►
From YouTube: Salt Lake City Council Work Session - 7/31/2018
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
B
So
just
a
quick
outline
of
where
we'll
be
going
today
is
we'd
like
to
take
this
opportunity
to
do
a
brief
check-in
on
the
engagement
so
far.
Liz
Bueller
is
here
to
speak
to
that,
and
then
we
have
the
opportunity
to
show
the
council
the
ballot
language.
That's
been
worked
on
and
see.
If
you
have
any
questions,
we
have
bond
counsel
available
to
speak
to
any
clarification
you
may
need,
and
then
we
can
take
a
quick
look
at
the
next
steps
after
the
council's
vote,
depending
on
what
the
council
decides.
C
Hello,
thank
you
for
allowing
us
to
provide
a
brief
snapshot
of
the
engagement
efforts
so
far
on
the
potential
streets
bond.
Thank
you
for
participating
in
the
coffee
conversations.
We
finished
the
last
one
yesterday
evening.
The
joint
coffee
conversation
with
district
six
and
seven
so
that
brought
the
total
to
nine
coffee
conversations
and
thank
I
want
to
thank
each
and
every
council
member
for
taking
the
time
and
coming
out
and
spending
time
talking
about
the
streets
bonds.
C
Just
to
give
you
an
idea
and
we'll
be
giving
you
a
full
report
of
the
engagement
effort
at
next
councils
meeting,
but
we
range
from
about
four
to
15
parts,
15
participants
at
each
coffee
conversation,
but
the
engagement
team
feels
like
these
were
really
good
efforts,
because
majority
of
people
stayed
for
quite
a
long
time.
We
had
very
few
people
just
to
stop,
say
hello,
grab
some
information
and
leave.
C
That
has
a
great
regional
appeal
but
specific
events
for
neighborhoods
throughout
the
city,
where
we
knew
we
had
a
lot
of
constituents
that
attended
those
events
by
far
our
highest
attended
event
was
the
sugar
house
farmers
market,
and
we
found
that
the
best
results
at
those
events
were
actually
when
we
weren't
at
our
tables,
but
when
we
were
walking
around
mingling
with
the
constituents
and
finally
just
want
to
let
everyone
know
that
our
online
survey
is
open
through
this
Friday
August
3rd.
So
far,
we've
had
about
900
responses.
C
Just
to
give
you
a
preview
about
a
third
of
the
respondents
find
overall,
our
city
streets
are
a
bit
bumpy,
as
we
turned
engineering
technical
classifications
into
a
bit
more
user-friendly
language.
A
third
find
our
streets,
rough
riding
and
about
a
fifth
find
them
pretty.
Okay,
the
rest
of
the
responses
are
spread
through
the
other
categories
and
finally,
we're
also
finishing
up.
Y2
analytics
continues:
they're,
statistically
valid
poll
on
the
ballot
language,
and
our
message
you'll
have
that
for
your
briefing
on
August
14th.
That's
all
we
have
thank
you.
Thank
You
Liz
does.
A
D
C
E
I'll
just
add
for
comparison's
sake,
when
doing
a
statistically
valid
survey
for
the
city
of
our
size.
4
to
500
is
kind
of
the
minimum
that
you
would
want.
That's
not
to
say
that
the
survey
with
a
900
respondents
is
statistically
valid
because
people
are
kind
of
self
selecting
into
it.
But
just
to
give
you
an
idea
of
the
proportions.
D
A
D
C
F
Just
want
to
say
thank
you
to
the
Engagement
Team.
You
guys
have
done
an
amazing
job,
the
the
three
different
coffee
events
that
I
was
able
to
attend,
while
two
coffee
events
and
the
the
sugarhouse
farmers
market.
You
guys
were
so
incredibly
informative
and
thank
you
Ben
because
often
times
I
would
be
like
Ben
knows
the
answer
and
he
did,
but
it
was
really
amazing
and
the
community
outreach
that
you
guys
have
done
has
has
proven
to
be
exactly
what
I
think
we
were
hoping
for.
The
cornhole
game
filled.
F
B
Right
so
I'm
pulling
up
the
ballot
language
the
council
to
take
a
look
at.
You
should
also
have
hard
copies
in
your
red
folders,
and
this
is
the
work
of
an
active
working
group
involving
council
staff.
Administrative
staff
bond
council
and
we've
worked
to
find
the
best
compromise
between
the
legal
requirements
for
bond
language
or
ballot
language
and
transparency
to
make
it
easily
understandable
by
anyone
who's
weighing
in
on
such
a
huge
decision.
A
G
Necessarily
question
but
well
I
guess
it
is
a
question
I'm
one
of
the
benefits
of
a
Geo
bond.
That's
on
the
ballot
is
it's
very,
very
prescriptive
on
what
that
what
the
money
can
be
spent
on?
Is
there
a
way
that
we
can
add
something
to
that
effect
in
the
in
the
language,
so
that
people
can
see
that
if
it's
voted
for
that
it
doesn't
just
provide
money
to
the
general
fund,
but
you
know
it
will
definitely
be
going
towards
what
the
you
know
intended.
Use
is
for
streets
and
roads
throughout
the
city.
H
You
could
make
an
adjustment
to
the
language
to
say
something
like
paella
portion
of
it
or
to
solely
pay
all
the
portion
of
the
cost
for
the
roads.
The
other
option
that
you
have
is
there's
a
balance
between
what
you
put
in
your
ballot
and
what
you
put
in
your
voter
information
translate
and
for
the
most
part,
what
we
would
generally
encourage
is
that
you
keep
your
ballot
as
general
as
possible
to
give
you
flexibility
and
then
add
whatever
you'd,
like
in
your
voter
information
pamphlet
for
these
additional
clarifications.
H
There's
a
two-fold
purpose
in
that,
and
that
is,
as
you've
noticed,
the
ballot
is
already
quite
large
yeah.
So
when
it's
a
one
word
adjustment,
maybe
it's
not
too
bad,
but
when
you
try
to
add
a
couple
sentences,
the
likelihood
of
somebody
actually
reading
the
whole
thing
before
they
vote
kind
of
goes
down.
So
it's
a
balance
in
it.
It's
really
a
judgement
call
for
you
on
what
you'd
like.
If
that's
something
you
feel
strongly
that
you'd
like
to
put
in
a
limiting
factor
of
you,
know,
she'll
be
used
solely
for
these
purposes.
G
Personally,
I
think
that
you
know
that
goes
a
long
way
in
in
the
conversations
that
I've
had
with
constituents
about
this.
You
know
where
there
may
be
some
concern
about.
You
know
you
having
a
future
Council,
for
example,
or
a
future
administration
use
this
money
for
something
else
other
than
what
it
is
intended
to.
I've
explained
I've
explained
that
you
know
when
it's
part
of
a
geo
bond.
G
A
G
H
G
H
I
H
A
F
A
quick
follow-up
question
on
that.
Is
there
a
scenario
where
adding
solely
could
then
create
a
litigation
problem,
saying
this?
Isn't
an
improvement
to
a
street
I
mean
because,
as
a
lawyer,
I
kind
of
go
big
with
you
as
well.
Only
because
I
don't
want
to
see
somebody
to
misinterpret
a
project,
that's
being
done
as
a
on
a
street
as
not
an
improvement,
even
though
it
is,
but
then
we're
stuck
with
this
solely
language.
H
You
do
run
that
risk
that
somebody
can
make
a
bigger
argument
that
it
didn't
fit
in
what
they
thought
was
a
road
or
a
road
improvement.
So
it
does
open
it
up
and
that's
why
we
generally
say:
let's
keep
it'll,
give
yourself
a
little
bit
more
flexibility
if
you
can
in
the
proposition
and
clarify
in
your
voter
information
pamphlet,
but
again,
where
you've
got
sort
of
the
various
streets
and
roads
improvements
in
the
rate
related
infrastructure.
