[0:00] [Music]

[0:35] [Music]

[0:44] [Music]

[0:53] [Music]

[1:35] [Music]

[1:44] [Music]

[1:53] [Music]

[2:34] Heat. Heat.

[2:36] [Music]

[2:44] [Music]

[2:53] [Music]

[3:36] [Music]

[3:44] [Music]

[3:53] [Music]

[4:05] Heat. Hey, Heat.

[4:08] [Music]

[4:36] [Music]

[4:44] [Music]

[4:53] [Music]

[5:36] [Music]

[5:44] [Music]

[5:53] [Music]

[6:38] Hey, hey, hey.

[6:45] [Music]

[6:53] [Music]

[7:36] [Music]

[7:54] [Music]

[8:17] I have uh enough council members in the

[8:21] room to get started. Um so welcome

[8:25] everyone to our city council work

[8:28] session for August 12th, 2025.

[8:33] Um, our meetings are public and w and

[8:35] you're welcome to join us in person or

[8:37] by watching from the council's agenda

[8:39] page, Zoom, YouTube, or SLCTV. We hope

[8:42] you'll continue to join us in whatever

[8:44] manner you feel most comfortable. This

[8:46] is a joint work session meeting during

[8:48] which there is no public comment. Please

[8:50] join us tonight during our 7 p.m. formal

[8:53] meeting to share your comments. And we

[8:55] of course welcome your feedback at any

[8:56] time to PO Box 145476, Salt Lake City,

[9:01] Utah 84114-5476,

[9:04] by email at councsil.comslc.gov

[9:07] or via our 24hour phone comment line

[9:10] 801-5357654.

[9:14] Comments on agenda topics are shared

[9:15] with all council members and posted to

[9:17] our website slcounsil.com.

[9:20] The first item on our agenda is um an in

[9:24] is a update from the administration.

[9:28] And so I would uh like to have um first

[9:33] um

[9:35] uh I think Chief Leeb from Salt Lake

[9:38] City Fire Department and Mayor Mendenhal

[9:40] join us.

[9:50] and um you're going to be providing an

[9:52] update on the fire on Main Street from

[9:55] last night.

[9:57] So, please go ahead.

[9:59] » Yeah, you can go first, mayor. That's

[10:01] all right. Just like this morning. Thank

[10:02] you, council members. Good afternoon.

[10:04] Thank you, council chair. I'm happy to

[10:05] give you briefing on the uh events from

[10:07] last evening. I'll uh try and keep it uh

[10:10] relatively

[10:12] um brief and then feel free to ask me

[10:15] questions following briefing. So um last

[10:19] evening about 8:40 p.m. we received a a

[10:22] first alarm commercial uh fire call at a

[10:25] restaurant uh the London Bell. Um

[10:29] potential fire in the kitchen. A crews

[10:31] arrived on scene and began to

[10:32] investigate a cooking fire. uh they

[10:35] found smoke and fire ultimately in the

[10:37] ceiling area uh within the establishment

[10:41] and uh they began to ensure evacuation

[10:44] of the building which had already really

[10:46] initiated by the employees um of the

[10:49] bell. Uh we initiated an aggressive

[10:52] offensive attack at that time to try and

[10:54] isolate the fire. However, it was

[10:57] located in the void space between what

[10:58] we see as a ceiling and the roof of

[11:00] these buildings and it started expanding

[11:04] and started moving uh laterally both

[11:06] north and south.

[11:08] Uh at 9:42 p.m. we transitioned from an

[11:11] offensive to a defensive strategy and

[11:14] called a third alarm. Offensive strategy

[11:16] in the fire department means we have

[11:17] firefighters interior, we may have

[11:19] firefighters on the roof, um near the

[11:21] exterior walls. We're doing everything

[11:23] we can to save the structure. When we go

[11:25] defensive, the scene has become so

[11:27] dangerous for firefighters, we have to

[11:29] fight from a safe position external of

[11:31] the building off the roof. Everybody's

[11:33] out.

[11:35] Uh we had approximately 78 firefighters

[11:37] on scene and 20 fire apparatus.

[11:40] Ultimately, we had major damage to five

[11:42] businesses. Um early this morning, it

[11:45] was updated from 4 to 5

[11:48] uh and included another establishment um

[11:51] to the north.

[11:53] 6:15 a.m. this morning, we concluded our

[11:56] fire watch and we knew demobilized fire

[11:59] crews. 6:40 a.m. last crew was released

[12:02] from the scene. Since uh we left the

[12:04] scene uh early this morning, we've been

[12:06] back um at least once just to extinguish

[12:09] some hot spots that the investigative

[12:11] team uh located. So, that's not unusual

[12:14] for a fire of this size. We had three

[12:17] minor firefighter injuries, but no

[12:18] civilian injuries. uh building

[12:21] inspections. Uh we're gathering that

[12:23] information for all the buildings that

[12:25] are involved. We partner with building

[12:27] services and code enforcement for these

[12:29] type of buildings. Uh they were built in

[12:32] 1914 and they underwent several remodels

[12:36] throughout the years. Many of us have

[12:38] have been in those buildings. It's very

[12:41] unfortunate.

[12:43] Mutual aid really helped us out uh last

[12:45] night. We uh have to give credit to SLC

[12:48] 911. They do a great job. Salt Lake City

[12:50] Emergency Man, Salt Lake County EM, Salt

[12:54] Lake City Police Department provides a

[12:56] drone for our use. We find that

[12:57] invaluable in fires like this. It's a

[13:00] it's a great collaboration, very

[13:02] valuable. Uh, Unified Fire Authority,

[13:04] West Valley, South Salt Lake, uh, fire

[13:06] departments all helped us out. They also

[13:09] moved, uh, some units into the city to

[13:10] back fill our stations so we could go

[13:12] on, uh, our regular calls that we have

[13:15] throughout the evening. So, that's very

[13:17] helpful. Initial estimated loss is

[13:19] approximately 5 million for all

[13:21] buildings involved. Rocky Mountain Power

[13:24] has started to turn power back on to

[13:26] adjacent businesses. That includes

[13:28] Cheers to You, the Bodega, and Utah Book

[13:30] and Magazine.

[13:32] Currently, the properties have been

[13:34] turned over to the owners and from there

[13:36] they will determine the next steps with

[13:38] building services. There's no immediate

[13:40] intent for the fire department to um do

[13:43] anything with those buildings from, you

[13:45] know, uh clearing them out to raising

[13:47] them. So, we have no plan for that right

[13:49] now. It's up to the owners. So, nothing

[13:51] will happen quickly. I just want to put

[13:54] a plug in for the firefighters. They did

[13:55] a tremendous job uh last night. This was

[13:58] a very intense fire. It was very fast

[14:01] moving. There's a lot of fuel in these

[14:04] uh roof void spaces. a lot of

[14:06] opportunity for it to gain uh traction

[14:10] uh and speed. And quite honestly, the

[14:12] conditions last night were they were

[14:15] hazardous. It's very hot. Uh visibility

[14:18] was next to nothing. We're trying to

[14:20] identify where the fire is, how can we

[14:23] reach it, how can we apply water, how

[14:25] can we keep our firefighters safe and

[14:26] ensure nobody's in the buildings. So,

[14:29] they did a tremendous job. Uh my whole

[14:31] leadership team was on scene. Of course,

[14:33] we had, you know, upwards of 80

[14:35] firefighters. As I said, they did a

[14:38] great job. So, hands off to their

[14:40] firefighters in Salt Lake.

[14:43] Give it to you, mayor.

[14:44] » Thanks, Chief. And I I just want to say

[14:47] the firefighters are Salt Lake City

[14:50] firefighters are the best and we also

[14:52] can't do the best work without the fire

[14:55] departments who back us up in these

[14:56] situations. And um we're just incredibly

[14:59] fortunate also that the three

[15:02] firefighters who sustained minor

[15:04] injuries when Chief Lee described them

[15:06] this morning in the press event, they

[15:07] don't sound minor to me at all. Broken

[15:10] ankle, uh falling ceiling debris that

[15:13] trapped a firefighter against a fence

[15:16] and another injury that escapes my mind.

[15:20] » Yeah. Um smoke inhalation.

[15:21] » Smoke inhalation, dehydration, and

[15:23] nausea. So, um I I hope that they're

[15:27] well. I wanted to give you an update on

[15:29] three ways that the city is working very

[15:32] quickly to try to help these business

[15:33] owners and their employees. First is the

[15:37] uh reach back to the tip your server

[15:39] program that we did with the downtown

[15:41] alliance and many other businesses

[15:43] downtown during COVID which recognized

[15:46] that these displaced employees need

[15:49] income right away and unrestricted

[15:51] income. And so we are standing up and it

[15:54] actually just went live on the Downtown

[15:56] Alliance website, the Salt Lake City

[15:58] Main Street Fire Employee Assistance

[16:01] Fund. And we're setting it up so that

[16:04] anybody can make a contribution. And

[16:06] those contributions will go 100% to the

[16:10] employees of those five businesses that

[16:12] were directly affected. We'll be working

[16:14] with the business owners, of course, to

[16:16] make those distributions. And the

[16:18] Downtown Alliance is a great partner in

[16:20] helping us to do that. I believe the

[16:21] Utah Restaurant Association is also

[16:23] involved with us. So that is now live on

[16:26] their website. The second part is an

[16:29] emergency loan fund concept that we also

[16:31] did during COVID. This provides um no

[16:36] interest loans with a term sheet of

[16:39] repayment over several years. We're

[16:42] looking at recreating something like

[16:45] that for these businesses so that um

[16:47] either while they wait for reimbursement

[16:50] from insurance or for the gap that the

[16:53] insurance cannot cover that we could

[16:55] work with them on some terms to get them

[16:57] uh no interest loans from the city. We

[17:00] will of course be coming to you to

[17:02] determine how whether or not you want to

[17:04] approve those funds and how we're going

[17:06] to deploy them. but we're working with

[17:08] economic development, Mary Beth

[17:09] Thompson's team, and the CRA to figure

[17:11] that out. We'll have information to you

[17:14] as soon as possible. Um, the third piece

[17:17] is that we've I've made a commitment to

[17:19] all of the business and property owners

[17:21] that we will give them white glove

[17:24] service to get their permits and

[17:25] inspections done as quickly as possible

[17:27] so that they can get reopened and doing

[17:30] business as quickly as possible. So,

[17:33] just wanted to give you an update and

[17:34] always open to your suggestions as you

[17:37] talk with those business owners and

[17:39] community members or have other ideas.

[17:41] We we are open to it.

[17:44] » Um, Council Member Lo Chavez.

[17:46] » Yeah, thank you so much. Uh, thank you,

[17:48] Chief Lib. Um, thank you to Station One

[17:50] and the B patrol and, uh, Mayor

[17:53] Mendenhal. Thank you eternally from

[17:55] district 4 and on behalf of not just our

[17:58] neighbors and residents but our small

[17:59] business owners that are the life and

[18:01] blood of Main Street in our downtown. It

[18:04] means so much to me and uh I I was

[18:07] completely shocked as is everybody. But

[18:10] this doesn't have to be another hole or

[18:13] another uh dilapidation on our main

[18:16] street. I think if anything it shows the

[18:18] vigor that city hall has to reinfuse

[18:22] and to extend expand on the dynamics

[18:26] that are at play here. We have a vibrant

[18:28] main street in downtown. Uh we have lots

[18:31] of isolated economic development

[18:33] projects and commerce coming in. And so

[18:35] I can't wait for the reopening. I'm

[18:37] really excited to hear that power is

[18:38] back online. You can still I I didn't

[18:41] hear Felt, but I hope Felt's on that

[18:42] list as well and other restaurants later

[18:44] that'll come back online. And uh I I

[18:48] just want to recognize the heroism of

[18:50] those three firefighters again. This was

[18:53] a brave act, an immediate response from

[18:56] our fire department and emergency

[18:58] response.

[19:00] Uh, and this is an opportunity for us to

[19:02] to step up and to really have a larger

[19:04] and broader conversation about how do we

[19:07] continue to supplement our burgeoning

[19:09] downtown. We've seen a lot of growth.

[19:11] Um, and I I'm excited for the time

[19:13] ahead, but I want to recognize and and

[19:15] share my sympathies as well for the

[19:18] damage that the fire has caused. uh but

[19:21] also very very grateful

[19:23] uh for the opportunity to speak with the

[19:26] businesses and and have longer term

[19:28] conversations about how we can support

[19:30] them.

[19:30] » Thanks.

[19:31] » Yeah,

[19:35] Mr. Chair.

[19:36] » Yes, Council Member Po. Quickly, I

[19:37] obviously I want to like thank the the

[19:40] the work of of of your uh personnel

[19:43] there, the firefighters that put their

[19:45] you know, it's it's uh it's always

[19:48] fascinating to uh you know, they run

[19:51] towards danger and and and keeps us all

[19:54] safe and the work uh putting themselves

[19:56] there uh to to mitigate this is is is

[19:59] huge. Um it was a there was probably

[20:02] hundreds of videos online. It was very

[20:04] visible of a of a fire and I'm sure is a

[20:07] is a traumatic uh time for the community

[20:10] of the employees and and and whatnot

[20:12] too. Um I my question relates to um uh

[20:16] securing the properties uh and ensuring

[20:19] that there are not in danger to the

[20:22] community as a whole. There is a very um

[20:27] public space and there's multiple ways

[20:30] to get to this uh properties. uh is that

[20:33] on uh the the owners to secure the

[20:36] properties and do they have a timeline

[20:39] to do that? Is there assistance possibly

[20:42] for that?

[20:43] » Yeah, it's normally that is that is the

[20:46] responsibility of the owners council

[20:47] member but emergency management will

[20:49] facilitate the securing of the property.

[20:52] So if they are not in a position to be

[20:53] able to do that immediately um emergency

[20:56] management will step in and make sure

[20:58] that that occurs.

[21:00] » Thank you. Any other questions?

[21:04] All right. Um well, thank you, Chief. We

[21:06] really appreciate the good work of you

[21:07] and your um firefighters and thanks,

[21:09] mayor, for being here.

[21:12] Okay. Um other updates from the

[21:16] administration.

[21:17] Um I believe we have Weston Clark,

[21:20] director of community and outreach, uh

[21:22] or director of community outreach, and

[21:24] Andrew Johnston, director of homeless

[21:26] policy and outreach.

[21:32] Good afternoon, council. Um, we'll go

[21:34] ahead and go into the engagement

[21:36] highlights for you all. Uh, if you go to

[21:38] the next page, a reminder to go to their

[21:42] slc.gov/feedbackedback

[21:43] page where we try to collect all of our

[21:45] projects for the community to engage on.

[21:48] Um, but I will reference today, um,

[21:50] we've started a soft launch of our new

[21:52] engagement software, which I'm really

[21:54] excited about. Um, and there are some

[21:56] engagement opportunities there already

[21:58] that we will point to. It's uh the

[21:59] shape.slc.gov.

[22:01] Um shape slc. Um so I will mention those

[22:04] later and hopefully we will get

[22:05] everything on there very soon. Next

[22:07] slide. Starting with some public lands.

[22:11] Um we've got several exciting updates

[22:13] across the city's parks and public

[22:15] spaces. Starting with Fleet Block. The

[22:17] public survey for the green space and

[22:18] artwork went live on August 11th and

[22:20] will stay open through the end of the

[22:21] month. We are teaming up with partners

[22:23] also to host community conversations

[22:26] throughout August so residents are able

[22:28] to share their ideas in person. In

[22:31] Glendale, we celebrated the grand

[22:32] opening of the new pickleball complex.

