[0:02] Welcome everyone. We are going to get

[0:04] started.

[0:11] Okay, we are recording and we are

[0:13] getting ready to start. Thank you so

[0:15] much for being here. Welcome to the

[0:16] meeting of the Wasat Front Regional

[0:18] Council. Today is Thursday, May 28th and

[0:21] we welcome all of you. My name is Don

[0:24] Ramsey and I have the privilege of

[0:26] serving as chair of the regional council

[0:28] uh right now and we want to make sure

[0:30] everyone knows who all is here. I

[0:32] appreciate the chance to serve with all

[0:33] of you. Let's do introductions. We'll go

[0:35] around the table starting right here

[0:37] with Commissioner Stevenson and then

[0:39] we'll go to the rest of the room and

[0:40] then I'm

[0:41] >> Bob Stevenson.

[0:46] » Shall I add to what he said? [laughter]

[0:49] my colleague um Loren Kamalu only I'm

[0:52] here not representing Davis County I

[0:54] represent Utah Association of Counties

[0:58] >> Joy Petro Leighton City

[1:02] » J Fox UTA

[1:04] >> um Beth Hull Brook UTA

[1:07] >> good afternoon Laura Hansen uh

[1:09] governor's office

[1:12] >> Ariel DeFay Utah House of

[1:14] Representatives

[1:17] >> Rosie Hernandez I'm part of the admin

[1:19] team at WFRC.

[1:21] >> Jordan Chandler, also part of the admin

[1:23] team at WFRC.

[1:26] >> Vincent, Boxelder County,

[1:30] >> Kate Bradshaw, Battlefield City.

[1:33] >> Jefferson, UTA,

[1:36] >> Ted Nolton, deputy director, WFRC.

[1:38] >> Carlton Christensen with the Utah

[1:40] Transit Authority.

[1:42] >> Tish Baro, Riverton City.

[1:45] >> I'm also Tish Baro. No. Uh Dustin

[1:47] Ghetto, mayor Midbau,

[1:50] >> uh David Bram, Immigration Canyon,

[1:53] Carlos Beris, Udat, Jim Harvey, Weber

[1:57] County,

[1:58] >> Andrea Pearson, WFRC admin.

[2:01] >> I'm Andrew Guber, executive director

[2:03] here at WFRC. Welcome everybody.

[2:06] >> Thank you. Let's start with our

[2:08] attendees over there.

[2:11] Uh, I'm David Went. Uh, uh, supporter of

[2:15] the Rio Grand Plan.

[2:24] Jack Stouse. I'm the executive director

[2:26] of Save Our Canyons.

[2:29] >> Doug Tolman, Save Our Canyons.

[2:32] >> Brad Rutled, Watch Back Country

[2:34] Alliance.

[2:36] >> Charlie Luke, Canyon Guard.

[2:39] Dalton Dailyaly, Canyon Guard.

[2:42] >> Emily Pitch, Friends of Little

[2:44] Cottonwood Canyon.

[2:50] » Connor House, Representative Mike

[2:52] Kennedy.

[2:53] >> Miranda Jones Cox, Government Relations,

[2:55] WFRC.

[2:57] >> George Joner, Long Range Planning Group,

[2:59] WFRC.

[3:00] >> Lauren Littlefield, Regional

[3:01] Development, Holly Lake County.

[3:03] >> Chandler Butler, UTA.

[3:07] Uh Julie Bjorn WRC long range planning.

[3:11] >> Victor Hollandbog, Governor's Office.

[3:19] » Cameron with the Utility League of

[3:20] Cities and Towns.

[3:21] >> Nicole Berto um UTA.

[3:26] » John Aardone WFRC.

[3:29] >> Renardman, uh interning analytics group

[3:31] at WFRC.

[3:33] >> Jiren Robertson with the Utah Transit

[3:35] Authority.

[3:36] Wayne Benny, WFRC staff.

[3:40] >> Byron Head, WFRC staff.

[3:43] >> Chrissy Dolberg, WFRC staff.

[3:46] >> Paulo Aguilera, WFRC staff.

[3:51] >> Samantha Deilhor, Longrange Planning,

[3:53] WFRC.

[3:56] >> Bert Granberg, WFRC Analytics Group.

[3:59] >> Ariel Sultani, short-range planning,

[4:01] WFRC.

[4:04] Ben Witridge, WFRC staff.

[4:10] » Okay, Jason, do you want to go ahead?

[4:13] >> Jason Brown in Vision Utah.

[4:15] >> Thank you. Andrea, would you mind going

[4:17] through our attendees online? Thank you.

[4:24] » Okay, so I'll read three names and have

[4:25] you introduce yourself. Uh, we have

[4:27] Mayor Erin Mendenhal, uh, Council Member

[4:30] Amy Wender Newton, and Mayor Sheree

[4:32] Wood. Here,

[4:37] » here. Here.

[4:40] >> John Croft, Davis County.

[4:43] >> Thanks, Commissioner. Okay. And now,

[4:45] Mayor,

[4:46] >> also Oh,

[4:48] >> sorry. Thanks. Thanks, Mayor Sultan. We

[4:51] got you. Okay. Um, Mayor Paul

[4:54] Fatheringham,

[4:56] Mayor Mara Manzioni, and Mayor Sher

[4:58] Bingham. Uh Paul Fatheringham, holiday

[5:01] mayor

[5:03] >> here. Mayor Manzion.

[5:10] » Okay. And Mayor Bingham is in

[5:12] attendance. Um Mayor Karen Lang, Mayor

[5:15] Mark Shepard, Mayor Janet Wampler.

[5:18] Apologies.

[5:21] >> Hi, Mayor. Thank you.

[5:23] >> Yep. Mark Shepard, Mayor Clearfield.

[5:25] >> Yeah, you're good.

[5:27] >> Thank you. Janet Wampler, mayor of Ogden

[5:29] Valley City.

[5:31] >> Uh, Commissioner Railen Blocker, Mayor

[5:33] Steve Gibson, and Mayor Alan Perry.

[5:38] >> Yes. Uh, Commissioner Blocker, Morgan

[5:40] County.

[5:47] » Mayor Perry White City.

[5:51] >> Thank you. Okay. And we have other

[5:53] attendees also online joining us. Thank

[5:55] you.

[5:57] Okay, welcome. We welcome all of you. We

[5:59] thank all of you for being here. All

[6:01] right, the first item on our agenda is

[6:04] an action item.

[6:07] Uh it's the minutes that have been sent

[6:08] in draft form of the WFRC meeting held

[6:11] March 26th, 2026. Our current financial

[6:14] report and the financial statements for

[6:15] February and March of this year. Those

[6:17] have been sent out for review. Does

[6:19] anyone have any amendments to make or is

[6:21] there a motion on the draft minutes? I

[6:23] make a motion that we approve the action

[6:25] item one.

[6:27] >> Motion by Commissioner Stevenson. Is

[6:29] there a second?

[6:30] >> Who is that? Thank you, Commissioner.

[6:36] Thank you. Okay. Motion and a second.

[6:39] Any discussion to the minutes? Seeing

[6:40] none, all in favor, please say I.

[6:43] >> I.

[6:45] >> Any opposed?

[6:47] Those minutes are approved. Okay. I'm

[6:51] going to ask for a motion to amend our

[6:53] agenda. We've got a lot to get through

[6:54] in this meeting, but we have a lot of

[6:55] folks who have joined us today that

[6:57] would like to speak that have asked for

[6:59] an opportunity to speak and we're always

[7:00] happy to hear from them. And so, I'm

[7:02] going to ask for a motion to amend the

[7:03] agenda and move public comment first

[7:05] next right now before we jump into all

[7:08] the rest of the meeting. Um, to be

[7:10] respectful of their time because they

[7:11] don't they don't need to be here all day

[7:12] if they don't want to. They're welcome

[7:14] to stay as long as you want, but you

[7:15] don't have to stay the whole time. So,

[7:17] can I get a motion to amend the agenda

[7:18] to put public comment above the chair

[7:21] report as our next item?

[7:22] >> So, move

[7:23] >> second.

[7:25] >> Motion by Commissioner Harvey, second by

[7:26] Mayor Pro. Any discussion? All in favor,

[7:29] please say I.

[7:31] >> I.

[7:34] >> Any opposed? All right. Great. Thank you

[7:37] so much.

[7:43] Okay. Um, one of our key roles here at

[7:46] the Wasatch Front Regional Council is to

[7:48] develop the regional transportation

[7:49] plan, as you all know, in collaboration

[7:51] with our transportation agencies, our

[7:53] local governments, and input from our

[7:55] stakeholders and the public. We recently

[7:57] completed the public input period about

[8:00] the preferred scenario, which is it's

[8:02] like a first draft of the next RTP. It's

[8:05] a four-year process, but it's it's kind

[8:06] of an initial draft. Uh, and a lot of

[8:08] people submitted comments. We had a lot

[8:10] of comments either by mail in meetings

[8:12] or through an online map and uh we take

[8:16] that feedback really seriously and we

[8:17] appreciate the input. The RTP is not on

[8:20] today's agenda to be clear. We're not

[8:22] talking about it today on the agenda.

[8:24] It's not it's not one of our discussion

[8:25] items. We are not scheduled to take

[8:27] action on that until next year. So that

[8:29] will be sometime in 2027. Hi Mayor. That

[8:33] will be sometime in 2027.

[8:36] However, um we have representatives from

[8:40] several organizations that reached out

[8:41] in advance and some of them they were

[8:43] able to introduce themselves a little

[8:45] bit. They asked to offer brief public

[8:46] comments during our regular public

[8:48] comment period today about the

[8:50] Cottonwood Canyons. And so before I open

[8:53] the rest of the public comment period,

[8:55] before I turn it to everybody else, I'm

[8:56] going to open the public comment period

[8:59] and um we're going to have two minutes

[9:01] each. We're going to invite first up

[9:03] Jack Strauss from Save Our Canyons.

[9:05] Jack, if you'd like to come up here,

[9:07] you're more than welcome. We love having

[9:09] you. Thanks for being here.

[9:12] » Uh thank you so much. I appreciate the

[9:14] uh opportunity to comment today, even

[9:17] though the RTP is still a year and a

[9:19] half out. Um but I think it's relevant.

[9:21] There's a lot uh in the works and I

[9:22] think uh all of our uh community members

[9:24] and collaborators are really interested

[9:26] to be engaged in this process.

[9:28] So, some of you may be familiar with our

[9:31] work, but those of you that are not,

[9:32] Save Our Canyons is a 54 year old

[9:34] nonprofit dedicated to preserving the

[9:36] Was the Wasatch Front beauty and

[9:37] wildness. Um, transit planning has

[9:40] become a key pillar of our work. And

[9:42] once again, we're really grateful to um

[9:44] be involved here in the first steps of

[9:45] the RTPA revision in 2027. And so, I was

[9:47] I feel like it's important to present a

[9:49] verbal comment uh attached to our um

[9:51] written comment that we sent last week.

[9:53] Um we strongly support the advanced uh

[9:56] enhanced bus service and bus rapid

[9:57] transit um to mobility hubs near the

[9:59] mouths of big and little cotwin canyons

[10:01] and we're really encouraged by UD do's

[10:02] progress on the gravel pit mobility hub

[10:04] and uh canyon bus infrastructure. These

[10:07] are things that our organization and

[10:08] partners strongly support and really uh

[10:10] excited to continue to engage in the um

[10:13] planning and facilitation of. We believe

[10:15] that for Canyon Transit to truly

[10:17] succeed, it must be integrated into the

[10:19] broader regional network, the regional

[10:21] front, the Rosiz front regional council.

[10:23] Um, so we urge the WFRC to work with

[10:26] agencies and municipal partners to

[10:28] expand the current canyon transit plans

[10:30] into a comprehensive tri canyon transit

[10:32] vision, one that includes Mil Creek, Big

[10:34] and Little Conway Canyons, and it serves

[10:36] year-round visitors at multiple access

[10:38] points.

[10:39] A tangible step towards this vision

[10:41] would be to support a second mobility

[10:42] hub at the 9400 South Highland. This was

[10:45] in the original one of the drafts of the

[10:46] little common canyon EIS but was

[10:48] excluded from the rod. Our written

[10:50] comments on the draft that's one example

[10:51] of ideas that we've had to help uh kind

[10:53] of work towards this vision and uh our

[10:56] comments on the draft RTP preferred

[10:58] scenario outline specific connections

[11:00] and further and more nodes to further

[11:01] support the vision

[11:04] because reliable transit service

[11:05] requires reli reliable funding. We also

[11:07] ask the WFRC work with UD do and other

[11:09] partners to identify accurate costs and

[11:11] reliable funding streams for operation

[11:13] and maintenance of canyon transit

[11:15] projects. And finally, we urge the WFRC

[11:17] to reassess the Little Conway Canyon

[11:19] environmental impact statement cost

[11:21] estimates which we believe are now

[11:23] outdated. Specifically, we ask the

[11:24] commission to provide updated costs for

[11:26] each phase of the project, including the

[11:27] Gondell proposal in phase three. We have

[11:30] reason to believe that the costs have se

[11:31] severely inflated in recent years.

[11:34] We believe existing roadways, improved

[11:36] buses, bus service, and strategic

[11:37] infrastructure investments can address

[11:39] both canyon and city traffic challenges,

[11:41] affordability, and uplift affordability

[11:44] and e equitable transit access.

[11:46] >> Jack, thank you for your comments. That

[11:47] was two minutes.

[11:48] >> Thank you so much.

[11:51] >> Not turned on. Thank you so much, Jack.

[11:53] Thanks for being here and for

[11:54] representing all the folks that are

[11:56] members of Saber Canyon. Okay. Brad

[11:58] Rutled with Wasach Back uh sorry Wasach

[12:02] Back Country Alliance. Apologies.

[12:11] Hello. Can you guys hear me? All right.

