability. Whether you agree or disagree with someone's comment, clapping, cheering, shouting, booing, snapping, gesturing, obstructing, or discouraging others from commenting is not allowed. As a reminder, as council members, we refrain from reacting or responding to allow everyone to share their opinions freely. This is to keep our reactions from affecting your ability to share your opinion freely. If you'd like to follow up with any of us, please see the council staff or the Zoom chat for contact information. When making your comments, please address the body and not any individual elected official. If you have a handout for the council, please raise your hand and the council staff will assist you. Council staffs are available during or after the meeting to help with any questions or information sharing. The full meeting rules are listed at the door and our staff will post this link on Zoom. As a reminder of our public comment registration process, individuals may register to comment on scheduled public hearings items up until the hearing is closed. For the general comments section, we will accept sign-ups until 7.30. The general comments section is limited to a maximum of one hour and will only include commenters who register before 7.30. So if you are here to give general comments, please sign up and remember that it is possible not everyone who signed up may be able to speak. And this brings us to item A4, which is looking for a motion to approve the work session meeting minutes of July 14th, 2026, as well as the formal meeting minutes of July 21st, 2026.

Motion to approve. Second.

I have a motion by Council Member Young, a second from Council Member Wharton. All in favor of this motion?

Aye.

I'm an aye. That motion passes seven to zero. Moving on to item number 85, the council will consider adopting a joint ceremony resolution with Mayor Mendenhall recognizing September as National Suicide Prevention Month in Salt Lake City. I will now turn the time over to Councilmember Carlson who will read the resolution.

Joint ceremonial resolution declaring September 2026 National Suicide Prevention Month in Salt Lake City. Whereas September is known nationally as Suicide Prevention Month, and whereas according to 2024 data from the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, suicide is the eighth leading cause of death in Utah, and the second leading cause of death for Utahns aged 15 to 44 years old. And whereas every life lost and every suicide attempt affects a surviving family member's friends, coworkers, neighbors, and community. And whereas there are many mental health resources through facilities such as the Huntsman Mental Health Institute and the Crisis Care Center, and hotline and emergency resources such as Safe Utah, the Trevor Project, Utah Crisis Line, and mobile crisis outreach teams, And, whereas free and confidential support is accessible and available by calling or texting 988 to be connected to a skilled, trained counselor at a crisis center in your area 24-7, and whereas anyone wishing to learn how to recognize the warning signs of suicide and how to help somebody in crisis can access numerous online resources including those provided by Live On Utah, the American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, NAMI, Utah, and the Utah Suicide Prevention Committee and Coalition, and whereas Salt Lake City values those who work daily to help improve the mental resilience and welfare of others through their professions in mental health care, education, and emergency services. Now therefore, be it resolved that the Salt Lake City Council and Mayor of Salt Lake City recognize the month of September 2026 as National Suicide Prevention Month in Salt Lake City. Be it further resolved that Salt Lake City encourages all residents to familiarize themselves with mental health education and treatment resources and to recognize how a healthy mind can help us better care for ourselves, our families, and our communities.

Thank you very much, Council Member Carlson. I'll now look for a motion. Mr.

Chair, I move that we adopt the resolution.

I second.

I have a motion from Council Member Wharton, a second from Council Member Pietro. All in favor of that motion? Aye. That passes seven to zero. And I'd like to welcome Elisa Burnham. Salt Lake City, Salt Lake County Suicide Prevention Coordinator, and Emma Blake, Salt Lake County Suicide Prevention Health Educator, here with us to receive the resolution. And if you want to say a few words, appreciate it.

While suicide continues to affect individuals, families, workplaces, and communities throughout Salt Lake County, suicide prevention reminds us that hope, connection, and recovery are possible. Suicide is preventable, and no single person or organization can do this work alone. Salt Lake County is strengthened by partners across public health, behavioral health, healthcare, schools, workplaces, faith communities, first responders, and community organizations who are working together to reduce risk and increase protective factors. Our community is also taking action to prevent suicide before a crisis occurs by promoting safe firearm storage and other lethal means safety practices, increasing awareness of 988 and other resources, and providing free suicide prevention trainings such as QPR and other evidence-informed programs. Recognizing September as Suicide Prevention Month in Salt Lake County is an opportunity to recommit ourselves to create a community where people feel connected, supported, and are able to ask for help. Prevention does not always require a professional response. It can begin with a coworker checking in, a faith leader creating a space for honest conversation, a friend recognizing warning signs, or a community member safely storing a firearm during a time of crisis. We also recognize the importance of supporting those who have been affected by suicide loss and strengthening coordinated postvention resources throughout the county. In 2026, we encourage every resident, organization, and community partner to take one meaningful step towards suicide prevention. Learn how to have a caring conversation, connect someone to 988 or other resources, make lethal means safer, strengthen community connections, or simply reach out and let someone know that they are not alone.

Thank you very much. Appreciate that. Take a picture? Or do you want to say a few words? All right. Come on up. I'm going to adjust the chair.

It's all right.