B
A
H
J
K
Know
that
charlie
is
looking
at
this
more
debt
than
I
am,
but
perhaps
you
could
just
it's
one.
The
whole
first
paragraphs,
one
sentence.
So
if
you
look
at
the
third
line,
such
bonds
will
be
used
to
pay
all
our
a
portion
of
the
costs.
If
you
added
such
bonds
will
only
be
used
issued
to
pay
all
something
along
those
lines.
K
It
clarifies
if
you
know
we
were
talking
about
it's
obvious.
It
already
means
this,
but
sticking
the
word
only
or
something
similar
in
there
doesn't
necessarily
change
this.
It
doesn't
narrow
it
anymore.
It
just
clarifies
these
funds
are
only
used
towards
cost
to
improve
various
streets
throughout
the
roads
Road.
So.
K
G
G
Or
the
state
laws,
that's
the
requirement
for
the
ballot
language
or
for
the
geo
bond
ruling,
or
how
could
we
do
some
of
their?
How
could
we
for
a
reference,
the
legality
of
what
you're,
already
saying,
I,
don't
know
I
know
you
don't
need
to
I
know
that
I
know
that
it's
there,
but
this
gets
you
there.
G
You'd
be
surprised
yeah
again,
this
is
just
I'm,
not
looking
legality.
You
know
what
the
what
the
legality
of
it
is
I'm.
Looking
to
explain
to
the
you
know
to
the
public,
who
will
be
making
a
decision,
you
know,
some
of
whom
will
have
read
the
others
will
or
the
the
pro
statements.
Some
will
be
reading
this
for
the
first
time
when
they're
voting
so
I
mean.
H
F
K
F
It
would
simply
be
to
leave
the
actual
language
to
the
lawyers,
but
with
the
intent
knowing
behind
what
we've
kind
of
discussed,
so
that
we're
not
not
looking
at
punctuation
and
how
it
should
fit
in
and
what
it
should
do,
but
that
we
know
and
I
think
that
we've
given
our
intent
to
add
the
word
solely
somehow
and
under
state
law.
But
how
best
that
fits
in
that.
Perhaps
we
leave
to
them
for
our
final
draft
to.
K
I
A
B
The
staff
report
includes
a
brief
outline
of
some
next
steps
and
key
deadlines.
It's
more
for
your
reference
and
again,
if
you
have
any
questions,
we've
got
some
of
the
greatest
minds
in
the
city
in
the
room
to
answer
them
beyond
that.
The
main
thing
that
we'd
like
to
walk
away
from
this
with
is
two
more
questions.
We
may
have
the
opportunity
to
name
the
bond
on
the
ballot.
The
City
working
group
has
proposed
the
title
streets-
reconstruction
bond-
it's
very
colorful
I
know,
but
does
the
council
have
any
problems
or
concerns
with
that
title?
B
Okay,
and
what
do
you
guys
need
to
know
for
your
next
briefing?
We've
got
a
vote
coming
up.
We
have
a
more
in-depth
engagement
report
on
all
the
results
that
civic
engagement
has
received
planned
beyond
that.
We
want
to
make
sure
that
we've
provided
you
whatever
information,
you
need
to
make
the
best
decisions.
A
Well,
I
I
will
look
forward
to
being
able
to
send
out
a
email
blasts
from
our
district
accounts
and
it
would
be
interesting
if
there
has
been
a
market
change
in
responses
not
in
number
of
responses,
but
maybe
the
the
opinions
of
the
responses.
You
know
if
that
was
unpredicted
or
I,
don't
I
don't
do
market
research,
so
I,
don't
know
if
you
get
a
lot
of
nays
at
the
beginning
and
then
it
kind
of
balancing
agent.
E
Add
that
the
statistically
valid
viability
poll
will
include
a
movement
analysis
to
say
initially.
What
is
your
opinion
on
this
and
then,
after
the
information
that
is
shared
so
then
better
to
understand
the
bond?
Did
they
change
their
opinion,
and
so
there
will
be
a
movement
analysis,
at
least
in
the
viability
poll.
A
Anything
else,
council,
members
cuz,
you
know
next
time
we
all
get
together
on
August
14th.
We
are
gonna,
be
voting
to
place
this
bond
on
November's
ballot.
So
if
there's
anything
else,
you
need
from
these
brilliant
minds.
Who've
been
hard
at
work
on
this.
We
need
to
let
them
know
soon
today,
but
it
looks
like
we're
very
satisfied.
All.
A
A
A
A
B
This
is
a
fairly
standard
thing
that
can
happen
with
justice
courts
and
it's
just
to
identify
judges
from
other
Justice
Court
jurisdictions,
who
will
be
available
to
fill
in
in
Salt
Lake
City's
Justice
Court.
If
the
need
arises
sometimes
when
the
judges
are
out
of
town
on
vacation
or
have
other
needs
to
not
be
available
for
court,
it
becomes
necessary
to
ask
other
judges
from
other
jurisdictions
to
fill
in,
and
this
step
is
necessary
to
recognize
those
as
as
valid
replacements.
B
B
M
A
Okay,
thank
you
lay
hua.
Hopefully,
Curtis
is
not
on
his
way.
Okay,
and
with
that
we're
a
little
bit
more
ahead
of
schedule
for
item
through
our
central
business
improvement
area.
2019,
designation,
I,
see
Ben
in
the
audience
and
Laura
Fritz
is
not
Ben.
Are
you
here
on
behalf
of
your
team,
great
and
Russell
weeks
from
our
council
office,
and
please
introduce
this
other
gentleman
who's
with
you.
N
Well,
this
is
a
periodic
creation
of
a
special
service
area,
a
special
assessment
area-
in
this
case,
the
downtown
where
property
owners
are
agreed
to
may
agree
to
tax
themselves
to
promote
economic
activities
downtown
it's
had
a
fairly
long
history.
It
was
one
of
the
foundations
of
downtown
Salt
Lake
City,
getting
off
its
feet
in
late
80s
early
90s.
N
This
is
one
of
a
series
of
steps
to
renew
any
special
assessment
area.
This
is
the
beginning.
The
council
will
the
next
step
for
the
council
is
to
adopt
a
proposed
resolution
or
at
least
consider
a
proposed
resolution
at
its
August
14th
meeting
that
will
actually
trigger
the
steps
going
forward
and
I
think
I'll
leave
it
at
that,
and
let
these
good
gentlemen
speak
to
the
issue.
Welcome.
A
D
Just
to
open
this
up
from
the
department
side,
this
is
about
every
three
years.
Is
the
rhythm,
so
I'm,
not
sure
I
wasn't
around
for
the
last
time
we
did
this.
It
was
also
an
initiative
that
took
place
in
a
different
department
at
the
time.
So
this
is
the
first
time
the
Department
of
Economic
Development
is
leading
this
effort,
so
just
to
back
up
a
little
bit.
This
is
a
really
valuable
tool
for
the
community.
D
Essentially,
what
we're
doing
with
this
district
is
creating
an
area
that
has
services
above
and
beyond
what
the
city
currently
provides.
It's
not
something
that
the
city
necessarily
says
we're
going
to
create
this
we're
going
to
do
this.
It's
really
led
by
the
community
saying
we
want
to
have
this
area
assessed
on
our
own
and
have
these
additional
services.
O
Will
say
that
the
downtown
Alliance
has
been
fortunate
for
the
past
27
years
to
be
the
contractor
for
this,
but
Denton
Alliance
isn't
necessarily
the
only
contractor
for
this.
The
question
I
think
for
you
today
is
whether
you
think
the
special
assessment
area
for
economic
development
is
good
for
downtown.
