[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.