Our next item is A6, and the Council will consider adopting a joint resolution with Mayor Mendenhall declaring the second Monday in October as Indigenous Peoples Day in Salt Lake City. And I will turn the time over to Council Member Napier-Pierce, who will read the resolution.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Joint resolution declaring the second Monday in October as Indigenous Peoples Day in Salt Lake City. Whereas the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples confirms the right of Indigenous Peoples to self-determination, and whereas Salt Lake City recognizes the city is built upon the homelands of the Indigenous Peoples of this region, including the Ute, Albans, Paiute, Goshute, Diné, Navajo, Shoshone, Arapaho, Oglala Sioux, Cheyenne River Sioux, Wind River Shoshone, Cherokee, and Rosebud Sioux tribes and their respective bands whose histories are entwined with the settlement of Salt Lake City. And whereas Salt Lake City strives for diversity and acceptance and established its Human Rights Commission, committing itself to protect, respect, and fulfill the full range of inherent human rights for all, and whereas Salt Lake City recognizes the city is built upon the homelands of the indigenous peoples of this region, whose histories are entwined with the settlement of Salt Lake City, and whereas Salt Lake City opposes systematic discrimination toward indigenous people in the United States and supports policies and practices that ensure broader access to resources and opportunities, and whereas Salt Lake City values Indigenous peoples' contributions to our community that substantially shaped the character of our city. Now therefore, be it resolved, the Salt Lake City Council and Mayor of Salt Lake City declare the second Monday in October as Indigenous Peoples Day in Salt Lake City and encourage educational recognition of Indigenous Peoples' history and culture and be it further resolved, the Salt Lake City reaffirms its commitment to fostering inclusivity and ensuring Indigenous Peoples' contributions are valued and commits to supporting the well-being of and collaboration with tribal nations and Indigenous community members on matters and policies that affect them.

Thank you very much, Council Member Napier-Pierce. I will look for a motion.

I move that we adopt the resolution. I second that.

I have a motion from Council Member Young, second from Council Member Napier-Pierce. All in favor say aye. Aye. I'm an aye. That passes seven to zero. And now I'd like to welcome Samantha Eldridge from the Center of Native Excellence and Tribal Engagement at the University of Utah. Here to ask today, if you want to say a few words. Oh, she's not here. All right. Strike that. Thank you very much. Okay, this brings us to the public hearing section of our agenda. These are specific proposals before the council that requires a public hearing. Your comments should pertain to the hearing item, and if you go off topic, we will ask you to stop your comment. In order to create this welcoming and safe space, we will pause the meeting at any disruptions of our ability to conduct the meeting or any safe concerns involving threats, unprotected speech. And if there are repeated actions or comments, we will remove it from the meetings. We've kind of went through all that before, so please just remember, let's allow everyone the chance to open their freely open... free to discuss your opinion. If you're on Zoom, please unmute your mic when your name is called. Each person will have two minutes. If you reach the two minute mark, the host will announce time and your microphone will be muted. We will be calling the names in order of sign up. If you need assistance in the room, please raise your hand and someone will be with you. If you're having technical issues on Zoom or need assistance, message staff support and Macy from our staff can assist you. If you're unable to finish your comments, please share the rest via email, mail, or call our office. Contact information is listed at slc.gov slash council. And if you have a handout for the council, please notify staff who will assist you. Okay, we'll open up to the first public hearing for items B1 to B3 and their grant applications, and that will be heard as one public hearing. Before we begin taking comments, I'll turn the time over to Sylvia Richards, Council Policy Analyst, to give us a short intro.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Periodically, the city applies for and receives grants which fund some city programs. Each grant receives a public hearing to provide the Council and public with additional information. The first grant is the first community-oriented, first is the community-oriented policing services And if funded, it would provide 12 new officers who would be assigned to the patrol division and 12 experienced officers would be assigned to a newly created squad focused on violent crimes and open-air drug markets occurring outside a one-mile radius of the homeless resource centres and where those crimes are dispersed around the city. Second is the Department of Workforce Services Office of Homeless Services grant. This is an annual appropriation from the legislature for homeless resource centre cities. This would fund four new social workers to expand the Project Connect program. Third is the 2026 Police Traffic Services Equipment Grant. If funded, this would be used for the purchase of 12 new LIDAR light detection units used for traffic enforcement replacing older units. Thank you.

Thank you, Sylvia. Taylor, our first commenter.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have three people registered to speak to these items. The first will be MJ Powell, followed by Ben Engle, and then Olive PJ. MJ is here in person.

Good evening, council members, Salt Lake City and Mayor, Rachel, administration. My name is MJ Powell. I'm speaking regarding agenda items B1 through B3. Every year, Salt Lake City is told that a growing city requires more officers, more technology, and larger police budgets. What I would like to see is that same level of ambition and commitment directed toward the programs designed to reduce the need for police intervention in the first place. Tonight, B1 would fund 12 additional officers. B2 would expand Project Connect. B3 would replace existing traffic enforcement technology with new LIDAR equipment. Please note, while I generally support these items, particularly the expansion of Project Connect, I am concerned that together they continue a familiar pattern. Additional personnel, additional enforcement capacity, and additional police technology. Between fiscal year 2022 and 26, the department's budget grew approximately $83 million. The department's budget grew approximately 83 million to approximately 135 million, an increase of nearly 62%. My concern is not that public safety has not been prioritized. Pardon me, let me clarify. My concern is that public safety I think you understand that my route is I am leaning towards public safety, so sorry for the typo. My long-term commitment devoted to alternative response models, youth engagement, violence prevention, mental health resources, housing stability, and community-based interventions. I support B1 through B3. However, I hope the council uses this opportunity to discuss not only how we respond to public safety challenges, but how we prevent them and how we fund them moving forward. And one last thing, specialized crime squads don't work.

