[music]
» meeting. We're happy to have you here whether you are joining us in person or
online. We hope that you continue to participate
whichever manner you feel the most comfortable. Now, we're going to do the
Pledge of Allegiance. Please join us.
Thank you. Before we move through the agenda, I
want to quickly go through registration information and share the reasoning
about how and why we chair these meetings the way we
We welcome everyone regardless of your opinion or your side on any issue.
Because we will have people with varying opinions on important issues, the
council's goal is to make the meetings a place
where people feel safe and comfortable participating. This is the most local
level of government and it is a key value of ours to ensure that we have
created a respectful and safe environment so that no one is
intimidated out of free participation. This also allows us to ensure that the
meeting can continue and we can conduct a scheduled city
business. We invite each of you to contribute to this space, to speak your
mind, and to welcome others to do the same.
In order to create a welcoming and safe space, we will pause the meeting at any
action that causes a disruption to our ability to conduct the meeting or any
safety concern involving threats or unprotected speech.
If there are repeated actions or comments, it may result in removal from
the meeting. To avoid intimidating others, please
avoid the use of threatening and discriminatory language.
Do not insult others based on religion, ethnicity, race,
color, gender, sexual orientation, or physical ability.
Whether you agree or disagree with someone's comment, clapping, cheering,
shouting, booing, snapping, gesturing, obstruct- obstructing, or discouraging
others from commenting is not allowed. As a reminder, as council members,
we refrain from reacting or responding to allow everyone to share their
opinions freely. This is to keep our reactions from
affecting your ability to share your opinion freely.
If you would like to follow us follow up with us,
please uh contact council staff uh or if you're in
Zoom, you can chat um and ask for contact information.
When you're making comments, please address the body and not any no
individual not any individual uh elected official.
If you have a handout for the council, please raise your hand and council staff
will assist you. Council staff are available during and
after the meeting to help with any questions or information sharing.
The full meeting rules are listed at the door
and our staff will post those uh in that link in Zoom.
As a reminder, our public comment registration process, individuals may
register to come to comment on scheduled public hearing items until the hearing
item is closed. For the general comment section, we'll
accept sign-ups until 7:30 p.m. The general comment section is limited
to a maximum of 1 hour and will only include commenters who register before
7:30. So, if you're here to give general
comment, please sign up and remember that it's possible that not everyone who
signed up may be able to speak. Finally, this brings us to item A4,
which is approving the meeting minutes for April 14, 2026, May 14, 2026, May
21, 2026, June 2, 2026, June 9, 2026, as well as
the formal meeting minutes for March 24, 2026, May May 5, 2026, and May 19, 2026.
» Move for approval. >> Second.
» I have a motion by Councilmember Wharton and a second by Councilmember Dugan. Any
discussion? I'm going to call the question. All of those in favor, say I.
» I. >> Any opposed?
Any abstentions? This motion carries unanimously.
This brings us to the This brings us to the public hearing section of the
agenda. These are specific proposals before the council that require public
hearing. Your comments should pertain to the
hearing item, and if you go off-topic, we'll ask you to stop your comment. In
order to create this welcoming and safe space, we'll pause the meeting at any
disruption to our ability to conduct the meeting or any safety concern involving
threats or unprotected speech. If there are repeated actions or
comments, it may result in removal from the meeting.
Also, as a reminder, please avoid comments that include profanity,
personal attacks, discriminatory language. Such comments can be
intimidating for others and not They're not persuasive or compelling to the
council. If you're on Zoom, you will have to
unmute your microphone when your name is called.
Each person will have 2 minutes. And when we reach the 2-minute mark, the
host will announce time and your microphone will be muted.
We'll be calling the names in the order of sign-ups.
If you need staff assistance in the room, please raise your hand and someone
will be there with you. If you're having technical issues in
Zoom and if you need assistance, you can message staff support or Akshay from our
staff can assist you. If you're unable to finish your comments
in those 2 minutes, please share the rest via email.
You can also mail it or call our office. The contact information is listed at
slc.gov/council. If you have [clears throat] a handout
for the council, you can notify notify the council staff and who will assist
you. Public hearing
uh number B1 is a resolution for the intention to designate the Sugar House
Special Assessment Area. Before we begin taking comments,
I will turn the time to Austin Kimmel, council policy analyst, to give us a
short introduction. Um Austin.
» [clears throat] >> Thanks, council. This is a protest
hearing for the proposed creation of a new special assessment area
or SAA in the Sugar House neighborhood called the Sugar House Business District
2027 or SHBD 27. The SAA is in the core commercial area
of Sugar House and would focus on economic promotion.
A second assessment would provide special specialty lighting and signage
and would be applied to properties with frontage on portions of 21st South, 1100
East, and Highland Drive. This protest hearing gives the public
and property owners the opportunity to provide input on the creation of the
assessment area, their inclusion in it, and the proposed services.
It also initiates a 60-day period during which property owners may file written
protests. If property owners holding 40% or more
of the total valuation of the SAA protest its creation, the SAA cannot be
created and the process ends. If the process continues, the council
will will appoint a board of equalization to hold three hearings to
consider adjustments to individual assessment amounts.
This The process will conclude with the council's consideration of the
assessment ordinance, which would officially establish the SAA,
anticipated in early 2027 if all according
If all goes according to plan. Thanks.
» Thank you, Austin. Isaac.
Please start with our first public comment.
» Our We have, sorry, we have Michael Carter uh, scheduled to speak followed
by Melva Sign and then Jeff Goddard. Michael, you may unmute.
Oh, sorry. I'm sorry. There we go. Can you hear me?
» Okay. Yes. Yes. >> Perfect.
Uh, I'm just going to read the letter that was submitted in objection to the
assessment. I object to the proposed assessment
because the property does not receive a meaningful or proportional benefit from
the economic promotion activities for which the assessment is being imposed.
The subject property is a small professional office building occupied by
long-term tenants including an insurance agency, a medical staffing agency, and a
dental practice. These tenants primarily service
established clients, preferred clients, or patients, insurance networks, and
scheduled appointments. They are not retail, restaurants, entertainment, or
foot traffic dependent businesses that would reasonably benefit from festivals,
special events, district branding, holiday lighting, wayfinding, or general
promotional campaigns. The property is located on
13th East and is not situated on 21st South, Highland Drive, or the other
primary commercial quarters targeted by the proposed proposed promotional
signage, lighting improvements. While the property may fall within the
proposed assessment boundaries, it is located
its location and use limit any direct economic benefit from the activities
funded by funded by the assessment. In addition, the property does not have
meaningful visibility from 21st South about from 21st South. A substantial
fence on the adjacent CVS property CVS Pharmacy property blocks all line of
sight from 21st South in sub and the subject property as shown I have
attached exhibits in the the letter that you will receive later.
Motors and pedestrians traveling along 21st South see a CVS property and fence,
not my property. Because the assessment costs will
ultimately be borne by the property and directly or indirectly by the
professional tenants occupying the property, the proposed assessment would
require an insurance agency, a medical staff, and dental practice to subsidize
programs that they won't benefit from. Uh
we request that we be removed from the special assessment district or have our
assess assessment substantially reduced. Thank you.
» Now, we will hear from Melba Sinyard, who is here in person.
Uh followed by Jeff Goddard. Melba, you may walk up to speak.
» Thank you. My name is Melba Sinyard. I represent the Utah Restaurant
Association. We've been asked by our members to come and speak with you
tonight. First, we want to thank you for providing a $500,000
uh revenue grant to many of the properties impacted. But, we want you to
know that recovery is not finished in the Sugar House area. These businesses
are still struggling. The cost of and the impact of construction has been lost
revenue, exhausted reserves, meaning restaurants have borrowed all the money
they can borrow. They have no place else to go, and many feel that they have
received broken trust from Salt Lake City. They were promised that the two
lanes would continue and it was reduced to one lane, which has cut their
visibility in half. The cost of the environment that they're
facing as business operators, labor costs are up 41%, wholesale food prices
up 34%, rent up 15%, supplies and consumables are up, and utilities and
fees have spiked double digits. These are all problems and whatnot. We feel
like that we need to um have support for the Sugar House
area, but we don't feel like and the restaurants don't feel like they should
be paying for something and fixing a problem they didn't create. We're asking
you to consider direct hardship grants from the general fund, a phase-in or
hardship exemption for those businesses in the area who who would apply and
would would qualify, and that restaurants have a seat at the table
where the decisions are made for whether or not the money is collected, whether
or not the money is spent, and how they are represented. And so, once again, we
thank you for your support of these businesses with your grants, but please
consider what these businesses need now. They're also going to be hit with the
12.5% property tax increase that will be
assessed to all businesses. Thank you.
» Now, we will hear from Jeff Goddard followed by Scott Clark, both of them in
person. >> Hi. Thanks. I agree with the last
speaker. Um I'm a business owner. Um Guthrie Bicycle in Sugar House, kind of
right on the corner across from where the Snow Groves property used to be. And
uh with the construction along 21st, it's just hurt our business quite a bit,
you know, like we were down the last 2 years
a significant amount, and the business offered that $3,000 grant per year,
which was pretty much nothing. It didn't help us out with the lost revenue. Um
And I feel like so many customers have just been driven away from that area
because of that construction for so long.
The homeless problems, and I feel like this lighting tax is due to a lot of
that copper piping that was stolen and removed.