[22:34] Some of you know that well on July 30th

[22:37] and the event drew a crowd of local

[22:39] players and neighbors who are excited to

[22:40] see the new courts in action. I haven't

[22:42] played there yet, but I hope to soon. at

[22:44] Liberty Park. The Rotary Play Area is

[22:47] going to be closing on August 19th for a

[22:49] major redevelopment that will run

[22:51] through summer of 2026. So, if you have

[22:54] kids with memories of that space, it's

[22:55] time to check it out one last time. In

[22:58] the meantime, we've posted a list of

[23:00] nearby playgrounds on the project's

[23:01] websites website so that families can

[23:03] find other spots to play. Looking at

[23:06] Allen Park, public lands will begin

[23:07] installing new water and fire lines in

[23:09] fall in this fall. Uh this is a $500,000

[23:12] project that will improve fire safety

[23:14] and support the health of the park's

[23:15] trees. Uh this is the first step in a

[23:17] series of major upgrades funded by the

[23:19] general obligation bond. Uh the work

[23:21] will take about 3 to four months,

[23:22] weather permitting. And in the short

[23:24] term, there is also a planned closure of

[23:26] the park on August 18th for some demo of

[23:28] a small building in the park. Next page.

[23:33] Um this is uh on our new shape SLC page.

[23:36] This is the um new well mural. You've

[23:39] probably heard we've had over a thousand

[23:40] responses to the survey already on uh

[23:43] Shape LC SLC, which is great. Uh it's

[23:45] going to make its debut in 2026, and we

[23:48] encourage residents to go there and

[23:49] share their ideas and feedback on the

[23:51] survey, which will be open until

[23:52] September 15th.

[23:54] Uh and then, uh in Love Your Block news,

[23:56] we just wrapped up our most competitive

[23:58] grant cycle yet with a record 32

[24:00] applications. Six projects were selected

[24:02] to receive fall mini grants, uh helping

[24:05] spur resident driven change. These

[24:07] projects will take place in Glendel,

[24:08] Popppler Grove, and Ballpark and will be

[24:10] completed by November 30th. Uh residents

[24:13] and council members are invited to roll

[24:15] up your sleeves and join. You can reach

[24:16] out to Diana RmIrez on my team in the

[24:19] mayor's office or visit the Love Your

[24:21] Block website in order to find out when.

[24:23] And the next slide is our uh fall events

[24:27] happening out in the community. Uh also

[24:29] where my team will be uh offering

[24:31] community office hours if folks would

[24:33] like to engage with the mayor's office.

[24:35] um including this weekend at the

[24:37] Kensington Street Fair and the Bonnie

[24:39] Ball in Sugar House on August 23rd. Uh

[24:41] so we encourage uh the community to show

[24:43] up to those events and chat with the

[24:45] liaison team there. And that is all for

[24:48] me.

[24:53] Next slide, please.

[24:56] Uh two slides to the council members. Uh

[24:58] the first one is the typical one with

[25:00] the utilization report. Uh 96%

[25:02] utilization. I will say that the

[25:04] majority of our openings recently have

[25:06] been at our senior uh shelter option.

[25:08] So, it's not necessarily uniform across

[25:10] all shelters. Uh clearly running at

[25:12] capacity across the board. Uh EIM at

[25:15] Gladiola Street in the industrial area

[25:17] this week. And then Victory Road and

[25:19] Warm Springs Park continue to be a focus

[25:20] area for the rapid intervention teams

[25:22] although they are across the city and

[25:24] other places as well. Uh resource fair

[25:26] did happen last Friday uh very

[25:28] successful and the next one is in

[25:30] September at Library Square. Uh next

[25:33] slide.

[25:36] Uh some updates here for some of you uh

[25:38] who have asked some questions about

[25:39] what's going on with certain uh

[25:41] initiatives. Uh the winter services

[25:43] planning has uh taken place over the

[25:45] summertime. The plan for the Salt Lake

[25:47] County was submitted to the state on

[25:49] August or July 30th for August 1

[25:52] deadline. Uh they have a couple of weeks

[25:54] to respond to the plan uh including uh

[25:57] whether they're going to accept it or

[25:58] reject it based on certain criteria. I

[26:01] will say that um the plan envisions

[26:04] about 400 more shelter beds this coming

[26:07] winter than last winter. Uh there is an

[26:10] open question about how to pay for those

[26:11] and if those will be available and

[26:13] that's something that will be back and

[26:15] forth with the state and the task force

[26:16] in the coming weeks. Transformative

[26:19] campus. Uh there's not much to say

[26:21] publicly about this at this point. The

[26:23] state is talking about they are

[26:24] evaluating land uh for the location. Uh

[26:28] but uh we will say very clearly that the

[26:30] office of homeless services the state

[26:32] does not have enough funding either

[26:34] capital for the build of it or for

[26:36] operations going forward. Uh that is a

[26:39] topic of discussion among all of us uh

[26:41] pretty consistently and going forward

[26:43] towards let's say next legislative

[26:45] session it will be a big topic. The

[26:47] governor I believe plans to have his

[26:50] budget ready in September and we'll have

[26:51] a better sense then about what he's

[26:53] proposing as well. Mobile hygiene pilot

[26:56] which was initiated at the council

[26:57] level. uh earlier uh this year. Uh it

[27:01] has been awarded to a local nonprofit, a

[27:03] small group is very excited. We'll have

[27:05] more info for you as soon as possible.

[27:07] They're looking at the name, working

[27:09] through us about details where, when,

[27:11] how that'll happen. Uh we'll hopefully

[27:13] have that with you very quickly. And

[27:15] then community corner on the left of the

[27:17] screen, you'll see a flyer. Uh this is

[27:20] an uh opportunity we've presented to uh

[27:23] small homeless providers who are doing

[27:25] mobile outreach uh to the community and

[27:28] typically are going where people are or

[27:29] going to parks and people are gathering

[27:31] in parks for those services. Uh we've

[27:34] been working with parks with some of the

[27:36] uh unintended effects in the park system

[27:38] uh of this happening consistently. So

[27:40] one option we're providing to people now

[27:42] is a vacant piece of land that we've

[27:44] fenced off and and secured uh that CRA

[27:47] owns. It is going to be open Mondays

[27:50] through Wednesdays in the afternoons. Uh

[27:52] local providers can apply to HART um to

[27:55] have to set up there to offer services

[27:57] to the unsheltered. They've planned

[28:00] those hours specifically to match up

[28:02] with existing services at the Wagan

[28:04] Center in St. Vincent Depal. So they're

[28:05] not overlapping or being duplicitous

[28:07] here. Uh duplicative, excuse me. And um

[28:11] it's intended to be a short-term thing.

[28:13] Um, so now until uh October or November

[28:16] when winter services open up and we're

[28:18] evaluating how impactful this is as far

[28:20] as still delivering services but

[28:22] containing them to a certain location

[28:24] where we can ensure it's clean, it's

[28:26] safe, um, and it doesn't overflow to

[28:27] other places and impact other users of

[28:30] parks. Uh, and HART will be

[28:32] administering is administering this

[28:33] program right now. Uh, so I can take any

[28:35] questions for you or we can talk

[28:37] offline.

[28:39] Council member Petro,

[28:42] » How many beds were accounted for in the

[28:45] task force's plan that they submitted?

[28:48] And does West Valley have to in

[28:50] perpetuity keep a temporary use going

[28:52] via preeemption?

[28:55] » Uh, I'll start with the West Valley

[28:56] question. The West Valley, uh, there's a

[28:59] state-owned liquor store what's been

[29:00] closed for several years now. Uh,

[29:02] they've used that for two years, I

[29:04] believe, now for an overflow shelter

[29:06] temporarily in the wintertime. Um, in

[29:08] the last couple of years, the state has

[29:10] been able to cobble together enough

[29:11] money to keep those uh facilities open

[29:14] through the summer so there's not a drop

[29:16] off in the spring. Because it is

[29:18] stateowned, West Valley doesn't really

[29:20] have a say in uh it operating there.

[29:23] Wayne Neerhouser and the Office of

[29:24] Homeless Services have worked with them

[29:25] and tried to keep them very much updated

[29:27] on their plans and intentions. Uh, but

[29:29] yeah, as a temporary site, it's been

[29:31] pretty much continuously operated for

[29:33] quite a while now. I believe it's still

[29:35] um it's part of the plan to be operated

[29:37] through this winter as well. So I can't

[29:39] really tell you sort of the future of

[29:41] that. The general numbers that the task

[29:44] force came up with were based on point

[29:47] in time count numbers uh last year

[29:49] shelter utilization and the number of

[29:50] beds we had plus turnaways uh and code

[29:53] blue nights. I'm trying to get the best

[29:55] estimate we can. Uh that came out to,300

[30:00] temporary beds. That's in addition to

[30:03] the 20 the year round beds we have fully

[30:05] funded in the HRC's.

[30:07] Um that means that includes say West

[30:10] Valley the extra beds in the current

[30:12] resource centers on North Temple other

[30:14] places like that plus uh that included

[30:17] the code blue beds which we've had

[30:19] previous years. Um I think it envisioned

[30:21] about 200 over 200 of those I'll say. Uh

[30:25] as well as 400 additional beds in that

[30:28] 1300 that we haven't had before. So it

[30:30] does market a market increase from last

[30:32] year. I I will say that um we know that

[30:37] there is a demand out there. Clearly

[30:38] we've been full in our current resource

[30:40] centers even with all of the additional

[30:42] beds from last winter. We're still full.

[30:44] Uh so the need is there. The question is

[30:46] how can we come up with the locations

[30:47] and the money to do it.

[30:51] » I'll say we in the general sense, not

[30:52] the city.

[30:53] » Council member,

[30:54] » Mr. Chair, I thank you. Uh I would love

[30:56] to um

[30:58] I I appreciate uh you know how you frame

[31:03] this uh answers as like we um because we

[31:06] are part of it. Um and uh but I

[31:10] obviously struggle sometimes with the

[31:12] rhetoric uh from uh from from some

[31:16] people that make it look like it's only

[31:18] select city's problem or select city's

[31:21] doing. Um I would love to uh explore the

[31:24] opportunity if uh

[31:27] Mr. Wayne Neerhauser would love to visit

[31:30] us. Uh we would love to have him here to

[31:32] explain uh to let us know how he's

[31:36] approached this and how we can help him.

[31:38] Uh you know I would love to to listen uh

[31:40] from from uh you know who's leading this

[31:44] department for the state. um and uh and

[31:47] put it on the record here too uh for our

[31:49] our ourselves and for our citizens and I

[31:52] I would love to um extend that

[31:55] invitation. I know that uh he doesn't

[31:57] respond to us and you know I have a

[31:59] great deal of respect for him myself um

[32:02] and we are not my intent is not to put

[32:06] him in an awkward situation but to

[32:08] actually uh understand the constraints

[32:11] uh that he is experienced and how he

[32:13] sees this problem. uh moving forward.

[32:16] So, um thank you for the work. Um as far

[32:19] as the uh corner, the community corner,

[32:21] uh are you intending to have a a board

[32:24] there or something that tells the times

[32:27] where the services are going to be

[32:29] implemented or so for those who visit

[32:32] the spot to know when is this what is

[32:36] the schedule looking like?

[32:37] » Sure. Uh, so I'll say that the first

[32:40] thing that happens a lot in the

[32:41] unsheltered community is word of mouth

[32:43] spreads things very quickly. Um, so we

[32:46] know that's going to happen. The

[32:47] providers themselves um are spreading

[32:49] the word through their networks, people

[32:51] they're already seeing on the streets

[32:52] and other locations. Uh, we haven't done

[32:54] a big opening for this uh site. Um, we

[32:57] kept it fairly low-key uh as a buildup.

[33:00] So for this week, we'll probably see

[33:01] some low numbers. Um and it depends on

[33:04] who what providers are showing up as

[33:05] well because they have to plan in

[33:07] advance to be there so we know who's

[33:08] going to be there make sure it's not

[33:09] overwhelming the the site etc. So um we

[33:12] are doing word of mouth and through the

[33:14] provider networks um both who are going

[33:16] to be there and who are also sort of

[33:18] other providers in the community going

[33:19] that route with the uh notification.

[33:21] We've also done some work Weston's team

[33:23] has done well to coordinate with the

[33:25] neighbors around that site uh to make

[33:27] sure that they were aware in advance.

[33:29] We've had meetings with them to hear

[33:30] their concerns. U make sure we try and

[33:32] address as much as we can there um to uh

[33:35] kind of ward off any issues that they

[33:37] may have foresee happening there.

[33:39] » Will you be so kind to share uh the

[33:41] process for any neighbor or uh resident

[33:44] in the area to uh just let let your team

[33:49] know of what's happening. Uh there's a

[33:51] there's a lot of constraints in the

[33:53] area. There's a lot of issues in the

[33:54] area as you very well know. uh and uh

[33:57] they're not very far from this site. Um

[34:00] certainly I I uh believe that offering

[34:03] this the right services is is key here.

[34:06] Um I also want to mitigate the impacts

[34:08] to the overall community too. Um that

[34:12] being said, garbage or uh you know

[34:15] potentially uh the popup of more of uh

[34:20] drug markets uh you know in the streets

[34:23] and whatnot. And um So I I would love

[34:28] that having those resources so I can

[34:29] share with my neighbors as well.

[34:31] » So u just up front right now Amy Stoxs

[34:34] who manages the heart team. She's the

[34:35] direct contact for this community

[34:37] corner. Um one-stop shop go right to

[34:40] her. Uh Commander Diamond in the police

[34:43] department and Lieutenant Davis uh who

[34:45] work with him. Uh they've been our

[34:46] contacts meeting with all the neighbors

[34:48] and for safety and security issues. Um

[34:50] so we make sure that all the neighbors

[34:52] have their contact information so they

[34:53] can contact us directly. Even yesterday

[34:55] when they were um working down there,

[34:57] they got calls from UTA to work on some

[34:59] things. Um so we are actively engaged

[35:01] with those neighbors on those things.

[35:07] » Okay, I don't think we have any other

[35:09] questions. Thank you so much.

[35:12] All right, the next item on our agenda

[35:14] is um a resolution for the capital

[35:18] improvement program follow-up

[35:20] discussions.

[35:22] And with us we have Kate Werret, um,

[35:25] council policy analyst. And then we also

[35:27] have available available for questions

[35:29] Ben Lekkey, um, deputy chief financial

[35:32] officer, uh, Rachel Molinari, capital

[35:35] improvement program manager, Mike

[35:37] Atkinson, capital asset planning

[35:39] manager, and some other department

[35:42] directors.

[35:45] Go ahead, Kate.

[35:46] » Great. Thank you. So, this is, I

[35:49] believe, our fourth briefing that we've

[35:50] had on the capital improvement program.

[35:52] I'm just going to refer to it as the CIP

[35:54] moving forward. And we have quite a bit

[35:56] of time today to discuss this because

[35:59] this is your opportunity to like

[36:02] finalize going through the projects,

[36:05] call out any projects that haven't been

[36:07] funded or or were funded and you want to

[36:09] adjust the funding. So, um, there are

[36:12] eight or nine projects that received a

[36:14] funding recommendation that we haven't

[36:16] discussed yet. If it's okay with you, I

[36:20] I say we just hit those projects and

[36:24] then opening it up for discussion on

[36:26] funding. You'll notice at your your

[36:29] seats you have a sheet that has all the

[36:32] projects that I was aware of that you

[36:35] had funding suggestions for um that that

[36:39] are there. But we'll get to that in a

[36:41] second. So let's go ahead and open the

[36:43] funding log and look at uh project

[36:45] number 28 is where we will start.