[12:13] I'm Brad Rutled and I represent

[12:15] approximately 45,000 backcountry

[12:18] enthusiasts that love the central Wasach

[12:20] Mountains. And I'm here with a simple

[12:23] request um to do the right thing. So,

[12:26] I'm here to talk about the Little

[12:27] Cottonwood Canyon proposed gondola and

[12:30] uh what do I mean by do the right thing?

[12:32] Well, one, don't ruin Little Cottonwood

[12:34] Canyon. Two, let's implement traffic

[12:37] solutions that solve the problem. And

[12:40] number three, please don't let Wasach

[12:43] Front Regional Council just rubber stamp

[12:46] things that have been coming up um and

[12:48] allowing this to go through. So um what

[12:51] I what I do want to ask about or what I do want to ask you to do implore

[12:55] you to do is um if you are neutral or

[13:00] you are pro gondola maybe you want more

[13:02] information about the gondola as a

[13:04] voting member or a member of this

[13:05] committee or this council let's meet

[13:08] let's talk about it I would love to

[13:10] share with you why so many people are

[13:12] against the gondola communities along

[13:14] the central was front are against it if

[13:16] you represent a community outside of the

[13:18] central was front for I'm sure you want

[13:20] to understand this because your

[13:22] constituents will be uh impacted by it.

[13:27] If you are against the gondola, I'm

[13:30] going to encourage you to be bold and

[13:31] actually be bolder. Let's not get caught

[13:34] up in the legal language, the

[13:37] bureaucracy of what's happening. Um, I

[13:39] actually believe in the WFRC when I

[13:43] first learned of it about four years ago

[13:44] on this topic. And um, I do want you to

[13:49] play a role in representing your

[13:51] constituents and learning about this

[13:53] issue. If you've been taught about the

[13:55] gondola and it's one-sided, please let's

[13:57] talk about it. Let's have a respectful

[13:59] conversation. So, I do think hundreds,

[14:01] if not thousands of comments have come

[14:03] in online recently. I'm not going to go

[14:05] through those. there's a lot of um

[14:08] really valid arguments that you know

[14:11] address engineering operational legal

[14:13] issues and I don't want to get into that

[14:15] but I am asking

[14:16] >> thank you for your comment

[14:18] >> and if I can leave with one final

[14:20] thought that's okay um in the end doing

[14:24] the right thing means preserving the

[14:26] canyon representing your people and

[14:28] having the courage to choose solutions

[14:30] that leave a legacy of stewardship and

[14:33] not regret thank you

[14:35] >> thank you

[14:38] Next, Charlie Luke from Canyon Guard.

[14:47] » Thank you, council members. Uh, my name

[14:49] is Charlie Luke, executive director of

[14:50] Canyon Guard. We believe that the

[14:52] gondola never should have been included

[14:53] in the 2023 2050 RTP. And as the 2027

[14:59] 2055 RTP is finalized, we're asking that

[15:02] the WFRC take four specific actions.

[15:05] One, establish consensus based metrics

[15:07] for phases one and two. In 2023, the

[15:10] WFRC adopted a policy of prioritizing

[15:13] and evaluating phases one and two before

[15:15] any advancement to phase three. But UD

[15:17] do's rod included no concrete timeline

[15:20] or intermediate benchmarks. We asked the

[15:22] WFRC to establish firm consensus based

[15:25] metrics so that the evaluation is

[15:27] meaningful and not a rubber stamp. Two,

[15:30] identify and support O andM funding for

[15:32] enhanced busing. UD do has committed

[15:35] hundreds of millions of dollars in

[15:36] capital costs for phase one bus service,

[15:38] but has not formally identified ongoing

[15:40] operations and maintenance funding.

[15:42] Reliable frequent service requires

[15:44] reliable frequent funding. We ask the

[15:46] WFRC to use its role as an NO to

[15:48] identify and support those ongoing

[15:50] funding sources. Three, plan and support

[15:54] a mobility hub at 94 South and Highland

[15:58] Drive. The current UTA park and ride at

[16:00] 94th South Highland Drive is an under is

[16:02] undersized for expanded transit. We

[16:05] asked the WFRC to support expanding it

[16:08] into a full mobility hub similar to the

[16:09] inprocess gravel pit hub to reduce

[16:12] bottlenecks and better serve visitors

[16:14] from the south and the west. This has

[16:16] broad community and municipal support.

[16:18] And four, update cost estimates for all

[16:20] three EIS phases. The rod estimated the

[16:23] gondola at $1.2 2 billion before recent

[16:26] inflation, tariffs, and economic

[16:28] uncertainty. As an WFRC has the

[16:31] responsibility to ensure long-range cost

[16:33] estimates are current. We ask that all

[16:35] three EIS phases be repriced. Thank you

[16:38] for your time and we look

[16:39] [clears throat] forward to working with

[16:40] the WFRC on these common sense steps.

[16:44] >> Thanks, Charlie.

[16:46] Okay, Emily Pitch, Friends of Little

[16:48] Cottonwood Canyon.

[16:55] Hello council. Um, in 2023 when y'all

[16:58] decided to include the gondola in the

[17:00] RTP, that decision was based at least in

[17:03] part on a legal memo from Stole Rives.

[17:05] But I think the conclusion of that memo

[17:07] should be questioned. First, the memo

[17:10] failed to consider appendix A of 23 CFR

[17:13] section 450, which states that for 40

[17:15] years it has been congressional intent

[17:17] for federally funded highway and transit

[17:20] projects to flow from transportation

[17:22] planning processes and not the other way

[17:24] around. Second, the memo failed to

[17:27] mention the Federal Highway

[17:28] Administration's document titled

[17:30] transportation planning requirements and

[17:32] their relationship to NEPA approvals.

[17:34] The document states that before a rod

[17:36] can be signed, it needs to be consistent

[17:38] with the RTP. This is consistent with an

[17:42] example from Missoula County, Montana.

[17:44] The rod for Miller Creek Road in

[17:46] Missoula County. While the final EIS

[17:49] selected a build alternative, the rod

[17:52] stated, and I quote, "A project must be

[17:55] included in a fiscally constrained RTP

[17:58] before a build alternative can be

[17:59] selected in a ROD. Therefore, the no

[18:02] action alternative has been selected.

[18:04] This suggests that the transportation

[18:06] planning organization had and exercised

[18:09] its authority to shape the NEPA outcome

[18:12] and not the other way around. I believe

[18:15] the WFRC had the authority to exclude

[18:17] the gondola, but that would have

[18:20] required you do to exclude the gondola

[18:22] from the rod. I urge the council to

[18:24] pursue a second independent legal

[18:26] opinion and answer the question of if

[18:29] the WFRC has the authority to amend the

[18:32] RTP to exclude the gondola going

[18:35] forward. Thank you. Thank you, Emily. We

[18:38] appreciate each of you and uh you

[18:42] everyone that you represent, everybody

[18:43] that that came to spoke today to speak

[18:45] today, we appreciate you. Okay, we have

[18:48] six or seven minutes left of our

[18:50] scheduled public comment time. If

[18:51] there's anyone here uh from the public

[18:53] that would like to speak about anything, on our agenda, whatever you'd

[18:57] like to speak about, yes, you're

[18:59] welcome. You can come take two minutes

[19:01] and let us know who you are. Again, you

[19:02] already did, but for the public uh

[19:04] record, we'd appreciate it.

[19:05] >> Sure thing. Uh my name is David Wentch.

[19:07] I am a supporter of the Rio Grand Plan.

[19:09] And first, I want to put in a brief word

[19:10] of thanks to the Wasad Front Regional

[19:12] Council for including several

[19:14] exploratory concepts in the draft 2027

[19:16] RTP. Uh pretty much every transit item

[19:19] in the exploratory concepts is a good

[19:21] idea that deserves its time in the sun,

[19:23] including things like the Tilla Regional

[19:26] Express, the transit fresh look

[19:27] projects, and of course, Rio Grand

[19:29] Plant. [laughter]

[19:30] That brings me to my second concern

[19:32] though. In item 5C of this meeting, we

[19:34] have a set of transportation project

[19:36] proposals that includes the Salt Lake

[19:38] urban area proposal item 18, Salt Lake

[19:41] City, Salt Lake Central Transit

[19:43] Improvements. Uh this is a proposal to

[19:45] redevelop the current Salt Lake Central

[19:47] Station in place with no adjustment to

[19:49] the current rail alignment. Uh I would

[19:52] ask that this be delayed until 2027 when

[19:55] the we connect study uh is uh concluded.

[19:59] If you don't know what we connect is,

[20:01] that is an ongoing study to for West

[20:04] East connections in Salt Lake City. Uh,

[20:07] every one of the public outreach events

[20:09] I've gone to for we connect, every

[20:12] single Westside resident has said, "Bury

[20:14] the rails. Bury the rails. Bury the

[20:15] rails." Uh, it is very likely that

[20:18] they're going to conclude, "Bury the

[20:19] rails." And UD do has pledged to follow

[20:22] whatever we connect recommends. And if

[20:23] the rails are buried, that is going to

[20:25] change what needs to be done at Salt

[20:27] Lake Central, which is going to re uh

[20:29] render this potentially a stranded asset

[20:33] or in need of uh additional amendments

[20:36] to that plan. So, in order to be more

[20:39] efficient with WFRC's resources, it

[20:41] would make sense to delay that

[20:43] consideration until that time. Thank you

[20:45] very much.

[20:47] >> Thank you. Thank you so much. Last call.

[20:50] If there's anybody here that has

[20:51] anything you'd like to speak to at the

[20:53] council.

[20:55] Okay, seeing none, we will close the

[20:57] public hearing. Uh we have we have a

[21:00] request. I believe Mayor Mendenhal is

[21:04] going to share a statement from Mayor

[21:07] Wilson who uh had something urgent come

[21:12] up and and at the last minute was not

[21:13] able to join us. So, we wish her well

[21:15] and hope all is well. We'll turn to

[21:16] Mayor Menhal.

[21:18] >> Thank you, Mayor Ramsey. Can you hear

[21:20] me? Okay.

[21:22] >> Yes, it's great.

[21:23] >> Okay.

[21:24] >> Dear Wasatch Front Regional Council

[21:26] members, as mayor of Salt Lake County

[21:28] and a member of the Wasatch Front

[21:29] Regional Council, I appreciate the

[21:31] opportunity to comment as the council

[21:33] begins development of the 2027 through

[21:36] 2020 2055 RTP or regional transportation

[21:40] plan. I've consistently opposed the

[21:42] proposed Little Cottonwood Canyon

[21:44] Gondola project, a position also shared

[21:47] by the majority of Salt Lake County

[21:49] Council and my position has not changed.

[21:52] While I support improving transportation

[21:54] access and safety in the Cottonwood

[21:56] Canyons, I strongly believe there are

[21:58] better, less impactful, and more

[22:01] cost-effective alternatives available. I

[22:04] believe public comment should carry real

[22:07] weight in the RTP process. As the RTP is

[22:10] again being modified, I hope members of

[22:13] this body will continue to take the

[22:14] public's opposition to this project

[22:16] seriously.

[22:18] Recent public comment once again

[22:20] reflects strong opposition to including

[22:22] the Gondola project in the upcoming RTP.

[22:25] I also acknowledge the previous actions

[22:27] of the WFRC body in 2023 with the

[22:31] adoption of an amendment requiring

[22:33] implementation of phase one and two

[22:35] improvements prior to advancement of the

[22:38] gondola. Additionally, legal opinion

[22:40] provided to WFRC stating that due to the

[22:44] structure and findings of the

[22:45] environmental impact statement process,

[22:47] the gondola project cannot easily be

[22:50] decoupled from the broader

[22:51] transportation package under

[22:53] consideration. While I understand that

[22:56] procedural reality, it does not lessen

[22:59] our responsibility to continue

[23:01] evaluating whether this remains the best

[23:04] long-term transportation solution for

[23:06] the canyon and the region. During the

[23:08] prior RTP process, more than 1,600

[23:12] public comments were submitted regarding

[23:14] the gondola proposal, and the public was

[23:17] repeatedly assured that inclusion in the

[23:19] RTP would not predetermine the final

[23:22] outcome. Importantly, UD do has already

[23:25] begun implementing phase 1

[23:27] transportation solutions. The agency is

[23:29] advancing development of a mobility hub,

[23:32] moving to acquire additional buses, and

[23:35] identifying a transit service provider.

[23:37] These investments represent meaningful

[23:40] and flexible improvements that can be

[23:42] implemented sooner and adapted over time

[23:45] as transportation needs evolve. I

[23:48] continue to believe these investments,

[23:50] expanded transit service, mobility hubs,

[23:52] demand management, parking controls, and

[23:55] phased operational improvements

[23:57] represent a better long-term solution

[24:00] than committing the region to a costly

[24:02] and inflexible gondola system. When the

[24:06] time comes for any amendment to the

[24:08] environmental impact statement or UD

[24:10] do's record of decision, I believe the

[24:13] project will face increasing scrutiny

[24:15] due to strong and sustained public

[24:17] opposition, escalating project costs,

[24:20] and growing unpredictably,

[24:22] unpredictability in weather patterns

[24:24] that raise legitimate long-term

[24:26] operational questions. I strongly

[24:29] believe these realities will ultimately

[24:31] lead to dismissal of the gondola option.

[24:35] In the meantime, canyon users and the

[24:37] broader public also have a

[24:38] responsibility to embrace practical

[24:41] transportation solutions that are

[24:43] available now and will soon be expanded.

[24:46] busing and transit improvements

[24:48] can succeed if we collectively commit to

[24:51] using them. We should do our part to

[24:54] demonstrate that common sense, flexible

[24:56] transportation solutions can work

[24:59] effectively in the canyon environment.