And it's hard to see that, you know, this this assessment go toward the
existing businesses as after we've seen so many businesses
go out of business. What businesses remain? I feel like it's just going to
hurt us even more and make it more difficult for businesses to stay open
and new businesses want to come in to that area. It is a great area, but with
what's happening lately, it's it's hard for me to see, you know,
have a desire to continue being there in the long term.
It's nice to have the construction over with.
For me, I feel like what good is an event going to do for my
business? You know, I don't have confidence that will really do anything.
I feel like if it was something about notifying the public in the area that
the construction is over with, come back to Sugar House, you know, I'm all for
that. But I don't see this exorbitant amount of fees to the
existing businesses really is going to really going to help us stay open.
That's all I have.
» Now we will hear from Scott Clark, who is also there in person.
» Thanks for your time this evening, council members.
My name is Scott Clark. I've owned a small business in Sugar House for 43
years. The building entity is SCSE Leasing. We
operate as Clark Executive Detail. We clean cars,
boats, motor homes, and we do storage as well.
» [clears throat and cough] >> I might receive this assessment,
and that was basically on top of my $20,000
per year property tax. Um I feel like uh the construction that
I've lived through for the last 25 30 years
uh has had a very negative impact upon my business.
Uh there's proposal to shut down Sugar Mount right next to Sugar House
Veterinarian for a period of at least 2 months to come
to have the to perpetuate the S-line it up to
the Sugar House Center, which is I believe about a quarter mile.
Uh that would also have a very negative impact upon my business. Um there's also
been 80% of our parking on McClelland taken away by the city
through little pop-outs, little build-outs for like little gardens.
That's been a very negative impact upon my business for our customer parking.
We've had a lot of customers complain about there's no parking, sorry, I'm not
coming down. So that's very negatively impacted my
business. It's very unconstitutional to
do a a a take upon the community members in Sugar House up and
above the property tax we're already paying.
Um you know, it's just been a negative impact upon me through all the
construction that's happened all through Sugar House over the years.
So I'd ask the council to reconsider this assessment and give a full
abatement to
Thank you. Thank you.
» We have nobody else signed up to speak on this item.
» Thank you all of those that commented. >> Is it too late for me to speak?
» It >> I didn't sign up.
» I I believe that that you needed to sign up. Um but you
um
I could I could get him. Okay. Yes, please come come into
You have to come in and you have 2 minutes.
» My name is My name is Bob Plumb and I own some properties on 2100 South.
So, I have four properties that would get this assessment. And like
Sky was saying about the what we've been through with the
construction and unfortunately, I feel with the
construction with the street design and what the final outcome is, it's
actually discouraging people from coming into Sugar House instead of encouraging
them. So, I don't know how you can
advertise that out. It is what it is at this point.
And people are avoiding Sugar House because of the changes.
So, to take I have one of my properties that I don't know how much money I lost
it. The building was empty for a year and a half during the construction
because I couldn't get a tenant. Then I had to do milk new build out. And that's
expensive. So, to add and then to add on top of what these property taxes have
done in the last six or seven years, some of these properties have gone up
three times what they were. So, to put this cost
on I feel like as a landlord, I'm going to be responsible for the cost. I don't
believe I can pass it on to my tenants. And one of my tenants is Chipotle and
when I talked to one of the people from their offices,
their business is down 50%. And that's after the construction is
finished. So, I don't believe what you're
proposing to do is going to you're going to be able to
fix the problem you created. I know it's not
you personally, it's the designers, the engineers, everybody.
And same thing with the parking. I have a
building now that I can't pick up or drop off anything because they took the
parking away in front of the building. They put a median in the road. You can't
turn left to straighten out before you go to
the buildings. So, now any kind of bigger vehicle can't go between the
buildings anymore. So, I can't >> Thank you.
Thank you. Thank you. The time is You can send us
the the rest the rest of the comment because it's a public hearing and until
like we close the public hearing and I can I can allow,
you know, people to add their their their thoughts.
This is only applicable to public hearing items.
Um Okay.
Um I think I need a motion. >> Mr. Chair, I move that the council close
the public protest hearing. >> Second.
» I have a motion by council member Young and a
second by council member Dugan. Is there any discussion?
» Yes, if I can >> make a comment. So, I appreciate the
businesses that have come out tonight um to be able to share your voice and be a
part of this process. And process is the word that I'm going to I'm going to
focus on in terms of some of the comments. So, tonight at the closure of
the public comment period, we are not voting on a final assessment of that
tax. What happens next is that it moves to the community to be able to then vote
on whether or not this is something that is chosen.
The proposal itself was not initiated by any individual up here. It was initiated
by um the Sugar House community um in co-sponsorship between the chamber and
the community council. I am more than happy to help connect you with those
individuals to be able to voice the concerns that you've brought here
tonight as well, and to use that to be able to help inform the conversation.
When it comes to some of the services that that you've spoken about and some
of the needs that we've heard from other businesses, there has been a call
related to wanting to see services that we see similar to downtown
in terms of being able to have some of the public safety ambassadors who are
there providing, you know, more engagement on the street, more real-time
support related to some of the security issues that we, you know, are are aware
of and that are working on as well. And then as well related to the signage and
the event space, it it again is really designed not to
replace anything you already have, but to improve upon those efforts to really
mimic some of the additional services that those businesses feel could be
valuable. Ultimately, this is a decision that is made by those who would be
impacted. So, it's it's not a decision that is made exclusively, you know, up
here by the council members, but it is a vote by the property owners who would be
within this space. And as kind of mentioned before, we do have a process
by which businesses can come and be a part of kind of what that
assessment looks like in terms of reflecting challenges within that space.
So, I I do want the opportunity to be able to connect you with some of the
individuals who are also sponsoring this and moving it forward. And again, it
moving forward is part of a process, it is not an outcome, and I just wanted to
be clear about that is not what's happening tonight.
» Thank you for that clarification Council member Young. You made the
motion and Council member Dugan made the second. I'm going to call the question.
All of those in favor say I. >> I.
» Any opposed? Any abstentions? This motion carries unanimously. We're going
to item B2 which is a resolution for the waiver of proximity for Silver Side Deli
at 21 22 South Highland Drive. We're going to
begin taking comments, but before that Austin Kimmel, our Council Policy
Analyst, is going to give us a short introduction. Austin.
» Thanks, Council members. This is a public hearing for a proposed
alcohol proximity waiver for Silver Side Deli, a restaurant at
21 22 South Highland Drive in District 7, also in Sugar House.
As of May 2026, state code requires cities to approve an alcohol waiver of
proximity before the Department of Alcohol
Beverage Services, or DABS, can issue a a retail license to a business near a
community location, such as a public park, playground, or library.
This business would be across the street from the Sprague Library Branch in
District 7 on Highland Drive. State code also requires that the
Council may take action on this item 30 days after the public hearing
and a vote is tentatively tentatively scheduled for September 22nd. Thanks.
» Thank you, Austin. Isaac, can you start with our first public comment?
» We do not have anybody signed up for this item.
» Mr. Chair, I move that the Council close the public hearing and defer action to a
future Council meeting. >> Second.
» I have a motion by Council member Young and second by Council member Carlson.
Any discussion? I will say just I'm excited that we have
this opportunity now. I said it last time. I'm also thankful that the city is
going beyond what is required by the law to inform the neighbors about this that
we can allow businesses to serve alcohol that makes sense. So, I'm
I'm thankful for this tool that we have. The motion was was by Council member
Young, second by Carlson. I'm going to call the question. All of those in favor
say I. >> I.
» I. Any opposed or abstentions? This motion
carries unanimously. We're moving on to item B3, which is an ordinance
for the maximum daily water use text amendments.
We're going to welcome Austin Kimble, who's
popular today, Council Policy Analyst, to give us a short introduction. Austin.
» [clears throat] >> Thank you. This is a public hearing for
a proposal to amend Salt Lake City code title 21A to limit daily water use for
new non-residential land uses with some exceptions.
The proposed text amendment would cap maximum daily water use for new
non-residential properties at 200,000 gallons per day for these properties.
The proposal follows a temporary land use regulation or TLUR that City Council
adopted on March 24th of 2026 for the same purpose.
It aims to make that TLUR permanent by adopting the ordinance since the TLUR is
valid for only 180 days, which would expire on September
20th of this year. During the July 21st briefing, the
Council requested that a definition of social services be included in the
proposed zoning code. The Attorney's Office provided updated
ordinance language including a definition, which if the Council
supports will be included in the final ordinance.
That definition can be found at the top of the attached staff report. Thanks.
» Thank you, Austin. Isaac, can you
start with our first public comment? >> Yes.
Anthony Washburn is here to speak in person.
» Hi, my name is Anthony Washburn, resident here of Salt Lake City. In July
21st meeting, when the when the city was proposing this to you guys, something
that struck me was that most of the businesses already use under
200,000 gallons a day. And with the drought that we're in,
things like that, I would just like to maybe consider dropping that cap to 150
or possibly even 100, because if businesses are already using under the
200,000 gallons per day cap, capping it to 100
isn't really encouraging anybody to use less water. And I think that we should
as a city try to encourage people to to use less water. So, thank you.
» We have nobody else registered to speak to this item.
