[0:03] [music]

[3:54] » Woo.

[4:03] » [music]

[4:12] [music]

[5:45] » Welcome to today's meeting. We are happy

[5:47] to you here for this formal meeting of

[5:49] the council. We're happy you're here

[5:51] whether in person

[5:53] or joining us online. We hope that

[5:55] you'll continue to participate in

[5:56] whichever manner you feel most

[5:58] comfortable.

[5:59] Please join us for the Pledge of

[6:01] Allegiance.

[6:22] Thank you again to everyone who's

[6:24] joining us tonight. Before we move into

[6:26] the agenda, I want to quickly go through

[6:28] registration information and share a

[6:31] little bit of the reasoning about how

[6:33] and why we share these meetings the way

[6:34] that we do.

[6:36] We welcome everyone regardless of your

[6:38] opinion or side on an issue because we

[6:40] will have many people with varying

[6:42] opinions on important issues. Our goal,

[6:45] council's goal, is to make these

[6:46] meetings a place where people feel safe

[6:48] and comfortable participating. This is

[6:50] the most local level of government and

[6:52] it is a key value of ours to ensure that

[6:54] we have created a respectful and safe

[6:56] environment so that no one is

[6:58] intimidated out of free participation.

[7:00] This also allows us to ensure that the

[7:02] meeting can continue and we can conduct

[7:04] the scheduled city business.

[7:07] We invite each of you to contribute to

[7:08] this space, to speak your mind, and to

[7:11] welcome others to do the same.

[7:13] In order to create this welcoming and

[7:15] safe space, we will the meeting at any

[7:17] action that causes a disruption to our

[7:19] ability to conduct the meeting or any

[7:22] safety concern involving threats,

[7:25] un- threats or unprotected speech. If

[7:28] there are repeated actions or comments,

[7:30] it may result in removal from the

[7:31] meeting.

[7:33] To avoid intimidating others, please

[7:35] avoid the use of threatening or

[7:37] discriminatory language. Do not insult

[7:40] others based on religion, ethnicity,

[7:42] race, color, gender, sexual orientation,

[7:45] or physical ability. Whether you agree

[7:47] or disagree with someone's comment,

[7:49] clapping, cheering, shouting, booing,

[7:52] snapping, gesturing, obstructing, or

[7:55] discouraging others from commenting is

[7:57] not allowed.

[7:58] As a remember as a reminder, as council

[8:01] members, we refrain from reacting or

[8:03] responding to allow everyone to share

[8:05] their opinions freely. This is to keep

[8:08] our reactions from affecting your

[8:09] ability to share your opinion freely.

[8:13] If you would like to follow up with any

[8:14] of us, please see council staff or make

[8:17] a comment in the Zoom chat for our

[8:19] contact info.

[8:20] When making your comments, please

[8:22] address the body and not any individual

[8:25] elected official.

[8:26] If you have a handout for council,

[8:28] please raise your hand and council staff

[8:30] will assist you.

[8:32] Council staff are also available during

[8:34] or after the meeting to help with any

[8:36] questions or information sharing.

[8:38] The full meeting rules are listed at the

[8:40] door and our staff will post a link on

[8:42] Zoom.

[8:44] As a reminder of our public comment

[8:46] registration process, individuals may

[8:48] register to comment on scheduled public

[8:50] hearing items up until the hearing is

[8:53] closed. For the general comment section,

[8:55] we will accept sign-ups until 7:30 p.m.

[8:59] The general comment section is limited

[9:01] to a maximum of 1 hour and will only

[9:04] include commenters who register before

[9:06] 7:30 p.m.

[9:08] So, if you're here to give general

[9:10] comments, please sign up and remember

[9:12] that it is not possible

[9:14] um

[9:15] it please remember that it is possible

[9:16] not everyone who signed up to speak may

[9:19] be able to speak.

[9:20] This brings us to item A4, approving the

[9:24] work session meeting minutes of March

[9:26] 3rd, 2026, March 24th, 2026,

[9:30] April 7th, 2026, May 12th, 2026, May

[9:35] 19th, 2026, as well as the formal

[9:38] meeting minutes of January 13th, 2026,

[9:41] February 17th, 2026, March 10th, 2026,

[9:45] April 7th, 2026, and April 21st, 2026.

[9:49] I'll look for a motion.

[9:50] >> Move for approval.

[9:51] » Move for approval.

[9:51] >> Second.

[9:52] » Second.

[9:52] >> It has been moved by Council Member

[9:53] » It has been moved by Council Member

[9:53] Dugan and and seconded by Council Member

[9:56] Wharton. Any discussion?

[9:59] All in favor?

[10:00] >> Aye.

[10:01] » Aye.

[10:01] >> Aye.

[10:02] » Aye.

[10:02] >> Any opposed?

[10:04] » Any opposed?

[10:04] Motion passes unanimously with two

[10:06] Council Members absent.

[10:08] I will now turn the time over to Council

[10:11] Member Jennifer Napier Pearce for some

[10:13] brief remarks.

[10:15] >> Thank you, Madam Chair and my fellow

[10:16] » Thank you, Madam Chair and my fellow

[10:16] Council Members for giving me just a few

[10:18] minutes of personal privilege. I promise

[10:20] I will keep this brief.

[10:22] Uh the past few weeks since my

[10:24] appointment have been an absolute

[10:26] whirlwind.

[10:28] Um I've had a a listening tour and I've

[10:30] had the pleasure of meeting with new

[10:32] neighbors, old friends, my esteemed

[10:34] colleagues, and dedicated public

[10:36] servants in coffee shops, parks, bars,

[10:39] street corners, local businesses, and

[10:41] private homes. And what I've learned has

[10:44] been both enlightening and inspiring.

[10:47] I'm filled with gratitude seeing how

[10:48] much people care about our capital city

[10:51] and how motivated they are to solve

[10:53] problems.

[10:54] I want to thank the many friends and

[10:56] colleagues who supported my candidacy

[10:58] and made calls and texts on my behalf. I

[11:00] truly appreciate all the encouragement

[11:03] and support. I'm grateful for Council

[11:05] staff, Mayor Mendenhall and the

[11:07] administration, and a special thank you

[11:09] to my colleagues here on the Council.

[11:11] I'm coming in midstream on so many

[11:13] issues, so I've really appreciated your

[11:15] patience as I've gotten up to speed.

[11:18] I'm not there yet. Let's not be, you

[11:20] know, let's not joke about that. You are

[11:23] all good-hearted, kind, and smart, and

[11:26] collaborative, and so I just I'm

[11:28] grateful. Thanks for filling the gaps in

[11:30] my knowledge. Thanks for sharing your

[11:32] perspectives, your experience, and your

[11:34] expertise. And thanks for showing up

[11:36] every single day to make a difference in

[11:38] our city. Special shout-out to my

[11:41] family, especially my sons Ben and Jonas

[11:43] watching on the livestream. Love you

[11:45] guys. Thanks for your support.

[11:50] Thanks most of all to my husband, Sean

[11:52] Pierce,

[11:53] who's [snorts] just by me through thick

[11:56] and thin for 34 years.

[11:58] Your love [snorts] means everything and

[12:00] I'm grateful for you.

[12:02] It's so weird, my first job out of

[12:04] college was here

[12:07] in City Hall, working for the Salt Lake

[12:09] City Council. So sitting on this dais is

[12:12] absolutely surreal.

[12:14] I'm humbled, honored,

[12:17] and um just grateful for the opportunity

[12:19] to serve the people of District 4. I

[12:22] look forward to working with all of you

[12:24] to make this city the best it can be.

[12:26] Thank you so much.

[12:30] » Thank you so much, Council Member

[12:31] Pierce, for those heartfelt and honest

[12:34] remarks. And I want to give a special

[12:36] thank you to your family members who

[12:38] have tuned in online and are watching,

[12:41] your friends, and and your um your

[12:43] partner, former Utah Supreme Court

[12:45] Justice Pierce. Thank you for being

[12:48] here. It truly takes so many people um

[12:51] in an elected official's life to wrap

[12:53] them with support, with love, with

[12:56] encouragement, and with courage. And so

[12:58] thank you to all of them for for them

[13:01] offering that to you, and thank you for

[13:03] stepping forward to serve the people of

[13:04] District 4.

[13:06] >> Thank you so much.

[13:09] » We're now moving on to the public

[13:11] hearing section of our agenda. Um public

[13:14] hearing is These are specific proposals

[13:16] before the council that require a public

[13:19] hearing. Uh your comments should uh

[13:21] pertain to the hearing item, and if you

[13:23] go off topic, we will ask you to stop

[13:26] your comment.

[13:27] Um, our first public hearing uh is for

[13:30] items B1 and B2 for grant applications

[13:34] and will be heard as one public hearing.

[13:36] Before we begin taking comments, I will

[13:38] turn the time over to Silvia Richards,

[13:40] Council Policy Analyst, to give a short

[13:42] introduction. Silvia?

[13:45] >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Periodically,

[13:47] » Thank you, Madam Chair. Periodically,

[13:47] the city applies for and receives grants

[13:50] which fund some city programs.

[13:53] Each grant receives a public hearing to

[13:55] provide the Council and the public with

[13:58] an opportunity hear about each grant.

[14:01] First is the Tourism Recreation Cultural

[14:03] Convention and Airport Facilities Tax

[14:06] Act Grant. If approved, it will fund

[14:09] consultant fees for the construction of

[14:11] up to 20 stations along the Jordan River

[14:14] Trail.

[14:16] Uh building on the groundwork laid by

[14:18] the Reimagine Nature Public Lands Master

[14:21] Plan, the Emerald Ribbon Action Plan,

[14:24] and Salt Lake County's efforts to

[14:26] develop the Jordan River Regional Park

[14:28] Master Plan.