[37:04] So, this funding um this project is the

[37:07] Riverside Basketball Court renovation.

[37:10] Um it was they requested $530,000

[37:13] and they were recommended um by both the

[37:17] the advisory board and the mayor to

[37:19] receive full funding for this.

[37:22] If there's no comments,

[37:26] good with that. Okay, we'll go ahead and

[37:28] go to project number 38 then.

[37:38] So, this is for electric vehicle

[37:41] charging expansion at the public service

[37:44] building. Um they had requested funding

[37:47] for phases one and two and uh the mayor

[37:51] recommended funding through phase three

[37:53] which will provide enough EV charging

[37:56] stations to fulfill the needs that that

[37:59] are had. Um you are going to be having

[38:02] an EV charging station as well as EV

[38:05] vehicle um well EV charging station for

[38:08] both public use and city use coming up

[38:12] here in the next couple months. We're

[38:13] waiting on one more transmitt from the

[38:16] airport to to bring that to you, just so

[38:18] you're aware. But um that that's why

[38:22] this is recommended for funding at a

[38:24] higher amount than their request because

[38:26] the mayor is recommending funding to the

[38:28] full amount to get them through phase

[38:29] three.

[38:30] » Mr. Chair,

[38:31] » Yes, Council Member Puy,

[38:32] » Quick question. Uh can uh are there uh

[38:36] breakdowns on this money that the I can

[38:39] quickly find out other uh smaller

[38:43] amounts of money that we can potentially

[38:45] allocate. I guess that's that's what I'm

[38:47] trying to get to. Um it's it's a

[38:50] significant amount of money. Not right

[38:53] now the pressure I'm feeling is uh that

[38:58] there is so much need and so little

[39:00] money. Um and uh and I'm trying to make

[39:05] good to uh public safety needs uh first.

[39:11] Uh

[39:12] in my mind. So, uh if you have any

[39:15] information on that one, I would love to

[39:17] explore the possibility of shaving some

[39:19] of the funds here if uh if possible.

[39:22] » Yeah, definitely. So, um they have a

[39:26] breakdown um in their application

[39:31] that had had it broken down. So for

[39:34] phase one, um it was going to be

[39:37] 1,11,000

[39:41] plus change. Um phase 2 um was $214,000

[39:46] plus change and then phase three was 98

[39:49] $99,000.

[39:51] So um if you look at um with with their

[39:55] funding recommendation

[39:57] um they had asked for phases one and

[39:59] two. So that 1 million $2,000 and the

[40:04] mayor added in the additional to make it

[40:06] the full three phases. So if you were

[40:09] looking to just do um phase phases one

[40:13] and two um that would give you

[40:17] about $76,118

[40:20] in the general fund that that could go

[40:23] towards other projects.

[40:25] » So 70

[40:27] » Can I clarify? I I don't think I wrote I

[40:30] see here allocated 1,78,87

[40:34] total.

[40:35] » Yes.

[40:36] » With 1,1,214,000

[40:39] and 999,000 as the the allocation here

[40:44] doesn't even cover the first two phases.

[40:50] Sorry, I don't know if I wrote something

[40:51] down wrong.

[40:52] » I just didn't follow that.

[40:53] » Maybe I I'm

[40:55] » Reading it wrong. Thank you. Hi, Julie

[40:58] Krookton.

[40:59] » Julie Kricxton, public services.

[41:01] » Kate just switched up some of the

[41:03] numbers. So phase one and two would be

[41:06] the figure you quoted. And then the

[41:07] phase three additional money that the

[41:09] mayor added is the 76,000.

[41:12] The sorry initial phase is expensive

[41:14] because you have to add electric

[41:16] infrastructure. So it's not just the

[41:17] chargers, which is why phase three is

[41:19] cheaper because at that point you're

[41:20] just adding more chargers. The first

[41:22] phase is adding transformers and more

[41:25] electric capacity.

[41:27] Can I follow up real quick?

[41:30] » So I'm seeing that we currently have a

[41:32] fleet of 50 our current infrastructure

[41:35] because this is an expansion of

[41:37] infrastructure that we have. Is our

[41:39] current infra is this is this expansion

[41:41] driven by actual demand or a projected

[41:43] demand. Is our current fleet being

[41:45] served or is this expansion required to

[41:48] serve that current fleet?

[41:50] » Both. So, the current fleet is needing

[41:53] to be very creative in how they charge

[41:55] their vehicles. So, they're having to do

[41:57] a lot of coordination to cycle

[41:58] everything through. And if you have too

[42:00] many vehicles charging at once, it trips

[42:02] the breaker of the building. So, this

[42:04] would address that as well as expand the

[42:06] capacity for the predicted vehicles that

[42:09] will could eventually become EVs.

[42:12] They're mostly sedans that the

[42:14] technology already exists, but because

[42:16] we haven't had the charging, we haven't

[42:18] bought the EVs yet. Um, could I if if I

[42:21] could I would love to see the projection

[42:23] for what we are switching to EV because

[42:26] I know in fleet it was part of the

[42:28] proposal during the budget session. So

[42:30] I'd like to see what we're converting

[42:31] and how long this expansion would help

[42:34] us like when when the next expansion

[42:36] will be required.

[42:37] » We can get you that information.

[42:39] » Yeah, obviously this is something I

[42:41] value myself. Sorry, Mr. Chair.

[42:43] » No, go ahead. the I value I trying to uh

[42:47] see if there's an opportunity to maybe

[42:49] punt some of these objectives to a

[42:52] little later buying ourselves a little

[42:53] time for the goals but ultimately I when

[42:57] I am uh working on my house uh you know

[43:00] sometimes is it makes sense to do it all

[43:03] together um you know then facing it but

[43:06] but even even from the explanation that

[43:09] we got today potentially it will be a

[43:12] satactory to do phase one and two and

[43:15] that will give us $76,000 of potential

[43:19] uh

[43:21] funding to play around.

[43:23] » Yes, that's correct.

[43:24] » This might be some more information.

[43:32] » Thank you. The other thing that I want

[43:33] to add is that um right now there are no

[43:38] um EV stations there and most officers

[43:41] are charging their vehicles at home.

[43:45] So it's costing them a lot of money

[43:47] whereas they could charge it at the

[43:49] public safety parking lot instead of

[43:51] charging them at home. So keep that in

[43:53] mind for these EV stations as well. I

[43:55] think it's really important for our

[43:56] officers to not have to have incur that

[43:59] expense at their home.

[44:07] Go ahead.

[44:11] » I don't think so.

[44:12] » Okay.

[44:12] » Yep.

[44:14] » Great. Well, we will continue on to item

[44:17] 40 or project 44.

[44:23] » This is event infrastructure and

[44:25] pavilion replacements for vibrant safe

[44:28] city parks.

[44:28] » I was being a bad student. I missed the

[44:31] the number. What was that number?

[44:32] » 44.

[44:37] » So, all the funding for this is coming

[44:40] from park impact fees.

[44:48] » Can I just ask park impact fees? Remind

[44:51] me. They can go to new. What What is

[44:53] their kind of guard rails around them?

[44:56] So, it's it's mainly new and

[44:58] improvements that are to increase the

[45:02] the city's overall level of service for

[45:05] new residents. It can't be a replacement

[45:07] of existing items.

[45:09] » Got it. And is it restricted to just

[45:12] areas that are designated parks or does

[45:14] it have more applicability across the

[45:17] city?

[45:18] » It it can go towards plaza areas also.

[45:21] Okay.

[45:21] » I'm not sure beyond that.

[45:23] um the the trick is that the projects

[45:28] across the city. So, first the answer is

[45:30] no, it does not need to be in a

[45:32] designated park area. So, for example,

[45:34] trails um the 9inth South um Neline

[45:39] Trail is an example where um there was a

[45:42] creative use of parks impact fees, but

[45:43] it has to be in our impact fee facility

[45:45] plan. So, if it's a new idea that wasn't

[45:48] included in that plan, um it potentially

[45:52] is not eligible for parks impact fees.

[45:54] Okay.

[45:54] » Thank you.

[45:56] » Mr. Go ahead, M. Council member.

[45:58] » I will also like to request a little

[45:59] more breakdown on cost here because it's

[46:01] a it's a it's a lot of money. Um and I

[46:06] want to know specifically what we can

[46:09] buy with that money. Um, and just to

[46:12] have an idea of how many pavilions I

[46:14] mean they have to be new being park

[46:16] impact fees. The description talks about

[46:19] uh replacements too. Obviously that's

[46:21] because there's $4 million request um if

[46:24] we had more money obviously will come

[46:26] from other funds but um so we are

[46:28] talking about new new um new amenities.

[46:33] I would like to see what the

[46:34] administration is planning to do with

[46:36] the $2 and a half million dollars if

[46:39] this were to go funded.

[46:41] » Okay.

[46:42] » I'mware potentially.

[46:43] » Great. I I will share the full

[46:46] application materials with you on that

[46:48] one. They they have provided some

[46:50] additional information. So I I'll send

[46:52] that your way or everyone's

[46:55] » Mr. Chair.

[46:57] » Yes. Go ahead, Council.

[46:59] » Yeah. Thank you. appreciate the

[47:00] questions and appreciate the explanation

[47:03] here. My question would be on

[47:04] specifically would bike racks be

[47:07] included in this.

[47:09] » So I asked and bike racks are not

[47:12] covered by park impact fees on a general

[47:16] basis unless it's at a park.

[47:18] » Why wouldn't they? Like it's a new

[47:20] amenity. Is that like a by law? Like

[47:24] » I think if they're included as part of

[47:26] an an entirely new park plan. Yes, this

[47:30] is where the way we write our impact fee

[47:33] plan is very important. Um so as the

[47:37] administration is upgrade is updating

[47:39] the impact fee plan um these are the

[47:41] kinds of lessons unfortunately we have

[47:43] to learn the hard way of um ways to um

[47:47] preserve our ability to use impact fees

[47:50] more flexibly in the future. But they

[47:52] are heavily regulated by state law and

[47:54] that's why the impact fee plan is

[47:56] written the way it is. Um, so it's

[48:00] frustrating and not perfect, but it

[48:01] means that we have to use them when we

[48:03] do know that they're eligible. So,

[48:07] » And are we planning to make that update

[48:10] eventually? Someone putting a sticky

[48:11] note somewhere on this one.

[48:15] » Yes.

[48:19] » Any other questions?

[48:22] » Okay,

[48:24] » Great. Okay. So the next project u is

[48:27] project 45 the very next one. So

[48:30] playground shade they asked for 500,000

[48:34] and were recommended to receive 500,000

[48:37] from park impact fees.

[48:40] You can see a list um there of where

[48:42] those shade structures may may go.

[48:49] » Council,

[48:50] » Sorry,

[48:50] » You're okay. How how is it that it comes

[48:52] from impact fees for like replacement of

[48:55] shades?

[48:58] » We need an impact fee attorney here. But

[49:00] in general, um, playground replacement

[49:04] has been deemed eligible for impact fees

[49:07] because the playgrounds that are

[49:09] replaced serve more kids than are

[49:12] currently being served. So, in a sense,

[49:15] new people who are moving in are able to

[49:17] use a facility that has expanded in

[49:20] scope. The way I think about it and the

[49:21] way it was explained to me at one point

[49:22] is are you adding a lane to a road or

[49:26] are you replacing the existing lanes

[49:28] with the exist a road with the ex same

[49:31] number of lanes. So if we're adding

[49:33] amenities to a park to serve growth and

[49:37] that's the key and we have it in our

[49:39] impact fee plan then we can use it then

[49:42] we can use impact fees

[49:44] » Or if you're a fire truck.

[49:45] » Yes. or if you're a fire truck.

[49:48] » Police bar.

[49:49] » Correct.

[49:52] » Okay, great. Okay, next up is number 48.

[49:56] Um

[49:59] this is the Rose Lane beautifification

[50:01] trail and safety improvement. You may

[50:03] remember that when we were reviewing one

[50:05] of the first um items in the project log

[50:10] um it was for ADA improvements and it

[50:12] wasn't fully funded because $680,000

[50:16] from that went to this project instead

[50:19] which is pretty much a sub project of

[50:21] that ADA improvement one. Um and the

[50:24] these funds are coming from the general

[50:27] fund. So, um

[50:31] » I'm not really asking for much anywhere

[50:33] else in CIP because of this. Um this is

[50:37] what's in the city's purview to

[50:38] accomplish. Um we consistently neglect

[50:41] this area. No offense. I know you all

[50:43] work as hard as you can, but every year

[50:45] I have two constituents who have to tell

[50:47] me, can we get the weeds mode? Can we

[50:48] get the weeds mode? It's just so on the

[50:51] edge of everything um that we don't that

[50:54] what they really need honestly is for

[50:56] you do to stop rejecting me. Um it's

[50:59] Carlos Brceros is the only man who's

[51:00] allowed to reject me and still get

[51:02] emails from me. But like they keep

[51:04] rejecting the request for a sound wall.

[51:05] There's a material change to the use of

[51:07] that highway since the truck prohibition

[51:10] left the legacy highway and since they

[51:13] added the high the um the factories

[51:16] across the way that caused like a

[51:17] reverberation effect. So this is a very

[51:21] lovely thing that the city is doing to

[51:23] enhance it. Still represents probably

[51:26] about a third of what that neighborhood

[51:28] needs, but it's a good faith signal from

[51:31] the city that we are hearing them. We

[51:33] care about them and even being on the

[51:35] edge of the city means that you still

[51:37] deserve full service from us.

[51:40] Council

[51:42] member Young,

[51:44] » Just a quick followup, and this may be

[51:46] for my fellow council member, but I'm

[51:47] open to feedback from anywhere. So, when

[51:50] we're installing just like the new trees

[51:53] and the new irrigation, do we also have

[51:56] like a plan to take care of those?

[51:59] » So, within their application, they

[52:02] include an estimate on how much it will

[52:04] impact the the the maintenance of the

[52:07] park areas in each application. Um, I

[52:10] can look this one up and let you know

[52:12] what that number was. What

[52:14] » And is that something where it's then

[52:16] reasonable to like have that as part of

[52:18] the consideration for the future budget

[52:21] conversation? Like really what I'm

[52:23] asking for is an ability to kind of flag

[52:26] those items where it's like we approved

[52:29] an improvement to this area and now we

[52:32] would like to commit to maintaining it

[52:35] in future budgetary cycles as opposed to

[52:38] it getting lost in the process.

[52:42] Is that a maybe? Maybe we could do that.

[52:45] » So are you asking for like the ongoing

[52:47] cost for this capital investment? So

[52:50] it's not just this project, it's all the

[52:53] CIPs that I'd just be curious in not not

[52:56] for today and today's approval but to be

[52:59] able to make sure that we are

[53:01] calculating those pieces because I think

[53:04] it is one of the things that I I have

[53:07] both seen not just in my district but

[53:09] across the city um that you know we

[53:12] create these new really really beautiful

[53:15] spaces for our residents and I just want

[53:17] to make sure that as a council we

[53:19] continue to have a conversation about

[53:21] funding the maintenance to keep them at

[53:23] that level when possible.

[53:24] » Yeah. And that is that is in the CIP

[53:27] book and part of the application that

[53:29] they submitted. Um if we get to a point

[53:31] where we have what you would like to see

[53:34] as the funding recommendation, well,

[53:36] what you want to approve. Um I will go

[53:39] ahead and calculate what your

[53:41] maintenance number will be.