If
it's
good
for
Salt
Lake
City,
it
is
sort
of
an
unusual
circumstance
where
you
have
property
owners
who
are
saying
we
want
you
to
tax
us.
We
want
to
pay
more.
O
That
doesn't
happen
very
often,
but
in
the
case
of
the
downtown
Alliance
they're
very
happy
to
pay
it.
We
have
a
very
low
protest
rate,
but
again
this
is
this,
isn't
necessarily
about
the
contractor.
This
is
really
about
whether
a
special
assessment
area
is
the
right
thing
to
do.
Generally,
what
happens
and
and
I
think
you
may
want
to
talk
to
this
a
little
bit.
Man
generally.
O
What
happens
is
that
there's
an
RFP
or
an
RFQ
that
goes
out
for
someone
to
manage
this
district
and
the
Alliance
has
been
fortunate
enough
to
win
the
RFQ
I.
Think
the
contract
this
time
stipulates
that
if
Salt
Lake
City
is
still
happy
with
the
Alliance,
we
can
just
extend
it
for
three
years,
but
that
isn't
necessarily
the
case.
A
I
know,
you've
built
a
strong
team
and
we'll
look
forward
to
seeing
this
relationship
continue,
but
I
want
to
publicly
thank
you
for
your
service
to
our
city
and
I
hope.
It
will
always
be
a
first
home
or
a
second
home
to
you,
even
in
sunny
Florida,
when
we
have
the
inversion,
you
can
still
come
back.
You
know
it's.
O
D
D
D
That's
correct,
correct:
if
I
may
it's
about
a
nine-month
process
and
will
be
before
you
several
other
times,
I
believe
in
September,
November
and
finally,
in
March
of
next
year,
with
different
phases
of
the
process.
So,
and
is
there
an
assumption
that
if
we
move
forward
today
that
the
downtown
Alliance
will
continue
to
operate
that
for
the
next
three
years,
the
contract
is
an
option
that
if
the
area
is
renewed,
this
the
administration
can
exercise
the
option
to
renew
with
the
downtown
Alliance
but
prior
to
renewing
with
the
downtown
Alliance.
N
D
So
Jason
I
as
Erin
mentioned
you're
leaving
so
we're
all
sad
about
that.
But
on
your
way
out,
I'm
gonna
maybe
be
a
little
bit
bold
here
and
request
that
you
respond
with
the
bold
answer
and
I
guess
what
I'm
looking
for
is
to
know
if
you
think
it
would
be
healthy
for
the
organization,
the
downtown
Alliance
to
go
through
the
RFP
process.
For
this
three-year
extension,
that's
obviously
always
a
good
idea
when
you're
using
public
resources,
but
as
somebody
who
represents
that
organization,
what
do
you
think
about
that
process?
I
mean.
O
O
You
know,
I
have
a
lot
of
confidence
in
Derek
Miller
who's.
Actually,
the
president
and
CEO
of
the
Alliance
and
his
leadership
abilities
and
his
ability
to
continue
to
do
good
things
for
downtown
downtown
is
a
lot
more
than
just
one
person
or
even
a
few
people.
It's
a
lot
bigger
than
a
single
organization,
so
I
would
say
if
I
was
staying,
that,
of
course,
you
wouldn't
need
to
necessarily
put
the
contract
out,
because
it's
you
know
challenging
to
respond
to
an
RFP,
but
I
think
that
the
city
should
have
that
option.
O
If
there
are
questions
and-
and
you
have
questions
about
that,
as
you
come
up
to
to
this
renewal
process,
I-
don't
think
you
should
necessarily
be
opposed
to
it.
My
belief
is
that
you'll
be
very
happy
with
the
services.
The
downtown
Alliance
continues
to
provide,
whether
I'm
there
or
not.
I
think
you'll
see
that
the
organization
will
continue
to
do
good
things
and
benefit
downtown
Salt
Lake
City.
One
of
the
benefits
of
the
organization
is
that
it
does
have
a
lot
of
oversight.
We
have
a
relationship
with
Salt
Lake
City
for
the
contract.
O
We
also
have
a
board
made
up
of
the
property
owners
who
pay
the
taxes
who
are
strong
personalities
and
who
care
a
lot
about
downtown
and
I
think
that
that
is
another
source
of
comfort
for
the
Alliance
staying
on
track
and
maintaining
the
the
continued
services
that
they
have
provided.
It
is
a
time
of
transition
at
the
Alliance
I
would
I
would
be
remiss
if
I
didn't
say
that
I've
been
there
for
ten
years
and
and
my
departure.
There
are
a
few
other
staff
members
who
have
also
left
recently.
O
But
again,
the
organization
is
more
than
just
one
person
or
even
a
couple
people
it's
really
about
this
mission,
and
this
commitment
to
downtown
Salt,
Lake,
City
and
I
think
that
you
should
reserve
the
right
to
put
it
out
for
RFP.
If
you
have
questions
or
concerns,
you
should
always
do
that,
as
you
alluded
to
with
public
money,
but
I'm,
confident
that
the
Alliance
will
continue
to
provide
valuable
services
and
will
be
governed
by
this
organization
by
Salt
Lake
City
and
by
the
business
community
who
serve
on
the
board
of
the
Alliance.
A
Of
the
unique
services
downtown
Alliance
has
has
undertaken
is
the
downtown
ambassadors
program
and
Russell
notes,
and
our
policy
questions
that
on
page
five
of
the
transmittal,
the
administration
refers
to
the
the
assessment
being
the
ongoing
funding
vehicle.
But
it
was
underfunded
in
the
the
budget
this
year
by
a
half
a
million
dollars,
and
it
was
a
subject
that
extra
half
to
make
it.
The
full
two
million
that
I
believe
is
necessary,
was
a
subject
that
this
council
we
worked
to
get
the
money
in
there
and
it
ended
up
not
being
in
there
yeah.
K
O
One
is
that
the
the
amount
that
is
generated
from
this
for
the
special
assessment
area
comes
from
property
taxes
and
it's
a
percentage
of
property
value.
We're
really
fortunate.
In
the
last
three
years,
the
value
of
downtown
has
increased
significantly
to
the
point
that
we're
actually
able
to
take
the
rate
down
that
we
will
assess
property
owners
but
still
generate
an
additional
three
hundred
thousand
dollars
a
year
that
will
go
towards
the
Alliance
and
it's
my
understanding
this
time
that
the
intention
is
to
use
those
funds
to
help
find
finance
the
Ambassador
Program.
O
So
Salt
Lake
City
was
very
generous
for
the
past
two
budget
cycles
to
provide
some
additional
program
funding
for
this
pilot
program
with
the
ambassadors,
it's
a
fairly
inexpensive
way
to
make
a
major
a
major
change
for
downtown
and
to
disrupt
some
negative
behavior
and
to
provide
some
services
to
people
who
need
some
help.
But
I
think
that,
with
the
increase
in
value
in
downtown
we're
able
to
lower
the
rate
generate
additional
revenue
and
that
I
don't
think
we
will
be
coming
back
to
the
council
to
ask
for
additional
funding
for
the
Ambassador
Program
I.
O
Think
that
that's
something
that
can
assume
your
question
was
well.
We
have
to
decrease
other
programs
and
I.
Don't
think
that
that
will
be
the
case.
I
think
that
we
can
realize
some
efficiencies
through
some
additional
staffing
changes
that
we've
looked
at
and
the
additional
funds
that
are
coming
because
of
the
assessment
generating
more
money
will
go
to
pay
for
those
new
services
for
our
ambassadors.
A
D
Are
two
types
of
protest?
One
is
the
percentage
needed
for
the
the
resident
area
to
carry
forward
and
it's
sort
of
a
60/40
rule,
and
that
is
in
November,
is
the
deadline
for
those
written
protests
and
then
there's
a
Board
of
Equalization
to
make
sure
that
if
there
are
protests,
individual
protests
about
the
value
of
the
property
and
the
assessed
value
from
the
city,
those
are
processed
in
January
of
next
year.