[14:30] Second is the State Dam Safety Grant. If

[14:33] approved, it would be used for the

[14:35] engineering investigation and design of

[14:38] upgrades to the Red Pine Dam, bringing

[14:41] it into compliance with the statute the

[14:44] State of Utah Dam Safety Rules. Thank

[14:47] you, Madam Chair.

[14:49] >> Thank you, Silvia. Taylor, please start

[14:51] » Thank you, Silvia. Taylor, please start

[14:51] with our first public comment.

[14:54] >> Thank you, Madam Chair. We do not have

[14:55] » Thank you, Madam Chair. We do not have

[14:55] anyone registered to speak to these

[14:57] items.

[14:58] >> Thank you. I will look for a motion.

[15:01] » Thank you. I will look for a motion.

[15:01] >> Madam Chair, I move this to Council

[15:02] » Madam Chair, I move this to Council

[15:02] close the public hearing and refer items

[15:03] B1 and B2 to a future consent agenda for

[15:06] action.

[15:07] >> Is there a second?

[15:09] » Is there a second?

[15:09] >> Second.

[15:12] » Any discussion?

[15:15] I'll call the question. All those in fa-

[15:17] It has been moved by Council Member

[15:18] Dugan and seconded by Council Member

[15:20] Wharton. All those in favor?

[15:22] >> I.

[15:22] » I.

[15:22] >> I.

[15:23] » I.

[15:23] >> Any opposed?

[15:25] » Any opposed?

[15:25] Motion passes with two council members

[15:27] absent.

[15:30] Council member Young.

[15:32] >> Thank you. If I may request a moment of

[15:34] » Thank you. If I may request a moment of

[15:34] personal privilege before we move to B3.

[15:37] >> Absolutely.

[15:39] » Absolutely.

[15:39] >> Thank you. So, it's come to my attention

[15:41] » Thank you. So, it's come to my attention

[15:41] that we're going to bookend

[15:44] um this celebration and I am fortunate

[15:47] enough to be the first. So, if I could

[15:49] invite uh policy analyst Brian Fullmer

[15:52] up to the podium, I just have a few

[15:56] comments to share.

[16:05] Excellent.

[16:06] So,

[16:08] I'd like to take a moment uh for a

[16:10] personal point of privilege to recognize

[16:12] someone whose work has made a meaningful

[16:15] difference to this council and to the

[16:17] residents of Salt Lake City. Tonight is

[16:20] Brian Fullmer's last formal council

[16:22] meeting in his role as our policy

[16:24] analyst. And I want to express my

[16:27] sincere appreciation for his service.

[16:30] Whether we were working through a

[16:32] complex land use application,

[16:34] negotiating a development agreement, or

[16:37] yes, even discussing fence heights,

[16:40] Brian approached every issue with the

[16:43] same level of professionalism, service,

[16:46] expertise, and care. He has an

[16:49] incredible ability to navigate

[16:51] complicated policy questions, provide

[16:53] thoughtful analysis, and help each of us

[16:56] make more informed decisions.

[16:59] What has always stood out to me is not

[17:01] just Brian's knowledge, but the way he

[17:03] carries himself. He is consistently

[17:05] prepared, responsive, patient, and

[17:08] respectful. He serves every council

[17:11] member with integrity and impartiality,

[17:14] and he has never loses sight of the fact

[17:17] that behind every agenda item are real

[17:19] people and neighborhoods who care deeply

[17:22] about their city.

[17:24] Public service isn't often is often

[17:27] behind the scenes and the people doing

[17:29] this work don't always receive the

[17:30] recognition they deserve.

[17:32] But the quality of our decisions and our

[17:35] ability to serve residents well is

[17:37] stronger because of Brian's dedication.

[17:40] Brian, thank you for your time,

[17:42] expertise, professionalism, and steady

[17:45] leadership you've brought to the

[17:46] council. We've been incredibly fortunate

[17:49] to work with you and I know you'll be a

[17:51] hard act to follow.

[17:53] On behalf of my district, my fellow

[17:55] council members, and personally, I wish

[17:58] you every success in your next chapter.

[18:01] Thank you for your service to Salt Lake

[18:03] City and I'm excited for one final

[18:06] council meeting together.

[18:08] Thank you.

[18:11] » Oh, there's more coming. There's more

[18:13] coming.

[18:16] You don't get to get out of here so

[18:17] easy, uh, Brian. So, I want to just

[18:20] share, uh, a little bit of the history

[18:22] of, uh, Brian's service to Salt Lake

[18:25] City.

[18:26] In May 2010, Brian Fulmer was told that

[18:29] the city council office position he was

[18:31] accepting was temporary and that it

[18:34] offered no long-term opportunity.

[18:37] And 16 years later, we are thankful that

[18:40] Brian decided to stick with us

[18:43] even after starting his project what

[18:45] which was to review comments about the

[18:47] then proposed Yale-Crest Historic

[18:49] District.

[18:51] While working in the council office,

[18:53] Brian took on roles both constituent

[18:56] liaison and policy analyst.

[18:58] His calm, I've never seen you get too

[19:01] razzled,

[19:02] but his consistent and calm and

[19:05] thoughtful approach brought stability to

[19:07] an office that could be fast-paced and

[19:09] unpredictable and elected officials just

[19:12] the same, fast-paced and unpredictable.

[19:15] As a liaison, Brian helped hundreds of

[19:18] constituents navigate complex issues,

[19:20] always ensuring that they felt heard and

[19:22] knew the city cared about their

[19:24] concerns.

[19:26] He trained and mentored many constituent

[19:28] liaisons to do the same.

[19:30] As a policy analyst, Brian became one of

[19:33] the office experts on land use. He

[19:35] guided street and alley closures,

[19:38] re-zones, text amendments, master plans,

[19:41] and his favorite topic, the naming of

[19:43] city assets.

[19:46] Brian handled dozens of zoning petitions

[19:48] with professionalism, helping applicants

[19:51] see that the city was not simply a

[19:53] faceless bureaucracy.

[19:55] Brian, on behalf of the council office

[19:58] and council members,

[20:00] I want to give a sincere thank you to

[20:02] you for your dedication, your expertise,

[20:05] and your sincere kindness.

[20:07] You have made a lasting difference in

[20:09] our office and community over your many

[20:11] years of service, and you will be sorely

[20:13] missed.

[20:14] We wish you all the very best in all the

[20:17] adventures in your well-earned

[20:18] retirement.

[20:20] Thank you, Brian.

[20:32] Well, I know you want to get down to

[20:33] business.

[20:35] >> [laughter]

[20:36] » [laughter]

[20:36] >> You really want me to follow that?

[20:39] » You really want me to follow that?

[20:39] >> Um

[20:41] » Um

[20:41] Thank you, Brian, for your service.

[20:43] >> Yes, thank you.

[20:44] » Yes, thank you.

[20:44] >> So, our next item uh is B3, which is an

[20:48] » So, our next item uh is B3, which is an

[20:48] ordinance um uh concerning the

[20:50] indefinite alleyway closure in Jefferson

[20:52] Park. Um and before we begin taking

[20:55] comments, I'll turn it over to our

[20:57] esteemed council policy analyst to give

[21:00] us a short introduction.

[21:02] >> Thank you, Madam Chair.

[21:03] » Thank you, Madam Chair.

[21:03] This is a proposal from public lands to

[21:06] indefinitely close, but retain ownership

[21:08] of two alleys within Jefferson Park

[21:11] within Council District 5.

[21:13] The intent is to consolidate parcels

[21:15] within the park for improvements funded

[21:17] by the Reimagined Nature General

[21:19] Obligation Bond. Thank you.

[21:23] >> Thank you, Brian.

[21:25] » Thank you, Brian.

[21:25] Taylor, please start with our first

[21:26] public comment.

[21:29] >> Thank you, Madam Chair. We have one

[21:30] » Thank you, Madam Chair. We have one

[21:30] person registered to speak to this item.

[21:32] That will be Marco Stevanoni. Marco, you

[21:35] may now unmute.

[21:43] » Marco, are you there with us?

[21:48] » I think he

[21:49] is there to speak on

[21:51] item six.

[21:52] >> Sounds like he might be speaking on

[21:53] » Sounds like he might be speaking on

[21:53] another item.

[21:54] Anybody else wish to speak to this item?

[21:59] Okay, I'll look for a motion.

[22:02] >> Madam Chair, move that the Council close

[22:04] » Madam Chair, move that the Council close

[22:04] the public hearing and then adopt the

[22:05] ordinance.

[22:06] >> Is there a second?

[22:07] » Is there a second?

[22:07] >> Second.

[22:09] » Second.

[22:09] >> It has been moved by Council member

[22:10] » It has been moved by Council member

[22:10] Dugan and seconded by Council member

[22:12] Wharton. Any discussion?

[22:15] All those in favor?

[22:17] Aye.

[22:18] Those opposed?

[22:20] None.

[22:21] Uh motion passes uh unanimously with two

[22:23] Council members absent.

[22:26] Our next item is B4, an ordinance alley

[22:29] vacation at approximately 567 East

[22:31] Warnock Avenue. And before we begin

[22:35] taking comments, I'll turn it over, I

[22:37] think, one last time

[22:40] to Brian Fullmer, Council Policy

[22:41] Analyst, to give us a short

[22:42] introduction.

[22:46] » Uh this is a proposal to vacate or give

[22:49] up ownership of a city-owned alley at

[22:51] approximately 567 East Warnock Avenue.

[22:55] Uh

[22:55] and it is between that property and

[22:59] Interstate 80 right-of-way.

[23:02] The alley was blocked when the freeway

[23:03] was constructed many years ago and does

[23:05] not serve its original purpose.