[53:42] » Thank you so much.

[53:43] » Yeah.

[53:44] » Can I also piggyback on that? this these

[53:46] improvements feel like really lowhanging

[53:48] fruit for us to innovate um smart ways

[53:52] to do maintenance as opposed to pushing

[53:55] lawnmowers, those self-propelled zero

[53:58] emission lawn maintenance machines that

[54:01] we have been getting sold every time we

[54:03] go to a conference. I'd love to see that

[54:06] take some of the burden off of manpower

[54:08] so that we can keep up and maintain.

[54:12] So, as we're as we're innovating these

[54:13] spaces, I would love to see us innovate

[54:15] care for those spaces that gives us bang

[54:18] for our buck on our ongoing dollar.

[54:24] » And Mr. Chair,

[54:26] » Yes, Council Member Dugan,

[54:28] » Thank you. And I just again, I'll piggy

[54:30] back on everybody else here. The uh I

[54:32] love the idea of the beautifification

[54:33] and I also appreciate Council Member

[54:35] Young's comments about ongoing. It's

[54:38] because in my district it's always

[54:40] ongoing along Foothill Drive. I know

[54:42] it's a U dot road, but it's our side of

[54:45] uh the street, but between like 13 South

[54:47] and Sunnyside on the east side. The

[54:52] overgrowth along that uh sidewalk just

[54:55] makes that sidewalk unuh unusable and

[54:58] unpassable. It's every year it seems

[55:00] like it's a stretch there. And the

[55:02] beautifification just does not happen.

[55:04] And even when we complain about it,

[55:06] doesn't happen. It's one of those we

[55:08] need to have that done. It's not really

[55:09] the CIP side of the house. It's more the

[55:11] general budget side of the house. But

[55:14] those one of those projects is like,

[55:15] hey, we need to make sure that all the

[55:18] stuff that

[55:19] needs to be done is being done on a

[55:21] regular basis and not until someone

[55:23] complains about it.

[55:28] » Okay. Go ahead.

[55:29] » Great. Thank you. So, the next two

[55:33] projects

[55:34] are a little bit different than the

[55:35] others. Um, well, we've already

[55:37] discussed 57, which is the next one.

[55:39] It's the civic campus and the green

[55:41] loop. I just since we're going in order,

[55:44] I wanted to just

[55:46] » I

[55:49] just uh Sorry, Mr. Chair.

[55:52] » Yes, go ahead, Council Member Dian.

[55:54] » I appreciate the the conversation. I

[55:56] appreciate the work on the the Green

[55:57] Loop and the the funding for that and

[55:58] the vision on that. I'm just looking at

[56:02] uh possibly using some of the funds from

[56:04] the green lip on another project. Uh

[56:07] because this project has 99,000 coming

[56:10] from the general fund, that means that

[56:13] those funds are open to any uh

[56:17] multiple uses in all uses that we deem

[56:20] nec that we deem appropriate. So, I'm

[56:23] just looking at possibly using some of

[56:25] that 99,000

[56:27] out of this uh 3 million to go to a uh a

[56:31] separate project, project number 18,

[56:34] just to in uh boost that project up.

[56:41] And I was looking for between, you know,

[56:44] 30 and $50,000 would be great to add

[56:47] some more bike racks in number project

[56:49] number 18.

[56:53] M Mr. Chair.

[56:54] » Yes.

[56:54] » Followup question to M. Yes. Council

[56:56] » Member Dugan.

[56:57] » So we have a coun a question for council

[56:59] member Dugan's proposal.

[57:01] » Go ahead.

[57:02] » Will you run through it one more time?

[57:05] So you you're trying to fund uh 18

[57:09] which is 100,000 and take it potentially

[57:13] from 57.

[57:15] » Yeah. just take uh a small portion of 57

[57:19] and add it to number 18. And the reason

[57:22] is because uh we are in dire need of

[57:25] bike racks across the city. And I'm not

[57:27] specifically saying what district or

[57:29] what area for the bike racks. I leave

[57:31] that more up to the transportation

[57:33] department, but our bike racks across

[57:35] the city are in disrepair. And it just,

[57:38] you know, it doesn't support users of

[57:40] bikes because now they don't have a

[57:42] place to park them. And so the bike

[57:44] racks are a capital improvement. So we

[57:47] could use the general fund for that

[57:48] because it's a CIP project, but just

[57:50] boosting that uh

[57:53] CIP from 100 grand to say 150 grand.

[57:57] That that will give you about uh

[58:01] 40 45 uh bike racks

[58:06] across the city. and and our bike racks

[58:08] right now are just uh

[58:10] » Increasingly just being demolished.

[58:13] » I'm gonna call on myself to answer the

[58:17] qu to ask a question.

[58:19] » Sure.

[58:20] » Which is I mean it the project's request

[58:22] was only 100,000. It's fully funded. Why

[58:25] would we give more than what's

[58:26] requested?

[58:28] » Because right now just the 40,000 is

[58:30] just for bike racks themselves. until

[58:32] the only a few a portion of those that

[58:36] funding needs to go into the bike racks

[58:38] and I think we need to inc increase the

[58:40] number of bike racks we got uh funded

[58:42] new bike racks

[58:43] » Right

[58:44] » I understand I understand I understand

[58:46] your your position right there uh you're

[58:48] correct in that case

[58:50] but this is a 50/50 so I think it I

[58:53] would just look to for more of that uh

[58:56] so that they go specifically to the bike

[58:58] racks

[58:59] » Yeah I mean it's not that I don't want

[59:01] to fund

[59:02] bike racks necessarily. I'm just what if

[59:06] what if 40% is what is necessary to

[59:11] accomplish that

[59:13] um and meet the needs?

[59:16] » I don't know why.

[59:17] » Yeah.

[59:17] » Well, I Yeah, I don't know why they only

[59:19] put 100 grand there. It doesn't meet

[59:21] meet the needs of the city, but it does

[59:23] replace 20 bike racks, but rather

[59:25] increase those bike racks by more.

[59:27] » Okay.

[59:27] » I'm not going to I'm not going to call

[59:29] that. I'm just saying this came to the

[59:30] transportation department division also.

[59:32] It wasn't a a

[59:34] » Res

[59:37] project.

[59:38] » Okay. Council member Lopez Chavez.

[59:40] » Yeah. Thank you and thank you to council

[59:42] member Dugan for sharing that. I share a

[59:45] different perspective um since district

[59:47] 4 only has a partial funding log in the

[59:51] CIP and we've been so delicate about

[59:53] dispersing these funds and so I

[59:54] appreciate the conversation. Uh however

[59:57] there is one constituent request that I

[59:59] have brought up to the attention. I was

[1:00:00] just waiting to be patient about it. Um

[1:00:03] but if we are going to have that

[1:00:05] discussion number 25 I brought up early

[1:00:07] on in the CIP log. You have a printed

[1:00:10] sheet in front of you that breaks up the

[1:00:12] line items and still without

[1:00:16] prioritization from public lands is the

[1:00:18] curb that is missing from the median

[1:00:20] green space. that is some of the only

[1:00:22] green space in East Central and District

[1:00:25] 4 that's utilized near the U. And so, as

[1:00:28] much as I appreciate the conversation,

[1:00:30] just to echo what Council Member Petro

[1:00:31] said, our districts all have dire need

[1:00:34] and lowanging fruit, I'd much rather I

[1:00:36] don't want to eliminate funding from

[1:00:38] this project, but if we're going to um

[1:00:41] act out of distress and try to represent

[1:00:44] the needs of this city, you know, quite

[1:00:46] frankly, I I'd rather go back and have

[1:00:48] that conversation, which um Council

[1:00:50] Member Dugan, you and I had in relation

[1:00:52] to this gutter. We currently have

[1:00:55] immense misuse in the neighborhood where

[1:00:57] people are parking in what otherwise

[1:00:59] would be our green space. So, as much as

[1:01:02] I'd love to fund Green Loop, there's

[1:01:04] also existing green spaces that are

[1:01:06] utilized as parks that are currently uh

[1:01:09] unfortunately

[1:01:11] and organic parking spaces. So, I I

[1:01:15] appreciate I know there's need I've

[1:01:16] heard from businesses that want to see

[1:01:18] bike racks installed. That being said, I

[1:01:20] also know that our departments are

[1:01:23] cultivating a list to phase out how we

[1:01:26] uh approach this installation. Um I just

[1:01:29] see that there's dire safety needs in

[1:01:30] our city that are more of an impediment

[1:01:32] today than the bike racks.

[1:01:37] Okay. So, is that an official

[1:01:40] I guess my question for both of um

[1:01:43] Council Member Dugan and Lopez Chavez is

[1:01:45] are you making a motion to make changes

[1:01:49] or are we raising these as discussion

[1:01:51] points?

[1:01:54] » I would make a motion to uh adopt change

[1:01:58] number

[1:01:59] uh 57,

[1:02:01] reduce it by 50,000 and add it to number

[1:02:04] 18 uh for bike racks. I understand

[1:02:07] council Lopez's point that's for close

[1:02:10] to a million dollars for the the curbs

[1:02:12] which is a broader subject and this is

[1:02:15] just a a small portion of the of the

[1:02:18] civic campus and the green loop but I

[1:02:20] also look at it as part of the overall

[1:02:23] big picture on the civic campus side of

[1:02:25] the houses because these bike racks are

[1:02:27] not just one district they're across the

[1:02:29] city.

[1:02:30] » Okay. Um well hold on. So

[1:02:34] » That's a long motion. So that's your

[1:02:37] your I guess proposal and do you want to

[1:02:40] call for a straw poll or council member

[1:02:43] do you want to speak to the straw poll

[1:02:44] before we

[1:02:45] » I wouldateate one way or the other.

[1:02:47] » Okay. Council member Young.

[1:02:49] » So would it be possible to ask the

[1:02:51] administration what the impact would be

[1:02:54] related to the project and the funding?

[1:02:57] Like it would be helpful for me to know

[1:02:59] that before making like this type of

[1:03:02] change in allocation versus what was

[1:03:04] proposed.

[1:03:09] » Sorry. Um we have Blake Thomas. Um

[1:03:12] please tell us um Mr. Downtown. What

[1:03:15] impact would this have?

[1:03:18] » Um official title.

[1:03:19] » Um yeah, Blake, Mr. Downtown Thomas, uh

[1:03:24] senior adviser in the mayor's office.

[1:03:26] Thank you, Council Member Young. Thank

[1:03:28] you, council members, for your support

[1:03:30] um historically of the Civic Center

[1:03:32] project. The funding request that we

[1:03:34] have was very intentional. Um and so a

[1:03:38] reallocation of that funding would

[1:03:40] compromise the project and the

[1:03:42] timeliness. And part of that is trying

[1:03:44] to take advantage of a very

[1:03:47] serendipitous moment in time where

[1:03:49] there's uh philanthropic and business uh

[1:03:52] interest in the community to help fund

[1:03:54] the beautifification of downtown as it

[1:03:56] relates to the 2027 Temple Openhouse and

[1:03:59] the 2034 Olympics. So our hope is that

[1:04:02] in our current recommended budget, we

[1:04:05] have $60,000 for green bike. We also

[1:04:07] have $40,000 for bike rack replacements.

[1:04:10] So, we hope to keep as much of that

[1:04:12] funding as possible dedicated toward the

[1:04:14] civic center to get the project off the

[1:04:16] ground as we're currently undergoing a

[1:04:19] capital campaign feasibility study to

[1:04:21] try to use that 3 million as a a

[1:04:24] leverage or a match to the philanthropic

[1:04:26] community. So, we just heard some of

[1:04:28] those prospects and what the city's

[1:04:30] commitment is to that project. So, thank

[1:04:32] you for letting me speak to that.

[1:04:35] » Thank you, Council Member Pui. I would

[1:04:37] love to uh push a little more

[1:04:40] information on that. I I think the the

[1:04:42] option that is in front of us right now

[1:04:46] is for a small amount of money taken

[1:04:49] from a project. Um u and I will struggle

[1:04:54] with with the concept of shaving a

[1:04:57] little bit of money uh and and saying to

[1:05:00] me and me having supported this this

[1:05:04] project along the line. Uh but hearing

[1:05:07] that shaving a little bit of money uh

[1:05:10] will put it all in the garbage to me

[1:05:13] that's a little bit of a strain into the

[1:05:16] conversation. I So

[1:05:18] » Council member Dugan is asking for,000

[1:05:22] for his project.

[1:05:25] » The CDCIP suggested 2.76

[1:05:29] uh and a half uh to fund this. Could

[1:05:33] this project make a significant moving

[1:05:35] forward with that amount of money? That

[1:05:37] would be my my question. Could we still

[1:05:39] show good commitment to this project? Uh

[1:05:43] and potentially not

[1:05:45] » Uh that would be my spin to Dugan's uh

[1:05:48] question. Uh but you could answer either

[1:05:50] way for his $50,000 or for the 99 half

[1:05:55] that the the mayor recommended.

[1:05:57] » Yeah. Um thank you, Council Member Pui.

[1:05:59] Just to be completely clear, I'm not

[1:06:01] saying the project would be thrown in

[1:06:03] the garbage. I'm saying that a

[1:06:04] reallocation would compromise the total

[1:06:06] amount that the city is committing for

[1:06:08] us to then go try to leverage. So, um,

[1:06:12] » Expl you explain that to me because I I

[1:06:15] don't understand what that means.

[1:06:16] » Yeah, I think this would be the first

[1:06:18] construction dollars that would be

[1:06:20] dedicated toward the civic block. So,

[1:06:22] our hope is to have as much money as

[1:06:24] possible from this eligible source to be

[1:06:27] able to go after grants, philanthropy,

[1:06:29] and other sources since it'll end up

[1:06:31] being probably a 15 to$18 million

[1:06:34] project. So, I don't mean to be

[1:06:36] hyperbolic in any way and completely

[1:06:39] understand where you're coming from. I'm

[1:06:40] not saying that it's throwing it in the

[1:06:42] garbage, but I'm just saying that the

[1:06:44] reallocation of the total amount that we

[1:06:46] can go try to leverage in the community

[1:06:48] would be compromised.

[1:06:50] Council member Petro,

[1:06:53] » Can I ask a little bit about that? As

[1:06:55] someone who

[1:06:57] fundraises professionally,

[1:07:00] um the uncertainty in the world around

[1:07:02] us and competing demands is making

[1:07:04] fundraising difficult as it never has

[1:07:06] been. I'm also not a large municipality

[1:07:08] with a lot of other off benefits to

[1:07:11] offer. So, as I'm looking at this being

[1:07:13] 20%, you know that like I I want the

[1:07:16] green loop ultimately. It's something

[1:07:18] beautiful we deserve to have. I still

[1:07:20] struggle with how we rank it as a

[1:07:22] priority when we have so many competing

[1:07:24] priorities and an increasing number of

[1:07:27] priorities given to us from federal del

[1:07:29] dereliction of duty all the way down. So

[1:07:32] can you you don't have to do it on the

[1:07:34] public record but if we're going to give

[1:07:37] seed money any angel investor

[1:07:40] would say what are the other prospects

[1:07:43] how far along are we in them what are

[1:07:45] some soft commitments we have made

[1:07:48] giving 20% to something that we want and

[1:07:50] I would be even more aggressive I would

[1:07:51] shut 200 east all the way down and

[1:07:54] actually just green it all the way

[1:07:55] through I think you're actually being

[1:07:56] conservative in what you're presenting

[1:07:57] to us um

[1:08:01] if we're being asked to prioritize this

[1:08:04] at this moment above all else, knowing

[1:08:07] that we probably have another three

[1:08:09] cycles of true difficulty ahead of us at

[1:08:12] minimum, um I'd like to see what we've

[1:08:15] prospected and what the what the honest

[1:08:18] to God leveraging opportunity is to make

[1:08:21] sure this 20% does realize into what we

[1:08:24] need it to, especially if we're going to

[1:08:28] not allocating it to other very concrete

[1:08:31] things that we know we need and that

[1:08:33] will make a difference. Um and then the

[1:08:35] other thing not for Mr. Downtown is um

[1:08:39] bike racks on the west side don't just

[1:08:41] need to be physically there. We need

[1:08:44] assistance securing them. I have yet to

[1:08:47] find the U-lock that isn't cut while

[1:08:49] people are in the Smiths on 700 North

[1:08:52] leading people to not want to bike on

[1:08:54] the west side because there is no way

[1:08:56] for us to be guaranteed that our mode of

[1:08:58] transportation will be there when we

[1:08:59] come out. So if we are going to allocate

[1:09:02] additional money to bike racks, I would

[1:09:04] like part of it to go towards

[1:09:06] understanding what the best technologies

[1:09:09] options that not only allow us to like

[1:09:12] use our own locks, but promote the

[1:09:14] highest level of safety for people if we

[1:09:16] honestly want them to use them as

[1:09:18] transit.