» Thank you, Isaac. Um
I'm going to need a motion. >> Mr. Chairman, I move the council close
the public hearing and defer action to a future council meeting.
» Second.
» Motion by Council member Dugan, seconded by Council member Wharton. Any
discussion? Can I call the question? All those in
favor say I. >> I.
» I. >> Any opposed?
This motion carries unanimously. I'm going to be moving to item B4, which
is the or an ordinance for the Northwest Community Plan.
Um I'm going to welcome Michael Saunders,
council policy analyst, to give us a short introduction.
» Thank you, council. So, the administration has proposed an
update to community plan for the Northwest community area.
This plan will replace the 1992 Northwest Master Plan, the 2010 North
Temple Boulevard Plan, and the 2001 Rose Park small area plan.
During the February 25th, 2026 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission
unanimously forwarded a positive recommendation for the plan to the
Council. The Council was briefed on this item
during the July 21st, 2026 work session. During that briefing, the Council
flagged several requested changes. Planning has addressed those requests,
which were included in an updated draft of the plan in the packet. The plan
division has also provided a summary of the changes, which was included as
attachment one in the staff report. Thanks.
» Thank you, Michael. Isaac, can you begin with our first
public comment on this item? >> Yes. Uh and
first up, we have Anthony Washburn, followed by Tony Diaz, and then Cindy
Cromer. Anthony, you may walk up to speak.
» Sorry, it's me again. My name is Anthony Washburn, and I want
to thank the city for developing the Northwest community plan, and thank the
City Council for giving me the opportunity to give some feedback.
I'm speaking as a long-time Westside resident, business owner, and community
advocate. I support growth and affordable housing,
but want development to happen in a way that strengthens, not destabilizes,
existing Westside neighborhoods. The city should consider stronger
incentives for developers who provide three-plus bedroom, family-oriented, and
workforce housing, including both affordable and mixed-income options.
Affordable housing should be distributed throughout the greater Salt Lake City
area, rather than concentrated in one neighborhood.
The city should evaluate what happens when multiple affordable housing
developments, mental health, and treatment facilities are concentrated in
just a few blocks. And where appropriate, developers should
be required to provide strong property management, security, and ongoing
coordination with the city and surrounding communities.
I ask the city to take a closer look at the impact of affordable housing
concentration, public safety concerns, and transportation barriers. We can
support affordable housing while creating more family and workforce
housing, dispersing affordable housing throughout the city, improving
neighborhood conditions, and making sure new development strengthens the Westside
rather than creating additional problems. Thank you.
And I did have a handout. Cuz that's only half of what I was going
» Staff will get it from you.
Next, we will hear by Tony Diaz, followed by Cindy Cromer, and then
Adriana Caras. They are all here in person.
» Hi, I'm Tony Diaz. Uh I am the chair of the Business Committee on the Fair Park
Community Council. Um I'm encouraged to see the start that the Northwest
Community Plan puts into place. Small businesses are the bedrock of the
Westside neighborhoods. Um they're not just buildings that you pass by when
you're driving through the neighborhood. They're the places that
that employ us. They are our neighbors. They're the source of community pride in
the Westside. Um
when these businesses thrive, they reinvest into the neighborhood and help
provide economic stimulus as well as job opportunities. Starting and running a
small business has never been an easy venture, um
but the conditions in the Westside are harder and harder as time goes on.
Rising leasing rates, regulatory hurdles, economic uncertainty, and the
inability to safely walk parts of our neighborhood make
um uh create a great deal of pressure for entrepreneurs and existing
businesses. In order to combat these, we need a plan
that actively prioritizes what the Westside really needs. And what we need
is a welcoming environment where small businesses can get their start and grow.
Um in regards to the community plan, uh the Fairpark Community Council uh
has a few points that we would like to advise. Uh first, actively partner with
the community councils on the west side, business owners, and their employees to
directly learn the full scope of their needs. Um this will inform how to make
real long-lasting impact. Secondly, enhance through public safety and
walkability along our business corridors. If you don't feel safe
walking down a street, you're certainly not going to shop there.
And last, through policy, encourage developers who build ground-floor
commercial spaces to build them in a usable, desirable, and move-in-ready way
for businesses that would want to move to this neighborhood.
» Next, we will hear from Ann Cindy Cromer, followed by Adriana Caras, and
then Dorothy Owen. Cindy, you may walk up to speak.
» Um in October of 2022, I happened to be at the Planning Commission for the first
hearing on the Northpoint Small Area Plan.
I have worked on many of the city's small area plans. The one for Northpoint
didn't check any of the boxes I associate with successful plans.
Now, almost 4 years later, it appears that I was right. The tools proposed in
the small area plan have not been adopted. The land use proposals are
environmental nightmares. And now, what would be the final insult, possibly, the
Northpoint area has been deleted from the larger Northwest Community Plan.
Other small area plans have been incorporated into the larger plans by
ordinance. Not so in this case. It is essential in pursuing transfer of
development rights to identify receiving areas. And transfer of development
rights are most effectively implemented when the receiving area is nearby.
I believe that the disconnect between the North Point and Northwest plans is
an obstacle to the use of TDRs and I'm saying this more than 16 years
after I first brought TDRs to the council's attention.
Thank you.
» Next we will hear from Adriana Caras followed by Dorothy Owen and then Nancy
Philip. Adriana
Adriana you may now speak.
» Hi, thanks for having me. I'm the owner of 824 West 200 South which is next to
Alta View Apartments. I support everything that Tony and
Anthony spoke about but let me talk about I I do support a safer more
walkable connected community on the Westside. I live in Millcreek. I have
every amenity that I possibly could need next to me but the Westside does not. I
feel that this community plan starts somewhere but isn't anywhere near where
it should be. This I gave you a handout with a bunch of data that came from your
own surveys. 56,000 residents live in the Westside of
Salt Lake. 29,000 of them commute out. So it's not a walking city. It's a
commuting city. 22,000 of those workers commute in. So when you come in to work
of those government agencies and all those businesses that are there there's
nowhere to eat. I've ridden horses in the Rose Park area for 20 years. My
friends work at the state businesses and they say it's a food dead zone. So I'm
currently trying to start a business called Coffee on Second in this house.
It's a 125 year old house. I've owned it for 9 years. Literally I have three
options. I sell it to a developer, I tear it down or I build something with
what I have. Basically I have to build with something with what I have because
it's not affordable for me to tear down the property and build something new.
So in the process of doing this I've had to work with the city to try to put a
coffee shop in this house. Let me tell you the process sucks.
Sucks for all of us. It's long, arduous. I've paid $6,000 in
fees and impact that I haven't even opened the building yet. I haven't even
opened the doors. So, it's a hundred thousand plus to open
up a business, redo my house, my mom remodel it up to the
the ordinances and the construction requirements you bring.
So, let me tell you how hard it is to put a business in Salt Lake City.
Especially when it clearly says in your statistics that most people want those.
The Westside wants grocery, restaurants, healthcare, recreation, and shopping.
And 48% of your Westside resident surveys say they cannot access that. So,
please look at this plan, put economy as number one. That's what it should do. It
will drive all the rest of the
» Next, we will hear from Dorothy Owen, followed by Nancy Philip, and then Lynn
Skitman.
» So, my name is Dorothy Owen. And I first became the chair of the West
Point Community Council 10 years ago. I checked it today. And I have with me
Lynn Skidmore, who is also here representing the board of West Point
Community Council. Um
We're here to speak to the Northwest plan that you're looking at and asking
you to pause it and to take advantage of the hundred
thousand dollar investment that you as a council made in developing the North
Point Small Area Plan. In 2019,
um this council appropriated a hundred
thousand dollars to a consulting firm to come up with that plan, realizing that
this was a very important area, very sensitive area,
and that the planning commission really didn't have nor did the planning staff
didn't have time to do that. Um when you read their report,
they talk about how much um community input they did. And we were
the community council was very much involved. There were questionnaires,
there were public meetings, there were draft comments, in-person interviews. I
mean, you know, they have a whole section on it.
Um as a result of that public input, their
consultants state that uh the plan focus shifted for them.
It shifted from developing land use recommendations, which are very
specific, to developing tools that would be
available to the city to preserve the habitat, mitigate negative impacts,
um and determine appropriate improvements.
You have a $100,000 investment in the North Point Northwest North Point small
area plan for tools to help you do your job.
And I think that um
it would not be wise to just ignore that.
Thank you. >> Thank you, Dorothy.
Thank you, Dorothy.
» Next, we will hear from Nancy Philip, followed by
Lynn Skitman, and then Lynn DeFritas. All of them here in person.
So, uh Nancy, you may walk up to speak. >> Good evening and thank you for um
accepting public comment on this really important issue.
Adriana is my business partner, and we're trying to put in a small business
uh locally owned, obviously, on 824 West 200 South.
What's important about this plan is not priority 1 2 3, it's priority 12,
which is economic growth. And
in your own survey, in your own plan, it says 48% of the residents on the west
side don't have access to certain resources,
small businesses, grocery stores, pharmacies, gas stations, convenience
stores. And we want to build something like that. And if we if you all talk to
the residents like we have, and we have people who walk by our building every
day, we're out there every day. They walk by and say, "When are you
opening? We can't wait. There's no coffee shops around here."
The The challenge is is that the 12th priority in your plan is economics.