[23:08] If adopted, the alley property would be

[23:10] divided in half and given to the two

[23:12] abutting property owners.

[23:14] Thank you.

[23:15] >> Thank you, Brian.

[23:18] » Thank you, Brian.

[23:18] Taylor, please start with our first

[23:19] public comment.

[23:21] >> Thank you, Madam Chair. We don't have

[23:22] » Thank you, Madam Chair. We don't have

[23:22] anyone registered to speak to this item.

[23:25] >> Thank you, Taylor. I'll look for a

[23:27] » Thank you, Taylor. I'll look for a

[23:27] motion.

[23:29] » I move that the council close the public

[23:31] hearing and defer action to a future

[23:34] council meeting.

[23:35] >> Second.

[23:36] » Second.

[23:36] >> It has been moved by Council Member

[23:38] » It has been moved by Council Member

[23:38] Napier Pearson seconded by Council

[23:40] Member Wharton. Any discussion?

[23:44] I'll call the question. All those in

[23:45] favor?

[23:46] >> I.

[23:46] » I.

[23:46] >> I.

[23:47] » I.

[23:48] >> Any opposed?

[23:50] » Any opposed?

[23:50] Motion passes unanimously with two

[23:52] council members absent.

[23:54] Our next item is B5 for an ordinance

[23:58] regarding a mobile business text

[23:59] amendment. Before we begin taking

[24:01] comments, I'll turn the time over to

[24:03] Nick Tarbet, a council deputy director,

[24:06] to give a short introduction.

[24:09] >> Thank you. This public hearing is on

[24:10] » Thank you. This public hearing is on

[24:10] proposed text amendment pertaining to

[24:12] mobile businesses operating on private

[24:14] property.

[24:16] The intent of the amendments is to bring

[24:17] the city's mobile business code into

[24:19] compliance with newer state regulations.

[24:23] >> Thank you, Nick. Taylor, please start

[24:25] » Thank you, Nick. Taylor, please start

[24:25] with our first public comment.

[24:28] >> Thank you, Madam Chair. We do not have

[24:29] » Thank you, Madam Chair. We do not have

[24:29] anyone registered to speak to this item.

[24:32] >> Thank you, Taylor. I'll look for a

[24:34] » Thank you, Taylor. I'll look for a

[24:34] motion.

[24:36] >> Madam Chair, I move the council close

[24:37] » Madam Chair, I move the council close

[24:37] the public hearing and defer action to a

[24:39] future

[24:39] council meeting.

[24:41] >> Is there a second?

[24:42] » Is there a second?

[24:42] >> Second.

[24:44] » Second.

[24:44] >> It has been moved by Council Member

[24:46] » It has been moved by Council Member

[24:46] Duggan and seconded by Council Member

[24:47] Wharton. Any discussion?

[24:51] I'll call the question. All those in

[24:52] favor?

[24:53] >> I.

[24:53] » I.

[24:53] >> I.

[24:53] » I.

[24:54] >> I.

[24:55] » I.

[24:55] >> Those opposed?

[24:57] » Those opposed?

[24:57] Hearing none, the motion passes with two

[24:59] council members absent.

[25:01] Our final item is B6 for a resolution, a

[25:03] waiver of proximity for Via Veneto

[25:06] Pizzeria at 511 East 9th South. Before

[25:10] we begin taking comments, I will turn

[25:12] the time over again

[25:14] um to Nick Tarbet, council deputy

[25:15] director, to give a short introduction.

[25:17] Nick.

[25:18] >> Thank you.

[25:19] » Thank you.

[25:19] As of May 2026, state code requires

[25:22] local municipalities to approve a waiver

[25:25] of proximity for liquor permits before

[25:27] the Utah Department of Alcoholic

[25:29] Beverage Services may grant a license

[25:31] when a when the location is within a

[25:34] specific proximity of a community

[25:36] location such as Liberty Park is.

[25:39] The restaurant located across from

[25:41] Liberty Park is in District 5. The

[25:43] city's required to hold a public hearing

[25:45] at least 30 days before a waiver can be

[25:47] approved.

[25:50] » Thank you, Nick. Taylor, please start

[25:51] with our first public comment.

[25:54] >> Thank you, Madam Chair. We have two

[25:55] » Thank you, Madam Chair. We have two

[25:55] people registered to speak to this item.

[25:57] The first will be Amy Stevanoni followed

[26:00] by Marco Stevanoni.

[26:02] Amy is here in person.

[26:07] » Good evening. Thank you.

[26:10] I am the owner of Via Veneto Pizzeria

[26:14] along with my husband. Um Via Veneto

[26:16] Pizzeria receiving a limited liquor

[26:19] license

[26:20] would positively contribute to the

[26:22] neighborhood without presenting

[26:24] any threat to public safety or the

[26:26] character of nearby community spaces

[26:29] such as Liberty Park.

[26:31] Via Veneto Pizzeria is a family-friendly

[26:33] establishment

[26:35] with a welcoming atmosphere and a clear

[26:37] focus on quality food, responsible

[26:39] service, and community involvement.

[26:42] Allowing us to serve a glass of wine or

[26:44] beer alongside our pizza will enhance

[26:47] the dining experience for adults and

[26:50] aligns with what many residents expect

[26:52] from modern neighborhood eateries.

[26:55] The ability to enjoy a slice of pizza

[26:57] with a drink is a standard amenity in

[27:00] most cities and has consistently

[27:02] demonstrated no negative impact on

[27:04] public behavior, safety, or community

[27:07] spaces.

[27:08] Liberty Park is a cherished part of Salt

[27:11] Lake City and maintaining its safe and

[27:13] family-oriented environment is important

[27:16] to everyone.

[27:17] Granting Via Veneto Pizzeria this waiver

[27:20] would not compromise that goal.

[27:22] The restaurant is operated with

[27:24] professionalism and oversight, follows

[27:27] applicable regulations, and is committed

[27:30] to responsible alcohol service.

[27:32] Its clientele and environment are not

[27:35] conducive to overconsumption or

[27:37] disorderly activity. In fact, supporting

[27:40] well-run small businesses near community

[27:43] spaces often strengthens neighborhoods,

[27:46] increases foot traffic safety, and

[27:48] fosters positive community engagement.

[27:51] In short, allowing Via Veneto Pizzeria

[27:54] to serve wine and beer under an approved

[27:56] liquor permit would not pose any threat

[27:59] to society. Rather, it would support a

[28:01] reputable local business, meet community

[28:05] expectations, and continue to uphold the

[28:07] standards residents value.

[28:09] Thank you so much.

[28:13] » Next will be Marco Stebanoni. Marco, you

[28:15] may now unmute.

[28:18] >> Yes, thank you. I apologize I cannot be

[28:20] » Yes, thank you. I apologize I cannot be

[28:20] there in person. I'm currently

[28:23] traveling, but I just [snorts] wanted to

[28:25] support my wife on

[28:27] this new venture.

[28:29] And I appreciate all your support.

[28:35] » And that was the final registered

[28:36] commenter for this item.

[28:38] >> Thank you to everyone who made a comment

[28:40] » Thank you to everyone who made a comment

[28:40] on this item. I'll look for a motion.

[28:43] >> Madam Chair, I move that the council

[28:45] » Madam Chair, I move that the council

[28:45] close the public hearing and defer

[28:47] action to a future council meeting.

[28:49] >> Is there a second?

[28:50] » Is there a second?

[28:50] >> Second.

[28:53] » It has been moved by council member

[28:54] Wharton and seconded by council member

[28:56] Duggan. Any discussion?

[28:58] >> I just I wanted to say I see some

[29:01] » I just I wanted to say I see some

[29:01] confused looks in the audience.

[29:03] What we typically do is when there's an

[29:06] item that's up for public hearing,

[29:08] we have the hearing, close action, and

[29:10] then vote on it at the next meeting. So,

[29:12] this is just part of the normal

[29:13] procedure. It doesn't mean that your

[29:16] action's not going to be voted on or

[29:17] that

[29:19] it's just how we typically do things.

[29:22] All right. So, people will have a

[29:24] will have until our next meeting to

[29:26] submit written comments.

[29:28] Um but I intend to to support that

[29:31] request. Yes.

[29:32] >> As do I.

[29:33] » As do I.

[29:33] >> Mhm.

[29:34] » Mhm.

[29:34] >> And and just to clarify, the council

[29:36] » And and just to clarify, the council

[29:36] cannot take action for 30 days on this.

[29:39] >> Yes.

[29:41] » Yes.

[29:41] >> Per state statute.

[29:42] » Per state statute.

[29:42] >> Right.

[29:45] » Okay.

[29:46] Any additional discussion?

[29:49] All those in favor of the motion?

[29:51] >> I.

[29:52] » I.

[29:52] >> I.

[29:52] » I.

[29:52] >> I.

[29:53] » I.

[29:53] >> Any opposed?

[29:55] » Any opposed?

[29:55] The motion passes

[29:57] with

[29:59] motion passes with four council members

[30:02] present and and two who are three who

[30:04] are

[30:05] four present, three who are absent. It's

[30:07] been a long day, y'all.

[30:09] >> I voted yes.

[30:09] » I voted yes.

[30:09] >> Five. And council members council member

[30:12] » Five. And council members council member

[30:12] Young, that's right. Yes.

[30:13] >> yes.

[30:14] » yes.

[30:14] >> Hopefully, city recorder has got that

[30:16] » Hopefully, city recorder has got that

[30:16] better than I than what I just repeated.

[30:18] Great. Thank you.

[30:21] Um we have no new potential action or

[30:24] new business item.

[30:25] Um we are now moving on to item E1,

[30:28] which is now unfinished business uh

[30:31] regarding the ordinance correction

[30:33] adopting the rate of the tax levy

[30:35] including the levy for the library fund

[30:37] fiscal year 2026.