[25:02] As the Wasatch Front Regional Council

[25:04] updates the RTP for the coming decades,

[25:06] I encourage careful consideration of

[25:09] both the public feedback received and

[25:11] the broader long-term implications of

[25:13] this project. Signed, sincerely, Mayor

[25:16] Jenny Wilson.

[25:18] >> Thank you, Mayor. Appreciate it. Okay,

[25:21] we have we have some council members

[25:24] that are new to the council who were not

[25:26] on the council in 2023 and are less

[25:29] probably informed about what we're

[25:31] talking about here because you weren't

[25:33] part of it before and it's not on our

[25:35] agenda to talk about so we haven't

[25:37] talked about it today. I'm gonna turn to

[25:39] our executive director, Andrew Gruber,

[25:41] to just um help round out the

[25:44] conversation to give additional context

[25:46] and also Carlos Brceris with you do if

[25:48] either of you have anything you'd like

[25:49] to share just to make sure everybody

[25:51] here on the council is is um all up to

[25:54] speed on the same page. That would be

[25:55] helpful.

[25:56] >> Sure, Madam Chair. Thank you very much.

[25:58] And let let me also echo, mayor, what

[26:01] you said, how much we appreciate the

[26:04] engagement not just of the council

[26:05] members, all the communities around the

[26:09] region and the public. Um, I think all

[26:12] of our processes work better when

[26:14] members of the public are actively

[26:16] engaged and they speak up and they

[26:17] express their views and they engage in

[26:19] the process. And so and I we and I have

[26:21] had great conversations with many

[26:24] organizations around the region on

[26:25] various issues including the Cottonwood

[26:27] Canyons and Rio Grand Plan and we really

[26:29] appreciate their uh engagement. We get

[26:32] comments from the public. We read and

[26:35] consider all of them carefully and we

[26:38] share those comments when they are when

[26:40] they are relevant to UD do or to UTA or

[26:42] to a city or to a county. We share those

[26:44] comments with those entities as well. So

[26:46] thank you. Um, with regard to the

[26:49] regional transportation plan and the

[26:51] Little Cottonwood Canyon environ

[26:53] environmental impact statement, um, I'm

[26:56] going to there's a lot to say about

[26:57] this, but I'm going to be mindful of the

[26:59] fact that, as you noted, it's not on the

[27:01] agenda, so I'm just going to be brief

[27:02] and we'd be happy to follow up with

[27:03] anybody who wants, but generally

[27:05] speaking, right, the RTP, the regional

[27:07] transportation plan, is the long range

[27:10] general plan for the region. And WFRC as

[27:14] a metropolitan planning organization has

[27:16] a significant amount of discretion

[27:19] in that plan in selecting the projects

[27:22] that get included, road, transit, trail

[27:24] projects that get included. Uh and that

[27:27] RTP process is done pursuant to federal

[27:29] law and regulation. Then there is also

[27:32] another uh federally established process

[27:35] under NEPA national environmental policy

[27:38] act uh which establishes the EIS

[27:41] environmental impact statement process

[27:43] which is a much more detailed intensive

[27:47] project or or corridor or project

[27:49] specific analysis. when there is an EIS

[27:53] that's done uh and most projects are not

[27:56] subject to an EIS but when there is an

[27:58] EIS that's done uh the discretion of

[28:02] WFRC is significantly limited that's the

[28:05] relationship between the broader

[28:06] planning process and the more detailed

[28:08] EIS process so we are required as an MO

[28:12] to include in the regional

[28:14] transportation plan the results of an

[28:16] environmental impact statement and then

[28:19] we do have a responsibility and we did

[28:21] this in 2023, which is with the results

[28:24] of the EIS included, we evaluate the

[28:26] entirety of the RTP to make sure that it

[28:29] satisfies regional air quality and

[28:31] fiscal requirements. And these processes

[28:34] are pursuant to federal regulations and

[28:37] legal guidance and decades of consistent

[28:40] practice. That's the nature of our

[28:42] processes. I will just note briefly that

[28:44] in 2023 when we adopted the regional

[28:47] transportation plan, this was noted

[28:49] already. We did include a a statement, a

[28:52] position if you will, that WFRC supports

[28:55] prioritizing, implementing, and

[28:57] evaluating phases one and two of the

[29:00] Little Cottonwood Canyon EIS before

[29:03] advancing uh to phase three. That

[29:05] continues to be the um established

[29:07] position uh of WFRC. And I'll note

[29:09] that's state law says that as well and

[29:11] it's the way the federal law works. Um

[29:15] the good news and this is where madam

[29:17] chair if it's okay I'll I'll give Carlos

[29:19] the opportunity to to comment. As you

[29:20] noted the good news for everybody is

[29:23] that there's so much support for phase

[29:25] one and there is a lot of progress

[29:27] happening uh on phase one. So Carlos can

[29:30] we put you on the spot to share a little

[29:31] bit about that please?

[29:34] >> Thank you Andrew. Thank you madam chair.

[29:36] Carlos Brceris, Utah Department of

[29:38] Transportation. Um, I I do want to maybe

[29:42] echo a comment that Mayor Mendenhal

[29:45] relayed from uh, Mayor Wilson. Um, back

[29:48] in 2023, Mayor Wilson was very clear in

[29:51] her opposition to the gondola, but very

[29:53] clear in her support trying to make

[29:55] phase one work. And I committed to the

[29:57] mayor to work together to make phase one

[30:00] a re.

[30:02] I committed then at that time to make,

[30:05] you know, to work together with her to

[30:06] make phase one a reality and to make it

[30:10] successful. And I think her comments of

[30:13] it's going to take all of us to choose

[30:15] to use the transit option once they're

[30:17] in place to actually make this

[30:19] successful. And so, um, Andrew had just

[30:22] asked, he gave me a little heads up. So,

[30:24] I have a cheat sheet here. Um, asked me

[30:26] to give a little update on what's going

[30:28] on with phase one. Uh we have completed

[30:30] the environmental document that was an

[30:32] environmental assessment for Big

[30:34] Cottonwood Canyon. We have we have uh

[30:37] selected a what we call a progressive

[30:39] design build contractor. So that's

[30:41] Granite Construction and Horox

[30:43] Engineering uh to do to build the Gravel

[30:46] Pit Mobility Center and we expect to

[30:49] have them under contract in July. Um so

[30:51] just a little over a month from now. Um

[30:54] we're evaluating different bus

[30:56] suppliers. So, it's important to have

[30:58] the right type of bus to be successful

[31:00] in the canyon. Our uh our snowplow

[31:03] operators and our maintenance station

[31:05] supervisors, it's like Snoopy's little

[31:07] doghouse where you put the little

[31:09] stickers of the planes they shot down.

[31:11] They have pictures of buses of how many

[31:14] buses they've had to push out of

[31:15] ditches. And some of them have quite a

[31:17] few pictures of buses they pushed out of

[31:19] ditches. And so, we're trying to make

[31:21] sure we get the right buses picked.

[31:23] We've entered into a contract with

[31:25] Washington State under their cooperative

[31:27] uses agreement. The legislature, thank

[31:29] you. Um passed a bill that allowed us

[31:31] now to be able to leverage off other

[31:33] procurement contracts. So Washington

[31:35] state has a contract with just about

[31:38] every bus provider um you can name. And

[31:41] so we're in the process now evaluating

[31:43] not only the manufacturers, but also the

[31:46] types of buses sizes and um the power

[31:49] honestly that's needed to be able to

[31:51] provide the mobility up there.

[31:53] um through uh the division of facilities

[31:56] and construction management. So that's a

[31:58] division in state government that does

[32:00] buildings. Um we've signed a contract

[32:03] with a architect and we're working on

[32:06] the design of the mobility hub. Um and

[32:09] we're going should be under that that

[32:11] contract should be underway right now.

[32:12] We're in rightaway negotiations with the

[32:15] um with the property owner. We have been

[32:18] for many years. Um they're actually

[32:20] moving forward now I think in a more

[32:22] positive way and we're doing site

[32:24] investigations as you know um the

[32:26] Wasatch uh fault runs along this area.

[32:29] So our geotech engineers are evaluating

[32:32] exactly where to put that. We're working

[32:34] in Big Cottonwood Canyon to locate the

[32:36] bus stations. So if you remember we're

[32:38] going to put bus stations on the road so

[32:40] they don't have to go into the resort

[32:42] parking lots. That's where the buses get

[32:44] delayed and we lose the kind of

[32:46] reliability and service levels that

[32:48] we're working for. So, we're working

[32:50] with the resorts and locating those

[32:52] buses. We're doing the same at Alta and

[32:55] Snowbird to uh to locate those bus

[32:57] stations as well. So, we're working to

[33:00] move as fast as we can. Uh buses,

[33:03] unfort, you know, we're thinking it's

[33:04] about 50 buses. The cost of buses is

[33:07] increasing [clears throat]

[33:08] and Jay knows this. Uh buses prices are

[33:11] going up incredibly fast right now and

[33:14] uh so we're going to you know we have a

[33:16] fixed budget of uh just a little over

[33:18] $350 million. So we're looking to buy as

[33:21] many buses as we can. We'd like to get

[33:23] about 50 of those. Um and then we're

[33:25] going to have to proceed with uh putting

[33:28] together how to operate and maintain

[33:30] those. But that's all underway. So it's

[33:32] moving fast. We expect two years to be

[33:35] able to have this service up and

[33:36] running.

[33:38] Thank you. I I I asked for them to

[33:41] prepare just a few comments because we

[33:43] have so many new council members and I

[33:45] thought I want to make sure everybody in

[33:46] the room knows what we're talking about.

[33:48] You know, we're all kind of on the same

[33:49] page. So, thank you again to each of you

[33:51] that came to speak. Thank you for all of

[33:52] that and we will definitely talk more

[33:56] about this, but probably not a lot more

[33:58] as a council until 2027. So yes,

[34:07] » for Carlos is there because one of the

[34:10] things mentioned was how much the costs

[34:12] increase and and all the unexpected

[34:15] things that have increased cost is how

[34:16] do we how are we handling it?

[34:18] >> Well, so if I understand the commenter's

[34:21] position is they believe we should redo

[34:23] the cost analysis that was done as part

[34:25] of the environmental impact statement to

[34:27] make choices between alternatives.

[34:29] that's really doesn't play a role in us

[34:32] moving forward in implementing phase one

[34:34] at all. In fact, I would argue that the

[34:36] cost differentials are probably going to

[34:38] weigh more in the direction they don't

[34:40] want it to with the cost of diesel and

[34:42] bus increasing costs as well. If you

[34:45] remember, the total cost of O andM plus

[34:47] capital was greater for the bus

[34:48] alternative than it was for the gondola

[34:50] because, you know, we're going to need

[34:52] probably about 75 bus CDL drivers. We're

[34:56] going to need diesel mechanics. it's

[34:57] going to take quite a bit more to

[34:58] operate phase one. And so that I I

[35:01] really do appreciate their encouragement

[35:04] to help identify how we operate and

[35:07] maintain this because the operating

[35:08] costs are truly the long-term operating

[35:10] costs for transit are truly the bigger

[35:12] hurdle than the capital.

[35:15] >> Good. Thank you. Okay. I just want to

[35:18] note a a couple of uh council members

[35:20] who have also joined us. I saw Mayor

[35:23] Walker. I don't know if he walked in. He

[35:26] was right there. Okay, he's coming. And

[35:28] uh we have uh Mayor Palmer, Mayor Tran,

[35:31] and Rob Jolly. And if anybody else has

[35:33] joined us and I didn't say your name, I

[35:35] did not see you.

[35:36] >> Senator Harper is also listening online.

[35:39] >> Great. Senator, we always welcome you

[35:40] and appreciate having you here. Oh, and

[35:42] Council Member Amy Winder Newton.

[35:43] [clears throat] Yeah.

[35:44] >> Has joined us online as well. Thank you

[35:45] each of you for being here. Okay, we're

[35:48] going to go back. Uh for those of you

[35:50] who weren't here for this part, we

[35:52] amended the agenda to put public comment

[35:53] first. And now we're going to go back to

[35:56] item two, the chair report. So last

[35:59] week, the first draft of the federal

[36:00] transportation reauthorization bill was

[36:03] released. And it's it's a significant

[36:05] milestone. You guys, thanks for being

[36:06] here. We really did try to save you from

[36:09] having to sit through all that.

[36:10] >> Well, there's so much other good stuff.

[36:11] You're leaving now.

[36:12] >> It is good stuff, but you know, it's up

[36:14] to you. [laughter]

[36:15] Yeah, it's good.

[36:18] Um we are excited to have this initial

[36:21] blush released. It is not um small, it's

[36:24] not short, it's not easy reading.

[36:26] There's a lot to it. And Miranda is the

[36:28] expert behind uh helping us understand

[36:30] all. So we're going to turn to Miranda

[36:32] Jones Cox to talk through um that give

[36:35] us a report of that initial release.

[36:38] >> Perfect. Thank you, mayor. Appreciate

[36:40] it. Uh, usually when I come to the

[36:42] council, I'm more or less sharing things

[36:44] that are happening up at our state

[36:45] capital with the legislative session,

[36:47] but today I get to share a little bit of

[36:48] what's happening back in Washington in

[36:50] Congress. Uh, with the surface

[36:53] transportation reauthorization,

[36:55] um, what is surface transportation

[36:58] reauthorization? It's a good question.

[37:00] As a reminder, um WFRC and a number of

[37:03] our other state uh transportation

[37:06] partners, UD do UTA, the other MPOS, um

[37:10] we receive our federal funding

[37:12] authorization and our program a programs

[37:15] authorization through this five-year

[37:18] authorizing bill um that sets our

[37:20] funding levels, sets our programs and

[37:22] priorities, and gives us the

[37:24] authorization to do the work that we do.