And next will be Ben Engle, followed by all of PJ. Ben is here in person.

Hello, I'm Ben Engle. I live in District 4. I just want to say thank you, City Council, for always inspiring me. I always hear comments that very few people watch you on YouTube, but I watch you on YouTube and... Sometimes you guys are the best thing to watch. So thank you. I wanted to address the problems that we have with our city policing and transparency with some of our technology that we have. And it's often difficult to get access to camera information, like as a civilian, or for us to be able to use that in investigating crimes that are happening in our neighborhood. I'm excited to see that we have more civilian or citizen-oriented, community-oriented policing. But very often I think that we say community-oriented policing and then we don't actually kind of live it out there. I'm out in my community all the time trying to help solve crimes, just trying to keep the place clean. And I really appreciate that we have this grant from our federal Department of Justice. I don't think that that comes with strings attached with how it is that we have to spend that money, and I just want to make sure that we're not compromising our own privacy by putting that video into systems that will aggregate it in ways that will not be beneficial to our community. I think it's a real danger. Earlier today in the work session, I know there was talk about us not having a jail here, and I know that was in response to some of our federal government's actions earlier this year. And I think it's really easy to forget just how terrible all that was. And so let's try to remember and use that to our best to utilize our resources the best we can. Thanks.

And next is Olive PJ. Olive, you may now unmute.

Hello, my name is Olive Peterson Jacoby, and I am speaking tonight to demand that the city refuse the cops hiring grant application. The city, the mayor and the council are complicit in any harm that Salt Lake City Police Department inflicts. Every dollar that you put into their pockets is a dollar used to surveil and abuse your constituents. They terrorize our unhoused neighbors. They skulk around train stations, leering at and harassing commuters. They waste countless hours booking the same people over and over and over again. They go against the city's supposed wishes and collaborate with ICE agents. They brutalize their fellow humans with little to no consequence. At the very best, they're the worst version of the mediator, doctor, therapist, lawyer, etc. that a person really needs. Consider the other costs as well. In 2024, they wanted $1.8 million for overtime. In 2026, that number grew to $3.8 million. Today, they want another $2.96 million so they can swell their ranks even further. How much will they want for overtime in three years with all these new hires? I'm not the first person to point this out, but it seems that the police department's budget is less of a budget and more of a suggestion. They are always, always asking for more, and it comes out of our pockets. Salt Lakers are struggling enough as it is. You should be working to improve our material conditions, thus eliminating the circumstances that spur people into committing criminalized acts, and thus eliminating the need for more police officers. Deny the COPS hiring grant application, put the money into your community instead, and hold the pigs accountable.

And that was the final registered commenter for these items.

Thank you, Taylor. I will look for a motion.

Mr. Chair, I move that the council close the public hearing and refer items B1 through B3 to a future consent agenda for action. Second.

A motion by Council Member Young. A second from Councilor Pietro. Any discussion on this item? All right, seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. I have an aye, opposed? That passes seven to zero. Moving on to item number B4, an ordinance zoning map and general plan amendment approximately 1919 and 2002 South 500 East. Before we take any comments, I'll turn the time over to Allison Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, or rather, Councilmember. Castlewood Development has proposed 22 for sale townhomes, each with three stories, including four bedrooms, three and a half baths, and a two-car garage. The requested changes would rezone the property from single-family residential to moderate-density multi-family residential, and amend the central community future land use map from low-density residential to medium-density residential. In addition, the council added the condition that all landscaping at the property be water-wise landscaping as defined in Utah code. The Planning Commission voted five to zero to recommend the council approve these changes with a development agreement.

Thank you, Allison. And Taylor, our first public commenter.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have 10 people registered to speak to this item. The first will be Brandon Pedroza, followed by Heather Tomlinson, and then Julia Kerr. Brandon, you may now unmute.

Good evening. My name is Brandon Pedrosa. I live at the intersection of Redondo and 400 East. I'm in opposition of the proposed 22 unit development on Redondo and 500 East. There's already 28 new townhomes on 400 East and 2100 South. Another 22 unit development is still under construction and we're being asked to approve yet another 22 units in the same immediate area. That would put us at 72 new units in this neighborhood in a very short period of time. This development. Um, the 1st development, I apologize has already changed the traffic. Parking congestion and character of our neighborhood. The 2nd, 1 isn't even finished and yet there is already pressure to approve a 3rd. Our neighborhood has already has already absorbed significant growth. We don't need another 22 units. Forced in this area before the impact of the existing development has been fully understood. You cannot keep adding development and then wait until the neighborhood is overwhelmed to acknowledge the consequences. I live here. I see the impact every day and I'm asking you to listen to the residents who actually live with the decisions. I strongly urge you to deny the proposal.

Next will be Heather Tomlinson, followed by Julia Kerr, and then Katarina Bollinger. Heather is here in person.

Is that right?

Yes.