[30:39] I'll look for a motion.

[30:41] >> Madam Chair, I move that the council

[30:42] » Madam Chair, I move that the council

[30:43] adopt a revised corrected ordinance

[30:45] updating the final tax final rate of tax

[30:49] levy including the final levy up for the

[30:51] library fund on all real and personal

[30:54] property within Salt Lake City

[30:56] made taxable by law for fiscal year

[30:58] 2026-27

[31:00] and acknowledge the updated tax rates

[31:03] listed on the motion sheets represented

[31:04] technical adjustments necessary to align

[31:07] with those entered into the tax rate

[31:09] systems prior to the June 22 deadline.

[31:13] >> Is there a second?

[31:14] » Is there a second?

[31:14] >> Oh, no.

[31:14] » Oh, no.

[31:14] >> Oh, you got more. Okay, keep going.

[31:17] » Oh, you got more. Okay, keep going.

[31:17] >> A tax of 0.003482

[31:22] on each dollar of taxable valuation of

[31:25] which

[31:26] 0.002374

[31:29] shall be credited as revenue in the

[31:31] general fund generating

[31:34] $123,837,279

[31:39] of ongoing revenue and

[31:41] 0.000006

[31:46] shall be credited to the judgment levy

[31:48] for the general fund a one-year

[31:50] adjustment generating

[31:52] $293,967

[31:57] of one-time revenue

[31:59] and

[32:00] 0.000626

[32:03] shall be credited as revenue in the

[32:05] library fund generating

[32:08] $32,657,748

[32:12] of ongoing revenue and

[32:15] 0.000395

[32:18] shall be credited toward repayment of

[32:21] general obligation bonds generating

[32:24] $20,614,755

[32:28] of ongoing revenue and

[32:30] 0.00008

[32:34] 0 shall be credited as revenue in the

[32:37] government immunity fund

[32:39] for tort liability generating $4,173,514

[32:45] of ongoing revenue.

[32:47] >> Thank you, council members. Are there a

[32:48] » Thank you, council members. Are there a

[32:48] second?

[32:49] >> I second.

[32:51] » I second.

[32:51] >> It has been moved by council member

[32:52] » It has been moved by council member

[32:52] Dugan and seconded by council member

[32:54] Napier Pierce. Any discussion?

[32:59] Seeing none, I'll call the question. All

[33:01] those in favor?

[33:02] >> I.

[33:03] » I.

[33:03] >> I.

[33:04] » I.

[33:04] >> Any opposed?

[33:06] » Any opposed?

[33:06] The motion passes with two council

[33:08] members absent.

[33:10] Okay, this now brings us to the consent

[33:12] portion of our agenda. I'll look for a

[33:14] motion.

[33:16] >> Madam Chair, I move that we approve the

[33:17] » Madam Chair, I move that we approve the

[33:18] consent agenda.

[33:20] >> Second.

[33:20] » Second.

[33:20] >> Second.

[33:23] » It has been moved by council member

[33:24] Wooten and seconded by council member

[33:26] Dugan.

[33:27] Uh any discussion?

[33:29] Those in favor?

[33:31] >> I.

[33:31] » I.

[33:31] >> I.

[33:31] » I.

[33:31] >> I. Those opposed?

[33:33] » I. Those opposed?

[33:33] Motion passes with two council members

[33:35] absent.

[33:42] We are now at uh section G of the uh

[33:46] agenda and that's questions to the mayor

[33:48] from the city council. Thank you uh

[33:50] Rachel Auto and Leslie Nokola for being

[33:53] here on on the mayor's behalf. Any

[33:55] questions for the mayor?

[33:57] Or the mayor's staff?

[34:00] All right.

[34:01] I

[34:02] uh council member Wooten was asking some

[34:03] very fun questions of the fire board of

[34:06] appeals, fire code board of appeals

[34:08] earlier today, but looks like he's out

[34:10] of fun questions.

[34:11] >> I

[34:12] » I

[34:12] What's Have you guys ever presided over

[34:14] an interesting fire board appeal?

[34:17] Okay. Well,

[34:20] here's hoping.

[34:21] >> See no comments. All right.

[34:23] » See no comments. All right.

[34:23] >> [laughter]

[34:24] » [laughter]

[34:24] >> Thank you so much for being here. Thank

[34:25] » Thank you so much for being here. Thank

[34:26] you for engaging in my levity, council

[34:28] member Wooten.

[34:29] Um we're now on to our second item,

[34:31] which is um comments to the city

[34:33] council. This is a 1-hour time slot for

[34:36] the public to comment on any city

[34:37] business that's not scheduled for a

[34:39] public hearing and each person will have

[34:41] 2 minutes um to talk. It is limited to a

[34:44] maximum of 1 hour and to only those

[34:46] individuals who are registered to speak

[34:48] before 7:30. Our meeting rules apply to

[34:51] these general comments. Uh you we will

[34:53] be calling the names in the order of

[34:55] sign up. If you're on Zoom, please

[34:57] unmute your mic when your name is

[34:58] called. Each person will have 2 minutes

[35:01] and to help make sure that as many

[35:03] people as possible can speak during the

[35:04] hour, anyone in person should feel free

[35:06] to come up and stand in line when you

[35:08] hear your name is called.

[35:10] Please avoid interruption so we can use

[35:12] the time for as many people to comment

[35:14] as possible.

[35:16] If we reach the 2-minute mark, the host

[35:18] will announce time and your microphone

[35:19] will be muted. If you need staff

[35:21] assistance in the room, please raise

[35:23] your hand and somebody will be with you.

[35:25] If you're having technical issues in

[35:27] Zoom or need any assistance, mention uh

[35:30] message staff support and Akshay from

[35:32] our staff will assist you. And of

[35:34] course, if you are unable to finish your

[35:36] comment, you are encouraged to share the

[35:38] rest of your comment via email, mail, or

[35:40] call to our office. Our contact

[35:42] information is located um at

[35:44] slc.gov/council.

[35:46] Taylor, can you begin with our first

[35:48] general comment?

[35:50] >> Thank you, Madam Chair. We have about

[35:52] » Thank you, Madam Chair. We have about

[35:52] seven 17 people registered to speak. The

[35:54] first will be Jennifer Oldham followed

[35:56] by Kira Saronsky and then Cindy Cromer.

[36:00] Jennifer is here in person.

[36:08] » I don't know why I was registered under

[36:09] my wife's name, but I'm Richard Oldham,

[36:11] so

[36:13] I just wanted [clears throat] to comment

[36:13] on the new uh short-term rental uh

[36:16] regulations or whatever you call them

[36:17] ordinances that were passed. Um and I

[36:19] would you know, you guys were discussing

[36:20] that earlier. I appreciate the

[36:22] discussion earlier. I want to

[36:24] specifically comment on the 200-night

[36:26] limit. Um I think, you know, in

[36:28] residential zones, that may might make

[36:30] sense. I think in zones like hotel zones

[36:32] or other zones, I think the 200-night

[36:34] limit I think the only thing it does is

[36:36] it pushes any short-term rentals from a

[36:39] business viability out of that space and

[36:42] and benefits hotels basically. And I

[36:46] think there's a lot of short-term rental

[36:48] operators that are small business owners

[36:50] and people coming and traveling to Salt

[36:53] Lake are looking for short-term rentals.

[36:55] I think there's definitely a market for

[36:56] that that needs to be served and would

[36:59] benefit to the entire area of Salt Lake.

[37:02] So, I think, you know, revisiting the

[37:05] 200-night maximum for

[37:07] for short-term rentals would be very

[37:09] beneficial for the community as a whole

[37:11] for certain zones. So, I just wanted to

[37:13] comment on that as well as, you know,

[37:15] there's other issues with the 10% and

[37:17] stuff like that. I think some other

[37:18] people are going to comment on those.

[37:20] So, thank you.

[37:23] » Next will be Kira Sabransky followed by

[37:26] Cindy Cromer and then Lauren Devoe.

[37:28] Kira, you may now unmute.

[37:31] >> Hi, my name is Kira Sabransky and I am a

[37:34] » Hi, my name is Kira Sabransky and I am a

[37:34] resident of Parkway Avenue in Salt Lake

[37:36] City.

[37:37] Just this week, we have seen two fires

[37:40] just blocks away from my house in

[37:42] Wasatch Hollow and Inner Park. We have

[37:44] an easement behind our homes on Parkway

[37:47] Avenue that could easily be the next

[37:49] spot for a fire to start with tall dry

[37:51] grass that is neglected for months

[37:54] during the height of fire season each

[37:55] year. This easement is owned by Salt

[37:58] Salt Lake and I worry that if Salt Salt

[38:00] Lake continues with their plans to put

[38:02] up a fence, the fire risk to that area

[38:05] will only increase. Salt Salt Lake has

[38:07] proven to us over the years that they do

[38:09] not maintain the land appropriately. We

[38:12] have no reason to believe that this will

[38:13] change. Having a fence will only leave

[38:16] the land neglected and forgotten. As a

[38:18] resident of Salt Lake City, I hope

[38:21] Council will help us and put this

[38:22] easement on your work session. We really

[38:25] need you to advocate for us and urge

[38:27] South Salt Lake to pause their work

[38:29] until an agreement has been reached,

[38:31] especially when irreversible changes

[38:33] could be done.

[38:34] This land could be a beautiful asset to

[38:36] Salt Lake City as a community park or

[38:38] garden instead of being fenced off,

[38:40] neglected, and forgotten about. Thank

[38:42] you.

[38:46] » Next will be Cindy Cromer, followed by

[38:48] Lauren DeBoe, and then Olive Jacobi.

[38:51] Cindy is here in person.