[37:26] Um and in Congress, uh this bill happens

[37:30] and is reauthorized every five years

[37:32] generally. Sometimes that isn't

[37:34] authorized on time. Uh in this case, we

[37:37] may not see another uh authorization on

[37:39] time. Um but the first draft, first bill, first version of the

[37:45] next reauthorization was released um a

[37:48] little over a week ago from the House

[37:50] Transportation and Infrastructure

[37:52] Committee. Um, some of you may be aware,

[37:55] uh, Utah has members of our

[37:58] congressional delegation on the House

[37:59] TNI Committee. Uh, Congressman Burgess

[38:02] Owens, Congressman Mike Kennedy, um,

[38:05] Senator Curtis also sits on a a similar

[38:09] Senate committee that oversees the same

[38:12] transportation title. Um, and so over

[38:16] the past year and a half, we've been

[38:17] working really closely as team Utah, as

[38:21] our transportation partners, and working

[38:23] closely with our congressional

[38:24] delegation to share with them what our

[38:27] priorities are leading into a

[38:29] reauthorization, which programs are

[38:31] important to us, what funding is

[38:33] important to us as Utah continues to

[38:36] grow. and we've been able to share those

[38:38] priorities with our delegation members

[38:40] and they have um done a really helpful

[38:43] and and successful job in working with

[38:46] the congressional committees to share

[38:48] those priorities and we've seen some of

[38:50] those play out in what's included in

[38:52] this initial proposal from the House TNI

[38:54] committee. I want to share just very

[38:56] quickly highlevel what's included in

[38:59] this bill. Um we're not going to get

[39:01] into too many details here but uh so you

[39:04] guys have some context. One is that the

[39:07] bill prioritizes federal funds coming

[39:10] through formula funding as in directly

[39:13] to the transportation organizations as

[39:16] opposed to uh primarily through

[39:18] discretionary grants. The infrastructure

[39:21] investment and jobs act which was the

[39:23] previous and current reauthorization uh

[39:25] authorization we're under focus more on

[39:28] u competitive discretionary grants that

[39:30] we had to to compete for. that is uh

[39:33] shifting some moving forward under this

[39:36] proposal. Uh overall funding and and

[39:40] structure of the bill is largely status

[39:42] quo. Uh it's not a significantly larger

[39:45] bill. Um and most of the programs are

[39:48] funded at relatively the same levels

[39:50] that we've seen through the IIGJA at

[39:53] least for formula funds. Um notably it

[39:56] does uh maintain funding for our core

[39:59] program. So, we're not seeing any sign

[40:01] large significant cuts. Um, the bill it

[40:05] does provide a modest increase for

[40:07] metropolitan planning funding. This is a

[40:09] core funding program for WFRC that

[40:12] allows us to do the work that we do. Um,

[40:14] some slight funding increase for surface

[40:17] transportation block grant program,

[40:19] which is funding for local projects

[40:22] within your communities. Uh, it

[40:24] continues the safe streets and roads for

[40:27] all grant program. This was a program

[40:29] authorized in the infrastructure

[40:31] investment and jobs act that provides

[40:32] safety uh funding for safety projects

[40:35] locally. Uh a very successful program

[40:38] and we're happy to see that one

[40:40] potentially continue to move forward. Uh

[40:43] it establishes a new bridge funding

[40:45] program and it extends eligibility for

[40:48] Utah to now qualify for a transportation

[40:52] assistance for uh international games.

[40:55] This would be a grant program uh that

[40:57] World Cup cities and Olympic cities

[40:59] would qualify for. Utah would now be

[41:02] included as an eligible entity for 2034

[41:06] Winter Olympics, which is exciting.

[41:08] Lastly, uh, Congressman Owens included

[41:11] what we believe is an important

[41:12] amendment in the bill, uh, which would

[41:15] allow fast growing areas like Utah, like

[41:18] specific areas in Utah that, um, may not

[41:22] currently be very competitive for, uh,

[41:24] federal transit funds to be more

[41:27] competitive based on the way some things

[41:28] are are structured. So again, another way that our delegation has been

[41:34] involved and um and was fighting for

[41:36] some some Utah priorities. So I guess

[41:39] just to kind of wrap things up, what

[41:41] does this look like moving forward? This

[41:44] is one initial step in a very long

[41:46] process. Um it's taken us a while to get

[41:48] here and it will take us a while longer

[41:50] to get to a final reauthorizing bill um

[41:52] and getting that passed. It may not

[41:54] happen on time. The bill uh expires in

[41:58] September, end of September of this

[42:00] year. Uh the Senate is far behind the

[42:02] House, so we may not we may see another

[42:06] extension uh 6 months a year even. Um

[42:10] all of that is is to be determined. Um

[42:12] but I guess the the

[42:14] where this leaves us is it gives us a

[42:16] really great baseline for negotiations

[42:18] moving forward. It allows the Utah

[42:20] transportation partners to work together

[42:22] to ensure that what priorities that were

[42:25] included in this bill continues to move

[42:27] forward with the Senate. Um and and that

[42:30] we also can continue to fight for things

[42:32] that maybe we didn't see in the bill uh

[42:34] yet. So, lots more to come on this uh as

[42:38] the year moves on. Um but it is a great

[42:40] first step and it was it was great to

[42:42] see the House already put some initial

[42:44] language out. So happy to answer any

[42:46] questions, but I'll turn things back

[42:47] over to you, mayor.

[42:49] >> Thank you. Does anybody have any

[42:51] questions for Miranda? It's a really

[42:53] good summary of the 105 or however many

[42:56] pages initial document that is, and so

[42:58] much work has gone into it. I do want to

[43:00] give a mention if I can. It's been about

[43:02] a year and a half ago, maybe a little

[43:04] more than that, that all of the

[43:06] stakeholders in Utah came together to

[43:08] come up with and really become granular

[43:11] on Utah's four top priorities for the

[43:14] reauthorization bill from all the

[43:17] stakeholders. This isn't any one group

[43:19] or elected body making up their own

[43:22] thing. Everyone worked together to come

[43:24] up with Utah's four top priorities. And

[43:28] when we create a package that's unified

[43:31] and nice and neat that we can give to

[43:33] our congressional delegation and say

[43:34] this is as a state what we want, what we

[43:36] need, uh they've worked really hard to

[43:38] help get us there and um I can tell you

[43:42] personally how grateful I am for the

[43:44] efforts that have been made to uh

[43:46] include language in an amendment that we

[43:49] have a long way to go, but Congressman

[43:52] Owens has worked to build bipartisan

[43:54] coalitions uh from states across the

[43:57] West because we're not the only ones

[43:59] growing fast that aren't competitive for

[44:02] new transit uh grants because of the

[44:05] formula that currently exists. And uh in

[44:08] my perfect world, we would be able to

[44:10] amend that formula to allow for fast

[44:12] growing areas that don't already have a

[44:14] massive writership because it costs so

[44:16] much less to put it in before all the

[44:17] writers are there and all the writers

[44:19] are coming. So, it's it's been a team

[44:22] effort by a lot of folks across the

[44:24] state for quite some time. And

[44:27] personally, with this first blush draft

[44:29] and where things are at, I could not be

[44:31] happier. I think we are in a good place

[44:33] and and team Utah has worked really

[44:35] hard. So, we'll just keep working hard

[44:37] and keep supporting our delegation and

[44:39] anything they can do because uh it looks

[44:41] good right now. It looks good. So, as

[44:43] people start to pick at it and take it

[44:45] apart and here and there, we'll just

[44:47] keep working to keep Utah's four

[44:48] priorities in there. And thank you to

[44:50] everyone who's been key in that. It's

[44:52] been a heavy lift and like you said,

[44:54] we're far from over. But right now, I

[44:58] was really happy with where things are

[44:59] so far. They came out really positive

[45:01] for Utah in this first draft. Right. And

[45:03] I've got all the people shaking their

[45:04] heads going, "That is true." Yes, we

[45:06] agree. We agree. And that's good news.

[45:08] So, any other questions for Miranda? Any

[45:11] Do you have anything you'd like to say?

[45:12] >> I have lots of things.

[45:13] >> Okay.

[45:15] Please. Thanks, Miranda.

[45:18] >> Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank I really

[45:19] appreciate the opportunity just to say

[45:20] something really quickly. Um, I think as

[45:23] we look at this from the funding

[45:24] perspective, um, just for context, I'm currently apta's legislative chair,

[45:29] the American Public Transportation

[45:30] Association. And one of the things about

[45:33] this that I think is really key is the

[45:35] funding um, unanimously throughout all

[45:38] transit agencies across the country was

[45:41] we need to have the funding. The

[45:42] strength of the funding and ongoing

[45:44] infrastructure is one of the key

[45:45] developments that needs to move forward.

[45:48] And for transit agencies, that's

[45:50] especially valuable. Um they've actually

[45:53] included the um acquisition of real

[45:55] property. They've um streamlining again

[45:58] that Miranda already mentioned. All of

[46:00] these things have incredible value and

[46:02] as we continue to move forward, keeping

[46:04] those funding levels keep um intact is

[46:07] probably one of the best values that

[46:09] will also value Utah as well. So, I just

[46:12] wanted to add that. Thank you so much.

[46:14] >> Thank you.

[46:16] Okay. Um, I do want to make note that we

[46:19] have uh Salt Lake County Council member

[46:21] Lori Stringham also with us online. And

[46:23] I don't know if anybody else has joined

[46:25] us and if I've missed them, but council

[46:27] member, we appreciate you being here and

[46:29] thanks to everyone who's here. I do want

[46:31] to take a note really quick uh with this

[46:33] chair report and I wish I had a whole

[46:34] lot more time to do this because really

[46:36] qui quick seems

[46:38] um like not enough. Um I just want to

[46:41] make a note of the governance change

[46:43] taking effect on July 1st. And my um

[46:46] heart is here to say thank you to the

[46:48] three trustees who are here with us

[46:50] right now. This is our last Wasatch

[46:52] Front Regional Council meeting with the

[46:53] three of you serving as trustees and we

[46:55] are grateful for the work that you've

[46:57] done and that's why I said I I just wish

[47:01] I had more time. So we have Carlton

[47:03] Christensen and Beth Hullbrook and Jeff

[47:05] Acerson here and just just grateful for

[47:08] the work that you've all done. uh with

[47:10] UTA, with all of our communities, with

[47:12] our partners, with the organization and the work that you've done to help

[47:16] elevate and expand um transit in your

[47:20] governance role. We just we do

[47:22] appreciate it. Plus, just your good

[47:23] relationship roles that you've developed

[47:25] with everybody. I think that goes a

[47:26] really really long way and you've all

[47:28] been very good at that. So, you know, we

[47:31] don't usually clap here, but I'm going

[47:33] to ask everyone if you would please join

[47:34] me in thanking these three

[47:43] All three of these great public servants

[47:45] have done a lot. They've all been

[47:46] elected officials. They've all served in

[47:48] leadership roles in different areas

[47:50] around the state in different ways. And they each have a pretty lengthy

[47:55] history of public service in a variety

[47:57] of roles. Thank you to each of you.

[47:58] We're excited to keep working with you

[47:59] and whatever whatever you decide to do

[48:01] next, wherever that is, we're grateful

[48:03] for you and look forward to continuing

[48:05] to work with you and we hope you keep

[48:07] working with us in some way, shape or

[48:08] form, whatever you choose to do, because

[48:12] um you've brought an immense value to

[48:14] the state in this role. So, thank you to

[48:16] each of you. Uh with that, um there are

[48:20] a couple of announcements that have come

[48:22] out. The COG announcements have come out

[48:24] on the new uh board structure. Andrew,

[48:26] would you take a second to just share

[48:27] those?

[48:28] >> I will. Um, but I can't not briefly also

[48:32] express my um appreciation for my

[48:36] friends, my colleagues. um not only

[48:39] friends and colleagues, I'll also note

[48:40] to you that Carlton was a um and well

[48:43] and Beth and Jeff, all of them are

[48:44] former elected officials, but Carlton

[48:46] was a member of the um regional council

[48:50] in his capacity as a Salt Lake City

[48:52] Council person um in 2010 and he was on

[48:55] the hiring committee for the WFRC

[48:58] executive director. So, uh Carlton has a

[49:01] special place in my heart.

[49:03] I

[49:04] >> I apologize. I'm sorry, you guys.

[49:08] But uh not to belabor it, thank you so

[49:10] much guys. Um yes, so everybody knows

[49:13] that the new governance structure for

[49:16] the UTA commission um will be seven

[49:19] members um and an executive director,

[49:22] Jay Fox. Um and at this point, three of

[49:27] the um uh nominations, the appointments

[49:31] have been made. They came from the COGS

[49:33] to the governor. The governor has

[49:35] submitted those names uh for

[49:37] confirmation by the Senate. Um these are

[49:40] names you'll recognize. You many of you

[49:42] may have heard this already, but former

[49:44] Ogden City Mayor and former WFRC chair

[49:48] Mike Caldwell um was nominated from the

[49:51] north, appointed from the north, subject

[49:53] to Senate confirmation. Um former Mil

[49:56] Creek City Mayor and former WFRC council

[49:59] chair Jeff Silva Streiny from Salt Lake

[50:02] County. and then former WFRC and UD do

[50:05] employee uh Mural Sochimill uh was

[50:08] appointed from Utah County and then the

[50:11] four remaining appointments from the uh

[50:15] House and the Senate um are still

[50:17] pending. So that's a little update and

[50:20] we look forward to continuing to work

[50:21] collaboratively with the new commission

[50:23] and of course with Jay and his great

[50:24] team going forward.

[50:26] >> Y thank you. Thank you. Okay, item four.

[50:30] We're going to try to make up a little

[50:32] bit of time from our public comment

[50:33] period. Just just going to keep going.

[50:36] Um we have a report on our regional

[50:39] growth committee last week. We're going

[50:40] to turn to the chair, Mayor Tammy Tran

[50:42] for that.