Good evening, chair and council members. My name is Heather Tomlinson, and I live four doors down from the proposed development site on Hollywood Avenue. I understand that our city needs housing, and while not opposed to development on this property, I do think it should be considered that the developer is wanting to build on a street of single-family homes instead of a large thoroughfare like 2100 South. two blocks over. My biggest concern with this rezoning is what happens to the street once these units are occupied. The proposed number of units will be adding up to 44 cars on our road in addition to their visitor parking. Our street is a smaller road that often has kids playing out in the street, people walking their dogs, families out biking, and neighbors talking in the street. Adding this many vehicles entering and leaving the development means more points of conflict with pedestrians and bikers. A child, pedestrian, or cyclist shouldn't have to compete with increased traffic on a neighborhood street where drivers have limited sight lines. Requiring traffic calming measures on Hollywood and Redondo could help to limit unsafe driving speeds and limit potential accidents. I would also ask the City Council to carefully look at the amount of open space being provided in the proposal. As part of a neighborhood single-family street, this development should align with the existing properties and include a substantial front yard area with landscaping and trees to create a buffer zone between the townhomes and the road. If buildings, landscaping or parked cars are too close to the street, visibility becomes even more of a problem for drivers that are already being inundated with all of the new developments mentioned previously. I respectfully ask the council to consider a zoning designation and development plan that addresses traffic and speeding through traffic calming measures and requires meaningful front yard and landscape space for the proposed development. Thank you for listening and considering the people that already call this street home.

Next is Julia Kerr followed by Katerina Bollinger and then Val Beckham. Julia's here in person.

Good evening, council members. My name is Julia and I live on Hollywood Avenue directly behind the development that's being proposed and considered for zoning and development. I want to begin by saying that I do support adding housing into our community. Thoughtful growth is important and I understand the need to create housing opportunities. However, I have concerns about whether this particular proposal is the right fit for our neighborhood. My primary concern with this proposal is privacy. Our neighborhood is made up largely of single story homes and cottages, and many of us purchased our properties with the expectation of living alongside homes of similar scale and height. The proposed development would place three story townhomes directly adjacent to existing residences. residents on the upper floors would have clear views into the neighboring backyards, patios, and even windows of nearby homes. That would significantly change the sense of privacy that current homeowners have enjoyed for many years. While vacant land will not remain vacant forever, I believe there is a meaningful difference between development that complements the surrounding neighborhood and development that overwhelms it. The issue is not the growth itself. The issue is whether the height and design of the project is compatible with the homes that already exist in the area. I believe there may be an alternative housing solution, including rezoning to maybe RMF 30, that increase the density while better respecting the privacy and character of the surrounding neighborhood. This could be lower profile homes, cottages, or other housing types that are more consistent with the existing area. I respectfully ask the council to consider the impacts of this project Um, we'll have on the privacy and quality of life of neighboring residents and to explore options that provide additional housing while remain a better fit for our community.

And next is Katerina Bollinger followed by Val Bella coin and then Lauren Fisher. Katerina is here in person.

Hi, good evening, chair and council members. My name is Katarina Bolliger. I live on Hollywood Avenue directly across from the proposed site. My neighbors and I support smart infill, but we have serious concerns about granting RMF 35 zoning without clear legal protections for our streets. First on zoning, as you may already know, Castlewood's design only calls for a 30-foot building height. Granting full RMF 35 entitlements expose us to possible height creep. If you approve RMF 35 over RMF 30, we just ask that you attach a legally binding agreement capping height strictly at 30 feet and locking in the central open space that they've commented on. This protects sunlight availability and privacy while preventing any future bait and switch situations which we've seen before here. Second, on traffic safety and environment, 22 four bedroom units brings 44 plus vehicles funneling onto narrow residential streets like Hollywood and Redondo. This creates immediate pedestrian hazards and sightline bottlenecks on 500 East, which we're already seeing. We asked the council to require traffic calming measures and mandate a 15 to 20 foot street setback along 500 East, Redondo, and Hollywood Avenues dedicated to large canopy shade trees like hackberries or oaks to cool our street and filter particulate pollution. Finally, on affordability, at over $700,000, these luxury units do not solve Liberty Wells' missing middle housing needs. If you grant a rezone, require two or three bedroom units or deed-restricted AMI homes so local public servants like myself, nurses, and young families can actually... Time.

Next is Val Belicoin, followed by Lauren Fisher, and then Jonathan Metzman. Val is here in person.

Good evening. My name is Val Belicoin. I'm here from the Salt Lake Board of Realtors, and I am the Municipal Outreach Liaison for the neighborhood. With that, I'm not here to suggest whether you do or do not approve this rezone, but I wanted to give you guys some information about what we've seen on our end to help you guys make decisions. So to start off, this has been a really hot year for the neighborhood. Median time on market for most of the year has been under a week, so people want to live there. With that, we've seen one townhome sell the entire year in the neighborhood, which is really funny because that's about 12% of everything that's been on the market for townhomes around there. Historically in the neighborhood, about half of them sell. To speak to the whole missing middle thing, Right now, we're seeing townhomes there go for about 97% of single home value. So I don't really think that they are filling that niche. They're supposed to be a gateway a lot of the time for younger homebuyers to get into something and build some equity. And at these price points, I'm just not really seeing that. So I just, I do have to question whether this is the best and highest use of the land. I like seeing and hearing, uh, you know, what some of the residents in the neighborhood say, as far as other things that we can maybe use that for. I think it's really interesting, too. I mean, going back 20 years, we're just not seeing demand in the neighborhood for this type of unit. And I understand that maybe we would assume the developers would scope that out ahead of time. I met with them a few months ago. They told me the alternative was put three single family homes here that would go for about a million and a half each. Median home value this year in the neighborhood is $557. So I don't know if those guys are necessarily doing their homework. And I just think that's a thing that we should consider going forward is, is this something that's actually going to help the neighborhood at all? Or are these going to sit vacant? Are they going to turn to rentals? What's going to happen? Is it really worth anyone in the neighborhood's time?