[1:09:20] » Thank you. Um just Yeah. Uh I'm going to

[1:09:26] go first and because we have and then

[1:09:28] I'll back to you. Um, so and is it about

[1:09:32] council member Dugan's request for a

[1:09:34] straw hole? Okay. So, I also have a a

[1:09:38] constituent request for a bike rack that

[1:09:41] I thought would be a very simple and

[1:09:43] easy thing. Um, it is not it is going to

[1:09:46] be extremely expensive. Um, I understand

[1:09:50] that and I really want to be able to

[1:09:52] deliver on that request. However, I also

[1:09:55] have conversations weekly with

[1:09:59] constituents about Green Loop and trying

[1:10:02] to understand like what it is, where are

[1:10:06] we in the process, how much is it going

[1:10:07] to cost, where is the money going to

[1:10:08] come from, when does it start, what is

[1:10:11] all of those things. Um, and

[1:10:15] we, I feel like, have already started

[1:10:18] going down the path of doing that, uh,

[1:10:22] of answering those questions and

[1:10:23] planning out, um, getting together

[1:10:25] enough of a of a coherent plan that we

[1:10:28] actually know how it how much it is

[1:10:30] going to cost and how we're going to

[1:10:31] fund it. And I feel like, um, I am

[1:10:35] getting a lot more questions and

[1:10:36] pressure from residents about wanting

[1:10:38] answers on that um, than I

[1:10:42] as than I am about bike racks. And while

[1:10:44] I want to deliver for my constituent on

[1:10:46] bike racks as well and this would help

[1:10:47] me do that. Um we also

[1:10:52] um I would point out have about like 13

[1:10:56] minutes left um dedicated to this

[1:10:58] discussion and um this is our fourth

[1:11:02] briefing on it and we're we're not we're

[1:11:04] taking steps backwards instead of

[1:11:06] forwards. we have to get through this

[1:11:07] CIP so that we can vote on it. And um so

[1:11:11] I'm not inclined to

[1:11:14] in the in all of that context also add

[1:11:17] more than what the project is being a is

[1:11:20] being asked of us. So I am not going to

[1:11:22] support that, but I do understand the

[1:11:24] situation and I appreciate council

[1:11:26] member Dugan raising it except that we

[1:11:29] really don't have time. Um, so I'm gonna

[1:11:31] give you a very very quick speech and

[1:11:35] moment and then council member Young and

[1:11:37] then we just need to move forward with

[1:11:38] the straw hall.

[1:11:39] » Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I I echo your

[1:11:41] sentiment. I think we had opportunity.

[1:11:43] We've we've had conversations like this

[1:11:44] where we've raised it.

[1:11:46] » Um, again, I have equally a request like

[1:11:49] that in my district. Um, and we're going

[1:11:51] through that process. And so I will not

[1:11:54] be voting in favor of this straw poll.

[1:11:56] Um, and again, I just want to highlight

[1:11:59] number 25. I brought that early on to

[1:12:02] this uh council and I'll be uh I hope to

[1:12:05] ask a question to um John Larson and his

[1:12:08] team as well as uh uh transportation

[1:12:11] because that's considered even though

[1:12:12] it's a public lands project, it's a

[1:12:14] transportation project and we have more

[1:12:15] information from their staff. So, that

[1:12:17] being said, that's all I wanted to to

[1:12:19] state on the record.

[1:12:20] » Thank you, Council Member Young. So, I'm

[1:12:22] wondering if there might be an

[1:12:25] opportunity in a future meeting um from

[1:12:28] the administration, whether in our

[1:12:29] monthly update or whatever that looks

[1:12:31] like, just to also get a broader

[1:12:34] understanding about where we have

[1:12:36] existing projects that may include the

[1:12:39] opportunity for bike racks to be able to

[1:12:42] present a more holistic picture. I'll

[1:12:44] give one example. I know that we're

[1:12:46] having a conversation around Fairmont

[1:12:48] Park and potential improvements for that

[1:12:51] area moving forward. Maybe there could

[1:12:53] be like a bike rack or something like

[1:12:55] that just to be able to kind of more

[1:12:58] holistically address the um concerns

[1:13:01] that Council Member Dugan was

[1:13:02] reflecting. So, just wanted to put that

[1:13:04] out there as a potential ask

[1:13:07] » With the power vested in me by Jill

[1:13:09] Love. I totally support that request.

[1:13:12] » Thank you. Um, we'd be happy to do that.

[1:13:14] And I think that that's a good problem

[1:13:16] is this demand for that kind of

[1:13:19] infrastructure.

[1:13:19] » Thank you. Show your feelings

[1:13:22] » On the straw.

[1:13:23] » Yes. On the straw pole.

[1:13:24] » The straw poll is to take money from the

[1:13:26] the Yeah. 50,000 from Green Loop and put

[1:13:30] it to um the um green bike. Oh, I'm

[1:13:34] sorry. I'm a down. Okay. We have one

[1:13:37] thumbs up. We have four thumbs down. We

[1:13:39] have some

[1:13:42] Dan's a thumbs up

[1:13:43] » And oh sorry and Dan Dan is a thumbs up

[1:13:45] and um council member Petro is a thumbs

[1:13:47] down. So that um does not uh indicate

[1:13:52] enough support. Um of course that's not

[1:13:54] a final decision but let's move on.

[1:13:57] » Thank you very much.

[1:13:58] » Thanks.

[1:13:59] » Um Tom Mar would like to come up briefly

[1:14:02] and talk about

[1:14:04] number 25.

[1:14:06] » Okay.

[1:14:08] » Be quick.

[1:14:09] » Yes, I will. Um, and if there are any

[1:14:12] other questions about any of any other

[1:14:14] public lands applications while we're

[1:14:16] here, be happy to answer those. Um, in

[1:14:19] attachment seven for this agenda item,

[1:14:22] um, one of the questions that we

[1:14:24] answered was how we could potentially

[1:14:25] break up the 1200 East um, the East

[1:14:30] Central Community Council's 1200 East

[1:14:31] median restoration proposal application.

[1:14:34] To note that that is not the other 1200

[1:14:36] East um, application. uh between 300

[1:14:40] south and 500 south. Um what we had said

[1:14:43] uh in those answers and what we said in

[1:14:45] the application is that we had worked

[1:14:46] with the constituent to develop kind of

[1:14:48] two funding scenarios. One would be the

[1:14:52] full funding of completely rebuilding

[1:14:54] those those medians the islands for

[1:14:56] those two blocks. uh completely

[1:14:58] replacing the irrigation, all of the

[1:15:00] sod, adding in other water- wise

[1:15:02] plantings and and water saving features,

[1:15:05] art benches, new trees, uh new median

[1:15:09] island noses that stick out farther into

[1:15:11] the intersection and slow down traffic.

[1:15:13] We also developed a partial scope

[1:15:16] funding that has fewer trees, partial

[1:15:19] sod replacement, still the irrigation

[1:15:21] system replacement, and uh curbing

[1:15:23] gutter replacement. Um, I would also

[1:15:26] like to note in last fiscal year CIP uh

[1:15:29] council approved several hundred,000 for

[1:15:31] irrigation uh replacements especially

[1:15:34] and the locations we had identified were

[1:15:37] especially in park strips, medians in

[1:15:40] those spaces that offer that that green

[1:15:42] space in areas that have very little

[1:15:44] green space. Um, we could use some of

[1:15:47] that for the roughly

[1:15:50] um 200 or $220,000 of that partial scope

[1:15:56] that is for irrigation and and

[1:15:58] landscaping. We could not use it for the

[1:16:01] curb and gutter though. And if we were

[1:16:03] to not replace the curb and gutter, but

[1:16:04] were to replace the irrigation system,

[1:16:06] it's likely that that irrigation system

[1:16:08] would just break over again. Um, so a as

[1:16:12] I say that, um, uh, would love to ask,

[1:16:15] um, council to to consider the

[1:16:18] possibility of funding at least the curb

[1:16:20] and gutter replacement of those median

[1:16:23] islands and then the irrigation

[1:16:25] replacement or repairs um, could at

[1:16:27] least be partially covered by existing

[1:16:29] funding.

[1:16:30] » Council member Lopez, thank you for that

[1:16:33] and I really appreciate the report. I

[1:16:35] know that you're working diligently to

[1:16:37] find um, available funding. That being

[1:16:39] said, I wanted to ask, as I understand,

[1:16:41] curb is something that the cost center

[1:16:43] goes under transportation. Is that

[1:16:44] correct?

[1:16:45] » They or they oversee it.

[1:16:47] » The So, we could replace the curb and

[1:16:48] gutter with public lands funding.

[1:16:51] However, if it wasn't if this project

[1:16:54] wasn't funded, we couldn't use our

[1:16:56] irrigation and landscaping funding to go

[1:16:59] replace curs. But yes, those medians are

[1:17:01] our purview and and we could uh repair

[1:17:04] them if the funding was available.

[1:17:05] » Okay? because I know I've highlighted

[1:17:07] this to my colleagues. I just want to

[1:17:08] mention they're currently dead. There's

[1:17:11] broken irrigation. They're used as

[1:17:13] parking lots in uh unfortunately during

[1:17:16] University of View events and other

[1:17:18] types of events here. That being said, I

[1:17:20] wanted to ask if there's any other

[1:17:21] excess funding in transportation or

[1:17:24] related to cur curvature projects that

[1:17:26] could be utilized so that we're not

[1:17:27] having to absorb this dire need through

[1:17:30] CIP this year.

[1:17:33] I don't know if I could answer that

[1:17:35] question,

[1:17:37] but John's here.

[1:17:40] » Yes,

[1:17:41] » Council Member Puy.

[1:17:43] » Thank you. The removal the curve uh

[1:17:48] it's $210,000

[1:17:51] and the um the regations is 150. What to

[1:17:57] summarize what you requested or if we

[1:18:01] could do something you you said to to

[1:18:03] replace the curve and the the the

[1:18:06] irrigation system. Is that what you were

[1:18:10] about like contingencies or design? Do

[1:18:13] we need to allocate more money? Could we

[1:18:15] do these things separate?

[1:18:18] Um, I would have to run numbers on what

[1:18:20] the what the contingency and inflation

[1:18:24] factor and those other soft costs would

[1:18:25] would be, but if we just did the

[1:18:27] replacement of the curbon gutter, the

[1:18:29] irrigation system replacement, I would

[1:18:32] recommend the partial sod replacement

[1:18:34] and then those soft costs, I could

[1:18:35] calculate that, but it would probably be

[1:18:37] still in excess of three or $400,000.

[1:18:40] But the total of the partial scope cost

[1:18:43] estimate is just less than 600,000.

[1:18:46] And then the total for the full scope uh

[1:18:50] was a little bit more than 950,000.

[1:18:52] » But I think your question is related to

[1:18:54] just the curb. Is that correct? The

[1:18:56] $200,000 that they have access that

[1:18:58] could be utilized for irrigation.

[1:19:01] » I mean, yeah, I'm trying to figure out.

[1:19:03] So you also mentioned that you could

[1:19:05] potentially pay find the funding for the

[1:19:07] curve from other areas that are not CIP

[1:19:11] or is that you're saying that it needs

[1:19:12] to come from CIP?

[1:19:14] » So I believe you say irrigation. He

[1:19:16] could use existing irrigation funding

[1:19:17] that was allocated by council last year

[1:19:19] to help fund the irrigation part. We

[1:19:21] don't have any current curb and gutter

[1:19:23] funding in public lands that could be

[1:19:25] allocated towards this. That's what I

[1:19:27] was trying to say.

[1:19:28] We'd have to look at um for the the

[1:19:30] curbon gutter I think could be eligible

[1:19:33] under like street reconstruction funding

[1:19:37] um which generally the streets are

[1:19:40] reconstructed based on on the pavement

[1:19:42] condition and then and and then we we

[1:19:46] look at the the street like all all the

[1:19:49] curb gutter along that street and fix it

[1:19:50] at the time. It's usually not driven by

[1:19:53] the curb and gutter, but in this case,

[1:19:55] um that's something especially if it was

[1:19:58] direction from council, we could look at

[1:20:00] some previous um allocated street

[1:20:04] reconstruction or complete street

[1:20:06] reconstruction funding um and move some

[1:20:09] of that to uh replacing the curbon

[1:20:12] gutter here.

[1:20:13] » So, if I'm understanding correctly, we

[1:20:15] could add a contingency on existing

[1:20:17] funding to just look at the curbon

[1:20:18] gutter. So that way we can deploy

[1:20:21] irrigation

[1:20:22] funds on the medians. Is that accurate?

[1:20:26] » Um I don't know that I would word it in

[1:20:28] that way that um because the budget has

[1:20:30] already been adopted, the opportunity to

[1:20:33] put a contingency on it is has passed.

[1:20:36] So you don't have the ability to put a

[1:20:38] contingency on existing funding. If the

[1:20:40] administration is amendable, they can

[1:20:43] decide to deploy existing budgeted funds

[1:20:47] in a particular way, but the

[1:20:49] administration would have to decide that

[1:20:50] unless the council went in and um

[1:20:54] altered it in a budget amendment. So, I

[1:20:57] think a future budget amendment would be

[1:21:00] um if unless the administration is just

[1:21:02] willing and ready to do that project,

[1:21:04] and I think that would be great. Um the

[1:21:07] council could do it in a budget

[1:21:09] amendment. I would I I guess I hesitate.

[1:21:11] Um the only hesitation I have is making

[1:21:14] sure that the administration does have

[1:21:17] sufficient funds to deploy those funds

[1:21:19] in that way and that the administration

[1:21:22] is supportive of using those funds in

[1:21:25] that way because those funds have

[1:21:27] already been adopted.

[1:21:28] » Okay. Um,

[1:21:30] » Yeah,

[1:21:31] » I um we can steal about 10 minutes from

[1:21:36] another Oh,

[1:21:38] » John, before we do that, we can steal

[1:21:41] about 10 minutes from another discussion

[1:21:43] item and then that's all that we have

[1:21:46] left to Kate. Have we made it through

[1:21:48] all of the ones that were recommended

[1:21:50] for funding?