[50:42] >> Okay. Thank you everyone. We had a great

[50:45] meeting last week. We had a discussion

[50:46] about water use, how it relates to urban

[50:48] growth and development patterns, and

[50:50] shared responsive responses from all of

[50:52] us to consider that fit with WFRC's

[50:55] mission. The conversation got a wide

[50:57] variety of ideas on the table, ranging

[50:59] from the impacts that development

[51:00] patterns have on per capita water

[51:03] consumption to sharing sprinkler time of

[51:05] the day enforcement practices to

[51:08] communicate to communicating with the

[51:10] public about the relative efficiency of

[51:11] watering turf grass when it is for

[51:14] shared community use such as parks and

[51:15] battlefields or ballfields. Ballfields

[51:19] not battlefields. RGC will be continuing

[51:22] the conversation and today I have one

[51:25] item to bring to the council. Item 4A is

[51:27] an action stationary plan certification.

[51:30] In the past year, tremendous progress

[51:32] has been made by communities in

[51:34] developing station area plans. There are

[51:36] now 108,700

[51:39] new homes planned, which is fantastic,

[51:42] in station areas along the Wasatch

[51:44] Front. Last week, the regional growth

[51:46] committee reviewed a resolution of

[51:48] impractability for Midville City portion

[51:51] of the historic Sandy Track Station

[51:53] area. RGC is making a recommendation to

[51:56] the council for certification. We are

[51:58] joined here today by Midville Mayor

[52:00] Dustin Ghetto and Byron Head, WFRC,

[52:04] community planner, will introduce this

[52:05] item. Thank you, Byron.

[52:08] >> Thank you, mayor, and hello, council.

[52:10] Um, as mentioned, we have one uh item on

[52:13] the agenda today. This is the midvil

[52:15] portion of the historic trendy historic

[52:18] sandy tracks station. Um you're all

[52:21] likely familiar at this point, but

[52:23] stationary planning is a requirement um

[52:25] from a few years ago in the legislature

[52:27] that cities just take a hard good hard

[52:29] look at the land use and uh first and

[52:32] last mile connections around their

[52:33] transit stations as these are uh

[52:35] significant public investments. Um and

[52:38] we have been making a lot of progress in

[52:40] this area. uh combined with the MAG area

[52:43] in Utah County, we have 127 station

[52:45] areas. Um and if we are able to certify

[52:49] this station area before us today, we

[52:51] will tick into the triple digits.

[52:52] Hooray. 100. Um so uh it's been a lot of

[52:57] good work going on. As Mayor Tran

[52:59] mentioned, we have over 108,000

[53:01] uh homes that have have been planned for

[53:03] in these these plans that we've been

[53:05] working on these last few years. And uh

[53:07] another way in which this planning work

[53:09] has has borne some fruit is we found out

[53:11] last month um that WFRC as an

[53:14] organization has been awarded a RIA

[53:16] grant, a regional infrastructure

[53:17] accelerator grant from the federal

[53:19] government, the build uh build America

[53:21] bureau. This project will look more in

[53:24] detail and finer grained at certain

[53:26] development projects within certain

[53:28] station areas to identify projects that

[53:31] are ready to go, but for certain

[53:33] financial gaps. And we'll work with them

[53:35] on strategies to make those feasible and

[53:37] get some buildings built and some, you

[53:40] know, parking structures and grocery

[53:42] stores and apartments and homes and all

[53:44] that kind of stuff. So, you'll be

[53:46] hearing more about that as we go. That

[53:48] is very new. We haven't even finalized

[53:49] our agreement yet, but we just wanted to

[53:50] share the good news.

[53:53] Uh to our item today, uh Midvail portion

[53:56] of the historic Sandy Tracks station

[53:58] area. This, as the name implies, most of

[54:00] the station area lies within Sandy. It

[54:02] just kind of clips into Midvail for I

[54:04] think it's less than five acres total.

[54:06] Um a couple of existing businesses and

[54:08] homes. So, this was seen as

[54:11] impracticable by the city. Uh Mayor

[54:13] Ghetto, u you have any thing you'd like

[54:16] to add here?

[54:17] Um just yeah real quick um this is our

[54:22] as as you know I often say to this group

[54:24] uh Midvail is a city of six square

[54:26] miles. We have three of our own station

[54:28] area plans and now we've worked with

[54:30] three different cities on uh their

[54:33] station area plans. So uh 3 plus 3

[54:35] equals six. So every square mile of

[54:38] Midvail at least is represented by a

[54:40] station area plan or projects we've

[54:42] helped other cities with. But we

[54:44] certainly support Sandy and their

[54:46] efforts here. Um I do like the sound of

[54:49] the resolution of impracticability.

[54:51] Sounds pretty cool. Um but yeah, we we

[54:54] certainly um we partner with all of our

[54:57] surrounding city neighbors and and we're

[54:59] looking forward to this.

[55:02] >> Yeah. Yes. As as Mayor Gle mentioned,

[55:04] this will be Midvail's last uh remaining

[55:06] stationary a piece to to fill all of

[55:09] their requirements. So it's a great

[55:10] milestone for them. Um, all of the

[55:13] information that you need is in your

[55:14] packets. Um, we have collaborated with

[55:17] UTA staff and as was mentioned, brought

[55:19] this to RGC last week and they made a

[55:21] positive recommendation to the council.

[55:22] So, we have a suggested motion on the screen, but I'll turn it back to

[55:27] Mayor Trann or Mayor Ramsey.

[55:28] >> I'll ask I'll call for the motion. Thank

[55:30] you so much. Mayor, would you like to

[55:31] make the motion?

[55:32] >> I would like to make that motion. Uh, so

[55:34] moved

[55:36] >> to I'm going to have you go ahead and

[55:37] res and say it.

[55:39] >> Sure.

[55:40] I move to certify the Midvil Historic

[55:43] Sandy Tracks resolution of

[55:44] impracticability.

[55:46] >> Thank you so much. Is there a second?

[55:50] by Commissioner Harvey. Any

[55:52] discussion?

[55:54] Okay, seeing none, all in favor, please

[55:56] say I.

[55:57] >> I.

[55:59] >> Any opposed?

[56:02] Congratulations on your

[56:03] impracticability. That's good stuff. And

[56:05] it's another stationary plan. So, we hit

[56:08] 100 and that is really good news.

[56:10] >> We do have a border with Cottonwood

[56:12] Heights that has not uh been uh subject

[56:15] to this. So, we do have one more

[56:17] possibility perhaps.

[56:19] >> Awesome. Well, we'll look forward to it.

[56:21] Back to you, Mayor. Is there anything

[56:23] else from the regional growth committee?

[56:25] >> Okay. Thank you so much.

[56:30] And Byron, thank you to you. I can't see

[56:32] you. Yeah. Thank you. Okay. Hey, item

[56:34] five. We've got our transportation

[56:36] coordinating committee. Mayor Mark

[56:38] Shepard is joining us online. We'll turn

[56:40] to him.

[56:44] » I'm going to pitch hit for Mayor Mark

[56:46] Shepard who's reached out to me and

[56:48] okay,

[56:48] >> as you can hear, he's got a severe case

[56:51] of laryngitis, which has been a great

[56:53] blessing for his city. [laughter]

[57:00] » We have uh we have three items today. Uh

[57:03] the first is an opportunity to ask

[57:05] questions about project modifications

[57:07] approved by the transcom in April. The

[57:10] second is an opportunity to take action

[57:11] on the most recent requested board

[57:14] modifications. And third, the council

[57:16] will have the opportunity to approve 65

[57:18] million in funding today that

[57:21] communities all along the Wasatch front

[57:23] have applied for. And we'll hear a bit

[57:25] about the process leading up to this

[57:27] action. I'll turn the time over to the

[57:29] great Ben Wridge. Ben, have at it.

[57:33] >> Thank you, Commissioner. [clears throat]

[57:37] So, as the commissioner alluded to, we

[57:39] do have a great opportunity today as we

[57:42] refer to the transportation improvement

[57:44] program. And the first couple items we

[57:47] have pertains to our current tip, which

[57:50] is the 2026

[57:52] 2031 transportation improvement program.

[57:57] The agenda items as identified by the

[58:00] commission is uh to report on the

[58:02] approved board modification by transcom

[58:04] on the 30th of April, approve the new

[58:07] board modification that'll be presented

[58:09] before you and then to review the new

[58:11] projects to be included in the draft

[58:14] programs. As a reminder, the

[58:16] transportation improvement program is a

[58:18] six-year

[58:20] program,

[58:22] not a plan, but a program of highway

[58:24] transit and active transportation

[58:26] projects. That means there's money

[58:28] associated with these projects. It

[58:31] implements the long range plans and

[58:33] meets the short range needs. And because

[58:36] of the dynamics of the projects, it

[58:38] requires periodic or almost every month

[58:41] modifications to projects in a

[58:44] transportation improvement program.

[58:47] So in your meeting materials is a copy

[58:49] of the resolution and a table that

[58:51] identifies the actions that TransCom

[58:54] took back on April 30th. This was a

[58:57] board modification number six. It

[58:59] identified a project up in Willard on

[59:02] 750 North. And this is an information

[59:04] item. Are there any questions on this

[59:06] project?

[59:11] » Questions for Ben?

[59:14] >> Let's move on then to the uh item 5B

[59:17] action on those board modifications on

[59:20] that. Ben, perfect. Thank you,

[59:22] Commissioner. So before you today in

[59:24] your meeting materials, there's also a

[59:26] table along with the resolution that

[59:28] identifies three projects that we have

[59:31] before you for review and approval.

[59:34] We'll go through each of those projects.

[59:36] The first one here is located in Tilla.

[59:39] It's in the unincorporated part of

[59:40] Twilla. It's on Drew Bay Road. Drew Bay

[59:43] Road is a a critical facility. Uh it

[59:47] connects uh Twilla City with Lakeside.

[59:51] It's a 9mm facility and this road has

[59:53] deteriorated

[59:55] almost beyond use. It's a it's a well

[59:57] worn out road. However, the portion that

[1:00:00] we're going to look at right here is on

[1:00:03] the south end. It goes um well, we'll

[1:00:07] get right into it on this one here. So,

[1:00:09] on the south end is Smelter Road and it

[1:00:12] goes three miles to the north to the

[1:00:14] railroad tracks. Now, this project will

[1:00:16] widen the lanes and the shoulders.

[1:00:19] It'll make improvements for pedestrians,

[1:00:23] including improvements for safety. It'll

[1:00:26] also reconstruct the road base, and

[1:00:29] it'll reconstruct the asphalt on this

[1:00:31] particular facility.

[1:00:33] Now, this project is a project that

[1:00:36] actually went through the community

[1:00:38] project funding, which are projects that

[1:00:41] are selected by Congress through an

[1:00:43] application process. We used to call

[1:00:45] these earmarks, but this project

[1:00:48] received 5.2 million in CPF funds and

[1:00:52] has a local match of a little more than

[1:00:54] a million dollars, giving us a total

[1:00:56] project cost of $6.24 million.

[1:01:01] The next project that we have to look at

[1:01:03] is I just want to note that Mayor

[1:01:05] Manzion is is online and she commented

[1:01:07] about the connection by this project

[1:01:09] from Tela City and Lakepoint. That's a

[1:01:11] favorable comment. So, keep going.

[1:01:13] Thanks.

[1:01:13] >> Oh, wonder. Thank you, Andrew. So, the

[1:01:16] next project then is a project in Salt

[1:01:18] Lake City, and this is a joint request

[1:01:20] from UTA in Salt Lake City. This is on

[1:01:23] the 200 South Transit Lane enhancement

[1:01:26] and [clears throat] capacity

[1:01:27] optimization.

[1:01:28] This goes from 600 West up to University

[1:01:31] Street, which is the street that ends

[1:01:33] there, right below the presidential

[1:01:35] circle. This project has a couple of

[1:01:38] items on it that that are important to

[1:01:40] this particular funding. It'll replace

[1:01:43] the intersection or the the signals at

[1:01:47] 13 and can install signals there at 9,

[1:01:53] but it'll also improve the signage

[1:01:57] um making the signage more visible as

[1:01:59] well as the lane markings on this

[1:02:01] facility. This project was also a

[1:02:04] project that went through and was

[1:02:06] recommended or approved by Congress on

[1:02:09] the community project funding program.

[1:02:12] This project received $2 million in a

[1:02:15] CPF funds with a $500,000 match. This

[1:02:19] project total cost is $2.5 million.

[1:02:24] The last project that we have to look at

[1:02:27] is the state funded programs. Now, every

[1:02:30] year on the state funding levels for the

[1:02:32] state funed programs are amended into

[1:02:34] the existing tip during the month of

[1:02:37] May. This um is to prepare for the new

[1:02:41] fiscal year which begins on July 1st.

[1:02:45] While I explain more of this board

[1:02:46] modification, I'm going to let the

[1:02:48] presentation slide through some pictures

[1:02:51] that represent some of the items covered

[1:02:53] in these programs.

[1:02:56] So these programs include funding levels

[1:02:58] for system preservation programs,

[1:03:01] operation and safety programs, region

[1:03:04] con region contingency funds and other

[1:03:07] programs and region concept development.

[1:03:10] Now the modification approves the

[1:03:13] program funding levels but each program

[1:03:15] is treated individually. The table

[1:03:18] colors identify there with the gray out

[1:03:21] is the previous year the 2026.

[1:03:25] The blue which is a real life blue was

[1:03:28] previously approved. The orange cells

[1:03:31] are those that are being proposed and

[1:03:33] the ones that are grayed out. Those are

[1:03:36] projected programming but this is to a

[1:03:40] proof that this board modification can

[1:03:43] go into the tip for the programs. The

[1:03:45] total program for the year 2027

[1:03:48] is 613,00,000.

[1:03:53] That's the three board modifications

[1:03:55] before you today.