Time. Next is Lauren Fisher, followed by Jonathan Metzman, and then Alyssa Johnson. Laura's here in person.

Good evening. My name is Lauren Fisher, and I also live on Hollywood Avenue in Liberty Wells. I'm asking you to deny the petitions to rezone 1990 and 2002 South 500 East. I think the Liberty Wells Community Council has done a great job of outlining what growth here should look like in their density statement, and I support their vision, and these rezoning requests do not align with that. The Liberty Wells Community Council's density statement supports gentle growth. Duplexes, triplexes, cottage courts, in its words, are house-scale buildings that fit seamlessly into existing residential zone neighbourhoods. This kind of housing doesn't require RMF 35 zoning to be built, and the proposed project asks you to approve something that is in conflict with what the Community Council statement lays out. RMF 35 allows more height and smaller setbacks than the single-storey, century-old homes around this block, mine among them, The development being proposed takes sunlight, views, and privacy from the surrounding properties without giving anything back. The increased scale strains the streets, adding congestion and safety concerns. There's no on-street parking on this stretch of 500 East, so the overflow lands on smaller side streets like ours, where shared driveways and existing rentals already leave the curb full, affecting the sidewalks where my children play and the streets where I bike with them to school. Deliberty Wells Community Council's mission is to promote the well-being of the neighbourhood, helping to voice what the families who live here need, and they've done that clearly and in writing, addressing a plan for growth, and what proposed housing development should look like. So in addition to requesting that you deny these petitions, I'll leave you with a question. When a community council has already thoughtfully defined the kind of growth that belongs here, and a developer asks you to set that aside, whose voice matters more? Please deny these petitions.

Next is Jonathan Metzman, followed by Alyssa Johnson and then Jeff Baer. Jonathan's here in person.

All right. Good evening, city council members. My name is Jonathan. I live in Liberty Wells, as some of you may know, and I live directly across from the development. We specifically chose this neighborhood for its character. The homes are single story and each home has their own story that goes with it. There's charming neighbors, unique front yard gardens. We all share Cohesive connections to define what this neighborhood is We're interested in development and new housing on housing on the vacant wells were a lot But it proposed a proposal as is and recommend that the council consider prioritizing Neighborhood compatibility. This is also called out in the plan SLC The wells on fifth development can be achieved entirely through a lower zoning code RMF 30 then is proposed There's one exception the setback requirement The proposal to rezone RMF 35 fails to address a future precedent that would allow for minimal setbacks next to our neighboring houses. Although this project nearly meets RMF 30, how do we know that the next vacant lot with RMF 35 won't be maximized with taller buildings, even further density, and pushing our neighborhood away from where it currently stands? The neighborhood petitions across our neighborhood showed 97% opposed, 61 to 2. Among those who responded, height was the primary factor. We recommend that the council evaluate reducing the height of the perimeter units. We could evaluate a step-down plan where the perimeter units are two stories instead of three stories. And this would also provide better attainability for entry point homebuyers. If four bedrooms are strongly desired, We can also recommend a plan that Castlewood has put forward, which would include two stories with basement units, as is in Trail View in Farmington. Liberty Wells is a unique place with a rich history.

Hi. Next is Alyssa Johnson, followed by Jeff Baer, and then Nathan McDonald. Alyssa's here in person.

Hi, everyone. My name is Alyssa Johnson, and I live directly across the street from the proposed development. I want to give my perspective because I believe that my friends and I are the target demographic for some of Salt Lake's main objectives, and those are increasing families in the city and increasing opportunities for young people to buy a home. $590,000 is a price that a very small portion of people in our entire country can afford comfortably. For sale is not the same thing as attainable. As someone who's thinking of starting my own family right now, I have to seriously consider how expensive this area is. Gen Z and young millennials who feel like they have been locked out of home ownership opportunities look at these townhomes at this price, and we don't feel any better about our chances of owning a home and starting a family in this neighborhood. I've personally already had to say goodbye to several friends who have left, not because they couldn't find a huge house, but because they couldn't find a house that they could afford. I urge this community council to remember your campaign promises to elevate community voices when you're making your decision. We've already felt so welcomed by a number of you, and we can tell how much you care about the city. Looking through each of your stated goals on your website, I felt so empowered and encouraged to see how committed every one of you are to listening to our needs and acting on our behalf. You are an extension of our voices, and we really hope that you can help us feel heard. And I believe that we've made it abundantly clear how we feel about the proposal in its current state. But we are obviously open to change. And I also want to give a sincere thank you to Castlewood because they have been so amenable with us. And I really hope that we can work together to offer some affordable options in the development in addition to or instead of the plan for bedroom homes.

Next is Jeff Behr, followed by Nathan McDonald. Jeff's here in person.