You For the residents that exist there right now, there aren't the resources
that they're looking for. So, you're proposing building a whole bunch of
housing without resources for the for the individuals that live there now.
Just yesterday, we had somebody who lived around the corner for our from our
shop that we're opening, hopefully soon. And they said, "I want to come work for
you." So, our small business is going to provide jobs, is going to provide
resources, is going to provide a safe space for people to come and visit and
stay and have a great cup of coffee. What I don't appreciate, what I'd really
like the council to look at is shifting the economic importance of your plan up
higher and move down residential. Thank you.
» Next, we will hear from Lynn Skitman, followed by Linda Freitas, and then
Heidi Holtan. Lynn, you may walk up to speak.
» Thank you. I have no comment. I must have checked the wrong box.
I'll donate my time to the other Lynn.
» Linda Freitas, you may walk up to speak. >> Thank you very much. I'm Linda de a
resident of Salt Lake City and the executive director of Friends of Great
Salt Lake working to preserve and protect the Great Salt Lake ecosystem.
Um as stated in the introduction of the Northwest Community Plan um and in
support of Salt Lake City's overarching vision established in Plan Salt Lake
over the next 15 years, the Northwest Community Plan will guide future
decisions about growth, development, and community priorities for its unique
neighborhoods and their impressive characteristics.
With a notable reference to the Jordan River Emerald Ribbon Action Plan as an
asset and valuable tool that recognizes nature, wildlife, ecosystems, and
opportunities for public engagement, I was disappointed with the exclusion of
the North Point Small Area Plan in this vision. This is a tremendous missed
opportunity for the Northwest community to expand its reach, its recognition,
and its relationship with its neighbor right next door, Great Salt Lake and its
shoreline. The Northwest Community Plan proposes to take all of us beyond the
2034 Utah Winter Olympics and into the future.
A future that should confirm Salt Lake City's belief in our commitment to
preserve and protect the Great Salt Lake ecosystem in perpetuity.
If wishes were for brine shrimp, the Salt Lake's Salt Lake City Council would
push the pause button on its approval of the Northwest Community Plan and give
further consideration of including the North Point Small Area Plan in this
vision. Thank you very much.
» Next, we will hear from Heidi Hoven followed by Izumi Nakamura.
» Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to speak to you. I'm Heidi
Hoven. I work for National Audubon Society and I oversee the management of
a shorebird sanctuary right on the shores of Great Salt Lake.
I am asking you to please pause adoption of the Northwest Community Plan as it is
incomplete. It is an opportunity to link plans with
the level of detail needed for proper uses of land adjacent to sensitive lands
included in the North Point Small Area Plan but not specified.
I ask how does the new Northwest Community Plan address the
2040 targets and initiatives of Plan Salt Lake?
By leaving out the North Point Small Area Plan and not having conservation
tools already in place to be used. These sensitive lands are hydrologically
connected to Great Salt Lake and its wetland and upland habitats and its
shoreline. I will read if I have time the three
bullets that that are here in Plan Salt Lake
to meet the initiatives. Support of zoo stewardship of city on natural open
space, implementation and promotion of best practices in management stewardship
of natural lands, restoration of aquatic and riparian
corridors and habitats including daylighting of streams and water
corridors and reduction in habitat fragmentation.
Please consider pausing and adopting the Northwest Community Plan and push for
more thoughtful protections and land conservation programs for Salt Lake City
by including the North Point Small Area Plan in the North West Community Plan.
Thank you.
» Now we'll hear from Izumi Okamura. Uh
they are the last person signed to speak on this item.
» Hello, I'm a resident of uh Fair Park and recently a member of the Community
Council there. Um in reviewing the plan uh there's some things that I would like
to um the council to consider is the maintenance of things going forward.
I go to the Northwest Park Center very
frequently. There were a bunch of updates made there. And um
it looked really nice for about a month until they stopped maintaining it
completely. Nobody mows the lawn, the weeds are growing. It was just like a
lot of investment without actually maintenance going forward. So, would ask
for all of these improvements to also include a plan for how to
maintain all the improvements so that we don't just invest and have things
go to the wayside. Um second point I have is there's a lot
about affordable housing and incentives there. And there's potential
um I think it said
uh that they would consider having incentives for mixed-income housing, but
I actually think that that's something that
that really needs to be considered for um kind of what a lot of the people here
have already mentioned about having businesses incentivizing them to want to
be in the area. If we only have affordable housing, um it's not going to
create the kind of economy that we need in the area. Um [clears throat]
okay, that's all. Thank you.
» Thank you all of those that shared their your comments.
Um we're going to um ask for I'm going to ask for a motion.
» I move the council close the public hearing and defer action to a future
council meeting. >> Second.
» Council member Petro for the motion and Dugan for the second.
Any discussion? I'm going to call the question. All
those in favor say I. >> I.
» I. Any opposed? Okay, this motion carries unanimously.
We're going to move to item B5, which is an ordinance for the
ballpark zoning map and text amendment. Uh we're going to welcome at the table
Kate Ward, who's council policy analyst, to give us
a short introduction. Kate. >> Thank you. In December 2025, the CRA
board adopted the Ballpark Next Community Design Plan. Two elements of
this project include, first, approximately 4.8 acres of public green
space. Of the overall 14.8 acres, um that 4.8 acres, or approximately 32%
of the overall acreage, is planned to be green space and outdoor public space,
including a creek park and neighborhood fields. Second, the CRA and city plan to
prioritize maintaining ownership of a majority of the land included in the
rezone. Tonight, this is a public hearing for a rezone proposal to amend
the zoning on 14.8 acres of city-owned property associated with the Ballpark
Next Community Design Plan for public lands
um to rezone from public lands to MU8 and MU5, and a text amendment to remove
existing ballpark signage requirements, which were
associated with the former ballpark stadium.
The planning commission and planning staff both recommend approval. In
response to constituent and planning commission feedback, at your July 14th
work session, the city council straw polled to amend the proposed maximum
zoning amendment. The f-
It proposed a maximum zoning um amendment to rather MU8 um to MU8 rather
than MU11 as presented by the community reinvestment rezone application. This
amended um rezone ordinance now includes changing the 14.8 acres of public of of
currently zoned public lands to um MU8 and MU5. Thank you.
» Thank you, Kate. Isaac, please start with our first
public comment on this item. >> First, we'll hear from Emily Sloan Pace,
followed by MJ Powell, and then Christopher Derbidge. Emily is here
online. You may now unmute.
» Thanks. My name is Emily Sloan Pace, and I'm here tonight as chair of the
Downtown Community Council. We urge the City Council not to approve a rezone
that results in less green space and less public space than currently exists.
Downtown knows what happens when development moves faster than investment
in the public realm. While we have welcomed thousands of new residents and
extraordinary amounts of construction, we've also watched a once mature tree
canopy disappear, replaced with trees that will take decades to provide the
same shade and cooling. We should learn from that experience, not reproduce it
five blocks to the south. Ballpark already has too little park space in one
of the hotter parts of the city and is absorbing significant growth. This
proposal could substantially reduce its existing green and public space. Trees,
parks, shade, and soil are infrastructure. They are key
determinants of health for generations, and importantly, this land belongs to
the public. The city is spending significant resources trying to put
trees, shade, and green space back where they were lost or never preserved.
Ballpark still has something downtown is desperately trying to recreate, publicly
owned land available to open for with established green space.
Please don't build it away and ask another generation to figure out how to
put it back. Preserving the space that exists today should be the floor. With
15 acres of publicly owned land, the city should be asking how much more
green space we can create, not how much we are willing to lose. To paraphrase
Mr. Wharton's recent comments about the Victory Arch, listen to the community.
Make sure this decision is made with the public, not just for the public. Thank
you so much.
» Next, we will hear from MJ Powell, followed by Christopher Derbidge, and
then Janice Loop. >> Uh good evening council. My name is MJ
Powell. I am a resident of District 3, but I am a sixth-generation resident of
Salt Lake City from the West Side. Today, I deliver my remarks um in this
um as it pertains to Ballpark and the rezone of Ballpark uh to share my
experience from a boots-on-the-ground level as someone who also interned at
the Utah Jazz, and also took a bike there every day public transit.
We are not prioritizing public transit the way we need to in areas of this city
that have been historically neglected and ignored, and where low-income
residents rely on these services to provide for their families. In a time at
a crisis where people are having problems putting food on the table, and
the conversation results to green spaces, it often makes me wonder if the
administration is ignoring the root of the real issues. Economic disparity is
more important than where people are going to go hang out in the middle of
July and on on a hot day. People are wondering where the free lunch programs
in those parks went, where they're going to go.
These are the target focuses that the partnerships within the administration
should be focusing on, not commitments and pledges to making sure that we're
building a thousand trees in an area where we we even have the irrigation or
water to sustain those developments. I bring this up because Ballpark is an
area that is going to be invested in significantly while the historical
residents and current residents of those areas are often ignored
while we see gentrification take place. I ask you in every decision you
implement when it pertains to this rezone to maybe even look at the people
in Midvale who were looking for housing right after an apartment fire where they
had nowhere to go. Your priority is the needs of the people that you were
elected to represent in the Constitution you serve, not the developers like in
the work session I kept hearing people straw polling for. Thank you.
» Next we will hear from Christopher Derbidge followed by Janice Lou and then
Jeff Sandstrom.