[38:53] >> It was about 6 years ago that I realized

[38:55] » It was about 6 years ago that I realized

[38:55] artists could be pivotal in land use

[38:57] battles.

[38:59] So, I was prepared when the musicians of

[39:01] the Utah Symphony launched an effort to

[39:03] save Abravanel Hall by nominating it to

[39:06] the National Register of Historic

[39:08] Places.

[39:09] I knew that they could make a

[39:10] difference. Artists can get out of the

[39:12] box, and they can lead other people out

[39:15] of the box.

[39:16] The nomination of the county's 10th East

[39:19] Senior Center to the National Register

[39:21] was a copycat of the effort by the

[39:23] symphony musicians.

[39:25] We even hired the same consultant.

[39:28] The votes of the Landmarks Commission

[39:30] and State History in May were unanimous

[39:33] for approval.

[39:34] The nomination is now in Washington,

[39:36] D.C., waiting for a final decision.

[39:40] The 10th East Senior Center was in

[39:42] jeopardy in the county's budget process

[39:44] last fall.

[39:45] It was the first building in the state

[39:47] dedicated to the needs of seniors. It is

[39:50] the work of the legendary architect

[39:52] Birch Beal,

[39:54] who led the effort to restore this

[39:56] building, the city and county building.

[39:59] So, two things.

[40:00] The nomination of the county senior

[40:02] center on city-owned land is pending.

[40:06] And secondly, those of us who have

[40:08] appreciated the architecture and

[40:09] programming at the center owe the

[40:11] symphony's musicians a thank you for

[40:14] their leadership.

[40:18] » Next will be Lauren Devoe, followed by

[40:20] Olive Jacobi, and then Jim Webster.

[40:23] Lauren is here in person.

[40:24] >> Good afternoon, Council. I'm here

[40:27] » Good afternoon, Council. I'm here

[40:27] representing the users of the Cottonwood

[40:28] Dog Park, and I have brought each of you

[40:30] a stack of letters and petitions from

[40:33] our community users. In 2021, a tree

[40:37] fell on our main access bridge to our

[40:39] dog park, and the users of Cottonwood

[40:41] Dog Park fully expected that it would be

[40:42] quickly rebuilt. And why wouldn't we? As

[40:45] of July of 2020, the city had over 2.7

[40:48] million dollars in unallocated park

[40:50] impact fee revenues, which had to be

[40:52] spent within 6 years or returned to the

[40:54] assessed property owners. In January of

[40:57] 2021, the parks department had proposed

[41:00] a 2.3 million dollar budget

[41:01] appropriation in part to fund

[41:03] improvements to the Cottonwood Dog Park.

[41:06] On May 3rd, 2022, the City Council

[41:09] adopted budget amendment number seven,

[41:11] which included 195,000 dollars to

[41:13] rebuild the bridge over the Jordan River

[41:15] to the park, which was completely budget

[41:17] neutral. But, the bridge was neither

[41:19] repaired nor rebuilt.

[41:22] Fast forward to the present, and the

[41:23] public lands department has completely

[41:25] closed off the bridge, leaving only a

[41:27] single width bridge far removed from

[41:30] city parking to access the dog park. If

[41:32] you stay on the paved trails to get to

[41:34] the dog park, the walk is long, uneven,

[41:37] without a single bench for those in need

[41:39] to rest, and roughly half is devoid of

[41:41] any shade cover.

[41:43] A week ago, several of us, dog park

[41:45] users, met with a number of

[41:47] representatives from the city, the

[41:49] public lands department, and the mayor's

[41:51] office. We were told that the meeting

[41:53] would be discussed to discuss

[41:54] accessibility issues, but unfortunately,

[41:57] the city's ADA coordinator was not

[41:59] present. When we suggested that the city

[42:01] representatives walk with our group to

[42:03] the dog park so they could observe the

[42:05] challenges our group

[42:07] faces with the current route, I was

[42:09] shocked to see them all start to cut

[42:12] across the grass, avoiding the paved

[42:14] pathways that your constituents with

[42:16] mobility issues and strollers and other

[42:18] circumstances are forced to take.

[42:21] Most frustratingly, when we rehashed the

[42:23] prior communications and promises of

[42:24] repair, including the various times our

[42:26] community

[42:28] >> Time.

[42:35] Next will be Olive Jacobi, followed by

[42:37] Jim Webster, and then Keith Carrick.

[42:39] Olive, you may now unmute.

[42:46] » Hi, my name is Olive Peterson-Jacobi.

[42:49] I'm here tonight to express my continued

[42:51] frustration and disappointment

[42:54] with the City Council,

[42:56] the city and the mayor, as well as the

[42:58] police department and the way they

[42:59] interact with the unhoused population of

[43:02] Salt Lake City.

[43:03] Um

[43:05] especially

[43:07] as as we are in such a

[43:10] warm, hot, dangerous time of year, uh

[43:13] our unhoused neighbors need to be given

[43:15] priority uh when it comes to

[43:19] outreach and resources to manage the

[43:23] temperature.

[43:24] Um and it just doesn't really seem like

[43:27] enough is being done.

[43:29] Uh this city has a habit of

[43:34] well, allowing the police to brutalize

[43:36] and displace unhoused people.

[43:39] Um they often report having their

[43:41] belongings destroyed uh or being forced

[43:44] to abandon them because they're afraid

[43:46] of the police, and then their belongings

[43:47] are stolen or trashed

[43:50] uh by, you know, the city when they come

[43:52] along to clean up.

[43:53] Uh so, they're losing things like water,

[43:56] medication, clothing, things that can

[43:58] help them handle the heat.

[44:01] Uh I don't know. I don't really have a

[44:02] script. Just

[44:04] I'm just very disappointed.

[44:06] Uh

[44:07] the city claims to care about its

[44:09] constituents, but anyone who doesn't own

[44:12] property is

[44:13] treated like a second-class citizen,

[44:15] especially as the city gets more

[44:16] expensive and we have more and more

[44:18] transplants coming from out of state.

[44:20] It's really important that we're

[44:21] prioritizing looking after the people

[44:22] who are here.

[44:24] Um and also I just want to say it's I

[44:26] find it frankly offensive uh that the

[44:29] mayor is recommending

[44:31] uh for people to go out and look after

[44:33] their unhoused neighbors, see if there's

[44:35] any way they can help them. Uh when we

[44:37] as individuals, uh we should be doing

[44:39] that, but we have no power. Uh we can't

[44:43] enact systemic changes the way you all

[44:44] can, and it doesn't seem like you're

[44:46] doing it.

[44:49] » And next will be Jim Webster, followed

[44:52] by Keith Carrick, and then Richard

[44:54] Oldham. Jim is here in person.

[44:57] >> My name is Jim Webster. I'm a landscape

[44:59] » My name is Jim Webster. I'm a landscape

[44:59] architect. I've done a lot of work with

[45:01] riparian uh channels. I wrote I was one

[45:03] of the authors of the riparian overlay

[45:05] ordinance. And uh in 1987 I designed a

[45:11] pathway

[45:12] uh system for Miller Bird Refuge and

[45:15] Nature Park. Uh we were advised I was

[45:19] working as a consultant with the Parks

[45:20] Department. I was a we were advised by

[45:23] the Police Department to put in a

[45:24] pathway because there was a lot of crime

[45:27] and there was no way to circumnavigate

[45:29] that park. Uh so we we did that and I

[45:33] was very proud of that. We it included a

[45:35] bridge down at the other end because uh

[45:37] people were forced to uh encroach on

[45:40] church property and so forth. Uh my

[45:43] background is uh is is in in Salt Lake

[45:46] and area is the Jordan River Parkway and

[45:49] a number of other riparian trails. I'm

[45:51] just curious of how many of you are

[45:54] familiar I know Dan knows about it, but

[45:56] are you familiar with the

[45:57] with the uh

[45:58] with the Red Butte um or

[46:01] I don't me, the

[46:03] the uh Miller Bird Refuge in Nielson

[46:05] Park.

[46:07] Are you

[46:08] Okay.

[46:09] No. Are you familiar with um the uh

[46:13] ADA

[46:15] 1990 ADA law that was passed by the

[46:18] federal government that applies to all

[46:21] public parks.

[46:23] Okay. Well, well, we're at a junction

[46:25] right now where the $425,000

[46:30] CIP bonds that I wrote 11 years ago is

[46:33] now being put into effect and um

[46:37] I'm I'm kind of

[46:38] I'm kind of concerned because uh one of

[46:41] the things we asked for was a

[46:42] reinstatement of that lower path.

[46:44] Um but I guess we get what we get.

[46:47] Uh I don't have the numbers in front of

[46:49] me and Dan, maybe you do, but

[46:52] I I I believe that at least 60 to 70%

[46:56] of that grant is going towards deferred

[46:59] maintenance.

[47:00] >> Time.

[47:03] Thank you for your comments. I just

[47:05] wanted uh reemphasize that as a general

[47:07] matter, um council members try to

[47:09] refrain from reacting or responding to

[47:12] to comments, but if there's additional

[47:13] information, any commenter is encouraged

[47:16] to share that information with staff.

[47:18] Uh Taylor, let's move on to the next

[47:19] public comment.

[47:21] Next is Keith Carrick followed by

[47:23] Richard Oldham and then Ashley Cortez.

[47:25] Keith, you may now unmute.

[47:29] » Hi, my name is Keith Carrick. I live on

[47:31] Parkway Avenue and I'm one of the

[47:33] spokespeople for the Parkway Avenue

[47:34] Neighbors Group.

[47:36] For months, South Salt Lake has met our

[47:38] requests for honest, constructive

[47:40] collaboration with silence while their

[47:42] public narrative is repeatedly

[47:44] contradicted by the facts.