I just want to say I'm proud of my neighbors. And I'm sure it's probably clear that we're passionate about our neighborhood. We love where we live, and we want to help guide its direction. And we support density. We want density. We feel it's important. We know that there is a housing crisis. It's important to listen to the voices of those that are directly affected by this. It's also important to realize that there are those that speak out that have ulterior motives and financial gain. It was frustrating at the time of the Planning Commission hearing that on the website there were only three submitted comments in support of the development. None of the submitted comments raising concerns were included. We were told, oh, this was a mistake, it'll be corrected. It never was. All the comments were just removed. Sorry, sucks getting old. So let's look at the three submitted comments. Sarah Makris, she lives in Rose Park, eight miles away on 1500 West. She's an escrow officer with Metro National Title. Lizana Hill, she lives in Glendale, over four miles away on Mission Road. She's an architect at Renovation Design Group, and someone commented that they believe she's done work with the developer. I haven't been able to confirm that. Anastasia Kestner, she lives on the east bench, four miles away. She's an officer with Fidelity National Title Insurance. All have potential financial gain. At the public comment, there was one, the public hearing, there was one comment in support, Sean Steinman, and he was kind of dishonest because he didn't use his address, he used his business address, and I think he purposely did that because it's in Sugar House. Surprise. He's a real estate agent with Sotheby's and founder and CEO of Renaissance Ventures, Resonance Ventures, a real estate development company.

Hi. And next is Nathan McDonald, who's here in person.

My name is Nathan McDonald, and I'm the direct neighbor of the development. I'm worried about a 30-foot-high building taking away half of my natural light. With the positioning of the townhome, it will also look directly into my kitchen, leading to a lack of privacy. The park and other townhomes will also look directly into my backyard. I bought this home last May after looking at similarly planned townhomes, and I moved into a home for additional privacy, and I'm concerned I'm now losing all of it, as there's also going to be a path to the park directly next to my entire house. Thank you.

That was the panel register commenter for this item.

Thank you for the comments. I look for a motion.

Mr. Chair, I move that the council close the public hearing and refer the item for a future date for action.

Second. I have a motion from Council Member Young, a second from Council Member Poole. Any discussion on this item? Council Member Carlson.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to say thank you to the community for coming out and for your involvement in this rezone process. Your involvement from the very beginning has shaped what we're even seeing here today under consideration, and so I I thank you for your efforts and for your advocacy. I also want to acknowledge the developer, Castlewood, for being willing to listen to that community input and feedback throughout the process and taking real steps to integrate that into the final design. And I would encourage to continue having those conversations even after a rezone vote is taken to listen to that community feedback and these neighbors the motion that's before this council is a motion to close the public hearing that does not mean that it's a yes or no vote on this particular item so If this is your first city council meeting and you hear us voting on this particular motion, it's a motion just to close that public hearing. Council Member Young looks like she also has something to offer, no? No, okay, sorry.

Thank you very much, any other comments? All right, all in favor?

Aye.

I'm an aye. Against? That passes unanimously, seven to zero. And we're gonna take a pause here for a second and take a picture. So come on up. This is the Indigenous Peoples' Day. We have a representative.

Her name is Sienna Riggs.

Come on up, Sienna.

Sorry for the confusion earlier. Yeah.

Did you wanna say a few words? Please.

Hello. I'm Sienna Riggs. I'm originally from Arizona, but I'm the new reigning 2026-2027 American Indian Ambassador for the University of Utah. And I joined this role to advocate for all the Native students that attend the university. And I've made it a drive for myself to make all students be seen, whether they're Native American or not. And I found it to be my home away from home. And I find it very valuable. And thankful that you take the time to recognize us on a specific day, even though we could be recognized every day. But being able to have our own day is very meaningful to me as a young individual who's carrying her tradition alive. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Sienna. Come on up here and we'll take a picture. Thank you very much, Salt Lake City. We will now move on to item B5. B5, an ordinance on the alley vacation near 2553 South Chadwick Street. Before we have public comments, I'm going to turn the time over to Austin Kimmel for a short intro.

Council Members, this is a public hearing for a proposal to vacate two portions of public alleyway near 2553 South Chadwick Street in District 7. Those alleyway portions are first a 262-foot alley running east to west from Chadwick Street to Dearborn Street, and the second is a 51-foot alley between the two streets running north to south. The applicants request the alleyway vacation to build a larger, detached garage, replacing a smaller one at the rear of their property. Thank you.

Thank you, Austin. Taylor?

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We do not have anyone registered to speak to this item.

All right, I'll look for a motion.

Mr. Chair, I move that the council close the public hearing and defer action to a future council meeting. Second.

I have a motion from Councilman Young, a second from Councilman Carlson. Any discussion on this item? Seeing none, all in favor?

Aye.

I'm an aye. Opposed? That passes 7-0. Moving on to item 6, B6, an ordinance and alley vacation at approximately 750 South Main Street. Before taking comments, I'm going to turn the time over to Michael Sanders for a short intro.

Thank you, Council. Intermountain Health has submitted an application requesting that the city vacate a publicly owned alley adjacent to properties at 750 South Main Street, 778 South Main Street, 16 West, 800 South, and 755 South Richard Street. Vacating the alley would end the city's public ownership of the property. If approved, the alley would support the construction of an offsite parking structure that would serve Intermountain Health's future hospital. The planning director has forwarded a positive recommendation that the council approve this alley vacation, and the council has briefed on this item during the August 25th, 2026 work session.

Thank you, Michael. Taylor?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We don't have anyone registered to speak to this item.

