[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]