[1:03:58] Great. Are there any questions? Are

[1:04:00] there any questions for you uh council

[1:04:03] members with regards to Ben's

[1:04:05] presentation?

[1:04:09] » Lorine,

[1:04:10] >> just a curious question. Um, in Tilla,

[1:04:13] is that a county road?

[1:04:16] >> Probably.

[1:04:17] >> I'm not sure who owns the road.

[1:04:19] >> Yeah. Anyway,

[1:04:20] >> it is.

[1:04:22] >> Okay,

[1:04:22] >> there you go.

[1:04:23] >> Thank you.

[1:04:26] » There's no more questions. Madam Chair,

[1:04:28] I'll make a motion that we adopt the

[1:04:30] resolution to modify the 2026 to 2031

[1:04:33] transportation improvement program as

[1:04:35] presented.

[1:04:36] >> Thank you, Commissioner. We have a

[1:04:37] motion on the table. Is there a second?

[1:04:39] Mayor Palmer with the second. Any

[1:04:41] discussion to this motion?

[1:04:44] Okay. All in favor, please say I.

[1:04:46] >> I.

[1:04:48] >> Any opposed?

[1:04:51] >> That passes. Thank you.

[1:04:53] >> Madam Chair, if I may,

[1:04:54] >> I may, Mr. Commissioner, can I just make

[1:04:55] one comment, please?

[1:04:56] >> Uh, on that last item, um, as Ben went

[1:05:00] through briefly, there was a list of

[1:05:02] 600ome million dollars of approved

[1:05:04] funding that is for programs that run

[1:05:07] through the transportation commission.

[1:05:09] Um, if you want more detail on that, uh,

[1:05:13] you can go back and watch the video of

[1:05:16] the UD do Transportation Commission

[1:05:18] programming workshop where they go in

[1:05:20] significant detail through all of those

[1:05:22] programs. And it's only what, Carlos,

[1:05:26] four, five hours of uh, of uh, viewing.

[1:05:29] Or you can do what I did, which is watch

[1:05:31] it on one and a half speed, and that

[1:05:33] shortens the time up a little bit. But

[1:05:34] if you're a real transportation nerd,

[1:05:36] you're going to want to go watch all of

[1:05:38] that stuff as well.

[1:05:44] » Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I

[1:05:45] appreciate Andrew saying that and I

[1:05:46] think it's important for the for the

[1:05:48] board to understand that that represents

[1:05:51] projects statewide, not just within

[1:05:54] front. So, it felt a little weird to me

[1:05:57] to have the council approving projects

[1:05:58] that other NPOs are going to be

[1:06:00] approving. That's really their authority

[1:06:01] to do, not yours. So those are program

[1:06:04] levels, project levels information will

[1:06:07] be coming later. So just it felt a

[1:06:09] little awkward.

[1:06:10] >> Well, I appreciate that, but I hope that

[1:06:11] it expresses the support that this body

[1:06:14] from the large portion of the wasat

[1:06:15] front regional coun you was front region

[1:06:18] um the support that we have for our

[1:06:20] colleagues across the state of Utah and

[1:06:21] our shared transportation priorities.

[1:06:23] >> Thank you. And Carl, I thank you. I also

[1:06:26] appreciate that. And so in our official

[1:06:29] documentation, we recognize that the

[1:06:32] actions taken by the council relate to

[1:06:33] the projects in our area and for

[1:06:36] theformational purposes, we show the

[1:06:38] entirety of the programs. But thank you

[1:06:39] for that clarification.

[1:06:43] » Thank you, Car.

[1:06:44] >> Thank you very much. Watching one and a

[1:06:46] half speech was not very difficult. All

[1:06:48] [laughter] right, let's for most of you

[1:06:51] that caught that. Uh action number 5C uh action to approve the projects for

[1:07:00] the surface transportation program, the

[1:07:03] congestion mitigation and air quality

[1:07:04] program and the transportation

[1:07:06] alternatives program and the carbon

[1:07:07] reduction program for the 2027 through

[1:07:10] 2032 tip. Ben,

[1:07:13] >> thank you commissioner. In preference to

[1:07:15] that, let me tell you a little story.

[1:07:18] One morning after a large storm, a man

[1:07:20] was walking along the beach when he

[1:07:21] noticed a boy picking up starfish and

[1:07:24] throwing them into the ocean.

[1:07:26] Approaching the boy, he asked, "Excuse

[1:07:27] me, but what are you doing?" The boy

[1:07:29] replied, "Throwing starfish back into

[1:07:32] the ocean. The sun is rising, the tide

[1:07:34] is going out. If I don't throw them

[1:07:37] back, they'll die." The man laughed to

[1:07:39] himself and said, "But there is too many

[1:07:41] starfish on this beach. You can't

[1:07:44] possibly make a difference." After

[1:07:47] listening politely, the boy bent down,

[1:07:49] picked up another starfish, and threw it

[1:07:51] into the ocean. Then turning to the man,

[1:07:53] he said, "I made a difference to that

[1:07:55] one." I imagine that there are times

[1:07:58] when we feel overwhelmed with the number

[1:08:00] of needs and the cost of the projects.

[1:08:02] We may think there's no way we can ever

[1:08:05] make a difference, but each year we have

[1:08:07] the opportunity to program funding for

[1:08:10] some of the much needed projects. And

[1:08:12] although our was front can be covered

[1:08:15] with project needs, we can make a

[1:08:17] difference to that one every year with

[1:08:20] the tip process. So if we were to look

[1:08:23] over the existing tip, the 2026 2031

[1:08:27] TIP, we currently have 367

[1:08:31] projects that were recommended and

[1:08:34] approved by the regional council. That

[1:08:37] amount of projects has a programmed

[1:08:41] amount of 678

[1:08:44] plus million dollars that the Wasatch

[1:08:47] Front Regional Council program.

[1:08:50] Today we have the opportunity to look at

[1:08:54] 39 new projects and those 39 new

[1:08:57] projects will bring an additional $65.6

[1:09:01] million to the TIP. So, it's kind of a

[1:09:04] big deal and it's pretty exciting. but

[1:09:06] you do a significant role along the

[1:09:08] Wasatch front as you identify the

[1:09:11] projects that move forward. So on agenda

[1:09:15] item 5C, we will talk about the projects

[1:09:18] for the surface transportation program

[1:09:20] or STP, the congestion mitigation air

[1:09:23] quality program or the SEMAC

[1:09:26] transportation alternative program, the

[1:09:28] TAP, and the carbon reduction, the CRP

[1:09:31] funds. Ben, just tying these things

[1:09:33] together, these programs that Ben is

[1:09:36] noting, these are the programs that are

[1:09:39] that WFRC in our area, we have the

[1:09:42] opportunity to program funds to projects

[1:09:45] in your communities, as Ben noted. And

[1:09:47] as Miranda was talking about earlier,

[1:09:49] these are programs that are authorized

[1:09:52] by the federal surface [snorts]

[1:09:54] transportation authorization

[1:09:56] legislation. So that bill going forward,

[1:09:59] getting the programs passed leads to us

[1:10:02] being able to allocate funds into your

[1:10:05] communities uh to help you with your

[1:10:08] transportation needs in partnership with

[1:10:10] UD do and with UTA. And so that's how

[1:10:12] these elements tie together. Thanks,

[1:10:14] Ben.

[1:10:15] >> And just quickly, there was a little

[1:10:16] change, there was a change federally on

[1:10:19] that, Andrew, that you texted all of us

[1:10:21] with the drip with regards to uh some of

[1:10:24] the federal with air quality. Are you do

[1:10:27] you remember

[1:10:28] >> there are yeah there are a there are a

[1:10:30] variety of modifications that are

[1:10:32] proposed

[1:10:34] in the draft in the bill that came from

[1:10:36] the House Transportation and

[1:10:38] Infrastructure Committee. Tweaks to some

[1:10:40] programs, adjustments to some funding

[1:10:42] levels. Uh those things have not taken

[1:10:45] effect yet. So what Ben is presenting

[1:10:47] right now is operating under the current

[1:10:50] structure as we go forward. Also, what

[1:10:54] you're probably you what you also might

[1:10:56] be referring to is the determination the

[1:10:59] preliminary determination from the

[1:11:01] Environmental Protection Agency uh that

[1:11:04] will allow Utah to avoid sanctions for

[1:11:09] failure to conform to federal ozone

[1:11:12] standards by recognizing that we don't

[1:11:15] have control over internationally

[1:11:18] sourced emissions.

[1:11:19] >> That's it.

[1:11:20] >> Okay.

[1:11:21] >> And you did an awesome job. I wanted

[1:11:23] everybody on on this executive committee

[1:11:24] to make sure they heard that like we

[1:11:26] did. Thank you, Ben. Go ahead.

[1:11:28] >> Thank you. So, to maybe remind you where

[1:11:32] we were. So, last August, we received

[1:11:34] direction from this body to solicit for

[1:11:36] letters of intent. Those letters of

[1:11:39] intent requests went out in September.

[1:11:41] They were due back in October. Then we

[1:11:43] did a real high level evaluation of

[1:11:45] eligibility projects, identified the

[1:11:48] projects that were good for our programs

[1:11:50] or where those projects would have the

[1:11:52] most competitive opportunity. We did

[1:11:55] then receive those concept reports by

[1:11:58] the middle part of December and began at

[1:12:00] that time for project evaluations that

[1:12:02] went all the way through and concluded

[1:12:04] at that last part of March. When we took

[1:12:07] all that information to our technical

[1:12:10] bodies and they made recommendations of

[1:12:12] other projects that we took to transcom

[1:12:15] in April and Transcom reviewed those,

[1:12:17] approved those and recommends them to

[1:12:20] you. And so that's where we are today in

[1:12:22] May. Then we'll prepare that information

[1:12:25] from your direction for a draft tip and

[1:12:28] then go out with uh for public review

[1:12:31] and comment during the month of July.

[1:12:33] Then we'll be back. So in the Ogden

[1:12:36] area, what did we see? Well, we had 24

[1:12:39] concept reports that were submitted um

[1:12:41] of unique projects. There were 28 total

[1:12:44] projects being some of those were being

[1:12:47] considered in multiple programs, but

[1:12:49] there was there were 17 that were

[1:12:53] requesting STP funds, six for CMAC, two

[1:12:57] for TAP, three for CRP. You could see

[1:13:00] the requested amounts there like 69 plus

[1:13:03] million in the STP funds where we had an

[1:13:06] available amount of 17.5. You can see

[1:13:09] how each of those programs are. There's

[1:13:12] a total availability of federal funds in

[1:13:14] the Ogden Lon area of 25.5 million.

[1:13:17] There's a requested amount of 111

[1:13:21] million in the Salt Lake area. 5656

[1:13:26] unique projects requesting more than 235

[1:13:29] million available was 39 plus million.

[1:13:33] You can see there were 28 STP, 16 CC, 19

[1:13:37] TAP, 14 CRP. Lot of projects requesting

[1:13:41] the funds, a lot of needs along the

[1:13:43] area. Well, we prepared the evaluations

[1:13:47] went through and there was a whole

[1:13:49] myriad of information that we collected

[1:13:51] through the concept reports. We

[1:13:53] established the data. In that data, we

[1:13:55] were able to provide the sheets that are

[1:13:58] in your materials for the meeting. We

[1:14:00] have on the CMAC program, those that are

[1:14:03] highlighted in yellow are the ones that

[1:14:05] we'll be talking about. Those are the

[1:14:06] ones that were being recommended in the

[1:14:08] CRP program. Also, the ones that are in

[1:14:12] the yellow that are being recommended.

[1:14:13] We have that also for the TAP program

[1:14:17] and then also for the STP program. So

[1:14:20] those projects there then were

[1:14:23] identified as the priorities after going

[1:14:25] through all of the data other uh

[1:14:28] relevant professional considerations and

[1:14:30] the information necessary to identify

[1:14:33] the most effective project for the time.

[1:14:36] So

[1:14:38] out of all of that work then we come

[1:14:40] with the recommendation from transcom

[1:14:43] seven projects in the agna lane area

[1:14:45] totaling 17.8 8 plus million in the Salt

[1:14:49] Lake area, 11 projects totaling 24.9

[1:14:52] plus million. So if we were going to

[1:14:55] look in your materials, here's the list

[1:14:57] of the projects for this the in the

[1:15:00] Ogden Leighton area.

[1:15:02] Here's the list of the 11 projects in

[1:15:05] the Salt Lake area.

[1:15:09] So maybe to highlight one of the STP

[1:15:12] projects. This is a project up in Davis

[1:15:14] County. This was a request from Clinton

[1:15:16] City. This is on 2300 North. This phase

[1:15:20] two. This is to reconstruct with minor

[1:15:22] widening to a narrow two-lane facility.

[1:15:26] This will construct curb gutter and

[1:15:28] sidewalk as well as make a uniform

[1:15:30] crosssection. Estimated project cost was

[1:15:32] $8 million. The funds being requested

[1:15:35] for this project was $2.5 million and

[1:15:39] the recommended amount for this project

[1:15:41] was $2.5 million.

[1:15:44] Going into the CMAC program, there were

[1:15:46] three projects recommended for the Ogden

[1:15:48] Lake area for $5 million. Six projects

[1:15:52] in the Salt Lake area for $9.6 plus

[1:15:54] million. The list of those projects are

[1:15:57] right here. The three in the Ogden

[1:15:59] Leighton area on top, the six in the

[1:16:01] Salt Lake area on the bottom.

[1:16:05] An example of a CMAC project that was

[1:16:07] recommended. This was one located in

[1:16:09] Sandy. This is on 90 90th South. close

[1:16:13] to the amphitheater. You can see that

[1:16:16] circle right there. This was a project

[1:16:18] that was changed during the evaluation

[1:16:20] process in a field review and discussion

[1:16:23] with the sponsors and with the

[1:16:24] department of transportation. The

[1:16:26] initial thought was let's put a hawk or

[1:16:29] a pedestrian crossing right there

[1:16:31] because we have the overflow parking for

[1:16:34] the amphitheater crossing the street

[1:16:37] over here in the lower parking lot of

[1:16:39] the hospital. At nights after the

[1:16:41] events, there's 400 plus people that are

[1:16:44] just crossing this road at random.