» Mayor and councilman, I am Christopher Derbidge of 1407 South Richard Street
immediately south of the Ballpark. I support reinvestment in this property.
I support adaptive reuse of stadium public amenities, appropriate housing,
safer streets, and strong future for the Ballpark neighborhood.
I'm not asking the city to abandon Ballpark next. I am asking you to
protect the southern residential edge and require the information needed to
protect the people who already live there.
My first concern is historic preservation and neighborhood
continuity. Richard Street did not appear after the
Ballpark. The original South Main Street addition plat and the legal description
that still governs our properties show that the residential area has roots
predating the ball baseball complex.
The site changed from community park to Derks
Field and later stadium while the small enclave endured. I and several of my
Richard Street neighbors came before the planning commission
over another development proposed and raised concerns about neighborhood fit,
parking, traffic, service access. Ballpark Next itself says it will
acknowledge the past and honor the neighborhood history.
I ask you to apply that principle to surviving neighborhood, not only to the
stadium. My second concern is the existing green edge immediately behind
our homes today are areas that include grass, a hill, a scoreboard, a stadium
lights, and children's playground and picnic tables.
The city's materials identify the ballpark property as publicly owned and
show buildings I, J, K up to 45 ft long the southern portion of
the site. But the materials we received do not tell us that the legal status of
the existing green areas or exactly what happens to those amenities. I'm not
asking to assume that they are legally dedicated parkland. I'm asking the city
to answer the questions before the edge is committed to the private development.
Which parcels contain playground, hill, picnic area, and other green spaces?
Who holds title today? Are any of those parcels on the city's open space lands
inventory? Thank you.
» Next we'll follow we'll hear from Janice Liu, followed by Jeff Sandstorm, and
then Jim Jenkin. Janice, you may walk up to the podium.
» Good evening. I'm here to express my opposition to the
proposed zoning map and text amendments for the
city owned um property that includes the Smith Ballpark site.
As a resident of the community and a Ballpark Community Council board
member, I have researched, discussed, and
engaged with the planning of the Ballpark site for months.
Um after carefully careful consideration, I think the proposed zone
changes aligning with the Ballpark Next Plan
would negatively impact our community. I respectfully ask that the City Council
to forward the proposed zoning map and text amendments.
They fail to adequately address the city's equitable equitable distribution
of public owned green space essential to protect our environment
support greener living and enhance community health.
Um public open green spaces are a critical part of the urban
infrastructure of a healthy city. Cities around the world are working to
mitigate extreme heat and adapt urban life to climate change.
Climate forward forward SLC states Salt Lake City is working to create create a
clean, green, affordable and resilient community where people and
nature can thrive. Integrating quality public green open
space into the heart of the Ballpark community is key to this.
And I'll just um mention that I'm very disappointed
with what was produced um for the Ballpark Next Plan.
Thank you.
» Next we'll hear from Jeff Sandstrom followed by Jim Jankins and then Fraser
Fraser Nelson. Uh Jeff, you may walk up and speak.
» I'm Jeff Sandstrom, Ballpark Community Council board member.
Resoning thoughts. Can the rezone remain flexible and done
in stages? Might be something to think about.
Preserving green space on the site is an integral part of the Ballpark Next
Community Plan. Does the rezone make green space a priority?
It is the number one requested uh item from our neighborhood and
community meetings. Since a comprehensive funding plan for
Ballpark Next is still to be determined, wouldn't the city be better served by
embracing, repurposing, and reimagining the existing Ballpark Stadium?
Imagine the top level with enhanced suites, enclosed banquet, and meeting
spaces with spectacular views. Imagine canopy over the seating,
year-round activation and utilization during the Olympics. This is a uniquely
sized, viable venue that is already owned by the city.
Proposed multi-family housing feels like it's encroaching on the entire project.
If the public land has to become housing, consider ownership opportunity
mid-density housing limited to the north and south boundaries of the property.
A hotel is an unacceptable use of public land and may not be viable
and does not promote community engagement. Reminder, the Red Lion, the
Sheraton, and Ramada were all unsustainable and have been repurposed
because they were too far from city center.
This space has been dedicated to public land for more than 100 years. Does the
proposed rezone focus on community engagement, open space, and green space?
We have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to preserve and maintain a rare parcel
of public land in Salt Lake City. Thank you.
» Next, we'll hear from Jim Jenkin, followed by Fresher Nelson, and then Amy
Hawkins. Jim, you may speak.
» Good evening, council members. I am Jim Jenkin.
Um and I stand with the members of the planning commission, the three of them
who opposed this plan on the basis of uh potential heights, premature timing, and
particularly insufficient public space. Uh like many speakers, I would like to
emphasize green space. Um, these public lands may represent the
last opportunity for green space within the city proper.
Green space, of course, provides relief from heat for people
and the surroundings. Ballpark is in a heat island.
They need trees. They need shade. They need water.
They need grass. Most of these are not found on a play
field. I urge the council
to reject this proposal and to retain public lands designated for the creation
of green space. I think that releasing so much public
land without the creation of green space wastes a huge opportunity to increase
public welfare. And to do so would provide enhancing for
the development and for the area as well. So, I'm a big green space fan.
Thanks.
» Now, we will hear from Frazier Nelson, followed by Amy Hawkins, and then Ze-
Sarah Snedeker. >> Hi, my name is Frazier Nelson. I'm a
resident of the Ballpark neighborhood and chair of the Ballpark Action Team.
BAT doesn't take positions on zoning. We leave that to our colleagues at the
Ballpark Community Council. But, we do activate our neighborhood through events
like Pie and Beer Day, which I know many of you attended. And we hold large
community meetings where residents, business owners, and landowners and
developers in the neighborhood provide input on plans impacting the future of
our neighborhood. One thing that we have heard
consistently throughout every meeting we've held over
the last 3 years is the need for more public space, public green space, and
you're hearing that again tonight. This has been a constant not only at our
meetings and reports from those meetings we have shared with the council and
shared with the planning commission and the CRA, but from your own studies
and every single public meeting that has been held on this issue, the one thing
you have heard consistently is that the plan does not address the need for green
space that exists in our neighborhood and exists in our city as a whole.
Now is the time to say that as much of the land as possible should be saved and
the zoning should reflect the needs that you've heard from the community and the
needs your own studies have addressed. We've heard over and over again that
this is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity and it is. It's a once-in-a-lifetime
opportunity public lands, save public green space,
and be responsive to the voices of the community that you've heard from.
Thanks.
» Now we'll hear from Amy Hawkins followed by Sarah Sinnett Decker and then Joe
Revaglia.
» Good evening. I'm Amy Hawkins and I serve as chair of the Ballpark Community
Council. My ask tonight is simple. Please do not
rezone the entire 14.8 acre Ballpark site to mixed-use right now.
Instead, please consider retaining public lands zoning on the portions of
the site that are intended to provide lasting green space and heat reducing
benefits. The city can move Ballpark next forward
while preserving flexibility to respond to the neighborhood's long-term needs
for green space and planning for heat resilience.
Please consider first, Ballpark next was designed to evolve. The plan describes
itself as flexible guidance intended to adapt to changing market conditions and
community priorities. Second, the geography of Ballpark Next has already
changed. The plan was developed around 14.8 acres. Since then, the city has
acquired three additional properties immediately to the west of the site to
contribute to Ballpark Next redevelopment. With a larger publicly
owned footprint, the city has more flexibility to consider where housing
and amenities should go and whether more of the original Ballpark site should
stay green. Finally, to our knowledge, no public
funding plan has been presented for implementing Ballpark Next and we know
that implementation is going to have to occur in phases.
This is not an anti-density request. The blocks immediately to the north and west
of the Ballpark site are already zoned MU-A. One block further west, most of
300 West is zoned for 11-story buildings, but we do think this area of
the city and its future residents deserve equitable access to green space
and tree canopy. This request today is to ensure that
Ballpark Next deserves the greatest possible public benefit for the
neighborhood and the broader Salt Lake City community. Thank you for your
consideration.
» Next Next [clears throat] we'll hear from
Sarah Snedecker followed by Joe Rabaglia and then Kevin
Latch. Sarah, you may walk up to speak.
» Hi, good evening. She's asleep, so I'll see if she That
stays that way. Uh my name is Sarah Snedecker and I live
on Richard Street just south of the Ballpark with my husband Joe and
our 5-month-old daughter. Uh Joe bought our house over a decade
ago and has been fixing it up since, making some much-needed upgrades. One
last major renovation on the list was redoing the 1980s kitchen and bathroom.
When we got married and decided to start a family, we talked about whether or not
to stay in our current house and do the remodel or to move. We waited to make
that decision until the Ballpark Next renderings were released and we had more
clarity on the city's intent for the space.
Although we would miss the B's as our neighbors, we were initially excited to
see these changes include so much community green space and a library at
our front door. And this is something that our neighborhood lacks greatly. Our
street is quiet and a great place to raise a family because of its unique
positioning as a dead end into the Ballpark.
We decided to stay relying heavily on these plans that were put out. We took
out a significant loan to make the much-needed improvements and upgrades.