Are
those
are
the
written
deadlines
for
that
protest?
D
O
O
People
get
into
public
service
for
lots
of
different
reasons,
but
this
council
is
a
group
of
people
who
care
about
the
community
who
do
the
right
thing
time
and
again,
who
are
collaborative
who
have
integrity
and
who
work
really
hard
to
try
to
find
solutions
for
our
community,
not
worried
about
scoring
political
points
was
worried
about
really
doing
the
right
thing
for
the
community
and
I
just
want
to
say
what
a
pleasure
it's
been
to
work
with.
All
of
you
thank.
A
D
A
Man
now
we're
really
ahead
guys.
Do
we
need
a
break
already?
Okay?
So
if
we
have
folks
with
us
given
that
we're
almost
40
minutes
ahead,
doug
is
here
where's
Doug
Dan
see
there.
You
are.
This
is
item
for
the
65
South
900
East
rezone,
Nick
Tarbert
from
our
office
duck
dance
he's
here,
Wayne
I
see
you
in
the
audience.
N
H
H
H
H
Basically,
he
has
since
combined
these
parcels
to
my
understanding.
So
it's
now
one
parcel.
So
basically
you
have
split
zoning
on
a
lot
and
he's
just
looking
to
get
his
full
lot
in
the
same
zone.
R2
allows
duplexes
RMF
30
allows
attached
homes
to
3/4
as
a
practical
matter.
It
makes
no
difference
on
this
site
because
both
zoning
districts
require
a
Bay
sighs
for
each
number
of
units
and
the
total
square
footage
of
the
Lots
allows
the
same
number
of
units,
whether
it's
r2
or
RMF
30.
H
So
it's
a
it
makes
no
difference
in
terms
of
the
build
ability
of
the
lot.
What
it
is
is
basically
clean
up,
so
that
he'll
have
his
whole
lot
in
one
zone.
Ngey
strict
the
front
parcel
is
a
being
used
as
a
boarding
house.
That's
a
non-conforming
use,
it
remains
non-conforming
one
way
or
the
other
you
can
see
from
the
zoning
map
here
that
to
the
north
is
higher
density.
H
D
A
D
H
D
Just
thinking
back
to
that
crew
that
came
through
with
a
couple
earlier
this
year,
I
can't
remember
the
folks
it
was
the
Rose
Center
yeah,
and
they
this
I,
think
this.
This
block
was
within
their
survey
area,
but
they
called
for
more
consistency
in
our
zoning
for
Central
City,
and
this
might
present
an
opportunity
to
make
at
least
this
quarter
of
the
block
a
little
bit
more
consistent.
So
I
just
want
to
toss
that
out
there
at
least
for
fodder.
If
nothing
else.
N
D
K
P
K
D
H
P
A
P
I
just
wanted
that
the
zoning
to
be
consistent,
you
know
it's
and
I've,
had
a
combined
as
one
lot
I
bought
that
piece
of
property
actually
from
the
gas
station
fifteen
years
ago
or
so
10-15
years
ago,
so
I.
Finally,
just
combined
the
lots
and
wanted
to
have
the
same
zone.
You
know
the
case.
I
want
to
do
anything
in
the
future.
Have
it
the
same
zone.
D
P
D
I'm,
not
a
planner,
so
maybe
I'm
off
the
wall
here,
but
I
would
love
to
see
the
council
initiate
a
rezone
on
this
corner
and
some
of
the
properties
to
the
east.
This
seems
like
an
opportunity
either
now
or
in
the
next
couple
of
years
for
housing.
I
can
see
a
developer
and
investor
somebody
coming
along
and
developing
that
property
into
housing,
either
condo
or
multi
Multi.
P
D
P
And
some
120
year
old
house
that
had
burned
down
when
I
bought
it
in
1988
and
it
was
only
one
storey
up
in
a
second-story
on
it.
So
there's
three:
nice
houses,
one's
the
old
cubby
mansion
next
to
the
church,
so
that
the
Mormon
Ward
is
the
fourth
place
up
and
next
to
that
steeled
cubby
mansion,
which
is
a
beautiful,
yellow,
brick,
fire,
brick
house
and
then
my
house
and
then
kind
of
an
old
farmhouse
and
then
a
beautiful
three-story
house,
just
east
of
the
gas
station.
So
what
I
was
right
there
referring.
D
P
H
To
get
to
you
from
the
aerial
here,
the
gas
station
is
right
on
the
corner
and
as
parking
behind,
and
when
you
look
at
the
zoning
map
that
that's
sort
of
in
the
yellowish
mustard
color,
that's
RMF
30
and
the
gas
stations
on
that.
It's
associated
parking
lot
is
the
one
lot
to
the
east,
just
a
single
lot
and
from
there
east
Sall
homes
and
other
things.
So
to
make
it
consistent,
it
would
really
just
be
rezoning
one
lot
and.
A
Nick,
can
you
tell
us-
and
we've
heard
that
on
this
case,
I
don't
think
mr.
Jones
you're
advocating
that
we
stop
your
process
and
back
this
all
the
way
up
to
include
the
corner
lot.
So
can
you
walk
us
through
a
few
of
the
possible
next
steps?
If
councilmembers
kitchen
desire
comes
to
fruition
sounds.
N
Like
the
field
trip
would
be
the
first
step
to
go
survey
the
area
and
see
if
it's,
what
you're
interested
in
moving
forward
with.
If
you
do
in
fact
want
to
initiate
a
text
amendment
or
a
zoning
change
for
that
property,
you'd
have
to
get
support
from
for
Vic
from
three
of
your
colleagues,
we
would
initiate
that
and
then
planning
it
would
run
it
through
the
process
which
includes
the
public
hearing
of
the
Planning
Commission
and
then
back
to
the
council
for
consideration,
usually
a
nine
to
ten
month
eleven
month
process.
Q
I
think
it
would
be
important
to
you
to
discuss
this
with
the
property
owner
themselves,
because,
if
a
petition
to
change
the
zoning
map
is
initiated
and
the
property
owners
more
part
of
that,
we
would
send
a
letter
to
the
property
owners
and
ask
if
they
want
to
be
involved
in
that.
So
I
want
to
get
that
buy-in
ahead
of
time
and.
D
A
I
appreciate
that
and
council
members,
while
we
have
the
applicant
here,
do
you
have
any
questions?
Okay,
I
think
we're
good
on
this
one.
It
looks
like
we've
got
you
scheduled
for
we're.
Gonna
set
the
date
tonight
for
public
hearing,
we'll
take
comments
on
Tuesday
the
21st
and
take
action
to
tentatively
on
Tuesday
September
4th.
Q
So
this
is
essentially
a
I'm
sorry
I'm,
just
jumping
it's
all.
Yours
essentially
a
tune
up
of
our
design
standards
chapter,
it's
pretty
minor
tune-up,
where
we
found
an
issue
in
the
zoning
text
that
actually
could
cause
us
an
issue
in
the
in
the
future.
Last
year,
the
City
Council
adopted
changes
to
the
zoning
horns
where
most
of
the
design
standards
for
each
zoning
district
were
consolidated
into
one
chapter,
and
this
new
design
standards
chapter
has
an
applicable
'ti
section
which
states
that
the
design
standards
apply
to
new
construction
and
additions
to
existing
buildings.
Q
The
current
language
in
the
design
standard
chapter
says
that
regulations
only
apply
to
new
constructions
or
additions.
So
if
there's
an
existing
building
that
existing
building
that
currently
meets
that
ground
floor
material
requirement,
there's
nothing
in
the
ordinance
that
would
prohibit
the
property
owner
from
renovating
the
building
and
removing
those
durable
materials.