[1:16:47] Significant safety issues, but it also

[1:16:49] contributes to air quality benefits cuz

[1:16:52] cars are stopping. There's not a lot of

[1:16:54] movement. But in the review, we were way

[1:16:57] too close to that intersection to put a

[1:16:59] ped crossing there. So, in discussion

[1:17:01] with the sponsor and with the

[1:17:03] department, it was suggested that we do

[1:17:05] a pedestrian separated facility. So,

[1:17:09] everyone went to work quick. We got new

[1:17:10] cost estimates and the recommended

[1:17:13] project now is an underpass that'll go

[1:17:15] into this project. The funds 5.4 million

[1:17:19] is the estimated amount to drop a covert

[1:17:22] box covert in that. And it was

[1:17:24] recommended that we put $2 million in

[1:17:27] the CMAC program on this project.

[1:17:30] The next project or the next group that

[1:17:33] we have is the TAP funds. We had three

[1:17:35] million or three projects in the Ogden

[1:17:38] Leighton area for a total of 1.3 plus

[1:17:40] million. Three in the Salt Lake area for

[1:17:43] $2.4 million recommended.

[1:17:46] Here's the list of those projects. The

[1:17:48] three in the Ogden Lon area there on the

[1:17:50] top and the three in the Salt Lake area

[1:17:53] there on the bottom.

[1:17:56] And project that is being

[1:17:59] was recommended here was the SR39. This

[1:18:02] is shared use. This is phase two. Phase

[1:18:05] one was recommended and approved by you

[1:18:08] last year. It's the part that goes from

[1:18:10] Harrisville or Harrison Boulevard up to

[1:18:13] where the yellow circle is. This

[1:18:15] incorporates the area that's covered by

[1:18:17] the circle there between Mountain Road

[1:18:19] and Whisperwood Development. All of

[1:18:22] those people have to come down and walk

[1:18:24] on the facility. There's not even much

[1:18:26] of a shoulder for them. they are on the

[1:18:29] facility when they come down to get down

[1:18:31] to the intersection to cross either

[1:18:33] doing shopping or wherever else they

[1:18:35] might go. The proposed to or the project

[1:18:39] estimated costs 523,000 plus funds being

[1:18:43] requested were 488,000 plus and it was

[1:18:46] recommended the requested amount for

[1:18:48] phase two to address a facility to take

[1:18:53] them off of SR39.

[1:18:57] And then the last program that we have

[1:18:59] to look at is the carbon reduction

[1:19:01] program or the CRP funds. Two projects

[1:19:04] were being recommended in the Ogden

[1:19:06] Lateon area for 1.3 plus million. Four

[1:19:09] projects in the Salt Lake area for $3

[1:19:11] million. The list of those projects are

[1:19:14] here with the two in the Ogden Late area

[1:19:16] on top and the four in the Salt Lake

[1:19:19] area there on the bottom.

[1:19:22] Sorry for going through this. We've got

[1:19:24] the copies of the list if you want to

[1:19:26] look at them, but let's look at the one

[1:19:28] of the projects there in the CRP

[1:19:30] program. This is the Vampool program.

[1:19:33] very successful program both in both

[1:19:35] urban areas. There was allocations for

[1:19:38] both urban areas for this. The request

[1:19:41] or estimated project cost is 500,000

[1:19:44] that'll purchase 10 new vans in the Salt

[1:19:48] Lake area. There was a similar request

[1:19:50] for the Agna area for 10 new vans in the

[1:19:52] Agna urban area.

[1:19:55] the requested amount of funds 466,000

[1:19:58] plus and it was recommended the full

[1:20:01] requested amount. So those are the kind

[1:20:03] of projects that are in the list that

[1:20:05] are included in the materials you have

[1:20:07] for your review and your approval and

[1:20:10] that's all we have. Commissioner,

[1:20:12] >> thank you. Questions for Ben today? Any

[1:20:15] council members?

[1:20:17] >> Beth, you're waving your you're okay. I

[1:20:20] just

[1:20:22] >> sorry we were just talking about uh the

[1:20:24] urbanized uh zone and the just what that

[1:20:27] was implying for UTA moving forward. So

[1:20:29] no it's great. Thank you so much.

[1:20:30] >> Great. No problem. If there are no

[1:20:33] questions, then I'll look for a motion

[1:20:35] or or madam chair, let me just make that

[1:20:36] motion to approve the recommendation

[1:20:38] STP, CMAC and TAP and the CRP projects

[1:20:42] added to the draft of the uh 2027

[1:20:45] through 203 2032 STP and CMAC programs

[1:20:49] for the draft of the 2028 TAP and CRP

[1:20:52] programs as presented.

[1:20:53] >> Commissioner, thank you. And Ben, thank

[1:20:55] you. Thank you for your presentation and

[1:20:57] all the work. We have a motion by

[1:20:59] Commissioner Harvey on this. Is there a

[1:21:01] second? second.

[1:21:03] >> Hood. It was up. Okay, we'll give that

[1:21:05] to We'll give that to Mr. Christensen

[1:21:08] since [laughter]

[1:21:09] since he won't get to make a a motion at

[1:21:13] our next meeting potentially. Who knows?

[1:21:14] We don't know what things are. I mean,

[1:21:16] there's a while. We'll see what happens.

[1:21:18] Um, we have a motion and a second on the

[1:21:20] table. Is there any discussion to this?

[1:21:23] All right. Seeing none, all in favor of

[1:21:25] approving. I'm not going to read the

[1:21:27] whole thing. Everything that you read,

[1:21:29] I'll say I. I I

[1:21:32] >> Any opposed?

[1:21:36] » Awesome. That that is approved. Thank

[1:21:38] you.

[1:21:39] >> Mayor, can I just briefly express

[1:21:40] appreciation for uh Ben and uh and Wayne

[1:21:45] and Fariba and Hugh uh who um lead this

[1:21:50] work on our team. Uh and they do it in

[1:21:53] really close collaboration with all of

[1:21:55] your communities, all of your teams.

[1:21:59] um the cities and the counties from UTA

[1:22:02] and from UD do this work doesn't just

[1:22:04] happen it involves a lot of engagement

[1:22:08] uh good professional work um uh a ton of

[1:22:13] collaboration and the process proceeds

[1:22:16] even though there's far as Ben noted

[1:22:17] there are far more needs and demands

[1:22:19] than we have funds available the process

[1:22:21] proceed proceeds I think and I hope

[1:22:23] you'll agree with um not a lot of drama

[1:22:28] and a significant amount of trust in the

[1:22:30] way that we go about this and that

[1:22:32] doesn't just happen. It takes

[1:22:33] intentionality of collaboration and good

[1:22:34] work. So, uh, nice job and thanks to all

[1:22:37] the part for all the partnership.

[1:22:39] >> I have a com comment if I may.

[1:22:42] >> Please, mayor, go ahead.

[1:22:43] >> Oh, yes. I just wanted to um remark on

[1:22:46] the underpass at the amphitheater

[1:22:48] connecting Ela View Hospital and the

[1:22:50] amphitheater. That's an example of uh

[1:22:53] well-intentioned planning but working

[1:22:55] together there's a better design a

[1:22:57] better solution and a a pivot that was

[1:23:02] would not have been possible without

[1:23:04] that uh effective collaboration. So so

[1:23:07] grateful for our partners not only in um

[1:23:11] funding but design and innovation and um

[1:23:14] vetting best practices. So thank you.

[1:23:18] >> Thank you mayor.

[1:23:21] Okay, item six. We're going to turn to

[1:23:23] our budget committee chair, council

[1:23:25] member Amy Winder Newton.

[1:23:26] >> Madam Chair, before you do that,

[1:23:28] >> yes,

[1:23:29] >> unless his Facebook profile is lying,

[1:23:32] today is Commissioner Harvey's birthday

[1:23:35] and and it's a demarcation from having a

[1:23:38] minor's driver's license to over 21 now.

[1:23:42] So, I just wanted to point that out.

[1:23:45] >> You know, I have not seen that yet

[1:23:48] today. So, uh, happy birthday, Jim.

[1:23:53] [laughter]

[1:23:57] » Well, happy birthday. Yeah. And I hope

[1:24:00] you get to do something just

[1:24:02] >> more fun than this tonight.

[1:24:04] >> Even Even more fun.

[1:24:05] >> I know. I like I'm trying to choose my

[1:24:07] words carefully, but I hope you get to

[1:24:09] celebrate. Yes.

[1:24:10] >> I want to see his driver's license. Make

[1:24:12] sure this isn't just

[1:24:17] [laughter]

[1:24:19] Happy birthday. Yeah, thank you for

[1:24:21] bringing that to our attention. Yeah,

[1:24:23] thank you. All right, uh Council Member

[1:24:25] Wender Newton, we're going to turn to

[1:24:26] you.

[1:24:27] >> Thank you very much. We um have in our

[1:24:31] packets the fiscal year 27 WFRC goals,

[1:24:34] budget, and unified planning work

[1:24:35] program that outline the activities that

[1:24:38] we plan to undertake in the fiscal year

[1:24:40] of 2027. These materials were were

[1:24:43] prepared by staff in coordination with

[1:24:45] the budget committee. And you may recall

[1:24:47] that these materials were presented at

[1:24:48] our March meeting and we authorized

[1:24:50] their release for review and comment by

[1:24:52] the public and the COGS. Um the budget

[1:24:55] committee has then reviewed them again

[1:24:57] at our meeting on May 14th and we're now

[1:24:59] recommending that the council approve

[1:25:01] the fisc year 27 WFRC goals budget and

[1:25:05] unified planning work program. Um, so

[1:25:08] we'll ask our CFO, Marian Florence, if

[1:25:11] she wants to summarize these materials

[1:25:13] and highlight the one major addition

[1:25:14] that we've added since March.

[1:25:21] Thank you. Um, very briefly, this is

[1:25:24] where we are in the process. You all saw

[1:25:26] this initial budget back in March. Um,

[1:25:29] and then we did have public comment. We

[1:25:31] didn't receive any public comments on

[1:25:33] the budget. Um, and so I wanted to just

[1:25:36] briefly highlight the one change that

[1:25:39] happened to our budget since March. So

[1:25:41] again, this this section of the agenda

[1:25:44] is the goals which also have not changed

[1:25:47] since March. Um, our overall goals.

[1:25:52] There we go. Um, we have three highle

[1:25:54] goals and some sub goals under that in

[1:25:57] your packets. Um, same as last year.

[1:26:00] These are our general high level goals

[1:26:02] and the work that we're doing. Um and

[1:26:05] then for this coming year, the budget

[1:26:08] for the initial budget is just the new

[1:26:11] funding that we anticipate having for

[1:26:13] next year. And so what we do is we look

[1:26:15] at that funding. It comes from also way

[1:26:17] back from when Miranda was speaking.

[1:26:19] These are the formula funds that come to

[1:26:21] us for planning um the planning work

[1:26:23] that we do. Um so here are this is the

[1:26:27] same presentation I gave you last March,

[1:26:30] but I wanted to highlight this one

[1:26:32] addition. Byron touched on it. We were

[1:26:34] awarded at the end of April the regional

[1:26:37] infrastructure accelerator grant. And

[1:26:39] what that means from my side of the

[1:26:41] table here is that we requested $1.5

[1:26:44] million. We were one of 14 awarded

[1:26:48] grants across the country and these are

[1:26:50] discretionary grants, federal grants. Um

[1:26:53] and we were awarded uh one 150 just over

[1:26:58] a million dollars. Um, and that's the

[1:27:00] same as all of the other awarded grants.

[1:27:03] So they they kind of equalized that

[1:27:05] amount across the awarded grants. And so

[1:27:08] as Byron already talked about, this is

[1:27:10] the next step in our stationary

[1:27:12] planning. And so we've had really

[1:27:14] generous funding from Go to work on

[1:27:17] stationary planning and this is the next

[1:27:19] step to make sure that we can work with

[1:27:21] specialized consultants who can help

[1:27:23] identify the right financing strategies

[1:27:25] to move forward to implementation. So,

[1:27:28] we're excited about this grant. It

[1:27:29] represents, as you can see, um a really

[1:27:34] large section of our work for next year

[1:27:36] along with continued work on the

[1:27:38] activity- based model development. So,

[1:27:40] those are kind of our our big efforts.

[1:27:42] We always have a couple of big things

[1:27:44] that we're working on in addition to the

[1:27:46] constant work that we're always doing

[1:27:48] here at WFRC. So, these are that is our

[1:27:52] big addition, the only change to the

[1:27:54] budget since you saw it in March. Um,

[1:27:57] and so that makes, as you can see, our federal sources go up above three

[1:28:02] quarters for this year because of that

[1:28:04] balance shift with that infusion of the

[1:28:06] federal grant for next year. So with

[1:28:09] that, our recommendation from the staff

[1:28:11] and from the budget committee, unless

[1:28:13] there are any questions, I'm happy to

[1:28:15] entertain questions. Our recommendation

[1:28:17] is to approve the goals budget and the

[1:28:21] unified planning work program where we

[1:28:23] describe all of this work that we're

[1:28:24] going to do and put numbers to it for

[1:28:27] next year.

[1:28:34] So, Madame Chair, if there are no

[1:28:36] questions or comments, I would like to

[1:28:39] um take action to open a public hearing

[1:28:41] to discuss this item.

[1:28:45] Thank you. We are now going to open a

[1:28:47] public hearing to discuss the WFRC

[1:28:48] fiscal year 27 goals, budget, and

[1:28:51] unified planning work program. Is there

[1:28:53] anyone here that would like to speak to

[1:28:55] this item specifically? If so, we will

[1:28:57] give you the microphone.