[1:21:51] » There's one more. It's number 62 and

[1:21:54] that is funding for vacant properties

[1:21:56] for um um Fisher mansion some historic

[1:22:01] rehabilitation and then for fleet block

[1:22:03] pre um pre-esign I believe for the

[1:22:08] public space. So um that's the last one.

[1:22:12] » Okay.

[1:22:14] Are there how many more proposals are

[1:22:17] there to shift funds around? You have

[1:22:19] one.

[1:22:21] Council member Mono, do you have any?

[1:22:24] Council member Young, Council Member

[1:22:26] Petro,

[1:22:28] » Thank you so much for being so go with

[1:22:31] the flow.

[1:22:33] » Um, okay. I also

[1:22:36] » I I know. Hold on. I also don't have any

[1:22:38] more. Um, Council Member Dugan, are you

[1:22:41] going to be making any more proposals to

[1:22:42] shift funds around?

[1:22:44] » No, sir.

[1:22:45] » Okay. So, I with the 10 minutes that we

[1:22:49] have left, I I know we want to hear from

[1:22:51] John, but I also don't know how much

[1:22:53] discussion we're going to want to have

[1:22:54] on this point. And this is all we've

[1:22:57] got. So, how long is your answer?

[1:23:03] Can it be in one sentence?

[1:23:06] » Can we get back to you for next week?

[1:23:08] » Thank you.

[1:23:09] » Yeah.

[1:23:11] » Great. Council, would you like to make a

[1:23:14] straw poll at this time?

[1:23:16] Well, there's there's no money. I was

[1:23:19] looking I was looking for an answer to

[1:23:20] see if that's something that they have

[1:23:23] funds to deploy. It sounds like that's

[1:23:24] something that we'd either have to talk

[1:23:26] as a budget amendment at a later time.

[1:23:28] » Uh that being said, since it is on the

[1:23:30] record, I just want to recognize this is

[1:23:33] uh eight years in the making of the CIP.

[1:23:35] I've brought this up. Um although yes,

[1:23:38] we're looking to replace irrigation

[1:23:39] system, the dire need of the curb. This

[1:23:43] is misutilized green space. Could you

[1:23:44] imagine the green loop if it was used as

[1:23:46] a parking lot?

[1:23:48] » So, this is the conversation we're going

[1:23:50] to hear from neighbors later today.

[1:23:52] » Okay. Do you want to make a strap poll?

[1:23:55] » No. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[1:23:56] » Okay. Thank you. Council member,

[1:23:58] » Can I ask a question that goes on with

[1:24:00] it? Are there easy going?

[1:24:02] » Are there are there tools available to

[1:24:04] us? Like I I love this that there might

[1:24:05] be other ways to fund this. I'm I'm

[1:24:07] happy with it. What I'm worried about is

[1:24:09] that it be falls off our priority list

[1:24:11] after the conversation. Um outside Is it

[1:24:14] a legislative intent or is there a tool

[1:24:16] we can employ now to make sure that I

[1:24:18] will not think of this again because

[1:24:20] it's not my district and we have so many

[1:24:22] other things. I don't want to lose track

[1:24:23] of this. This is a commitment that we

[1:24:25] need to make to these neighbors. Um I

[1:24:27] think we could absolutely include it as

[1:24:29] a legislative intent um when you adopt

[1:24:31] CIP. And I think the I mean we can

[1:24:35] brainstorm as staff to figure out what

[1:24:37] the most appropriate next step is. I

[1:24:39] think in my mind I think the most

[1:24:40] appropriate next step would be a budget

[1:24:42] amendment just because then it's it

[1:24:44] stands out. It stands alone as its own

[1:24:45] project. It doesn't kind of get lost in

[1:24:47] the departmental um you know other

[1:24:50] priorities in the department. And I and

[1:24:51] I wonder if between now and the next

[1:24:53] budget amendment, we can work with the

[1:24:54] administration to figure out, you know,

[1:24:57] c does it need to come can can it come

[1:24:59] from fully from within existing

[1:25:01] department budgets and it's just

[1:25:03] reallocating existing department budgets

[1:25:06] or does there need to be some infusion

[1:25:08] from like fund balance for to to make up

[1:25:10] some difference. So, between

[1:25:12] transportation and public lands, I think

[1:25:15] we'll have a few follow-up conversations

[1:25:16] to figure out like exactly what that but

[1:25:18] it can be a council added item in the

[1:25:20] next budget amendment. Um, and we can

[1:25:23] adopt a legislative intent, I think, so

[1:25:24] that we don't forget it.

[1:25:26] » I don't want to trample you, but I'm in

[1:25:28] support of anything that helps keep this

[1:25:29] top of mind.

[1:25:31] » Thank you, Council Member Puy. Go ahead.

[1:25:33] » Thank you. I Okay, join me for the this

[1:25:36] fun ride. I So, number 41 is Glendale

[1:25:39] traffic calming. Uh it this is a a

[1:25:42] project that is uh very important to

[1:25:43] district 2. It's uh it's on California

[1:25:46] Avenue. Uh and uh the community

[1:25:49] organized themselves to uh for several

[1:25:52] years on a row to study the

[1:25:54] intersections uh of California and

[1:25:56] Navajo with Mountain View uh elementary

[1:26:00] um you know and Glendel Middle School uh

[1:26:04] and all the traffic issues. There's a

[1:26:05] lot of kids. Those are schools that are,

[1:26:07] you know, growing and and very very

[1:26:11] important to the to the to the community

[1:26:13] as a whole. Uh they submitted a CIP

[1:26:15] years ago that we funded uh to study uh

[1:26:19] what improvements to do in these

[1:26:20] intersections. Uh and 41 is the result

[1:26:24] of that study. Uh it basically requests

[1:26:27] almost half a million dollars in in in

[1:26:30] improvements. That's a lot of money that

[1:26:32] we are we seem not to have. Uh but phase

[1:26:36] one uh potentially we could do this in

[1:26:39] phase in phases and we're talking about

[1:26:41] safety uh you know we we heard a lot

[1:26:44] about this year different u uh public

[1:26:46] safety uh requests and I would like to

[1:26:49] make an argument to fund partially phase

[1:26:52] one uh which I to my understanding is

[1:26:55] about $200,000

[1:26:57] uh of of phase one. Um, and I would like

[1:27:00] to uh propose if there's a if there is

[1:27:03] an amicable uh interest in uh in funding

[1:27:06] it uh to to um take $76,000 from number

[1:27:11] 38 which is uh the uh phase three

[1:27:16] phase three on the uh uh

[1:27:20] public safety uh PV charging stations

[1:27:23] which is the phase the last phase of it.

[1:27:26] Uh uh and then uh

[1:27:29] » How much?

[1:27:30] » $76,000

[1:27:31] which is what we were told earlier that

[1:27:33] was the last phase of that project. So

[1:27:35] we find still phase one and two the most

[1:27:37] expensive parts of it. Um and then uh

[1:27:41] take uh take $50,000

[1:27:45] from uh number 57 which is the the Green

[1:27:48] Loop um the Green Loop implementation um

[1:27:53] initial commitment. Um And I that is

[1:27:57] really where I would like to stop. It's

[1:28:00] it's giving some tools to the to the

[1:28:02] department to uh to see if they can

[1:28:05] leverage some other funds. That gives

[1:28:06] you $126,000 for um for public safety

[1:28:12] across the school.

[1:28:13] » How sorry, how much was it from 57?

[1:28:16] » 50.

[1:28:18] » Okay.

[1:28:21] » Okay.

[1:28:22] Um

[1:28:24] discussion to this item,

[1:28:26] » Mr. Chair.

[1:28:27] » Yes.

[1:28:27] » Um

[1:28:29] council

[1:28:29] » Member Pui, I don't know as much about

[1:28:32] the Glendale safety project.

[1:28:35] If we only did the 70 some odd thousand

[1:28:39] from the electric vehicle charging, but

[1:28:41] not the additional 50 from the green

[1:28:43] loop. Would that be usable?

[1:28:46] » I think that's a Jordan Larson question.

[1:28:48] I I will say u you know I I would love

[1:28:52] to,

[1:28:55] you know, phase one is about 200,000.

[1:28:57] Um, you know, I'm trying to get them as

[1:29:01] close as possible to that. Uh, I don't

[1:29:04] know how much on a $3 million project,

[1:29:07] 50,000

[1:29:09] derails it or shows that we're not

[1:29:11] committed to the the green loop. I been

[1:29:14] very supportive of it, uh, especially on

[1:29:17] this block. Um, and I still think that

[1:29:21] meets all the goals a bit in the middle

[1:29:23] um which I think it's a recipe of a good

[1:29:26] argument but um maybe we can ask uh you

[1:29:30] know John if he

[1:29:32] » John can you

[1:29:34] » So if it so that was how much 75 plus 50

[1:29:38] » So 126 126,000 versus 76,000

[1:29:45] » What can you do with 126,000 on

[1:29:48] California.

[1:29:51] » Um the the concrete speed humps or speed

[1:29:55] cushions on wider roads are um coming in

[1:30:00] probably around 20,000 each. Um there

[1:30:04] are some like engineering fees and um

[1:30:07] mobilization costs that um the

[1:30:10] contractors charge us. So the smaller

[1:30:12] the contract, the more those kind of

[1:30:15] extra fees are. Um but if it was kind of

[1:30:19] that that phase one just doing um speed

[1:30:23] humps on on one street

[1:30:26] then um we could probably package it

[1:30:29] with one of one of the other um bigger

[1:30:32] traffic calming packages that already

[1:30:34] happening and so that would lower some

[1:30:35] of those those overhead costs. So, um I

[1:30:39] mean just to be safe, maybe assume

[1:30:41] 25,000 per uh per speed hump or speed

[1:30:46] cushion.

[1:30:49] I don't know if will that answer you

[1:30:51] know I guess the options we have right

[1:30:54] now is either 76,000 alone potentially

[1:30:58] if you know if I can get some support

[1:31:01] here or um

[1:31:05] you know is there a better number that

[1:31:07] you could obviously getting all the

[1:31:09] money is certainly ideal but

[1:31:11] » Is there a little more money that will

[1:31:12] make a difference here uh knowing that

[1:31:14] you're saying $25,000 is valid speed

[1:31:18] cushion

[1:31:19] So

[1:31:21] potentially that gives you three but not

[1:31:23] quite because there is engineering cost

[1:31:25] to all of that maybe two. Um is that I

[1:31:29] don't know if that answers

[1:31:32] » Or can repeat. I

[1:31:33] » I guess the reason I was asking the

[1:31:34] question is just I think I'm more

[1:31:35] comfortable with the first request and

[1:31:38] given what Mr. Downtown just told us

[1:31:41] about the green loop funding I I'm a

[1:31:44] little more hesitant to take money away

[1:31:46] from that request.

[1:31:48] Um, so I think if you're calling for a

[1:31:52] straw poll, I I feel comfortable

[1:31:55] uh with the the electric vehicle

[1:31:57] charging one and I need a little more

[1:31:59] convincing on

[1:32:02] » Mr. Chair,

[1:32:03] » Hold on just a second. We got council

[1:32:04] member Petro first, then council member

[1:32:07] Dugan, then council member Pu or unless

[1:32:09] council member Pui is answering

[1:32:10] something directly from Darren.

[1:32:12] » I was just going to call for a vote.

[1:32:13] » Oh. Uh, do you, Council Member Petro, do

[1:32:16] you want to speak to this?

[1:32:17] » I want to speak to this. Go ahead. If

[1:32:18] you look in the description, we have

[1:32:22] three schools in on this road, like not

[1:32:26] close by, like on the road. The school

[1:32:28] has the community learning center. So,

[1:32:30] we have pregnant moms going there to get

[1:32:32] prenatal care. English is a second

[1:32:35] language. It is a refuge and it is one

[1:32:38] of the most dangerous places in the city

[1:32:41] and one of the most underengineered. Not

[1:32:43] for fault of the current transportation.

[1:32:45] It's what we inherited. I I I think

[1:32:48] you're being kind by only asking for

[1:32:50] that money and not asking for us to go

[1:32:52] back on the green loop to what was

[1:32:54] suggested by the CDCIP board. This

[1:32:57] requires a level of investment and much

[1:32:59] like what we're committing to on the

[1:33:01] east side over on 11th east which has

[1:33:03] been forstalled for a long time. this

[1:33:05] outcry has existed for a long time. So I

[1:33:08] I commend you for being as restrained as

[1:33:10] you are in your district and trying to

[1:33:12] meet us. Uh I think that if you ask for

[1:33:16] more this this issue augers that kind

[1:33:19] this these are literally children. Plus

[1:33:22] when you add in who goes to the library,

[1:33:23] who goes to the CLC, the the massive

[1:33:26] social function that that serves, it

[1:33:28] it's without a question one of the

[1:33:30] things we have to be investing in.

[1:33:33] Council member Duggan. Um,

[1:33:35] » Michael, thank you and I appreciate the

[1:33:38] all the traffic comment discussions.

[1:33:39] Now, how does this live uh align with

[1:33:42] the livable streets constructions and

[1:33:44] the zones on the on the in the area?

[1:33:49] I can't from the map I can't determine

[1:33:51] if this is in zone 7

[1:33:54] or not as far as liberal streets or

[1:33:57] zone. Yeah, zone seven.

[1:34:00] Was

[1:34:04] it outside zone seven?

[1:34:07] » Looks like it might be zone 49.

[1:34:11] » Oh, it's zone 49. Okay,

[1:34:19] » That is an area where as council member

[1:34:22] uh said multiple schools.

[1:34:26] » Yeah. I I I wonder I mean my question to

[1:34:29] uh council member Mano uh is there any

[1:34:34] amount uh just so I can frame my uh you

[1:34:37] know is there any amount that if I made

[1:34:41] this number 100,000 so being 76 from the

[1:34:45] uh electrical uh PSB building uh and we

[1:34:50] add you know the $24,000 to make it a h

[1:34:53] 100red uh is that something that still

[1:34:55] like feels iffy to you.

[1:35:04] » Can you remind me which number is the

[1:35:06] green loop funding that you're wanting

[1:35:08] to take from

[1:35:09] » The which one?

[1:35:10] » The the green loop

[1:35:11] » Green loop is 57.

[1:35:12] » 5 Okay, let me

[1:36:06] I'm not sure exactly how to answer your

[1:36:08] question, but I

[1:36:11] um

[1:36:13] I'm hearing the arguments. I know the

[1:36:15] traffic calming is important and I

[1:36:19] understand that that street has three

[1:36:21] schools. I I'm also

[1:36:25] Um, it historically with traffic calming

[1:36:28] requests, I've tried to go with what

[1:36:31] we've done with data and and understand

[1:36:34] the prioritization that was done by the

[1:36:36] departments and and make sure that we're

[1:36:38] funding as much of the traffic calming

[1:36:40] money in that main livable streets line

[1:36:43] item, which I think we have 2 million

[1:36:45] in. Um, so I guess I'm I'm not sure

[1:36:49] exactly where I'm landing on that, but

[1:36:51] » I would like to suggest a straw poll uh

[1:36:53] to move $76,000 from the uh PSB uh

[1:36:58] number 38 to uh the um to this uh to

[1:37:04] this line item 41. Um that is my straw

[1:37:08] poll right now.

[1:37:12] » Okay, we have um six thumbs up. Council

[1:37:15] member Dugan,

[1:37:18] » He's thumbs up. Okay. So, that is a

[1:37:21] seven thumbs up for to reallocate 76,000

[1:37:26] from um the um phase three of the

[1:37:29] electrification of the polar electric

[1:37:32] outlets, EV stations at PSB and um to

[1:37:37] put it towards uh this project.