If
the
renovation
doesn't
include
an
addition
or
new
construction.
Q
So
the
proposed
zoning
text
amendment
would
add
language
to
the
code
stating
that
the
design
standards
apply
to
properties
to
all
properties
and
that
repairs,
maintenance
and
alterations
cannot
eliminate
any
existing
design
elements
regulated
by
the
design
chapter.
Above
of
the
zoning
ordinance,
the
Planning
Commission
reviewed
this
text.
Amendment
and
Rec
did
recommend
approval.
A
A
Nothing.
Council
members
we're
going
home
really
today,
good
cleanup
thanks
planning,
division,
Thank,
You
Wayne,
that's
it
then
we're
gonna
set.
A
public
hearing
tonight
will
hold
comment.
20
on
the
21st
of
August
tentatively,
take
action
on
Tuesday,
September
4th
and
we're
going
to
keep
you
here
for
item
6,
the
retail
services
in
the
mixed-use
zoning
district
text,
amendment
planning
departments
been
busy
may.
N
N
B
A
B
Q
Q
Before
we
paid
our
major
change
to
our
land
use
tables,
there
was
a
big
project
where
we
evaluated
all
of
the
land
uses
and
all
of
our
land
use
tables
and
and
made
some
huge
changes
and
honestly
I
believe
this
was
a
mistake
where
we
should
have
put
a
P
and
we
didn't
put
anything
when
we
redid
those
tables.
So
this
would
not
be
introducing
a
land
use
into
this
stone
that
wasn't
allowed.
You
know,
prior
to
about
five
years
ago,
I.
A
B
The
time,
though,
with
massage
therapists
and
that
type
of
thing
they
have
to
they
have
like
their,
they
have
business
licenses
and
state
licensing
requirements
to
have
that
type
of
use,
and
it's
regulated
that
way
more
than
it
is
through.
You
know,
like
retail
services,
type
of
use
and
that
type
of
thing
through
the
business
license
process
and.
Q
Certainly
could
be
an
issue
because
they
are
you
know
they
all
are
clumped
into
that
one
retail
Service
land
use
I,
don't
have
a.
You
know,
good
answer
to
say
that
that
won't
ever
be
an
issue
here.
The
map
shows
where
the
MU
zoning
districts
are
located
and
it's
actually
it's
not
a
really
wide
range.
A
So
it
sounds
like
excluding
a
particular
business
type,
isn't
something
that
this
zoning
does.
Although
other
zones
like
C
G
and
C
n,
if
I'm
getting
those
right,
no.8,
neighborhood
commercial,
which
is
C,
n
right
and
I,
don't
remember
all
the
the
ninth
and
ninth
there's
a
CB.
Thank
you.
We
do
get
specific
about
certain
business
types
under
those
don't
we
know.
Q
Those
would
I
believe
I'll
need
to
check,
but
I
believe
those
are
still
covered
under
the
retail
Service
land
use.
That
was
one
of
the
things
we
did
with
the
with
the
big
land
use
table
project
was
that
we
did
do
a
lot
of
consolidation,
because
our
land
use
tables
were
getting
a
little
out
of
hand
and
a
little
too
specific.
So
we
did
consolidate
a
lot
of
uses
into
more
generalized
use
categories
when.
A
I'm
remembering
and
I'm
sorry
to
get
down
this
rabbit
hole
when
we
reasoned
the
ninth
south
corridor
between
about
seventh,
east
and
80s.
Do
you
remember
this?
There
was
some
concern
about
what
type
of
businesses
we
did
down
zone
basically
in
that
area,
and
we
did
a
rezone
on
the
corner
of
ninth
and
seventh
and
I.
Remember
us
that
the
community
felt
comforted
by
the
limited
types
of
businesses
that
could
occupy
that
space.
A
Q
H
H
Q
H
N
A
Nick
not
kind
of
want
to
keep
you
at
the
table,
but
Wayne.
Maybe
you
can
answer
this
for
me,
so
my
concern
that
I
just
kind
of
I'm
throwing
it
out
there.
My
concern
is
that
we
have
residential
zoning
that
allows
for
certain
business
types
that
are
more,
that
are
more
highly
disposed
or
more
highly
likely
to
be
nuisance,
type
businesses,
and
it
feels
to
me
that
in
other
zoning
scenarios
we
make
we
come
into
it
with
spent
a
great
'red
agree
of
specificity
to
avoid
nuisance
type.
A
Businesses
like,
for
example,
that
they
business
types
that
don't
generally
have
high
parking
needs,
or
you
know
we've
been
very
specific
about
that
in
other
areas,
so
I'm
concerned
about
allowing
nuisance,
oriented
businesses
to
operate
in
neighborhoods,
and
we
don't
have
to
fix
that
with
this
today.
But
I'd
love
for
you
to
respond
to
that
concern
and.
Q
One
of
the
key
things
with
the
mixed
use
district
is
there
there
are
actual
controlled
it
is.
It
is
a
district
that
focuses
more
on
residential,
it's
a
mixed
use
district,
but
the
purpose
statement
is
really
focused
on
providing
a
residential
environment.
So
when
you
look
at
the
actual
design
regulations
for
commercial
versus
residential
they're,
much
more
strict
for
commercial
uses,
you
need
to
preserve
if
there's
a
residential
structure-
and
you
want
to
actually
turn
it
into
commercial.
You
have
to
preserve
that
residential
structure.
Q
In
some
cases
it
requires
a
conditional
use,
the
height
requirements
are
lower
or
the
height
height,
allowances
are
lower
for
commercial
properties
or
for
commercial
uses
than
they
are
for
residential
uses.
So
there
are
some
other
mechanisms
there
in
place
that
doesn't
to
solve
the
the
nuisance
use
issue,
but
there
are
some
other
design
mechanisms
in
place
to
try
to
protect
the
the
residential,
more
residential
character
of
the
way.
A
N
A
Hi
Amy
Thompson,
thanks
for
joining
us
and
Nick,
so
folks
were
moving
we're
skipping
item
7.
For
the
moment.
We've
got
a
time
certain
at
4
o'clock
and
we're
gonna,
go
to
item
9
right
now
and
then
we'll
take
a
break
until
4:00,
so
Nick,
Nick
and
Amy,
who
wants
to
start
Amy
I,
think
Amy
does
and
we've
got
a
packet
paper
packet
on
this
one
too.
This.
H
Is
a
text
amendment
to
change
sections
21,
a
0
6
21,
a
16
and
21
a
34
0
to
0
of
the
zoning
ordinance?
The
purpose
of
these
amendments
is
so
that
we're
compliant
with
changes
that
were
passed
by
the
state
legislation
in
regards
to
appeals
of
HLC
decisions,
so
the
bill
basically
or
the
proposed
text
changes
do
a
few
things.
The
first
thing
it
does
is
establishes
a
historic
preservation,
appeal,
Authority
and
because
of
our
form
of
government.
The
appeal
authority
is
the
mayor
and
then
applicants
appealing
a
decision
will
now
have
30
days.
A
K
Q
Q
F
H
F
H
Actually
been
following
this,
since
it
went
into
effect
last
year,
so
we've
had
two
or
three
appeals
that
have
gone
to
the
mayor,
where
they've
at
a
pill
and
has
picked
so
this
is
just
to
bring
our
code
into
compliance
so
that
it's
easier
for
people
looking
for
the
appeals
process,
so
they
don't
have
to
go
to
our
code
and
state
code
figure
it
out.
So.
A
Q
H
B
H
A
No
point
in
wasting
our
breath
then,
thanks
for
being
with
us,
Amy,
Nick
and
Nick.
Thank
you
thanks.