I will look for a motion.

I move that the council close the public hearing and defer action to a future council meeting. Second.

I have a motion for Council Member Pietro, a second from Council Member Wharton. Any discussion on this item? Seeing none, all in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? That motion passes unanimously seven to zero. Move on to item B. Oh. No item B7. For item B7, the automatic license plate reader system. This hearing will be rescheduled to a later date. We know that there's been a lot of interest on this topic and thank you for the city for being so engaged. Once the item is ready for public review and a hearing, we will re-notice the date. So stay tuned. A lot of discussions going on. If you are here to speak to this item, we will recall your name during the general comment portion of the agenda. But thank you again for all your engagements on this matter. It's important. Now we move on to item C, potential action items. And C1, the ordinance of maximum daily water use text amendment. I will look for a motion.

I move that the council adopt the ordinance. I further move that the council adopt a legislative action requesting the administration to one, analyze water use data once the maximum daily water use for non-residential properties at 200,000 gallons per day goes into effect to determine whether the maximum daily use could be further reduced and to submit a report to the city council with their findings within nine months. And two, explore additional incentives to encourage the adoption of smart irrigation controllers by consumers and other measures to reduce outdoor water use.

Do I have a second?

Second. Second.

A motion from Council Member Pietro, second from Council Member Nietzsche-Pierce. Any discussion on this item? Mr. Chair. Yes, sir.

Mr. Chair, I want to highlight that incentive on smart irrigation controllers to customers. We really want to make a big difference on this, so we're looking for more emphasis on this to curb the water usage that ultimately will affect our lake. So we're looking forward to that.

Thank you for that comment. And I would just also just want to almost do the same thing on the First Amendment. Great Salt Lake is important to all of us and it's vital to all of us. So we all have to do our part. So Ali was talking about the smart irrigation systems, but across the board from the largest users to the smallest user, we all have to do that part. And so we really wanna look at the big users also and see how they can do their part in setting the tone for the rest of us by possibly reducing the maximum gallons per day. but we also need to look at the study on how that also impacts things. That's why we've kind of asked for a nine-month window on that. So thank you very much for the work from the public utilities, public service in the city, and all of you for doing your part on the water conservation. So all in favor?

Aye.

Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? That passes seven to zero. If I got my pages right. We're on item no new business. Unfinished business is item number one. Ordinance administrative organization text amendment for public service. I look for a motion.

Mr. Chair, I move that the council approve an ordinance amending the title to administrative organization for public services. Second. Second.

I have a motion for Councilman Young, a second from Carlson, Carlton, Carlson. Any discussion? Seeing none, all in favor? Aye. Opposed? That passes seven to zero. Moving on to item E2, a resolution building permit fee waiver for ivory innovation development at approximately 707 South, 400 East. I'll look for a motion.

I move the council adopt the resolution.

Second.

I have a motion from Council Member Pietro, second from Council Member Napier-Pierce. Any discussion? All in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? That passes seven to zero. Moving on to item F, consent agenda. I look for a motion.

Move for approval. Second. Second.

I have a motion from Council Member Wharton, a second from Council Member Pietro. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed? That passes seven to zero. This brings us to item G, the comments. Questions to the mayor? Council members, any questions to the mayor? Rachel? This is just from the council of the mayor. You can make the general comment, yeah. Rachel, any questions for Rachel?

All right.

Thank you for joining us, as always, at our council meetings. Now we move on to the items two, which is comments to the city council. I've already mentioned the rules of decorum. Please, again, no jeering, snapping your fingers, yelling, screaming, or anything else like that. This is a time for people to have the opportunity to speak freely and give their opinion to the city council. And you'll see probably blank faces from our end, but that's just so that we express our unbiased opinion when we're listening to you. So Taylor, first comment.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have six people registered to speak. The first will be MJ Powell, followed by Keiko Jones, and then N Canada. MJ's here in person.

Good afternoon, good evening, Salt Lake City, City Council, Mayor, Administration, and Chief Redd. Let me be clear where I stand. I don't support license plate readers, and I do not support expanding surveillance technology in this city. These systems are too easy to abuse and too easy to manipulate, and the people who bear the cost of that abuse are never the people who authorize it. Although removed from today's conversation and agenda, I understand this council is to consider it anyway at some point. So here's what I'm asking before the hearing when that does occur. First, don't move it until you've read us the contract. This ordinance regulates the department. It doesn't regulate the vendor. ensure the data lives with the city. Salt Lake City uses vigilant cameras made by Motorola, not by Flock. ICE has held a multi-million dollar contract for access to Vigilant's national database, and again, Vigilant owns Motorola. That data has reached federal agencies through Thompson Reuters, through a sister company. Plate data has also been sold to lenders and debt collectors. The department says our data isn't shared. That currently is an assurance. An assurance is not a contract term transparent to the people in terms of an ordinance. Second, penalties right now, the consequences for misusing the system is an audit that funds it. Write real penalties into the code for officers who run unauthorized queries and for any vendor that moves this data without authorization. A rule with no penalty is a suggestion. Additionally, ensure that all proposed safeguards are shared publicly and ensure that when audits are conducted, the community is able to access the data. addition to the REP commission third codify federal access not policy not practice code say in writing on a federal agency can obtain this data under what next is Keiko Jones followed by N Canada and then Val Belacoin Keiko is here in person good evening council members mayor

You have a tough job because there is no world where everyone can agree on one thing. And, you know, I admire you doing this job because people tend to think their issues are the most important ones, and I'm no exception. I advocate for the West Side community, especially for aging adults. where food insecurity and isolation can be a big problem. And senior centers operation is under the county, but we are residents of Salt Lake City. And I hope the city will do good things like I attended some community events where people got together and that was wonderful and I've heard that you are cutting budget for food equity micro grant and I hope you will keep supporting that program. It's important. And I'm not supposed to name names, but I would like to say a special thanks to Victoria, Ale, and Chris for personally supporting Rivers Bend Advisory Committee. Thank you.