[1:37:41] Any other discussion to this? Great.

[1:37:44] because we're already over time. Good

[1:37:46] job, everybody. We made it.

[1:37:48] Um

[1:37:54] » Oh, okay.

[1:37:56] Do you have another shopple?

[1:37:58] » No, I I think I'm going to uh I'm going

[1:38:00] to work that one a little harder.

[1:38:01] » Okay, thank you.

[1:38:04] All right, great. So, um we are at

[1:38:08] agenda item number three. Um, this is

[1:38:13] anformational discussion on our safe

[1:38:15] streets action plan kickoff.

[1:38:19] Very timely after our streets safety

[1:38:22] discussion.

[1:38:26] Okay. So, with us, sorry, we have

[1:38:27] Allison Roland from um the council

[1:38:30] office. We have John Larson. We have

[1:38:31] Jenna Simkins, uh, transportation

[1:38:33] planner.

[1:38:35] » Um, Allison, do you want to start us

[1:38:38] off?

[1:38:39] » Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh this plan is

[1:38:42] focused on reaching zero traffic

[1:38:43] fatalities and serious injuries by 2035.

[1:38:47] The plan will be based on systemwide

[1:38:49] approach to transportation safety and

[1:38:52] use data to identify and prioritize

[1:38:54] strategies for improvements. The

[1:38:56] division has been building consensus

[1:38:58] among stakeholders across city, county,

[1:39:00] and state actors including UD do and the

[1:39:04] Wasatch Front Regional Council. So two

[1:39:06] of the biggest fish. Um, and the final

[1:39:08] plan is anticipated in spring 2026. So,

[1:39:12] I will leave more detail on all these

[1:39:14] items to John Larson and Jenna Simpkins.

[1:39:19] Okay.

[1:39:20] » Uh, thank you for inviting us to come

[1:39:22] and speak with you today. Um, my name is

[1:39:24] Jenna Simpkins. I am the project manager

[1:39:26] for the Safe Streets Action Plan. Um,

[1:39:28] I'm going to be giving a brief overview

[1:39:30] of why we are creating the plan, what an

[1:39:32] action plan is, the underlying

[1:39:34] philosophy behind it, um, and our

[1:39:37] timeline. If you could hit next, please.

[1:39:41] So, why are we creating this plan? Um,

[1:39:44] in 2023, Mayor Menden Hall made a

[1:39:47] commitment to uh, end traffic fatalities

[1:39:50] and serious injuries in Salt Lake City

[1:39:51] by 2035. This action plan will be our

[1:39:54] roadmap to achieving that ambitious

[1:39:56] goal. Um it also gives us a great

[1:39:58] opportunity to be transparent and

[1:40:00] accountable to the public. Uh we are

[1:40:02] already doing good work to make streets

[1:40:04] safer. Uh and we want to highlight the

[1:40:06] next steps we'll be taking um towards

[1:40:08] this ambitious goal. The action plan is

[1:40:11] a way for us to build consensus uh among

[1:40:14] stakeholders. Uh we've been working with

[1:40:16] UDOT and zero fatalities program and

[1:40:19] also the Wasatch Front Regional Council

[1:40:21] with the comprehensive safety action

[1:40:22] plan. um because the reality is uh the

[1:40:25] transportation division cannot achieve

[1:40:27] this goal alone. We need a

[1:40:29] multid-disciplinary approach.

[1:40:32] And then lastly, an action plan is one

[1:40:34] of the requirements from the vision zero

[1:40:35] network for recognition as an official

[1:40:38] vision zero community or city. Um the

[1:40:41] vision zero network is a national

[1:40:43] organization that provides resources and

[1:40:46] guidance um to cities like ours that

[1:40:48] want to stop traffic deaths and serious

[1:40:50] injuries. Um we've already met some of

[1:40:53] the other requirements which include

[1:40:55] support from elected officials. Um

[1:40:57] setting a target date of 2035,

[1:41:00] identifying the high injury network

[1:41:02] which is our streets that have a

[1:41:03] disproportionate number of um deadly or

[1:41:06] severe crashes. Um and then of course

[1:41:09] the vision zero task force. Next please.

[1:41:16] So uh briefly what is an action plan?

[1:41:19] Um, a vision zero action plan identifies

[1:41:22] and prioritizes datadriven, short-term,

[1:41:25] multid-disciplinary strategies to end

[1:41:27] traffic fatalities and serious injuries.

[1:41:29] Our plan will be focusing on the next

[1:41:31] five years. Um, we want concrete,

[1:41:34] measurable strategies we can implement

[1:41:36] in the short term. In 2030, we will look

[1:41:39] to update the plan based upon what we

[1:41:41] learn as we work to implement it. it's

[1:41:43] likely we'll need to pivot and adapt um

[1:41:46] based upon what we experience as we work

[1:41:48] to implement the plan. Next slide.

[1:41:53] So digging more into the strategies

[1:41:55] we're looking at um the underlying

[1:41:58] approach is the safe system approach

[1:42:00] that will guide our plan. Um in a

[1:42:03] nutshell it starts with the basic

[1:42:05] understanding that humans are imperfect.

[1:42:09] Humans will make mistakes and so we need

[1:42:11] a system that when someone makes a

[1:42:13] mistake when walking, biking or driving

[1:42:16] um it does not result in a death or

[1:42:19] serious injury. Um so that means that we

[1:42:22] need to shift to acknowledging that

[1:42:24] responsibility is shared between the

[1:42:25] system designers and the system users.

[1:42:28] We need to be very proactive in

[1:42:30] improving safety and we need to have

[1:42:32] many layers of protection um to reach

[1:42:35] this goal of stopping traffic deaths and

[1:42:38] serious injuries. So uh the strategies

[1:42:40] in the plan will be uh in these

[1:42:42] organized in these five categories um

[1:42:45] safe vehicles, safe speeds, safe roads,

[1:42:49] postc crash care and safe road users.

[1:42:53] Next slide please.

[1:42:56] Here's a rough overview of our timeline.

[1:42:59] Um, so far we've been um working on

[1:43:02] reviewing existing plans, policies, and

[1:43:05] programs. Um, one of the challenges with

[1:43:08] this project is we don't want to

[1:43:09] duplicate good work that's already

[1:43:11] happening at within the city and with

[1:43:13] our external partners. Um, we've also

[1:43:16] been undertaking stakeholder interviews

[1:43:17] to gain more information.

[1:43:20] We've kicked off a community engagement.

[1:43:21] There's a survey online right now that

[1:43:24] people can take to share their thoughts

[1:43:25] about uh what they think we should do to

[1:43:27] make streets safer.

[1:43:30] Um later this year we will share a draft

[1:43:34] version of the plan. That will be the

[1:43:36] second time the public can provide

[1:43:37] input. The key question there will be um

[1:43:41] what out of all the strategies we're

[1:43:42] listing, what do you think is the most

[1:43:44] important for us to do? What should we

[1:43:46] do first? Basically,

[1:43:48] um, based upon the feedback we hear, we

[1:43:50] will update and finalize the plan over

[1:43:52] the winter and then have a final version

[1:43:54] of the plan in the spring. Um, we will

[1:43:56] come back to you to present the plan for

[1:43:58] your consideration for adoption. Um,

[1:44:02] after that, assuming is adopted, we will

[1:44:05] uh apply to the vision zero network for

[1:44:07] recognition as an official Vision Zero

[1:44:09] community.

[1:44:12] Next slide, please.

[1:44:15] So that was a brief overview. Um I

[1:44:18] wanted to uh thank you know again this

[1:44:20] is a multi-disiplinary effort uh and

[1:44:22] we've had a lot of people helping us uh

[1:44:24] helping the transportation division with

[1:44:26] it. In particular I want to thank um the

[1:44:28] city innovation team for all the work

[1:44:29] they are doing for the safe streets

[1:44:31] action plan. Um I want to thank the city

[1:44:34] uh the citywide commun communications

[1:44:36] team for their help in using shape SLC

[1:44:39] and uh thank the steering committee for

[1:44:41] their uh work.

[1:44:43] Thank you.

[1:44:46] » Thank you.

[1:44:49] » Questions,

[1:44:51] » Mr. Chair?

[1:44:52] » Yes, Council Member Dugan.

[1:44:54] » Thank you very much. And Janet, thank

[1:44:56] you for the presentation. And John and

[1:44:58] Jenna, thank you for the the focus on

[1:45:00] this vision zero. Uh we can't focus, you

[1:45:03] know, using that same word. Uh and we

[1:45:07] need to continue to focus on this this

[1:45:09] issue. It's probably one of the number

[1:45:11] one issues I see in my district. I'm

[1:45:13] always getting requests about how we

[1:45:16] make our city streets safer for

[1:45:17] pedestrians, bikers, drivers, all alike.

[1:45:20] And we can't uh we don't have enough

[1:45:22] funds for all the projects I want in

[1:45:24] just District 6 uh because of this. And

[1:45:26] so this is a really a great tool and I

[1:45:30] I'm looking forward to the plan. I'm

[1:45:31] looking forward to implementation and

[1:45:33] and pressing on with the livable streets

[1:45:36] program and making sure we can move as

[1:45:38] fast as we can. uh across the board on

[1:45:41] all these areas. So, thank you very much

[1:45:42] for the work.

[1:45:46] » Council member Petro,

[1:45:48] » Generally supportive of people crossing

[1:45:50] streets safely and cars getting where

[1:45:52] they go. Can I please beg even if it's

[1:45:55] just in written form? I need to

[1:45:57] understand better maybe like a a matrix

[1:46:00] of some sort that shows me what is

[1:46:02] complete streets versus what is livable

[1:46:04] streets versus what is vision zero? What

[1:46:07] what other things am I missing? Like I I

[1:46:09] just want to be sure I understand that

[1:46:12] in doing and I'm doing my job well in

[1:46:14] allocating resources.

[1:46:17] » It's all in the depot district plan.

[1:46:19] » It's all in the web

[1:46:20] » The depot district plan which is not to

[1:46:22] be confused with yeah

[1:46:26] » We have actually been working on

[1:46:27] » Insider council joke

[1:46:31] sorry um John go ahead. Um

[1:46:34] we are actually working on a on a matrix

[1:46:36] that we are excited to share with you

[1:46:37] soon. Um I was reviewing a draft of it

[1:46:41] this morning um for for this and all all

[1:46:44] the programs and um I have to admit my

[1:46:47] goal is to get something that you would

[1:46:49] be willing to put on the your office

[1:46:51] wall and so no pressure but uh would

[1:46:54] mean a lot. Um so it it just a quick

[1:46:59] answer to um what what you said is um

[1:47:05] the the livable streets is focused on um

[1:47:09] local uh residential streets. Um the the

[1:47:14] vision zero program is focused on the

[1:47:18] streets that have um a higher incidence

[1:47:21] of of injuries and fatalities which are

[1:47:23] the the collectors and arterials. Um and

[1:47:26] then um the the complete streets are

[1:47:30] focused on um the uh

[1:47:35] basically building out the the

[1:47:37] pedestrian and bicycle and transit

[1:47:38] master plans which um are are targeted

[1:47:42] at um fleshing out a multimodal network.

[1:47:46] » It feels like sometimes when he funds

[1:47:47] something it funds all three of them,

[1:47:49] sometimes it's only one of them. So it

[1:47:51] would just help me as a reference

[1:47:56] Mr. Chair.

[1:47:57] » Yes. Council member Pu.

[1:47:59] » I I'm uh certainly this is you know this

[1:48:02] council has shown uh support to um to to

[1:48:08] safer streets uh you know and and uh and

[1:48:11] implementing uh with our with money uh

[1:48:16] you know making a difference in our

[1:48:18] communities to to make our our roads

[1:48:20] safer for everyone. Um I um

[1:48:26] what this plan would do as far as um

[1:48:31] what weight of uh importance has it will

[1:48:34] it have guiding our future uh changes or

[1:48:37] improvements and is this going to be uh

[1:48:41] suggested changes uh and are going to be

[1:48:46] either in policy or infrastructure or

[1:48:48] both? uh and the question that I'm

[1:48:51] asking relates to uh for example

[1:48:54] starting that with the current funding

[1:48:57] it will take us a 100red years to go

[1:48:59] through um paving our streets to the

[1:49:02] level that we have identified that we

[1:49:04] need to pay pave um and I don't I always

[1:49:08] struggle with you know unattainable

[1:49:10] goals um and you know setting up a goal

[1:49:13] for ourselves that we will never uh be

[1:49:16] able to accomplish So

[1:49:19] what will this study give us and uh you

[1:49:22] know are there different achievable

[1:49:25] goals that we can actually fund uh in

[1:49:28] the long term or short term?

[1:49:31] » Um yeah and I I think what's so exciting

[1:49:34] about this plan is that it really builds

[1:49:38] upon uh kind of like what Jenna talked

[1:49:41] about the the whole safe systems

[1:49:43] approach. So it's not just about the

[1:49:46] capital investment and that's really one

[1:49:48] of the big things that we've learned by

[1:49:49] um plugging into this national vision

[1:49:51] zero network. Um I feel like we have the

[1:49:56] through CIP we we've together have

[1:49:59] created some channels by which we can um

[1:50:02] continue to invest in in safer streets

[1:50:05] and um that could be accelerated on

[1:50:07] years where there's you know more more

[1:50:09] funding to to invest there. But to

[1:50:11] really get to where we need to go, it

[1:50:13] truly needs to be multid-disciplinary,

[1:50:16] not just within the city, but also um

[1:50:19] bringing in our our our partners um you

[1:50:21] know, and the the zero fatalities folks

[1:50:25] over at UD do and and the the state

[1:50:28] highway safety folks um have have been

[1:50:31] fantastic. and then um internal to the

[1:50:34] city. It it really is going to take

[1:50:36] everyone um to

[1:50:40] really work together and keep safety top

[1:50:43] of mind as we change the culture not

[1:50:45] just for um you know within the city

[1:50:48] government but across the city of just

[1:50:51] driving safely. And it's um not all of

[1:50:54] that necessarily requires

[1:50:57] uh funding. I mean, funding can fix a

[1:50:59] lot of things, but a lot of it is um

[1:51:02] really changing that culture that uh all

[1:51:06] of us are are all in on um getting to

[1:51:10] zero fatalities. Um and I think a lot of

[1:51:13] people they're they're interested, they

[1:51:14] want to help, but they don't know how.

[1:51:16] And so this makes it so that uh every

[1:51:18] employee in every department knows the

[1:51:20] role that they play in getting us to

[1:51:22] zero fatalities.

[1:51:25] Any

[1:51:28] other questions? Okay. Thank you.

[1:51:33] Let's move on now to agenda item number

[1:51:36] four, which is an ordinance amending the

[1:51:38] administrative hearing process.

[1:51:41] Um, we have with us Michael Sanders,

[1:51:44] council policy analyst. Um, we also have

[1:51:47] Arturo Garcia, director of finance

[1:51:49] operations, and Katherine Pascer, senior

[1:51:52] city attorney, available for questions.

[1:51:55] Or maybe not, Katherine. Oh,

[1:51:58] » Katherine plans to join us online.

[1:52:00] » Okay, great.

[1:52:07] » Okay,

[1:52:07] » Michael, take it away.

[1:52:11] So the administration is proposing to

[1:52:13] consolidate the appeals process related

[1:52:15] to license denial, revocation or

[1:52:17] suspension as well as civil infraction

[1:52:20] appeals. This will replace the current

[1:52:23] small claims process for formal appeals

[1:52:26] that is currently housed within the

[1:52:27] justice court with a new process

[1:52:30] outlined in code section 2.75 which

[1:52:33] would be outside of the justice court.