We
will
hold
a
public
hearing
on
this
on
20
on
the
21st
of
August
and
take
action
on
Tuesday
September
4th
and
with
that
we're
gonna
take
a
break
till
4:00
o'clock.
We
do
have
a
time
certain
folks
and
I
hope
40
minute.
45
minutes
is
plenty
for
us
to
come
back
on
time
for
4
o'clock
with
the
parlays
interchange,
environmental
impact
statement,
study,
see
you
then.
A
L
L
A
I
That's
a
method
that
we
use
to
measure
the
flow
of
traffic.
You
can
think
of
it
like
a
report
card
a
is
the
best
and
then
F
is
not
moving.
So
we
want
to
try
and
get
to
level
service
D
which,
with
the
amount
of
traffic
and
growth
in
the
valley,
is
challenging
at
times.
But
that's
our
goal
that
we're
setting
out
for
and
what's
the.
A
H
I
I
Many
people
that
travel
this
area
are
familiar
with
the
loop
ramps
that
are
right
there
going
onto
Foothill
and
not
a
good
situation
if
you've
had
to
navigate
yourself
through
that,
you
know:
you're,
higher
high
interstate
speed
having
to
clear
down
really
slow
to
make
the
tight
corner
and
then
try
and
merge
so
not
safe.
So
there
is
very
high
accident
rates
there
and
we
want,
to
you
know,
improve
that
their
sight
distances.
I
So
the
screening
I
Tyria
that
we
want
to
use
and
make
sure
that
any
solution
we
come
up
with
is
that
we're
achieving
that
level
of
service
that
will
help
us
with
the
traffic
congestion
we
want
to
make
sure
travel
time
is
gonna,
be
reduced.
We
want
travel
speeds
to
be
better
and
again
safety.
We
don't
want
any
backup
occurring.
We
want
to
make
sure
all
the
highway
geometric
standards
are
being
met.
I
We
did
a
process
to
identify
some
ideas
or
solutions
of
what
we
could
do
to
improve
the
congestion
and
meet
safety.
Many
of
the
ideas
originated
from
previous
studies
and
planning
things
that
have
been
done
over
the
over
the
last
10
to
20
years.
There
was
you
dot
major
investment
study
done
about
20
years
ago.
There's
been
the
Foothill
study.
You
did
a
traffic
study,
there's
been
numerous
efforts
to
try
and
identify
some
starting
points
for
alternatives.
I
So
these
starting
alternatives.
We
had
15
of
them
and
these
are
purely
representations
of
how
traffic
would
connect
from
point
A
to
point
B,
so
how
you
would
get
from
Foothill
2
to
15
how
we,
how
you
would
get
from
IAT
to
Foothill.
So
it's
a
representation
of
how
many
lanes
we
would
need
to
make
the
various
movements
through
there
now
once
we're
through
this
alternatives,
development
and
in
an
identification
phase
we'll
be
getting
into
the
actual
engineering
looking
to
see.
Are
these
alternatives
feasible?
Can
we
actually
construct?
I
I
So
I'm
gonna
begin
with
what
we're
calling
alternative
a
and
maybe
first
I'll
point
out
that
all
the
alternatives
have
some
common
things
and
one
of
the
main
things
is
mainline.
Iat
is
shifting
to
the
south.
It
varies
or
will
vary
depending
on
the
alternative,
as
we
make
all
the
connections
with
the
ramps,
but
that
shifting
is
allowing
us
to
make
it
straighter
those
that
drive
it
today
will
know
what
I'm
talking
about,
but
right
at
the
very
mouth
of
the
canyon,
there's
kind
of
a
blind
corner.
I
We're
adding
lanes
places
where
we
have
a
single
lane
right
now
is
gonna.
Go
to
two
lanes,
the
main
lines
gonna
get
an
additional
lane,
so
we're
adding
the
capacity
to
help
with
the
congestion
in
there
there's
a
trail
system
that
kind
of
weaves.
Through
there
we
intend
to
have
the
trail
system
continue
on
generally,
in
the
same
alignment,
there
may
be
some
adjustments
we're
not
into
that
detail
of
engineering.
I
Quite
yet
so
with
alternative
a
some
of
the
unique
things
we
have
going
on
with
alternative
a
is,
as
you
pay
attention
to
the
connections
going
into
Foothill,
we
have
some
exit
ramps
that
people
take
that
slow
them
down
with
some
corners
there.
One
of
the
main
things
we
heard
with
purpose
in
need
is
people
are
going
too
fast
on
Foothill,
so
we've
got
some
corners
there
that
are
slowing
them
down.
I
A
I
If
you
go
to
the
project
website,
you
can
should
be
easier
for
you
to
see.
It's
partly
is
calm
again,
I
want
to
caution
people.
These
are
representations
of
where
various
roads
and
routes
connect.
It's
not
the
footprint
of
where
the
projects
gonna
be
great,
but
on
the
website
you
can
trace
movements,
for
example,
I'm
on
I-80
and
I
want
to
know
how
I
can
connect
to
Foothill.
We
do
some
highlights
there,
so
you
can
concede
the
movements
so.
I
I
H
I
All
right,
I'm
gonna,
go
on
to
alternative
B
B
is
very
close
to
what
exists
today.
If
you
look
right
in
the
center,
you
will
see
there's
still
that
loop
ramp.
Now,
the
good
news
is
that
loop
ramp
has
been
able
to
be
increased
in
size
and
the
distance
to
merge,
and
you
don't
have
the
conflict
of
the
people
trying
to
get
off
I-80.
So
the
traffic
modeling
shows
that
that
this
alignment
will
work.
Most
of
the
other
ramp
connections
are
very,
very,
very
similar
to
where
they
are
today.
I
Now
alternatives
see
has
a
slightly
different
approach.
It's
got
a
traffic
signal,
that's
gonna
regulate
people
heading
on
the
eastbound
to
northbound
Foothill.
That
would
be
one
movement
of
the
traffic
signal
and
then
the
people
headed
southbound,
so
that
would
be
alternating
between
those
two
movements.
So
there
would
just
be
two
movements,
but
this
does
have
the
traffic
signal
underneath
similar
to
what
you
would
see.
Other
interchanges
throughout
the
valley
like
on
I-15,
sometimes
the
signals
on
top
of
the
bridge.
Sometimes
it's
underneath,
and
in
this
case
it
would
be
underneath.
I
The
other
thing
I
want
to
point
out
on
alternative
see-
and
this
is
the
only
alternative
where
we
are
unable
to
keep
all
the
current
movements
that
exist
today,
and
that
is
the
movement
to
parties
away.
As
we
had
a
public
meeting
several
weeks
ago,
the
neighborhood
was
concerned
about
it.
We
are
concerned
about
it
ourselves,
it's
our
goal
to
make
sure
everyone
has
access
that
exists
today.
So
this
is
a
big
negative
for
alternative
C
will.
I
Okay,
so
if
you're
going
uphill
so
eastbound
and
you
want
to
go
to
northbound
Foothill
today,
there's
a
little
ramp
that
cuts
off
and
you
go
underneath
to
part
ways
way
to
parlays
way.
We're
not
able
to
achieve
that,
because
we
don't
have
enough
distance
for
people
to
merge
and
make
that
maneuver.
There's
just
not
room,
there's
physically,
not
room
there.
So
the
alternative
to
that
would
be
travel
north
on
Foothill
to
the
intersection
with
a
signal
and
then
turn
west
there
and
make
your
way
back
around
okay.
So
it's
out
of
Direction
travel.
G
I
Thank
you
for
your
comment,
we're
aware
of
that
and
concerned
about
that
ourselves.
We
want
everyone
to
make
sure
they
have
their
access.
So
you
know
the
NEPA
process
is
look
at
a
reasonable
range
of
alternatives,
so
we're
trying
to
have
a
bunch
of
ideas
out
there
to
look
at
and
assess
and
get
input
on
all
right.