[1:29:02] Okay, we're not seeing any, so we'll

[1:29:04] close the public hearing uh and turn it

[1:29:06] back to you. Thank you. Um, well, I

[1:29:10] would like to make a motion that we

[1:29:11] approve the fisc year 27 WFRC goals,

[1:29:15] budget, and unified planning work

[1:29:16] program. Thank you. We have a motion on

[1:29:18] the table and we have a second. Any

[1:29:20] discussion to this budget?

[1:29:25] >> I know it's just good news, right? The

[1:29:27] only change is that we got a grant, more

[1:29:30] money. It's good. Okay. Uh, seeing none,

[1:29:32] all in favor, please say I.

[1:29:34] >> I.

[1:29:36] >> Any opposed?

[1:29:38] That's good news. And that is approved.

[1:29:40] Thank you. Back to you, uh, council

[1:29:43] member.

[1:29:44] >> Thank you. Um, item 6B is our fiscal

[1:29:48] year 26 fraud risk assessment. Um, WFRC

[1:29:52] has completed its annual assessment of

[1:29:54] fraud risk as required by the off by the

[1:29:56] office of the state auditor and the

[1:29:58] budget committee reviewed this item at

[1:30:00] our last meeting.

[1:30:03] We remain in the optimal c category of

[1:30:06] very low risk, which is awesome, and

[1:30:08] that's because of our robust internal

[1:30:10] controls and separation of duties,

[1:30:12] trained staff, careful policies, and the

[1:30:15] transparent structure and processes. So,

[1:30:17] we're really happy about that. Um, the

[1:30:19] assessment and the memo about this are

[1:30:21] in your packets for your review prior to

[1:30:23] the required submission to the state

[1:30:25] auditor.

[1:30:28] >> Thank you. Thank you so much.

[1:30:30] Thank you to everyone on the budget

[1:30:31] committee for working on this. Marian,

[1:30:33] thank you and all the team.

[1:30:38] Is that can I I think that concludes

[1:30:40] your report, but I want to make sure.

[1:30:42] You good?

[1:30:42] >> That does. Yes. Thank you.

[1:30:43] >> Thank you so much. Appreciate it. All

[1:30:45] right. Item seven. We've made it to item

[1:30:47] seven. We've got our active

[1:30:48] transportation committee may uh update

[1:30:50] from Mayor Troy Walker.

[1:30:54] >> Thank you. It's great to be with all of

[1:30:56] you. Um I'm happy to report um on our

[1:30:59] most recent activity related to our

[1:31:01] committee and that was the golden spoke

[1:31:03] ride. How many of you participated in

[1:31:05] this room,

[1:31:07] Kate? No.

[1:31:10] >> Okay. All over here. Yeah. I was looking

[1:31:13] for Mayor Bradshaw, but she didn't

[1:31:15] participate. We'll have to work on it.

[1:31:17] >> Representative DeFay, you rode.

[1:31:19] >> Yeah.

[1:31:20] >> Excellent. Um the if you're not

[1:31:23] familiar, the Golden Spoke is an annual

[1:31:24] ride. This was the ninth annual Golden

[1:31:26] Spoke Ride and it was a huge success. I

[1:31:29] mean, hundreds of people. I think it was

[1:31:30] the biggest I've ever seen it. Um, it

[1:31:33] was really awesome. I had 80 riders with

[1:31:36] just that signed up and rode with from

[1:31:38] our Rotary Park up. So, it was

[1:31:40] fantastic. It celebrates the 100 plus

[1:31:42] miles um that we have of multi-use

[1:31:45] trails stretching from Ogden to Provo.

[1:31:48] Showcases all the work of different

[1:31:49] agencies and counties. They've created

[1:31:51] safe fund trails for everyone to use

[1:31:53] along the Wasatch Front. Special thanks

[1:31:55] to the Jordan River Commission who was a

[1:31:57] primary lead organizer of the nature

[1:31:59] center at Paya Okai, I hope I'm saying

[1:32:01] that right, for hosting the end of the

[1:32:03] ride event along with all the partners

[1:32:05] and the volunteers that were there with

[1:32:07] aids, you know, providing snacks and

[1:32:09] drinks and it was really well attended.

[1:32:12] Um, awesome weather, too. It was a

[1:32:14] perfect perfect ride. The next update

[1:32:16] for you is, and I know you're all aware

[1:32:17] of this, is the ebikes versus e-

[1:32:20] motorcycles. This line I'm not sure I

[1:32:22] agree with that Hugh wrote.

[1:32:25] I didn't. The rise of varying electric

[1:32:28] mobility devices caused confusion over

[1:32:31] what ebicycles are and and the legal use

[1:32:34] of the different devices. This is the

[1:32:36] part I disagree with. New state

[1:32:38] legislation was passed to clarify the

[1:32:41] difference and improve safety. I'm not

[1:32:43] really sure we've clarified, but uh we

[1:32:46] have definitely identified. Um maybe not

[1:32:49] clarified. Um anyway, um you all know

[1:32:53] about these vehicles that are that are

[1:32:55] popping up in lots of communities. And

[1:32:57] I'm not talking about regular ebicycles

[1:33:00] that people ride and put put their own

[1:33:02] effort in. I'm talking about electric

[1:33:04] motorcycles that will do north of a 100

[1:33:06] miles an hour um that are fully capable

[1:33:08] of, you know, any kind of desert riding

[1:33:10] that kids are riding under the age of 13

[1:33:14] in some cases. No helmets all across our

[1:33:16] pave trails, dirt trails on our city

[1:33:19] streets, um sidewalks. You're right. Um

[1:33:22] and so, uh I know we're all meeting with

[1:33:25] our police departments and and trying to

[1:33:26] figure out how we're going to enforce

[1:33:27] this new state law, but there is a new

[1:33:29] state law. If you're not up on it,

[1:33:30] please let us know. we can get you the

[1:33:32] information. There is some good

[1:33:33] definitions, but I think enforcement is

[1:33:35] still going to be an interesting move,

[1:33:37] but we definitely are have some teeth

[1:33:39] now to do something about. I hope we all

[1:33:40] do. Uh, so stay tuned for that

[1:33:42] information. Um, the committees, we're

[1:33:44] always looking for ways to help cities

[1:33:46] improve their active transportation. And

[1:33:49] we're very fortunate in Utah to have a

[1:33:51] legislature and a governor that's

[1:33:52] committed to trails building.

[1:33:55] Unprecedented level of trail building

[1:33:56] going on right now in Utah. Um, hats off

[1:33:59] to all all all of our elected officials

[1:34:02] who value it and are putting money into

[1:34:04] it. We're going to all benefit in years

[1:34:05] to come. So, anyway, that's my report.

[1:34:07] Thank you.

[1:34:09] >> Thank you, mayor. Okay, item 7B is our

[1:34:13] executive director's report. We will

[1:34:14] turn to Andrew, our fearless leader, for

[1:34:16] this.

[1:34:17] >> Thank you, Madame Chair. I have only one

[1:34:19] thing to note today and this is one of

[1:34:22] my favorite things that I get to do at these meetings periodically and

[1:34:26] that's recognized a milestone for u an

[1:34:29] employee and there's just one employee

[1:34:30] to recognize today

[1:34:35] » and she loves to be in the spotlight

[1:34:38] >> uh and that is uh Andrea Pearson our

[1:34:41] senior executive assistant for 10 years

[1:34:44] of service at WFRC.

[1:34:52] And so I I just want to say a few things

[1:34:54] about Andrea. Uh I think you probably

[1:34:56] get this that Andrea is working mainly

[1:34:59] behind the scenes to make sure that

[1:35:01] things work smoothly here. Um these

[1:35:04] meetings, but beyond just these

[1:35:06] meetings, Andrea is is valued by all of

[1:35:10] us within WFRC and any of our partner

[1:35:13] agencies that work with us. Many folks

[1:35:15] come to Andrea to help coordinate the

[1:35:18] arranging of various meetings and and um

[1:35:21] and I remember uh actually back to

[1:35:23] Andrea's interview uh years ago. Um I

[1:35:27] knew that that it was going to work out

[1:35:29] for us because scheduling is the bane of

[1:35:31] all of our existences, right? It's

[1:35:32] really challenging. And we we talked

[1:35:34] about it and I said, "How do you how do

[1:35:37] you do this?" and and her answer was

[1:35:39] something um about with being uh polite

[1:35:42] to people and nuance and using a crowbar

[1:35:45] metaphorically speaking uh to work

[1:35:47] things in. Um and she does that day in

[1:35:50] um day in day out. Uh I trust her

[1:35:53] completely. I value her uh greatly. Um,

[1:35:57] and uh, just on a personal note, I'll

[1:36:00] say it's funny because um, uh, Andre and

[1:36:03] I are of a similar generation and we

[1:36:06] have noted before that we could not come

[1:36:08] from more different places. I grew up in the heart of New York City and Andrea

[1:36:13] grew up in Tensle, Wyoming. How many

[1:36:17] people live in Tensle Wyoming? Roughly,

[1:36:20] >> uh, less than 400.

[1:36:22] >> Okay. And we actually did a fun thing if

[1:36:24] we overlay tensely over uh uh uh in a

[1:36:27] Google map with New York City just to

[1:36:29] like point out how different it is. But

[1:36:31] here we are working in partnership

[1:36:33] together. So um Andrea, thank you for

[1:36:35] your 10 years of service.

[1:36:44] » That was well said. U it's it's been a a

[1:36:49] great privilege for me to get to work

[1:36:50] with Andrea, too. and she hates working

[1:36:53] with my schedule. I know she does. I

[1:36:55] know she does, but she never says it.

[1:36:56] And she's always great and uh uses a

[1:37:00] crowbar to find a way to make everything

[1:37:01] work. And just appreciate you. We all

[1:37:04] appreciate you. Thank you. And

[1:37:05] congratulations on 10 years. I'm not

[1:37:07] going to ask you to say anything unless

[1:37:09] you'd like to. Okay. Just I love you too

[1:37:12] much to put you on that spot. So, okay.

[1:37:15] All right. Uh our next council meeting,

[1:37:17] just by way of calendar, Thursday,

[1:37:19] August 27th.

[1:37:22] We'll have to talk about that. My son's

[1:37:24] getting married that day. Somebody else

[1:37:25] might have to conduct this meeting. So, just so you know, um,

[1:37:31] >> where are your priorities?

[1:37:32] >> Yeah, I know. I was like, yeah,

[1:37:36] I just wanted to share one thing that

[1:37:38] this is a little bit outside of the box,

[1:37:40] but um, roll with me. Right now I'm

[1:37:42] currently the chair of Utah Utah ULI

[1:37:46] Urban Land Institute and I'm segueing

[1:37:49] off of that next month. I'm very

[1:37:51] excited. Tai McCutchen is taking my

[1:37:52] place and um thrilled um Kristen Cordova

[1:37:57] is executive director of ULI and she

[1:37:58] sits on the regional growth and um one

[1:38:02] of the things that I want to tell you

[1:38:03] about is that there's a next generation

[1:38:05] of planners out there and they are

[1:38:07] taking advantage of what ULI offers

[1:38:09] which is the urban plan and we've done

[1:38:11] this at Brighton High School and now we

[1:38:14] just did one in Bluffell at Summit

[1:38:16] Academy and um what these kids are

[1:38:20] coming up with when they're thinking about cities and future growth

[1:38:23] and how they address all of these

[1:38:25] problems is incredible. And I just

[1:38:27] wanted you guys to know that we're

[1:38:29] looking good on the nextG so far. So

[1:38:32] just kind of a shout out for

[1:38:35] our next the people coming here that are

[1:38:37] going to be in these meetings in 10, 15,

[1:38:39] 20 years. So

[1:38:40] >> awesome. Thank you. Thank you. Okay.

[1:38:44] Unless anyone has anything else. Go

[1:38:46] ahead, Mayor.

[1:38:46] >> May I say something real quick? Yes. Um,

[1:38:48] I wanted to everyone to know if they

[1:38:50] didn't know already that our very own

[1:38:53] mayor Don Ramsay won an America 250

[1:38:56] government champion award. And yes,

[1:39:00] >> thank you.

[1:39:01] >> So,

[1:39:03] if you hear me refer to her as the

[1:39:05] award-winning Mayor Don Ramsey, I plan

[1:39:08] to do that for the rest of the year at

[1:39:09] least. [laughter]

[1:39:10] >> Thank you. And uh, thank you to

[1:39:13] everybody who nominated me for that.

[1:39:15] came as quite a surprise. I thought

[1:39:17] the email was like spam. I thought it

[1:39:19] was they were going to be asking me for

[1:39:20] money. Hey, you get this award and it'll

[1:39:23] only cost you, you know, I mean, I

[1:39:24] thought that's what it was going to be.

[1:39:25] And I'm reading through it and I'm like,

[1:39:26] this seems real. Is this real? And then

[1:39:29] I found out that the person who

[1:39:31] submitted the nomination was also copied

[1:39:33] on that email and it was a name that I

[1:39:36] knew. And so, thank you to everyone from

[1:39:38] across the region and across the state.

[1:39:40] Thank you to WFRC and the League of

[1:39:42] Cities and Towns and my city and

[1:39:43] everybody else who contributed to that

[1:39:44] nomination. It means a great deal. and I

[1:39:46] knew nothing about it. So, thank you.

[1:39:48] Yeah, thanks you guys. Okay, I need a

[1:39:52] motion to adjurnn and we'll be done. So,

[1:39:54] moved.

[1:39:55] >> All right, all in favor. Okay, we're

[1:39:58] out. Thank you so much all of you.

[1:40:00] Appreciate it.

WFRC Council Meeting - May 28, 2026

Transcript