[1:52:35] Over the past years, the Justice Court

[1:52:36] has handled an average of 30 formal

[1:52:38] appeal cases per year. So, if an

[1:52:42] individual wishes to contest an

[1:52:43] administrative citation or license

[1:52:46] denial, they may request an initial

[1:52:48] written review by hearing officer at no

[1:52:51] charge. If they wish to contest that,

[1:52:53] they may request a formal appeal before

[1:52:55] an administrative appeals officer, which

[1:52:57] will have an $81 fee that can be

[1:53:00] refunded if the appellant prevails. And

[1:53:02] if the appellant wishes to further

[1:53:03] appeal, they may do so with the district

[1:53:05] court. Um, differences between hearing

[1:53:08] officers, administrative appeals

[1:53:10] officers was summarized as a table in

[1:53:12] attachment one of the staff report. In

[1:53:15] addition to this new process, um the

[1:53:17] ordinance also contains other amendments

[1:53:19] to various sections of code related to

[1:53:22] license, namely the repeal of some

[1:53:24] alcohol establishment enforcement

[1:53:26] provisions, amendments to petticad

[1:53:29] driver qualifications, and the repeal of

[1:53:31] motor vehicle insurance requirements.

[1:53:33] All of those were detailed on page four.

[1:53:36] Um with that, I'll end and hand it over

[1:53:39] to Arturo.

[1:53:41] » Thank you, council members. Any

[1:53:45] questions?

[1:53:50] » Uh, it doesn't look like it.

[1:53:54] » Michael,

[1:53:55] » I must have heard it wrong. Did you say

[1:53:57] a $1 fee?

[1:53:59] » $81.

[1:54:00] » $81 fee.

[1:54:01] » $1. Okay.

[1:54:02] » Thanks. That's all.

[1:54:05] » Okay. Any other questions?

[1:54:08] All right. You're off the hook. Thanks.

[1:54:11] » Um, okay. Let's move to agenda item

[1:54:16] number five which is a resolution um for

[1:54:20] the to add the city of holiday to the

[1:54:22] central Wasatch commission.

[1:54:25] For

[1:54:27] this we have uh Austin Kimmel from the

[1:54:31] um council staff. We also have Jason

[1:54:33] Oldroid, senior city attorney. Where'd

[1:54:35] he go?

[1:54:37] » Nope.

[1:54:37] » Sorry, council chair. I can I can

[1:54:39] » Nope. We have Mark Trail.

[1:54:42] um who's gonna join us on this item.

[1:54:45] Austin, take it away.

[1:54:48] » All right, council members. Uh the

[1:54:49] Central Was Edge Commission is a local

[1:54:51] cooperative agency tasked with carrying

[1:54:53] out the mountain accord charter which

[1:54:56] lays out proposals to address

[1:54:57] transportation, economic, environmental,

[1:55:00] and recreation issues in the central

[1:55:02] mountains. Salt Lake City is one of the

[1:55:05] commission's founding four members along

[1:55:07] with Salt Lake County, Cottonwood

[1:55:09] Heights, and Sandy City. Since then, the

[1:55:12] commission has grown to a nine

[1:55:13] jurisdiction commission. The proposal

[1:55:16] before you today would add the city of

[1:55:18] Holiday as a new member of that

[1:55:20] commission. Under the terms of the local

[1:55:23] of the interlocal agreement, additional

[1:55:25] members may be added by a majority vote

[1:55:27] of all commissioners plus a vote by the

[1:55:30] legislative bodies of each member, which

[1:55:32] is the matter before you today. Holiday

[1:55:35] has already been provisionally approved

[1:55:37] as a new member. action must be taken by

[1:55:40] the end of the month. So, we've

[1:55:41] tenatively scheduled this item for a

[1:55:44] vote at the August 19th formal meeting

[1:55:47] and happy to take any questions. And

[1:55:50] Mark, did you have anything to add?

[1:55:52] » I didn't, Austin. Thank you. That was

[1:55:54] good. Um, background.

[1:55:59] » All right. Excuse me.

[1:56:02] Okay. Thank you. Um,

[1:56:06] lost my wig for my microphone here. And

[1:56:08] anyone have questions on this?

[1:56:12] Okay. Doesn't look like it.

[1:56:13] » Okay. Thanks.

[1:56:14] » All right. Thank you.

[1:56:19] » All right. We are on to agenda item

[1:56:22] number six. We we really skipped ahead

[1:56:26] in terms of making up time. Didn't think

[1:56:28] that would happen. Um do we do we have

[1:56:31] the um do we have Heidi Adler available?

[1:56:37] Alder, I mean,

[1:56:42] » I'm guessing not.

[1:56:45] » I'm checking online really quick. I'm

[1:56:47] not seeing

[1:56:49] » Heidi,

[1:56:49] » Mr. Chair, will you move?

[1:56:53] » Council member Pui,

[1:56:54] » Would you like to Would it be possible

[1:56:56] to move uh ahead on on item number

[1:56:59] seven?

[1:57:00] » Um, number seven's a written briefing,

[1:57:02] actually.

[1:57:02] » Oh,

[1:57:03] » So that's Oh, yes, you're right.

[1:57:04] » Yeah. So, I think we can actually just I

[1:57:08] mean we can go back and talk about CIP

[1:57:10] some more if you want. Okay. Um or we

[1:57:14] can um just saunter until

[1:57:17] » Okay.

[1:57:18] » Until um Miss Alder is available.

[1:57:21] » Saunter it in.

[1:57:22] » Yeah. Okay. So, we're going to do that.

[1:57:26] Um just uh don't go too far, please.

[1:57:30] Okay.

[1:57:32] » How long?

[1:57:34] uh until she come until she shows up.

[1:57:38] » And it looks like she'll be joining

[1:57:40] online. So, we'll be watching for her to

[1:57:42] join online.

[1:57:43] » Okay, great. Thank you.

[1:58:22] [Music]

[1:58:47] [Music]

[1:58:55] [Music]

[1:59:04] [Music]

[1:59:22] [Music]

[1:59:46] Hey. Hey. Hey.

[1:59:47] [Music]

[1:59:55] [Music]

[2:00:04] [Music]

[2:00:22] [Music]

[2:00:47] [Music]

[2:00:57] [Music]

[2:01:04] [Music]

[2:01:39] Heat. Heat.

[2:01:47] [Music]

[2:01:55] [Music]

[2:02:04] [Music]

[2:02:22] [Music]

[2:02:42] [Music]

[2:02:55] [Music]

[2:03:04] [Music]

[2:03:16] Heat. Heat.

[2:03:22] [Music]

[2:03:47] [Music]

[2:03:55] [Music]

[2:04:04] [Music]

[2:04:16] Heat. Heat.

[2:04:19] [Music]

[2:04:47] [Music]

[2:04:54] our

[2:04:56] um board appointment available. Um so

[2:05:01] Heidi, can you hear me out there?

[2:05:04] » Yes. Can you hear me? Okay.

[2:05:06] » Yes, we can hear you.

[2:05:08] We just can't see you.

[2:05:10] » Oh. Oh,

[2:05:12] » We can. There you are.

[2:05:14] » Okay,

[2:05:14] » There I am.

[2:05:15] » We can see you. I just had something

[2:05:16] blocking my screen. Um, okay. So, this

[2:05:20] is your opportunity to tell us a little

[2:05:23] bit about yourself and why you are

[2:05:26] interested in serving um as a

[2:05:29] disciplinary appeals hearing officer for

[2:05:32] Salt Lake City. Um, so you can talk

[2:05:34] about your background and um, what you

[2:05:37] uh, hope to bring to this position. Um,

[2:05:40] and then we'll let you know if we have

[2:05:41] any questions.

[2:05:43] » Go ahead.

[2:05:45] » Um, hi everyone. My name is Heidi Alder.

[2:05:47] I am an attorney. I've been practicing

[2:05:49] since 2005. So when I graduated from law

[2:05:52] school, um, I bounced back and forth a

[2:05:55] little bit between um, law and my my

[2:05:58] first profession. Before I went to law

[2:05:59] school, I was a teacher in the

[2:06:01] classroom. Um, and in after about three

[2:06:06] years at a law firm, I ended up leaving

[2:06:07] the law firm and going back to teaching

[2:06:09] because I felt a lot more fulfilled in a

[2:06:12] classroom than as an associate at a law

[2:06:14] firm. But I also at that same time

[2:06:17] contracted with the state board of

[2:06:19] education to be a hearing officer, same

[2:06:23] uh similar capacity for disciplinary

[2:06:25] matters with regard to educators

[2:06:27] licenses. So it was a a rotating basis.

[2:06:31] I was called when needed and I would

[2:06:34] hear evidence and write decisions along

[2:06:37] with a panel of the Utah Professional

[2:06:39] Practices Advisory Commission. That's an

[2:06:41] 11 member body. And every time there was

[2:06:44] a hearing, three members of that panel

[2:06:45] would be the the judges, so to speak.

[2:06:48] And I would administer the hearing as a

[2:06:49] hearing officer. So I would administer

[2:06:51] the hearing and write up a report. I did

[2:06:54] that for several years, about three

[2:06:56] years until the state board of education

[2:06:59] actually had an opening when I I went

[2:07:02] over to the state board, left my job as

[2:07:04] a teacher, second second time as a

[2:07:06] teacher back to uh work in the in law. I

[2:07:10] was an investigator with the state board

[2:07:13] of education, their professional

[2:07:15] practices advisory commission, and I

[2:07:17] also did work and and provided training

[2:07:19] in the legal department over there. So I

[2:07:21] did a lot of trainings on um a whole

[2:07:24] host of issues related to education law

[2:07:26] specifically but I did a lot of uh

[2:07:29] training about boundaries and about

[2:07:32] ethics and about um educator uh code of

[2:07:35] conduct.

[2:07:37] I was in that position until 2014

[2:07:42] when I left the state board of

[2:07:44] education. I went into uh semi-private

[2:07:47] practice uh semi employment with Weber

[2:07:51] School District. And ever since then,

[2:07:53] for the past 11 years, I've been

[2:07:55] part-time with Weber School District as

[2:07:57] their legal counsel and then part-time

[2:07:59] working privately with school districts

[2:08:02] across the state. I work with districts

[2:08:04] to help advise them on um a whole host

[2:08:07] of legal issues related to schools, but

[2:08:09] um human resources is a big aspect of

[2:08:12] that. And I also contract with districts

[2:08:16] as a hearing officer when school

[2:08:18] districts have employment terminations.

[2:08:22] So I have acted as a hearing officer in

[2:08:25] the educator licensing capacity and in

[2:08:29] public education employment capacity.

[2:08:33] And in the background of all that, I've

[2:08:36] spent time advising and consulting with

[2:08:39] primarily school districts and charter

[2:08:41] schools. um although I've taken on a few

[2:08:43] other clients about all things related

[2:08:46] to education law. So that that's my

[2:08:49] background.

[2:08:53] » Thank you. Um council members, any

[2:08:55] questions?

[2:08:58] Oh c I didn't know if you were just

[2:09:00] giving me a thumbs up or if you had a

[2:09:01] question. Council member Young.

[2:09:03] » Heidi, thank you so much. I have to say,

[2:09:06] not only do I love your background, um,

[2:09:08] coming from K12 education as well, but I

[2:09:11] think that it's so relevant to the

[2:09:14] conversations that we have here at the

[2:09:16] city. Um, so we're talking about public

[2:09:18] employees. We're talking about

[2:09:20] individuals who in many ways are

[2:09:23] responsible for the care and um,

[2:09:26] consideration of public resources and

[2:09:29] public benefits. um but also wanting to

[2:09:32] have a high standard for the individuals

[2:09:35] who are serving and representing our

[2:09:37] city. So, I'm super excited to have you

[2:09:40] um and bless you for the continued work

[2:09:42] that you do in K12. I know that it

[2:09:44] continues to be um quite the ever

[2:09:46] evolving landscape and we'll be excited

[2:09:49] to have that expertise helping us here

[2:09:51] in Salt Lake.

[2:09:52] » Thank you.

[2:09:55] » Okay, any other questions?

[2:09:58] All right, I think that's it. Thank you

[2:10:01] so much, Heidi, for uh being here today

[2:10:03] and answering our questions. And um

[2:10:05] thank you for your willingness to serve

[2:10:07] Salt Lake City.

[2:10:08] » Of course. Thank you so much for having

[2:10:09] me.

[2:10:10] » Thank you.

[2:10:11] » I'll log off now.

[2:10:12] » Okay. Thanks.

[2:10:13] » Bye-bye.

[2:10:14] » Um council members, um

[2:10:18] that uh brings us to our reports of the

[2:10:22] chair and vice chair. I don't have any.

[2:10:24] Do you?

[2:10:25] » I don't have any.

[2:10:26] » Okay.

[2:10:27] um and executive director. Okay, no

[2:10:30] announcements. And then um so yeah, then

[2:10:34] the last thing is a tenative close

[2:10:35] session. Um I um food is here, right?

[2:10:41] So, um

[2:10:43] we can once we vote on this, um if

[2:10:46] you'll go and get your food and then go

[2:10:48] down to the canon room for our close

[2:10:51] session and then um following the close

[2:10:54] session um we will be adjourned um until

[2:10:58] our formal meeting at 7. So, go ahead.

[2:11:00] Um

[2:11:01] » Mr. Yes.

[2:11:02] » I move that we enter close session for a

[2:11:05] strategy strate strategy session to

[2:11:07] discuss the purchase, exchange, lease,

[2:11:10] or sale of real property and to receive

[2:11:13] attorney to discuss attorney client

[2:11:15] matters.

[2:11:15] » Second. I have a motion from council

[2:11:17] member Mono and a second from council

[2:11:19] member Lopez Chavez. Any discussion?

[2:11:21] Seeing none, we'll go ahead and roll

[2:11:22] call it. Council member Petro,

[2:11:24] » Yes.

[2:11:25] » Pui,

[2:11:25] » Yes.

[2:11:26] » Mono,

[2:11:27] » Yes.

[2:11:27] » Lope Chavez,

[2:11:28] » Hi.

[2:11:29] » Dugan,

[2:11:30] » Yes. Young

[2:11:31] » I

[2:11:32] » And I am a yes as well. That passes

[2:11:34] unanimously. We'll be in close session

[2:11:36] and we will adjourn after that and

[2:11:38] reconvene at 7 for our formal meeting.

[2:11:40] Thank you.

[2:11:42] [Music]

[2:12:02] [Music]

[2:12:10] [Music]

[2:12:19] [Music]

[2:13:11] [Music]

[2:13:20] [Music]

[2:13:29] [Music]

[2:13:46] [Music]

[2:14:10] Heat.

[2:14:11] [Music]

[2:14:20] [Music]

[2:14:25] Heat.

[2:14:29] [Music]

[2:14:46] [Music]

[2:15:11] [Music]

[2:15:20] [Music]

[2:15:28] [Music]

[2:15:40] Heat. Heat.

[2:15:44] [Music]

[2:16:12] [Music]

[2:16:20] [Music]

[2:16:29] [Music]

[2:16:47] [Music]

[2:17:11] [Music]

[2:17:22] [Music]

[2:17:29] [Music]

[2:17:47] [Music]

[2:18:11] [Music]

[2:18:20] [Music]

[2:18:25] Heat. Heat.

[2:18:29] [Music]

Salt Lake City Council Work Session - 08/12/2025

Transcript