[47:46] Consequently, we have issued a formal

[47:48] legal demand to the involved governments

[47:49] refuting South Salt Lake's claim to this

[47:52] open space parcel behind our homes. This

[47:54] land actually belongs to Salt Lake City

[47:57] and its future will affect residents for

[47:59] generations. It should not be fenced

[48:01] off, neglected, and left to rot or burn.

[48:04] There's a lot of potential for this

[48:05] space while ensuring that it is safe. It

[48:08] could be a community garden serving the

[48:10] many new residents of Sugar House. It

[48:12] could be a walk and bike park or

[48:13] something else.

[48:15] We invite you to meet with the Parkway

[48:16] Avenue residents.

[48:18] We'd love to share ideas with you and we

[48:20] ask that you place this issue on agenda

[48:22] for future council work session. Have

[48:24] the city staff evaluate options for

[48:26] preserving, protecting, and improving it

[48:28] so that we can all understand what this

[48:30] property could be.

[48:31] We have the facts and the law on our

[48:32] side. Now we need Salt Lake City on our

[48:34] side, too. Not only to prevent harm, but

[48:37] to help create something great. Thank

[48:38] you.

[48:41] » And next is Richard Oldham followed by

[48:44] Ashley Cortez and then Rhett Jeppson.

[48:46] Richard is here in person.

[48:50] » So, I believe Richard spoke in place of

[48:51] his wife previously.

[48:55] I don't see him here.

[48:57] >> Great. Good evening, council members. My

[48:58] » Great. Good evening, council members. My

[48:58] name is Ashley Moratz. I'm a District 3

[49:00] resident. First, thank you and the city

[49:02] staff for the work has gone into

[49:04] developing the city's new short-term

[49:06] rental ordinance. I appreciate the

[49:08] difficult balance that you're trying to

[49:10] strike between protecting neighborhoods,

[49:12] expanding housing opportunities, and

[49:13] providing a clear regulatory framework

[49:16] for short-term rentals.

[49:17] I know you discussed this in the working

[49:18] session and a pre- a fellow owner uh

[49:21] spoke to these concerns as earlier

[49:23] tonight. I'm here to ask the council to

[49:25] reconsider a provision of the ordinance

[49:26] as it applies to condominium buildings

[49:29] located in the D3 downtown zoning

[49:30] district.

[49:31] I purchased my condominium at 327 West

[49:34] 200 South in 2023 through a

[49:36] self-directed 401k retirement account

[49:39] with the understanding that STRs were

[49:41] permitted use under the city zoning

[49:42] regulations.

[49:44] My purchase price reflected that

[49:45] permitted use.

[49:47] Our building has approximately 25 condos

[49:49] and up to 20 have historically operated

[49:51] as STRs.

[49:53] Under the new ordinance, the 10% cap

[49:55] would reduce our building from

[49:56] approximately 20 operating units to only

[49:58] two or three licensed STRs.

[50:01] I respectfully ask the council to

[50:02] consider whether condominium buildings

[50:04] like ours in D3 and similar downtown

[50:05] zoning districts should be treated

[50:07] differently from buildings in primarily

[50:08] residential neighborhoods, and whether

[50:10] they should be exempt from the 10% per

[50:12] building cap.

[50:14] This change is not simply an

[50:15] inconvenience. It materially diminishes

[50:17] property values, reduces expected rental

[50:19] income, and drastically alters the

[50:22] financial assumptions under which we

[50:23] purchased our properties.

[50:25] We're ordinary owners who invested our

[50:27] savings, in my case retirement savings,

[50:29] in good faith, relying on the city's

[50:31] zoning regulations and the established

[50:33] character of our building.

[50:34] We're not asking for special treatment.

[50:36] We're asking that the ordinance

[50:37] recognize unique circumstances of

[50:39] downtown condominiums where STRs have

[50:41] long been a lawful and permitted use.

[50:43] I respectfully ask that you consider

[50:45] targeted amendments that preserve the

[50:46] city's policy goals while avoiding

[50:49] unintended financial consequences for

[50:51] owners in buildings like ours.

[50:53] Thank you for your service to the city,

[50:55] and thanks for considering my comments.

[50:59] » Next is Rhett Jeppson, followed by

[51:01] Willow Jeppson, and then Garrett

[51:03] Beckler. Rhett is here in person.

[51:11] » My name is Rhett Jeppson. I live in the

[51:13] Sugar House area adjacent to 2.65 acres

[51:16] of artificial turf that was installed

[51:18] last May at the Rowland Heights Sports

[51:20] Complex. I am here to urge you to uphold

[51:23] the current prohibition on allowing

[51:25] artificial turf in residential areas.

[51:28] This issue is not theoretical for my

[51:29] family. Living next to an artificial

[51:31] turf installation, we experience its

[51:33] impacts every day.

[51:35] Since the turf was installed, our

[51:37] property is materially hotter than

[51:39] before. We have experienced the negative

[51:41] damaging effects, scorching our trees,

[51:43] shrubs, vegetable gardens, and plants.

[51:46] Even our chickens show noticeable signs

[51:47] of distress.

[51:49] We regularly use a surface temperature

[51:51] gun on the turf. A few weeks ago on a

[51:53] day while the air temperature was 83°,

[51:56] the turf surface measured 164°.

[52:00] The turf was roughly 80° hotter than the

[52:02] surrounding air.

[52:04] Surprising to many, turf is much hotter

[52:07] than asphalt and cement.

[52:09] These extreme surface temperatures

[52:10] contribute to the urban heat island

[52:12] effect, making nearby outdoor spaces

[52:14] less tolerable and potentially unhealthy

[52:16] for residents. We have lost the peaceful

[52:19] enjoyment of our own backyard.

[52:21] Salt Lake City has made significant

[52:23] effort in reducing heat impacts,

[52:24] protecting urban trees, conserving

[52:26] livability, and adapting to a warming

[52:28] climate. I applaud you. Allowing more

[52:31] artificial turf in residential

[52:32] neighborhoods moves us in the opposite

[52:33] direction. I understand that some

[52:35] residents are attracted to artificial

[52:37] turf because it appears low-maintenance.

[52:39] However, convenience should not outweigh

[52:41] the long-term impacts on neighborhood

[52:43] temperatures, surrounding vegetation,

[52:45] pets, and overall quality of life.

[52:46] Please do not cave into the few and

[52:48] overturn a policy that was based on

[52:50] sound science and careful consideration

[52:53] of the public good. Thank you.

[52:57] » Next will be Willow Jepson, followed by

[52:59] Garrett Beckler, and then Natalia

[53:01] Trammeloff.

[53:02] Willow is here in person.

[53:04] >> Good evening. I was proud of Salt Lake

[53:06] » Good evening. I was proud of Salt Lake

[53:06] City when I learned we were one of the

[53:08] cities leading the way in banning

[53:09] artificial turf in certain applications.

[53:12] Our city stands in the vanguard of those

[53:13] putting public health and environmental

[53:15] integrity ahead of the so-called

[53:17] amenities of synthetic turf, showing the

[53:19] way for other communities in making this

[53:21] positive change. Last year I was forced

[53:24] to learn all about the negative effects

[53:25] of artificial turf first hand when our

[53:27] next door neighbor, an LEA, installed a

[53:29] huge amount of it next to our fence

[53:31] line.

[53:32] Since there, then our yard has been

[53:34] engulfed with noxious petrochemical

[53:36] fumes. Near the turf, my formerly cool

[53:39] shady yard is now an average of 8 to 10°

[53:42] hotter than our neighbor's yard on the

[53:43] other side.

[53:45] A

[53:45] difference of this magnitude is

[53:47] noticeable when it comes to personal

[53:48] comfort, but even more significant in

[53:50] how hospitable the environment is to

[53:52] plant life. Last year, as my husband

[53:54] mentioned, our trees, shrubs, and garden

[53:56] were visibly scorched and shriveled by

[53:58] this new heat island that's now next

[53:59] door. Microclimate shift is a real

[54:01] thing. I know because it happened in my

[54:03] yard. Synthetic grass was formulated in

[54:06] the 1960s and embraced by cities, sports

[54:08] clubs, and school districts before its

[54:10] effects to health and environment are

[54:11] well known.

[54:12] Artificial turf gets bad press and

[54:14] deservedly so. The public needs more

[54:17] education about its negative effects.

[54:19] Billboards about its heat, for example.

[54:21] Two days ago, I measured the artificial

[54:22] turf on my neighbor's lot at 199.2°

[54:25] Fahrenheit.

[54:27] The only good news surrounding turf is

[54:28] that its drawbacks are finally gaining

[54:30] notoriety, and little by little more

[54:32] sports clubs and forward-looking

[54:33] communities are deciding to put this

[54:35] chemical grass where it belongs, in the

[54:36] past. Along with leaded gasoline, DDT,

[54:39] and airline smoking sections, it's had

[54:42] its day, and future generations will

[54:43] say, "What were they thinking?"

[54:46] Nobody has to use artificial turf. There

[54:47] are plenty of better options. Please

[54:49] don't step back from the council's

[54:51] far-sighted 1995 decision to ban new

[54:53] artificial turf, and from the wise

[54:55] resolution you took last year to apply

[54:57] that ban. For the sake of those who have

[54:59] the heat island effect imposed by a

[55:00] neighbor, for the city, for the health

[55:03] and safety of our city's air, soil, and

[55:04] water, the Great Salt Lake, and the

[55:06] downwinders of

[55:07] >> Time.

[55:12] Next is Garrett Beckler, followed by

[55:15] Natalia Trafimov, and then Tim

[55:18] Ballantyne. Garrett is here in person.