We could have spent significantly less to simply up update the look and sell
it, but we chose to invest in our future home there to honor the history of the
1909 home. Not only did we upgrade the typical things for our kitchen and
bathroom like you know, the typical things, but we
also furred out walls to add insulation. We replaced old knob and tube electrical
wiring and added mini splits. And I'm telling you all of this because we love
our house, we love our street, and we are hopeful for the future of the
neighborhood. We changed our economic position in order to make it our home
and to raise our family in. We made this decision because of the
initial plans that detailed open community green space. And if you go
forward with the proposed rezoning, we will be harmed and who would benefit? So
we urge you to please consider voting no on the
rezone. Thank you for your time.
» Next, we will hear from Joe Rabaglia followed by Kevin Launch and then Ashley
Lawrence. Joe, you may speak.
» Thank you. Good evening and thank you for letting us speak. Uh my name is Joe
Rabaglia, resident of Richard Street 1396. I am
here to speak on several concerns. Um one being the proximity of the new
rezoning of the high-density housing to my property. I am feet away from the
Ballpark property which would be close enough for the safety of my my
family um to basically to prevent the
the the view of apartments above my property. Um
Safety being first and of my family, uh the second priority is also the
well-being of my my family. Um the removal of public land would uh
negatively affect my the the development of my of my child. Uh we would love to
grow up with a park nearby and uh
enjoy those amenities. Uh third, the the proximity of the higher density housing
would negatively affect my property value. I As my wife just said, we have
spent a significant amount of money to invest in that property that we want to
stay in for the future. Um and speaking with other investors and
resources that um the
the high-density housing would is also negatively affecting their properties.
Um that's it. Thank you.
» Next, we'll hear from Kevin Launch, followed by Ashley Lawrence, and finally
John Allison. >> I should apologize. Going to date myself
here. Anyone who's played SimCity knows the
formula. First, all right, you build the shacks, right? Then you build houses,
then townhouses, then huge mega complexes, and then everything falls
apart. New residents flock in. That's what
you're after, right? But those ungrateful Sims are unhappy, and you
keep getting those little frowny faces that tank your score. You quickly learn
you have to offer services to get back the little smiley faces. Nothing works
well enough, though. Eventually, the last thing that everyone does, me, too,
as a Hail Mary, basically, we start putting in statues, and gardens, and
parks. Doesn't make any sense. You don't make money off those things, but you do
it anyways, cuz what else you going to do?
And that's when things start to change for really no clear reason.
Real life isn't so different. Ballpark has received multiple new high-density
projects. For all you're mad. Our census has exploded. We have to offset that by
protecting this valuable and unique parcel of land.
Filling each square foot to bursting with no public safe solves a very small
fraction of the housing problem, while creating subtle, but devastating new
problems. Our biology actually craves space and greenery. I'm a dude. I don't
want to believe that, but it's true, right? And we literally suffer in its
absence. It may not be intuitive, but you need only look at the thousands of
people who utilize Liberty and Sugarhouse Park every single day to
observe this point. We settled these questions 70 years ago.
Rats, like us, are very social creatures. So, Calhoun created a rat
utopia with unlimited resources, but in a very fixed and overcrowded space and
just watched what happened. Initially, it thrived. Population
doubled and doubled and doubled again. But then social cohesion and mental
health just plummeted. There were huge spikes in aggression, peer predation,
even parental abandonment, followed by colony collapse every time they ran the
experiment. Critics argue, "We're not rats." Fair enough. Vallance and Baum
conducted randomized studies on college students.
Same thing, to a lesser extent. And we found that increased size, anxiety,
isolation, dislike, and and disengagement carried
outside their their environment. I see what you're trying to do for us, but I
challenge you to consider what you're doing.
» Next, we'll hear from Ashley Lawrence, followed by John Allison.
» Hello. I purchased our house on 1400 Richard Street about 9 years ago. It was
a definitely above my price range, but we invested
um at it being a reach, knowing that it was a dead-end street and how quiet the
neighborhood was. What I was not prepared for was the level of crime that
we have have in the neighborhood, and I feel like we are
kind of sheltered from that because of the dead end. And so, I'm mostly
concerned about the opening up of our road to a driving access and the high
density houses because of that quiet safety that we currently have on our
street. So, that is what I would like to request for you guys to keep it public
lands for those reasons. Thank you.
» Now, we'll hear from John Allison and there is nobody signed up to speak after
them.
» [clears throat] >> Hi, my name's John Allison. I live at
the intersection of Merrimack and Richard Street on the south side of
Ballpark neighborhood. And I think everyone here has already kind of said
what I wanted to say, which is to maintain maximum amount of green space
while also offering housing to people who come to our city and want to live
here. Um, I'm getting in a bit in the minutia, but if things should open up on
the south side of the ballpark at Richard Street, I would highly recommend
this council consider limiting access Richard Street into the ballpark area.
We have a serious issue with people using Merrimack as a cut through,
constantly speeding, you know, running up potentially occasionally almost
running over me, my dog, my wife. And I feel like if you open up Richard Street
to full access to vehicles, it's only going to be made worse as people enter
and exit whatever ends up going into the space on Richard Street. And that's all
I got. Thank you for your time.
» Thank you. All of those who shared your comments on this item, I need a motion.
» Mr. Chair, I move that the council close the public hearing and defer action to a
future meeting. >> Second.
» Second. >> I have a motion by Councilmember Carlson
and a second by Napier Pierce, Councilmember.
Um, is there any discussion on this item?
» Mr. Chair. Um, I want to say thank you to neighbors
and to residents of the Ballpark community as well as residents from
across Salt Lake City who came to share their thoughts and feedback on this
proposed rezone. I also want to acknowledge that many of the voices that
were involved in the Ballpark Next plan which took place over a year that helped
to reimagine what the future of this space would be.
I hear the concerns about the urban heat island that
this exists in. We feel the urban heat island that this
exists in. And I share the concerns around max opportunities to maximize
green space, opportunities to protect the mature trees that do exist in the
Ballpark neighborhood, and other ways to bring down the heat island in this in
this part of the city. Related to that heat island effect and
to bringing down some of the heat that is experienced in that part of the city,
I'm appreciative to my colleagues for being willing to re-examine the proposed
zoning from MU-11 to MU-8 because we know that the taller the buildings, the
greater the heat island effect. And so I'm grateful that we were able to be
thoughtful of that. Lastly, I am also grateful and will
continue to stand steadfast by continued public ownership of the Ballpark site.
This is a site that's been in Salt Lake City hands for generations. And I'll
stand very firmly next to that along with what was outlined in the Ballpark
Next plan specific to Richard Street that it maintains a that it maintains
being a pedestrian street. So, I know that there are a lot of details
that we yet don't know about the Ballpark Next and
down and dirty of what's what's to come, but we do have a a concept of what's
coming next and would love to stay in conversation with neighbors on what the
future looks like. And so, thank you to everyone for being here, for caring
about the neighborhood, and for showing up tonight. Thank you.
» Any other comments? I'm going to call the question. All of
those in favor say I. >> I.
» I. >> Any opposed or abstentions?
Okay, this motion carries unanimously. Moving on.
Um we're going to go to item C2, which is an ordinance for mobile
business tax amendment. I need a motion.
» I think it's C1. >> C1?
» Yeah. >> Did I skip C1? I did.
Going a little too fast here. C1, thank you.
It's a resolution for the waiver of proximity for Via Veneto Pizzeria at 51
511 East 900 South.
And I need a motion for that. >> I move that the council adopt a
resolution authorizing the execution of a local authority act
local authorization for proximity to a community location for Via Veneto
Pizzeria located at 511 East 900 South, Salt Lake City.
» Second. >> Second.
» I have a motion by Council Member Petro and a second by Council Member Dugan.
Any discussion?
Okay, this makes sense. So, I'm excited. Uh all of those in favor say I.
» I. >> Any opposed?
This motion carries unanimously. Now, actually, C2.
An ordinance for mobile business tax amendment, and I do need a motion.
» Mr. Chair, I move that the council adopt the ordinance.
» Second. >> Um motion by Council Member Dugan,
seconded by Council Member Young. Any discussion?
All of those in favor say I. >> I.
» Any opposed? Abstentions?
This motion carries unanimously. Now we are in the D section of our agenda. Now
we're going to go to D1, which is a resolution
for the amendment to the interlocal agreement between Salt Lake City and the
library related to tax increment. I need a motion.
» Mr. Chair, I move that the council adopt the resolution amending the interlocal
agreement between Salt Lake City and the Salt Lake City Community Reinvestment
Agency to clarify the exclusion of the Salt Lake City Library tax increment.
» Second. >> Councilmember Dugan made the motion and
it was seconded by Councilmember Wharton.
Is there any discussion on this? I think we should like file a claim. We
don't like what we're doing here. We tried to make sense with the state
and the county, but I'm going to call the question. All of those
in favor say I. >> I.
» Any opposed? This motion carries unanimously. Now
we're going to skip E because there is no unfinished business and we're going
to go to item F, which is the consent agenda.
» Now for approval. >> And we need a
We need to remove >> Sorry, with the exclusion of
um >> Number five.
» Yes, item number five. >> Second.
» Okay, I have motion Councilmember Wharton
and it's seconded by Councilmember Dugan is for the approval of the consent
agenda except for item number five.
All of those Is there any discussion?
All of those in favor say I. >> I.
» Any opposed? No opposed, so this motion carries
unanimously. We're moving on to comments.
Um section G. Um
and are there any questions to for the mayor?