We
have
a
slight
variation
on
alternative
C
and
when
you
look
more
at
the
mouth
of
the
canyon,
we've
added
a
flyover
ramp.
I
So
if
you're
coming
westbound
and
you
wanted
to
connect
to
I
to
15,
so
use
your
imagination
and
you
can
visualize
what
this
might
be.
You're
gonna
come
up
wraparound
and
have
to
drop
clear
down
so,
like
the
other
alternatives,
there's
there's
pros
and
cons
to
each
of
them.
This
one
at
the
mouth
of
the
canyon
in
the
wintertime
is,
is
a
concern
to
us.
But
again
this
is
an
alternative,
so
we
so
we
put
it
out
there
to
seek
input
on
it.
I
I
We
will
be
making
modifications,
adjustments
deletions
to
the
alternatives
based
on
public
comment
that
came
in,
and
then
we
will
start
a
in-depth
engineering
process
to
look
at
the
feasibility
of
some
of
these
things.
This
is
a
difficult
area.
We
have
to
look
at
the
bridges.
We
have
to
look
at
how
to
keep
roads
all
open,
trailheads
open.
That
is
our
intent
to
keep
those
roads
open.
I
That
engineering
is
going
to
be
looking
at
the
vertical
we
haven't
taken
a
look
at
that
refining.
The
alignments
like
I
said
with
horizontal
just
to
make
sure
everything
will
work
and
can
be
built
and
constructed
once
we've
done
that
we're
going
to
be
doing
the
environmental
impacts.
This
is
where,
once
we
know
the
footprint
of
the
alternatives,
we
can
assess
what
the
impact
may
be
to
water,
wetlands,
homes,
trails,
cultural
resources,
air,
etc.
All
the
environmental
resources
noise
and
we'll
be
conducting
those
surveys
and
assess
what
those
impacts
are.
I
I
We
have
done
public
outreach,
we've
done
presentations
to
Mill
Creek,
the
county.
We've
had
public
working
groups
with
business
owners,
residential
community
councils.
We
did
have
a
meeting
at
Skyline
High
School
a
few
weeks
ago.
All
of
the
information
that
has
been
presented
at
all
of
these
venues
is
available
on
the
project
website
and
I
would
encourage
everyone
to
go
to
the
project
website.
Just
because
you're
able
to
get
a
closer
look
and
take
the
time
to
understand
the
alternatives.
I
I
did
mention
that
we're
planning
to
have
the
draft
EIS
available
next
summer
I
do
want
to
emphasize
there's
absolutely
no
funding.
That's
been
identified
for
this.
When
you
look
at
the
Wasatch
Front
long
range
plan,
it's
a
project
listed
in
the
Phase
two,
which
is
2025
to
2035.
So
many
years
out,
and
you
never
know
where
a
project
may
end
up
in
that
phasing,
it
could
shift.
I
Again
my
name's
Becky
strongness,
my
emails
on
there,
but
you're
just
certainly
welcome
to
go
to
the
website
to
the
far
right-hand
of
the
website,
you're
able
to
submit
comments,
there's
online
comment,
form
or
you're
welcome
to
send
an
email
to
the
parlays.
Yes,
project
team,
thanks
Becky
with
that
Thank.
F
And
you
may
have
said
this
and
I
just
kind
of
want
to
make
this
clear,
I
apologize
if
I
make
you
repeat
yourself,
but
the
impact
to
pedestrian
accessibility
and
transit
accessibility
and
our
trail
systems
will
that
come
in
this
second
screening
and
will
that
be
for
all
four
alternatives,
and
is
that
question?
Do
you
I
need
to
break
that
down
so.
H
F
What
about
looking
at
for
future
things,
perhaps
about
how
the
road
would
be
impacted
by
transportation,
mass
mass
transit
and
if
we
are
designing
for
a
future
idea
of
potentially
putting
mass
transit
on
the
freeway?
If
that
were
possible,
I
mean.
Are
we
looking
at
that?
Is
that
a
possibility?
Have
you
thought
about
that?
We've.
H
F
H
A
Another
council
member
questions
so
Becky
and
Kevin
I
guess
it
looks
like
your
public
comment
period
for
this
phase
ends
on
the
10th.
Yes
August
10th,
and
if
there's
we
had
another
agenda
item
earlier
today,
our
own
general
obligation
bond
outreach
that
we
all
I
think
quietly
committed
to
sharing
with
the
with
our
constituents
to
ask
for
their
input.
A
If
there's
a
opportunity
that
we
could
have
to
share
the
feedback
mechanism
that
the
public
has
through
the
10th
I
think
if
you
could
send
a
concise
little
write-up,
we
can
connect
you
with
our
staff
before
you
go
so
that
we
can
get
that
out.
We
would
be
happy
to
share
that
I'm.
Sure
I
would
guess.
Council
members,
Luke
and
Fowler
have
already
been
involved
in
that
process,
but
this
is
an
important
interchange
for
a
lot
of
the
city.
A
H
A
H
A
I
ask
our
staff
I,
don't
know
if
we
have
any
one
assigned
to
this
item
already,
but
that
when
we
hear
back
or
if
there's
an
opportunity
for
us
to
hear
from
Public
Utilities
about
the
coordination
with
the
potential
project,
I
get
that
there's
no
money
for
it
yet,
but
that
this
is
long-range
planning.
I'm
sure
that
Public
Utilities
has
some
idea
about.
Regardless
of
the
project.
There's
an
opportunity
for
the
council
to
hear
about
that
coordination.
We
would
like
to
anything
else:
councilmembers,
Becky
and
Kevin.
When
do
you
anticipate
coming
back
to
us
I'm.
I
Guessing
next
summer,
there
may
be
I
think
we'll
be
meeting
with
the
like
utilities
and
trails
and
various
people
in
between
as
we
try
and
work
through
various
design,
issues
or
considerations.
If
there's
preferences
or
will
this
work
yeah
so
I
think
they'll
be
informal
meetings
taking
place
okay,
but
we
would
anticipate
coming
back
during
the
public
hearing
sometime
next
summer.
Okay,.
A
We
will
look
forward
to
that.
Thank
you
for
spending
the
time
with
us
to
update
us
on
this
potential
project.
Thank
you,
Thanks.
We
have
public
comment
tonight
at
our
formal
meeting
and
you
can
make
comment
during
the
general
comments
section
on
the
agenda
tonight,
which
is
it
it
begins
at
7:00.
The
general
comment
section
is
a
little
bit
later
in
the
agenda.
You
can
take
two
minutes
to
say
whatever
you
want
to
the
council,
and
that
happens.
Sorry.
A
We
don't
take
comment
like
this,
but
one
of
our
staff
right
here
can
take
your
question:
okay,
Kevin
and
Becky.
Thank
you
very
much
and
we
already
did
item
eight.
Actually,
we
don't
have
an
item
eight.
For
some
reason
we
have
seven
and
then
it
goes
to
nine
and
we
already
did
nine
so
we're
going
to
item
ten,
which
is
our
small
cell
wireless
facilities,
item
and
I.
Don't
know
if
we
have
Dan
Dan
rip.
Are
you
you're
here
all
right,
nice
and
early?
Thank
you
and
Kimberly.
A
P
E
So
I'll
start
with
introduction.
This
is
the
first
briefing
on
the
proposed
ordinance.
Second
briefing
is
to
be
determined.
There's
a
public
hearing
scheduled
on
August
14th
and
potential
council
action
on
August
21st,
small
cell
wireless
facilities.
The
intent
is
to
add
capacity
and
coverage.
This
lays
the
groundwork
for
5g
or
fifth
generation
wireless
technologies,
and
it
also
improves
the
current
abilities
of
the
4G
network.