[55:24] » Good evening, council members. Thank you

[55:25] for this opportunity. I'm also a Parkway

[55:28] resident neighbor, uh currently uh

[55:31] dealing with um

[55:32] some unfortunate uh controversy with

[55:35] South Salt Lake and with how things are

[55:37] are being handled. We are

[55:40] here to

[55:42] ask that there be some step in and and a

[55:45] pause

[55:47] of what is happening so that way things

[55:48] can have a better direction and be

[55:51] figured out where I feel like we could

[55:54] be heard and things can

[55:57] move on in a more positive direction.

[56:00] The thought

[56:01] with this open space is that there is

[56:03] already some beautiful fruit trees and

[56:06] garden boxes that have been there for

[56:08] 40-50 years and there's a lot of things

[56:11] that have already existed and the

[56:13] feeling that somebody may want to just

[56:14] come in and bulldoze and start over with

[56:16] just a bunch of grass that could

[56:17] probably light up on fire real fast.

[56:20] That kind of is a big concern right now

[56:22] especially for what we just saw with

[56:24] Tanner Park

[56:25] since we're in that same kind of

[56:27] corridor area. It is kind of a very big

[56:30] concern.

[56:31] So that's why we're asking for Salt Lake

[56:33] to please put us on that agenda. Please

[56:36] let's have some conversation. We want to

[56:38] be neighborly, want to have that ability

[56:40] to have dialogue cuz it feels like

[56:43] with the others we have not had any and

[56:45] we would love that opportunity just to

[56:47] be in front of you

[56:48] and give our our opinions of what that

[56:50] could be and and give us that chance to

[56:52] be a great neighbor to not only Salt

[56:54] Lake, to the residents there.

[56:56] We we value and we cherish that space.

[56:59] It has been a fantastic

[57:02] way for neighborhoods to to grow and and

[57:04] for memories to be made. One last quick

[57:08] quote.

[57:10] People make history, not the other way

[57:11] around. In periods where there is no

[57:13] leadership, society stands still.

[57:15] Progress occurs when courageous,

[57:17] skillful leaders seize the opportunity

[57:19] to change things for the better.

[57:21] Please seize this opportunity and change

[57:23] it for the better for all of us. Thank

[57:25] you.

[57:27] » Next is Natalia Trofimova followed by

[57:30] Tim Valentiner and then Amy Beckler.

[57:33] Natalia's here in person.

[57:37] » Good evening, council members.

[57:39] Um I am here tonight because I'm

[57:41] concerned about how public funds are

[57:43] being spent for the 999 ride and the

[57:45] community members for bike riding. As

[57:48] taxpayers, we expect our money to be

[57:51] used in ways that makes our community

[57:52] safer, stronger, and more united. Not in

[57:55] ways that create fear or erode trust.

[58:00] Practices should be reevaluated as

[58:02] members of the community are being

[58:03] viewed as targets rather than neighbors.

[58:05] On a ride taking place on June 11th, I

[58:09] was a witness to officer Brennan badge

[58:11] X115

[58:14] using profanity at city members.

[58:17] Um in reviewing the entry police officer

[58:20] salary at $36.69

[58:24] approximately for 3 and 1/2 hours, the

[58:26] city is roughly spending $3,800

[58:30] on the expense of trying to patrol these

[58:32] members, excluding any air patrol that

[58:35] has been used excessively.

[58:38] Monthly, it would be about 15,500.

[58:42] I urge you to review these expenditures

[58:44] carefully and make sure that every

[58:45] taxpayer dollar is being spent in a way

[58:47] that serves the entire

[58:50] not at the expense of it.

[58:52] Thank you.

[58:57] » Next is Tim Valentiner, followed by Amy

[59:00] Beckler, and then Amy Stevenson. Tim is

[59:02] here in person.

[59:05] >> Good evening. My name is Tim Valentiner.

[59:07] » Good evening. My name is Tim Valentiner.

[59:07] I am here also representing 35 Salt Lake

[59:09] City residents who live along Parkway

[59:11] Avenue near Sugar House Park.

[59:14] As the fellow neighbors have already

[59:15] talked, we are here to ask for Salt Lake

[59:16] City's continued engagement and support

[59:18] ensuring that South Salt Lake acts as

[59:20] responsible neighbor and landowner.

[59:23] South Salt Lake's or sorry, Salt Lake

[59:25] City, Salt Lake County, and Sugarhouse

[59:27] Park Authority sold this eight-piece

[59:29] eight-acre piece of land in 1980 to

[59:32] South Salt Lake, which is located just

[59:34] on the other side of Sugarhouse Park.

[59:35] It's a remaining sliver of the park from

[59:37] when they they cut out I-80.

[59:40] Um, they that at that time it was sold

[59:42] by Salt Lake City with the legal

[59:44] obligation to South Salt Lake that it be

[59:46] maintained and even landscaped to the

[59:48] standards of the neighborhood or

[59:50] automatically revert back to the

[59:52] original owners, including Salt Lake

[59:53] City. That has already happened and it

[59:56] needs to be acknowledged.

[59:58] They have not maintained it or lived up

[59:59] to the obligations over the last 46

[1:00:01] years.

[1:00:02] Council Member Young um and

[1:00:04] representatives from the mayor's office

[1:00:05] have been working very hard with us on

[1:00:07] this issue and but we felt it important

[1:00:09] to raise it to the full council.

[1:00:11] For months now, our neighborhood has

[1:00:13] raised thoughtful questions regarding

[1:00:14] South Salt Lake's new plans for the

[1:00:16] Parkway Isma property, where their

[1:00:17] underground water tanks are located and

[1:00:19] have served for some years. However,

[1:00:21] there is a large open space parcel east

[1:00:23] of their water tanks that has been

[1:00:25] abandoned and not used and as a result,

[1:00:27] neighbors have been making productive

[1:00:29] use of a firebreak, even including

[1:00:31] watering it regularly, putting garden

[1:00:33] boxes, fruit trees to help create a

[1:00:35] firebreak for safety.

[1:00:37] No one seeks to prevent South Salt Lake

[1:00:39] from continuing to access and using

[1:00:40] their water tanks. We are simply asking

[1:00:42] for consideration regarding the impact

[1:00:44] fencing in the entire property will have

[1:00:47] on the neighbor the neighborhoods and in

[1:00:48] in particular fire safety,

[1:00:51] which is

[1:00:52] now hitting very close to home with

[1:00:54] recent fires all around us.

[1:00:56] South Salt Lake's proposed fencing could

[1:00:58] permanently alter a landscape and we're

[1:01:00] asking for help to prevent that from

[1:01:01] happening. We simply ask for a seat at

[1:01:04] the table and Salt Salt Lake City's

[1:01:05] continued

[1:01:07] >> I'm

[1:01:13] Next is Amy Beckler, followed by Amy

[1:01:16] Stevenson and then Brent Stevenson. Amy

[1:01:19] Beckler, you may now unmute.

[1:01:22] Hi, this is Amy Beckler. I live on

[1:01:24] Parkway Avenue as well.

[1:01:26] Um and as Tim said, the field behind our

[1:01:27] house is owned by South Salt Lake and

[1:01:29] they have not maintained it as they have

[1:01:31] promised or required to do per their

[1:01:33] deed of sale. We moved in about 16 years

[1:01:36] ago and we were told upon move in that

[1:01:38] um neighbors had access and permission

[1:01:40] to use the field. And we have been the

[1:01:43] ones to maintain it and beautify the

[1:01:45] space. We have mowed firebreaks and

[1:01:47] watered, pulled weeds, mitigated

[1:01:49] invasive species. We have also been able

[1:01:51] to make priceless connections with our

[1:01:53] neighbors there. And that's the part

[1:01:54] that we really love. My children have

[1:01:56] gardened with our amazing neighbor. They

[1:01:58] helped her weed and water while she

[1:02:00] imparted her 60-year-old wisdom upon

[1:02:02] them.

[1:02:03] They have spent countless hours playing

[1:02:04] with neighbors of all ages safely and

[1:02:06] imaginatively. It is a space we hold

[1:02:08] very dear to our hearts and a space that

[1:02:10] has recently created incredible amounts

[1:02:13] of stress.

[1:02:14] The inability of South Salt Lake to

[1:02:16] protect our homes from fires such as the

[1:02:18] Tanner Park fire is terrifying. We are

[1:02:21] geographically very similar to the way

[1:02:23] to the space in Tanner Park. However,

[1:02:25] Tanner Park has a road and South Salt

[1:02:27] Lake would like to give us a fence.

[1:02:30] Um the fence would install

[1:02:32] that they want to install would restrict

[1:02:34] emergency access especially to

[1:02:37] firefighters and other emergency

[1:02:39] workers.

[1:02:40] It would also take away our ability to

[1:02:41] take care of what we have taken care of

[1:02:43] for decades

[1:02:45] without solving the field's maintenance

[1:02:47] problems. It is a space that could

[1:02:48] provide so much value to this corner of

[1:02:50] Salt Lake Salt Lake City. It could be a

[1:02:52] pump track, a pollinator field, a

[1:02:54] community garden, so many things. But

[1:02:56] what we need is Salt Lake City to stand

[1:02:58] up for us. We need to see this space for

[1:03:00] the value it holds. And can we please

[1:03:02] add Parkway Avenue to a future work

[1:03:04] session agenda where those are who are

[1:03:06] impacted can all discuss options for

[1:03:09] preserving and improving the space.

[1:03:11] Thank you.

[1:03:14] » And next is Amy Stevenson followed by

[1:03:17] Brett Stevenson, and then Reza Bakhtiar.

[1:03:21] Amy, you may now unmute.

[1:03:24] >> All right, thank you, City Council, for

[1:03:26] » All right, thank you, City Council, for

[1:03:26] the opportunity to um

[1:03:29] present or comment tonight. Um I would

[1:03:32] like to address the short-term rental

[1:03:33] ordinance that has recently been

[1:03:35] established

[1:03:38] with some of our fellow owners who are

[1:03:39] here tonight. My husband and I purchased

[1:03:42] a condo in November last year.