Mayor's staff, thank you for being here.
No? >> Thanks, Council. I've been listening in.
Great public hearings tonight. >> Thank you, Mayor, for being there. Thank
you, Rachel, um, for being here. Um, we're now at the general comment
portion of our agenda. This section is for the public comment of a
for the public to comment on any city business not scheduled for a public
hearing. It is limited to a maximum of 1 hour and
and to only those individuals who register to speak before 7:30.
Our meeting rules apply to those, uh, general comments. Please avoid
disruptions or threats or we'll ask staff member to assist you out of the
meeting. Also, as a reminder, comments that
include profanity, personal attacks, intimidation, or discriminatory language
which are not persuasive or compelling to the council.
They are not helpful to create a respectful and safe environment.
We will be calling the names in the order of sign-ups. And if you're in
Zoom, please unmute your microphone when your name is called. Each person will
have 2 minutes to, um, and to help uh, make sure that
as many people as possible, uh, can speak during the hour. Anyone in
person should feel free to come up and stand in line if you so wish.
Please avoid interruptions so that we so we can use the time for as many people
as possible. If you, uh, reach the 2-minute mark, the host will announce
time and your microphone will be muted. If you need staff assistance in the
room, please raise your hand and someone will be with you.
If you're having technical issues and, you know, if you're online in Zoom,
um, and if you need assistance, you can message staff support and Akshay from
our staff can assist you. If you are unable to finish your
comment, you can share the rest of your comment via email. You can also mail it
to us or call our office. If you want that contact information, you can visit
slc.gov/council. If you have any handout for the council,
you can lift raise your hand and staff should assist
you to make sure that that makes it to us.
Isaac, can you begin with our first public comment?
» Yes, first we will be hearing from Anthony Washburn
followed by MJ Powell and then TJ Young. Anthony, you may walk up to speak.
» I think Anthony is not here at the moment.
Maybe he's in the hallway.
» He's not marked in the registration sheet, so maybe we'll just move on to TJ
Young who does have, I believe, marked there and we can circle back if they
come back. >> Didn't you I think you mentioned MJ
Powell before TJ Young. Sorry for >> Oh, sorry. MJ was also not marked, so I
assumed he was also not there. In that case, yeah, MJ Powell may walk
up. >> Yes.
» Good evening, Salt Lake City residents, members of the mayor's administration,
city council members and staff. My name is MJ Powell and I'm here
tonight to ask for transparency, accountability, and clarity
regarding the Salt Lake City My Brother's Keeper initiative.
I was directly involved in helping bring My Brother's Keeper to Salt Lake City
and co-led that effort with Ephraim Kum, another former intern of Aaron's
administration, Mayor Mendenhall's administration, respectfully, pardon me.
I became involved because I deeply I believe deeply in the initiative's
purpose, creating meaningful opportunities, removing barriers, and
improving outcomes for boys and men young men of color. And this is why I'm
concerned that the public still lacks a clear understanding of what this
initiative has accomplished and how its success has been measured. When
questions have been raised about the program's direction and the outcomes
there within, to my city council member of district
three, Chris Wharton, as recorded in prior conversations,
I have asked for receipts and I've yet to receive them.
So, tonight I'm simply asking for the facts.
How many young people were served? What measurable outcomes were achieved? How
much funding was allocated and spent and where did those resources go? What
programs, partnerships, and contracts or services were supported? What goals and
metrics were established and what were the actual results? And how was
community input from those who established this initiative incorporated
into its implementation? If the administration believes this effort has
been successful, then that success should be demonstrated through
transparent reporting and evidence, not simply a designation that the work is
complete on the mayor's website. The young people this initiative is
created to deserve serve deserve measurable results, pardon me. The young
people this initiative is created to serve deserve measurable results. The
public deserves accountability for public resources and the commitments
made by our elected leaders deserve to be honored and evaluated transparently.
Thank you.
And I've emailed you all about this. >> Yes.
» It's in your inbox. >> Yes. Yes. Anybody can Yes, please.
Next comment. >> Next we'll be hearing from T.J. Young,
followed by Margaret Holloway, and then Nadia
Mataya.
» My name is T.J. Young. I'm a resident of Sugar House and I'm here to talk about
the ICE deportation flights that are happening at Salt Lake International
Airport. Since July 6th, ICE and Aero have trafficked over 400 friends,
family, and neighbors out of Salt Lake City, away from their families, some
before they can exercise their constitutional right to legal counsel
and receive their due process. I hear the Salt Lake Airport is
partially under your control. I'm here to ask that you install a public webcam
where ICE boards planes to help monitor the safety of these Utah residents as
they're trafficked away in secrecy. Shine a light on what ICE is doing and
how they're doing it. As they love to say, if you're not doing anything wrong,
it shouldn't be a problem, right? If there's nothing wrong with
trafficking peaceful, hardworking neighbors who have no criminal record
and shackling them at the hands, waist, and feet, let us see. Install a webcam.
When a loved one is detained by ICE, they just go missing. Their phone is
seized, turned off, and sometimes they don't appear in ICE custody
for up to 18 hours. And when they're in transit, including
aboard an ICE flight, they disappear again, no indication of where they are
or where they're being taken for up to 24 hours, when hopefully they reappear
in the ICE locator. They're trafficked in as short as 3 days
before they can exercise their right to legal representation.
They're taken to detention centers that are currently having hunger strikes over
lack of medical care, overcrowding, spoiled food, not enough food, and dirty
water. This request is not huge, not difficult
to implement, and not unprecedented. King County, Washington not only has a
publicly viewable webcam that airs ICE flights, they also share updates on
flight schedules in advance. Shine a light, Mayor. Shine a light,
Council. You have an enormous budget allocated to
public safety. This is the public
and this is very much about their safety.
Thank you for your time.
» Next we'll hear from Margaret Holloway, followed by Naja Mataya, and then Kurt
Middlestadt.
» Hey, I learned a lot from >> [clears throat]
» the other discussions tonight, especially about Northwest.
I came to talk about the utility fee
that was not presented, was not told that was coming.
$30 plus a month is a lot of money to take in. The property tax, we heard
about the property tax and that's like $50 a year.
But people that are on limited income, that have gardens, big gardens that
you're trying to help serve and pass out food to other people in the community,
are hitting getting hit hard. This and this is going to go on. I never
would have planted it. I never would have planted it. All my stuff goes up to
the senior center. I don't even take but I think I had two tomatoes out of my
whole patch. But we weren't warned. Why didn't
anybody warn us this was coming? You all knew this was coming.
And you could have started it last year at $15 and said, "Look, this is what's
going to happen." This so people could plan things out. But you didn't do it.
You just said, "Oh, here it is. Sorry, it's been mismanaged for the last 50
years." We all know that. We all know that. Mayor Jackie tried to straighten
that out, but she didn't stay. Um
but it's just so depressing because it it just makes me have to sell my house,
even that much faster because I can't All my money's invested in my house and
I'm going to have to sell and move out of state.
» [snorts] >> But you guys didn't tell us and you all
knew. You knew this was coming.
And I don't understand why you couldn't have told us this because that's a lot
of money every single month. And even if you don't even using it. And
the renters are like and the Airbnbs, okay? I'm so glad Airbnbs complaining
because you guys affordable. You're cramming more and more and more. And
what happens they lease them out to Airbnbs.
Okay, and you try and crack down on that and I heard Airbnbs upset with the city
over that and I just laughed. The guy says, "Well, I bought it to invest for
an Airbnb." Sell it to someone who wants to live there for crime and sex. That's
what they're there for. 85% of the houses around Liberty Park are Airbnbs.
If you guys get rid of the Airbnbs, I'm sorry unless they're 8
» Thank you, Margaret. Thank you, Margaret.
» Next we'll be hearing from Naja Mataya followed by Kurt Middelstadt and then
Anne Canavati. Naja, you may speak.
» Hello, Salt Lake City Council and Mayor Mendenhall. My name is Naja Mataya and
I'm a lobbying leader from the Wasatch Assembly and we want to thank you, Chris
Wharton, for replying to our uh policy survey for 2026.
We hope to hear from all of you about these policies.
Um we in the Wasatch Assembly believe that local government should protect its
people and today that I'm here to talk about the immigration policy and
opposing ICE. ICE has shown itself to be
indiscriminate, violent, and unaccountable to the public as TJ said.
This feeling is shared by more and more people across Utah and America as a
whole. We are encouraged by this body's fight against the
Salt Lake City Detention Center. This is a big step,
but we need to do more. We have built a list of policies agreed
on by our community on the topic of immigration policy, especially
pertaining to ICE. These are on the pamphlets we have given
to you and we hope that we can find alignment on all of these policies. Of
the top three, um Salt Lake City Council has already committed to two of them.
Stop ICE facilities from being constructed
and no 287G agreement or municipal resources to ICE.
Um our third pri- prioritized policy is free legal services for constitutional
rights violations. Our citizens need protection against the inevitable
unconstitutional violence of ICE. In general, we want to see municipal
government in Utah be more responsive, visionary, and able to meet the material
needs of the people. As others have said today, Utahns are
suffering from general unaffordability of everything, rollbacks of rights and
protections, and seeing the destruction of the environment
for the benefit of no one except for the 1%. At such a crucial time, we need
municipal leaders who will take action to improve the lives of people and the
protection of the environment and to take action even when it pushes against
the state. As we seen
» Thank you. >> Thank you so much.