Next will be in Canada, followed by Val Bellacoyne and then Jeff Baird. And you may now unmute.

Hello, N Canada District 2 representative from Wasatch Assembly. Wasatch Assembly stands against ALPRs in the expansion of the surveillance state. The reality is we can't keep funneling money into things that aren't actually solving the reasons for crime, which is the weakening material conditions with the war in Iran happening, oil price increasing, crime will increase because people are going to struggle more, and the police don't solve the fundamental issue at hand, which is people can't afford food, people can't afford gas, people can't afford houses, and these fundamental social contracts are crumbling around us. And instead of investing money from the police department to ALPRs, maybe we invest in community care, maybe we invest in... community land trusts and deeply affordable houses to buy. So I think that that is really important that we create an economic agenda that's big enough to support us and support our needs rather than funding the police state to beat us into submission. The other tension I want to highlight that a lot of the people who commented on the housing is that no one wants buildings in their neighborhood. And also, Private developers are trying to make a huge profit on building these buildings only for a certain class of people. So the city needs to step in in a more substantial way to actually build the things that we need. Even if you don't see that as your job, the moment's upon us. So the Watcher Chambly will be coming in October to lobby for our housing policies, which you're aware of. But yeah, please don't approve the ALPRs. Thank you.

Next will be Val Belacoin, followed by Jeff Baer, and then Brennan Rosen. Val is here in person.

Feels like I was just standing here. So on the subject of these ALPRs, I understand we have this idea that there might be some legitimate uses. We've also seen across the country an overwhelming amount of abuse. And I watched your work session. I understand that this ordinance is supposed to put safeguards in place. But those safeguards are cops holding each other accountable, right? We live in a country where Derek Chauvin killed a man on camera, and it took half the country rising up just to get this one officer to be held accountable. I don't think that we can really depend on cops to say, oh, my buddy in the next office over illegally looked at a camera feed from a public street, let's string them up. I don't believe that this ordinance is going to be enough. I don't think that giving this sort of power and opportunity to our law enforcement is something that we can regulate, is something we can put safeguards on effectively when they're the people who are supposed to be enforcing those safeguards. And so I would say do not approve this ordinance. I'd say let's take a step back. Let's remove these cameras. Let's remove this ability to cause harm to the public. And that's what I'd like to see come out of that. So thanks for hearing me.

Next is Jeff Behr, followed by Brennan Rosen. Jeff is here in person.

Hello again. I enjoy coming downtown. I've been a seasoned subscriber, it's hard to admit, with the Broadway at the Eccles for 30 years since I was in college. Always come enjoy getting a bite to eat before the show. Scooters on the sidewalk. I've had four come up behind honking the horn telling us to get out of their way. On the 29th, right outside in front of the Eccles, these new VO scooters that you can sit on, there were three of them doing circles on the sidewalk and running around. They almost hit a lady. And I said, dude, you can't run on the sidewalk. It even says it on the scooter. He told me to shut the F up. He said he was going to F me up, threaten physical harm. There's just no enforcement for this. I talked to friends that have Sunday matinee tickets, and they didn't tell you so. They said, we don't even grab a bike anymore because the scooters are just everywhere. It seems that we have this ordinance, but there's no means of enforcement. It's also frustrating when there's bike lanes, And people are still riding on the sidewalk. I've seen them side by side holding hands, driving and telling people to get out of their way. Microtransportation isn't the problem. It's, again, enforcement. Complete streets only works if everyone stays in their lane. Pun intended. I just want to raise the issue because it's untenable. And I'm at the point where I'm thinking of just not coming and eating before the shows anymore. So again, the businesses downtown need the revenue. So I just wanted to raise that.

And next is Brennan Rosen, who's here in person.

I'm Brennan Rosen. I didn't sign up to speak tonight, but given the opportunity, Um, the flock cameras, the APLRs, whatever you guys call them, they produce more of a danger than they do any good. Like people have stated, there has been many cases of abuse and, you know, we say all these things and, you know, we talk about other countries that they have surveillance States and that's exactly what flock these cameras are. On top of that, 400,000 to 600,000 children go missing. Maybe not each year, but a lot of kids go missing. And the flock cameras haven't been used to solve any of that. The only positive case I've seen of a flock camera was to find a stolen car. And personally, I think, you know, finding missing children is more important than that. But these people, you know, they don't use their power for that. They use it to stalk ex-girlfriends like there was cases of. There's just too much corruption to give these people full public view. These people can just access these things, and that's not something that should be allowed. Thanks, guys.

And that was the final registered commenter.

Thank you, everyone, for joining us today, and thanks for your comments. Appreciate it very much. And we are adjourned.