[1:03:46] We also purchased in good faith

[1:03:48] thinking that the condo was legally

[1:03:51] operable as a short-term rental. Um and

[1:03:55] honestly, it's just been a nightmare

[1:03:56] since then. We are a small family with

[1:03:59] young kids, and this was not a

[1:04:01] small purchase for us. Um so, what I'm

[1:04:04] asking for

[1:04:06] is consideration to change some of the

[1:04:08] ordinances

[1:04:10] or the the restrictions in this

[1:04:12] ordinance. Um I am all for regulation

[1:04:15] and making it so that short-term rentals

[1:04:17] are legally operated, especially in the

[1:04:20] downtown districts. We benefit greatly

[1:04:22] from short-term rentals as a

[1:04:25] family with young kids, hotels are not

[1:04:26] really feasible.

[1:04:28] Um

[1:04:29] so, I'm asking City Council to address

[1:04:31] the 10% building cap,

[1:04:34] uh especially for condominiums, and

[1:04:37] maybe have some type of a grandfather

[1:04:39] for people who have been operating for

[1:04:41] multiple years

[1:04:43] as a short-term rental. Um

[1:04:45] like my colleague Ashley said, this is

[1:04:48] going to greatly

[1:04:49] affect our property values, and we all

[1:04:51] purchased the condo with the

[1:04:56] um purchase price reflecting short-term

[1:04:58] rental ability.

[1:05:00] Um

[1:05:01] I would also like to address the

[1:05:02] two-night minimum stay and the annual

[1:05:06] night cap. These numbers seemed

[1:05:08] really random, and

[1:05:11] um

[1:05:12] don't make much sense, especially

[1:05:15] in my experience as a short-term rental

[1:05:17] operator.

[1:05:18] Um, we have had great experiences with

[1:05:20] just one-night overnighters who are

[1:05:22] traveling

[1:05:23] um, between the national parks. So,

[1:05:26] thank you for your consideration on

[1:05:28] changing these things.

[1:05:32] » Next will be Brent Stevenson, followed

[1:05:34] by Reza Fakhri.

[1:05:37] Brent, you may now unmute.

[1:05:39] >> Hey there, can you hear me?

[1:05:41] » Hey there, can you hear me?

[1:05:42] >> Yes, we can hear you.

[1:05:43] » Yes, we can hear you.

[1:05:43] >> Perfect. Hey all, uh, you just heard

[1:05:45] » Perfect. Hey all, uh, you just heard

[1:05:45] from my better half. I made public

[1:05:46] comment previously, several months ago,

[1:05:48] around STR.

[1:05:49] Um, and following up, uh, I I wanted to

[1:05:52] say, of course, that we respect and

[1:05:53] appreciate the move to introduce this

[1:05:55] licensing. You have a large group of

[1:05:57] people that are interested in working

[1:05:59] with the city, bringing this revenue in,

[1:06:01] and doing so legally. Um, I do feel that

[1:06:03] the recent ordinance that was passed,

[1:06:05] uh, via the budget, was, uh,

[1:06:08] not to be offensive, but messy and

[1:06:10] fairly poorly outlined. This is

[1:06:12] evidenced by some of the response that

[1:06:14] was given in today's working session.

[1:06:16] Seemingly, and this is without

[1:06:17] exception, when the council was

[1:06:18] challenging different points of the

[1:06:20] ordinances, uh, to the creators and

[1:06:22] legal counsel present, their answers

[1:06:25] were, "I don't know." And "We don't

[1:06:27] really have the data."

[1:06:29] I appreciate the board members. I

[1:06:30] watched that meeting today.

[1:06:32] Um,

[1:06:33] thank you, council members, for pushing

[1:06:34] on this and exploring some amendment

[1:06:36] options. This is encouraging to see for

[1:06:38] a local government. Um, quickly, we'll

[1:06:41] rattle these off. 10% rule. Um, we've

[1:06:44] been told that condos are considered

[1:06:45] single-family homes, in effect,

[1:06:47] different than wholly owned multi-family

[1:06:50] units. With these units being wholly

[1:06:52] owned by individual owners,

[1:06:54] uh, this is quickly putting together and

[1:06:57] stripping single-family property rights

[1:07:00] of owners that purchased in the area.

[1:07:02] And these are individuals, not, you

[1:07:05] know, faceless corporations. Uh, the

[1:07:07] two-night minimum

[1:07:09] defense that was provided today when

[1:07:11] challenged was that it would {quote}

[1:07:12] "cut down on foot traffic in the area."

[1:07:15] Um, I I guess there's no pushback there,

[1:07:18] but we've also been told that it will

[1:07:19] cut down on parties. Uh, a perspective

[1:07:22] here,

[1:07:23] if you're requiring a local

[1:07:25] uh,

[1:07:26] contact within 2 hours, let them deal

[1:07:27] with the nuisance, potentially

[1:07:29] introducing decibel readers or what have

[1:07:31] you, and not penalizing um, on the

[1:07:34] one-night requirement. I have other

[1:07:36] points on the 200-night maximum. That

[1:07:38] seems erroneous, but I will save

[1:07:40] comments for another day. Thank you.

[1:07:44] » And next will be Reza Fakhr

[1:07:47] Reza, you may now unmute.

[1:07:49] >> Good evening, Mayor and members of

[1:07:51] » Good evening, Mayor and members of

[1:07:51] Council. My name is Reza Fakhr. I'm a

[1:07:53] resident of Salt Lake City. I've owned a

[1:07:55] condominium in the Warehouse District

[1:07:57] Condominiums, a building in the D3 zone

[1:07:59] in Salt Lake City for

[1:08:01] uh, over 10 years now. I'd like to focus

[1:08:03] my comments as others have this evening

[1:08:06] on just one area specifically of the

[1:08:08] short-term rental ordinance,

[1:08:10] specifically the 10% cap for

[1:08:12] multi-family buildings. First, I want to

[1:08:14] let you know I support the ordinance's

[1:08:16] goals, licensing, safety inspections, an

[1:08:19] accountable local contact, honest

[1:08:21] records. These are all sensible and

[1:08:23] reasonable objectives that can and

[1:08:25] should be complied with. My concern is

[1:08:27] primarily one provision, which is this

[1:08:29] 10% cap on short-term rentals in

[1:08:31] buildings with more than 10 units.

[1:08:33] Here's the problem. Salt Lake City

[1:08:35] allows short-term rentals mainly in the

[1:08:37] same districts where it allows hotels, a

[1:08:40] pretty deliberate choice for transient

[1:08:42] lodging. The 10% cap exists to protect

[1:08:45] long-term housing in residential

[1:08:47] neighborhoods, but our building was

[1:08:49] never part of that housing supply. It

[1:08:51] sits in a district the city zoned for

[1:08:53] exactly this use, and this isn't

[1:08:56] hypothetical. About 75% of our building

[1:08:58] has operated as short-term rentals

[1:09:00] openly and lawfully for well over a

[1:09:03] decade. The cap would cut that to one in

[1:09:06] 10, only eliminating roughly seven of

[1:09:09] every eight existing rentals

[1:09:11] retroactively through a first-come,

[1:09:13] first-served scramble that pits neighbor

[1:09:15] against neighbor. So, I ask two things.

[1:09:17] Uh first, exempt buildings in the

[1:09:19] district where short-term rentals are

[1:09:22] already permitted. The cap solves

[1:09:24] nothing there. So,

[1:09:25] uh or at a minimum, grandfather units

[1:09:27] with a years-long history or more of

[1:09:30] lawful operation. We're not asking to

[1:09:32] skip licensing, inspections, or safety

[1:09:34] rules. We embrace them. We ask only that

[1:09:37] a lawful, properly-zoned, decade-old use

[1:09:40] not be erased by a rule built to solve a

[1:09:42] different problem. Thank you for your

[1:09:44] time.

[1:09:48] » And that was the final registered

[1:09:49] commenter.

[1:09:51] Uh thank you, everyone, uh for your

[1:09:53] comments.

[1:09:54] Uh Council member Young.

[1:09:57] Thank you. I appreciate it. Um I'd just

[1:10:00] like to thank everyone who came to speak

[1:10:02] tonight with a specific call out to the

[1:10:04] Sugar House residents who came to speak

[1:10:07] about both the Parkway property

[1:10:09] discussion as well as the experience

[1:10:11] with artificial turf athletic fields at

[1:10:14] Rowland Heights. Um as mentioned in the

[1:10:16] comments, although Salt Lake City

[1:10:18] Council is not the primary

[1:10:20] decision-making authority on these

[1:10:21] properties, it's important to note you

[1:10:24] are Salt Lake City residents, and your

[1:10:26] voices matter. I appreciate the time,

[1:10:30] thoughtfulness, and advocacy you've

[1:10:32] brought forward on behalf of your

[1:10:33] neighborhoods. Thank you for continuing

[1:10:35] to engage with us, ask important

[1:10:37] questions, and work collaboratively as

[1:10:39] these conversations move forward. I'm

[1:10:41] grateful for your partnership in helping

[1:10:43] protect and strengthen our community.

[1:10:45] Thank you.

[1:10:48] Thank you, Council member Young. This

[1:10:50] concludes our Salt Lake City Council

[1:10:52] meeting. The Council's formal meeting

[1:10:53] now stands adjourned.

[1:10:57] » Good job.

[1:10:59] >> Thank you.

[1:11:00] » Thank you.

[1:11:00] >> it.

[1:11:06] » [music]

[1:11:11] [music]

Salt Lake City Formal Meeting - 07/14/2026

Transcript