» Next, we'll hear from Kurt Mittelstadt, followed by Ann Canada, and then Olive
PJ.
» Hi Council. Thank you for your time tonight. My
name's Kurt Mittelstadt. Um I'm also a member of the Wasatch Assembly. Um I'm
here today because I firmly believe that um there needs to be accountability for
ICE as well as policy reform um at all levels of government. I think starting
at the local level. Um I also, like my wife just said, want
to recognize, thank the Council um for joining the fight against um the
proposed detention center. And appreciate the city taking a stand
against the expansion of ICE infrastructure in our community.
Um We, the Wasatch Assembly, are asking
Salt Lake City to adopt policies that protect residents from immigration
enforcement, federal immigration enforcement, and prevent city resources
from being used to facilitate it. Um some of my top priorities of uh the
Assembly's agenda are um mostly centered around accountability, requiring
judicial warrants before city facilities, records, databases, or other
resources are accessed for um federal immigration enforcement except where
access or disclosures are otherwise legally required.
Um holding a public hearing on ICE and its impact on Salt Lake City residents.
Um and requiring city departments to publicly report their interactions with
ICE and other federal immigration authorities, including requests for
information, records, access, or assistance.
Um as you know, I'm sure you're elected to represent the people
um who live here. We're here as those people asking you to listen, uh respond,
and act. Thank you.
» Next, we'll hear from Anne Canada, followed by Olive PJ, and then Kayla
Medina. >> Hi, MD2 Wasatch Assembly representative.
You've heard the various policies. We've sent them to your inboxes, so I'll not
belabor that point. What I will speak to is our need to build a stronger
municipal pub- uh politic in Utah. As the capital city
and economic hub of Utah, we have power and leverage,
both political and economic. I want to see the city wield it to build a
municipal political movement against ICE and for immigration.
Silently moving in back rooms does not help build our community's confidence in
this body. People are begging for authenticity and
engagement. This body needs to start thinking in
strategic and populist terms. The Wasatch Assembly is trying to build
that political movement, and we'd love for you to for you to join it.
But we must be brave and take risks. Nothing profound has ever come from
being safe. Our community wants you to take risks to
expose the Republican Party for the sham it is, make moments to highlight the
economic contradictions. Start meeting the needs of the community
you serve. Even the needs that the supermajority
does not want to hear. The civil rights movement was created
under the supermajority tyranny of red states.
There is no excuse for this body to not help us in leading the charge to change
in creating a new Utah, a better Utah, a more free and prosperous Utah, a more
just Utah. We need to leave no strategic stone
unturned. Dream of what a pro-immigrant city looks like, what it looks like to
welcome dreamers from across the world, what it looks like to build an
ethnically diverse culture, what it looks like to protect our immigrant
community from a fascist federal branch and a hateful legislature. People are
growing tired of a politic of hate. Are you willing to step up and be the
movement leaders we need on the municipal level?
I hope you all are.
» Next, we'll hear from Olive PJ, who is online, followed by Kale Akina, and then
Brent Stevenson. Olive, you may unmute.
» Can you hear me now? >> Hello. I am speaking tonight or here
today, I guess, to express my frustration with the city,
uh the mayor and the council, uh between arrest ICE arrests at Matheson Matheson
Courthouse, uh ICE flights out of Salt Lake City
International Airport, um a lack of overall transparency, and
what appears to be sort of a stalling, you know, no more
forward movement in the fight against ICE.
Uh and then, more broadly, um, the over-policing of our homeless
population, the lack of social safety net for
everyone living in Salt Lake City, um, the lack of care and dignity of of
equitable, uh, medical treatment, um, cooling
centers, just across the board, uh, your constituents are being failed,
especially if they have any sort of marginalization,
um, and it's just it's so frustrating, uh, coming to these meetings, uh, and
being told to, um, avoid swearing, to speak
kindly, to remain calm, to not express frustration or appreciation when someone
says something that we agree with, um, with all the photo ops and with the
policing of our speech, it feels like the city cares more about its
reputation, uh, as a
progressive hub than actually serving,
uh, the people, the identities, the communities that they claim to love and
seem to want the clout of uh, championing championing, um, just across
the board, you need to do more and you need to
just stop being like this.
» Next, we'll hear Sorry. Next, we will hear from
Kylie Akina, followed by Brent Stevenson, and then Matilda Wep.
Kylie, you may now unmute.
» Hello. My name is Kylie Akina. I'm a resident of Salt Lake City.
City Council can implement um, legislation to resist ICE expansion um,
apart from just the new facility that we've been able to stop. So, thank you
for that. We can continue forward. I'm urging this council to prioritize
meetings with many of the attending residents as well and prioritize
accountability processes in response to human rights violations enacted by ICE
agents and appropriating city budgets uh, to the rehabilitation of impacted
survivors. Members of the Wasatch Assembly and multiple SLC residents have
brought you clear a clear set of demands developed by the people in our community
and I'd like to echo that while ICE may be a federal agency, the consequences of
their actions are local. So, dozens of uh, Salt Lake City
residents um, have also been violently mishandled, racially profiled, do not
have adequate access to medical care, cannot reach their family members and
often elders and children are left unattended to
uh, with no clarity um, or foresight as to what will happen be happening to
their family members. So, local government has choices about
whether it helps ICE by allowing violations without ability, ignores ICE
um, and your neighbors to whom you are accountable to
um, or actively protects its residents from these abuses.
I'm again urging Salt Lake City Council to implement the following, provide
legal services free legal services for city residents whose constitutional
rights are violated by federal immigration enforcement, require
judicial warrants before city facilities, records, databases and other
city resources are accessed for federal immigration enforcement except where
access or disclosure is otherwise legally required, pass a resolution
calling for the abolition of ICE and require city departments to publicly
report their interactions with ICE and other federal immigration authorities
including requests for information, records, access or assistance.
Um, you are the elected to represent the
people who live here regardless of their backgrounds. So, thank you for upholding
that.
» Next we'll be hearing from Brent Stevenson, followed by Matilda Webb.
Brent, you may unmute.
» Hello, my name is Brent. I'd like to make comment on the short-term rental
ordinance, specifically in legal zones with some real-world context. First off,
um we've had multiple dates reported to us for licensing requirements. We were
told we had to comply by July 1st. That was postponed to August 8th. That was
then moved up to July 23rd. It continues to move. For STRs with HOAs, that's
putting the HOAs in a difficult spot, seemingly needing them to seek their own
legal counsel for a poorly and hastily written bill with many flaws and
oversights. I want to call attention again to how hastily this was put
together. There's evidence of this by a recent grammar email report, and in the
working session last month, when the council challenged the creators of the
ordinance for the work logic that went into the requirements, such as the 10%
allowance in multi- family unit buildings, the 200-day
maximum, etc. Without exception, the ordinance creators, including their
legal counsel, could not support their logic or provide any detail around how
these requirements were put together. That working session concluded keeping
the ordinance intact as is, with the council asking that ordinance team to
come back with data supporting the with real-world use cases.
This is a clear conflict of interest. That team is now incentivized to come
back with predetermined findings with
evidence as compared to using evidence to inform their findings and the
ordinance in turn. I'm worried that the considerable lack of due diligence,
public hearings, formal studies, etc. are being glossed over for ulterior
motives to effectively shut down short-term rentals in Salt Lake.
Uh on the 10% cap on multi-family buildings, I need to comment that
condominiums are not considered multi-family because they're
individually owned and managed. They're most commonly looked at as single-family
homes. This is well-established in cities like Denver and Seattle. The
precedent has been set avoiding lawsuits and penalties. This was even confirmed
by Arturo Garcia over email on June 25th, but the city continues to
flip-flop asking for positive enforcement and an ordinance revision
for condominiums. Thank you.
» Finally, we will hear from Matilda Webb who is here online. And after that, we
have nobody else registered to speak. Matilda, you may unmute.
» Hi, my name is Matilda Webb and I'm a resident here in Salt Lake City. And I
just wanted to um comment towards uh the City Council and their
lack of stance seemingly um on ice. I have uh
the fortune of working with a lot of youth in our community and I'm seeing
more and more often children that have no idea where their parents are, are
unable to locate their parents, um and often times case workers that also are
unable to locate parents or give their children any sort of um real answers.
And it is heartbreaking and frustrating. And I would love to see um our City
Council step up and be more vocal about um
the way that our community is being treated and the way our citizens are
being treated. I would love for them to be an example for for our children and
our youth in how you stand up for others and look out and care for your
community. Uh
I I I appreciate the the words that that are spoken during these meetings and the
sentiments and the photo ops and you know, we're out here building our
community, but that that's not what what we're actually seeing out every
day. And I would just love to have more um
more action taken by City Council. Um, I don't have the the cheat in front of me,
but I absolutely agree with everything that the Wasatch Assembly is doing and
saying and the things that they are asking. I would be thrilled to see even
one of those things being taken seriously by our City Council
um, and I would love to see our youth grow grow more into uh, community
building as well. But, having the leaders in front of them
show them how that looks. Thank you.
» Thank you for all of those that commented or
participating in the meeting. Uh, thank you everyone. Um,
this concludes the Salt Lake City Council meeting for today.
Um, and this meeting stands adjourned.
» [music]