Federal
and
state
laws
give
the
telecommunication
providers
the
right
to
install
in
the
city's
public
right-of-way.
E
Under
the
proposed
ordinance,
a
provider
would
need
to
obtain
a
master
license
agreement
and
this
mirrors
the
process
of
franchise
agreements
that
the
city
currently
uses
for
utilities.
Once
a
provider
has
obtained
a
master
license
agreement,
they
need
to
submit
a
permit
application
for
each
location
that
they
want
to
install
one
of
the
small
cell
wireless
facilities.
At
back
on
May
8th,
the
council
held
a
briefing
for
the
first
non-exclusive
master
license
agreement.
This
was
for
a
company
called
X
net
and
on
May
15th,
the
council
approved
that
master
license
agreement.
E
We
understand
that
negotiations
are
ongoing
with
a
few
other
interested
providers,
so
the
council
may
see
additional
master
license
agreements
later
this
year
under
Senate
bill
189,
which
was
passed
by
the
state
legislature
and
signed
by
the
governor
earlier
this
year,
and
it
goes
into
effect
September
1st.
This
is
an
important
deadline
that
the
city
is
working
under.
E
The
administration
hopes
that
the
council
will
act
on
the
ordinance
before
SB
189
goes
into
effect.
On
September
1st.
The
state
law
gives
the
right
to
gives
the
right
to
providers
to
install
their
small
cell
facilities
on
all
city
infrastructure
and
they
municipal
right-of-way,
and
it
also
gives
the
providers
the
right
to
construct
new
polls
specifically
for
the
small
cell
facilities.
E
E
Do
not
they
are
in
development
and
after
my
intro
I'll
turn
it
over
to
Dan.
Who
can
give
you
an
update
on
the
status?
Okay,
a
couple
of
the
main
points
about
SB
189:
there
are
height
restrictions,
new
and
modified
utility.
Poles
cannot
exceed
50
feet,
but
they
do
allow
an
additional
10
feet
for
antennas.
If
the
pole
was
built
before
September
1st,
when
the
new
law
goes
into
effect,
as
I
mentioned
earlier,
decorative
poles
are
not
exempted.
E
Along
with
the
proposed
ordinance.
The
council
received
ordinance
amendments,
and
these
amendments
would
be
to
ensure
that
there
is
fair
and
equal
treatment
for
all
of
the
providers
submitting
public
right-of-way
permits.
So
the
ordinance
amendments
would
add
additional
information
that
must
be
submitted
with
the
application,
and
this
would
be
for
all
providers,
not
just
small
cell
facilities,
so
they're
all
subject
to
the
same
application
requirements
and
with
that
I'll
turn
it
over
to
Kimberly
and
Dan.
To
talk
about
the
status
of
the
design,
guidelines
and
feedback.
That's
been
received
from
the
industry.
H
Great
Thank
You
Ben,
so
we
are
actually
building
the
plane
while
we
are
flying
through
this
experience
so
bear
with
us.
What
it
entails
is
the
work
of
four
or
five
different
city
departments
coming
together
and
really
digging
in
in
the
details
of
what
these
attachments
is
going
to
look
like,
and
we
get
into
the
weeds
of
attachment
sizes,
materials,
colors,
the
poles
that
they're
going
to
use
and
how
they're
going
to
match.
H
You
know
downtown
decorative
light
poles
and
all
of
the
details
that
are
necessary
for
a
provider
to
be
able
to
put
their
plan
together
and
with
those
we
have
a
book
that
we
are
putting
together.
It's
a
design
standard
book.
There
will
be
six
chapters
and
of
the
six.
We
have
three
written
and
we're
hoping
to
have
the
other
three
complete
in
the
very
near
future,
and
we
anticipate
being
able
to
deliver
that.
E
A
H
A
K
Thank
you
very
much
and
for
a
previous
meeting
on
a
another
poll
that
wasn't
directly
related
to
this
I
understand
the
restrictions
we
have
and
what
we
can
and
can't
regulate.
It
seems
a
little
vague
still
about
design
standards
for
polls
and
where
they
can
go
on
those
kind
of
things.
One
of
my
hopes
was
that,
because
this
is
an
infrastructure,
need
that
a
lot
of
residents
want
frankly,
is
there
a
way
to
also
get
maybe
decorative
lighting
as
part
of
the
plan?
K
E
K
Talking
quarter-mile
kind
of
thing:
no,
no,
it
was
their
way
for
to
a
win-win,
essentially
that
if
we
need
poles
for
this
technology,
can
they
also
double
as
direct
decorative
lighting
across
the
city,
because
they're
gonna
be
hopefully
fitting
into
the
city
and
even
if
they
can't
be
hooked
up
now
at
least
it
would
be
there
so
when
the
city
could
hook
them
up
of
lights.
Is
that
part
of
the
discussion
at
all
or
anything
along
those
lines?
So.
H
R
K
H
A
E
So
the
first
policy
question
actually
has
three
parts
and
they're
all
about
the
design
guidelines.
The
first
one
is
if
the
council
is
interested
in
having
a
public
outreach
process.
Part
of
the
difficulty
is
we're
working
under
a
tight
timeframe
with
September
1st
having
SB
189
go
into
effect,
and
the
council
does
have
a
public
hearing
scheduled
on
August
14th.
The
administration
wasn't
currently
planning
to
do
a
public
outreach
process,
but
they
have
engaged
with
some
of
the
providers
to
get
the
industry's
feedback.
E
So
the
first
question
is:
are
you
interested
in
an
additional
level
of
public
outreach,
maybe
about
the
design
guidelines,
specifically
since
that's
what
people
would
be
seeing
in
their
neighborhoods?
The
other
two
components
are
monitoring
and
enforcement
mechanisms
to
make
sure
that
the
design
guidelines
are
being
followed,
and
if
the
council
would
like
to
adopt
the
design
guidelines,
it
is
not
required,
but
it
is
I
believe
an
option.
If
the
council
is
interested.
R
So
I'll
take
those
next
two
questions.
If
that's:
okay
enforcement,
the
design
guidelines
are
part
of
what
the
city
would
put
in
place
under
the
new
ordinance
that
you
have
in
front
of
you
and
a
violation
of
that
ordinance,
including
a
violation
of
the
design
standards,
would
be
a
default
under
the
ordinance
would
be
default
under
their
permit
and
it
would
be
a
default
under
their
master
license
agreement.
R
A
State
statute
has
been
created
so
severely
limits
the
the
the
funding
that
the
city
will
receive
from
these
installations.
That
I
mean
we
have
a
hard
time
enforcing
on
things
that
we
can
fully
charge
the
cost
justified
cost,
for
we
aren't
necessarily
getting
that
here.
So
do
we
actually
have
the
enforcement
for
the
potential
one
eight
hundred
to
a
thousand
installations
that
we
have
the
capacity
for?
Do
we
have
the
enforcement
I
mean
personnel
wise
and
time
wise
to
look
at
this
I.
R
Think
we'd
probably
have
to
ask
engineering
to
answer
that
we
do
have
the
mechanism
the
legal
mechanism
to
enforce.
But
your
question
is
a
far
more
practical
one
would.
K
A
R
Know
that
I
can
hazard
a
guess
whether
or
not
everyone
will
think
that
sufficient
to
make
them
want
to
comply.
If
they
don't
comply
it
we
have
another
mechanism,
which
is
we
don't
issue
them
any
more
permits,
so
that
might
be
an
immediate
consequence.
That
has
a
little
bit
more
effect
and
that's
something
that's
in
place
now,
with
engineering
and
code
for
in
chapter
14,
okay,.
D
K
So
it's
not
your
fault
in
the
city's
fault.
It's
just
a
matter
of
being
able
to
say
here's
a
clear
code:
here's
the
violation!
Can
we
enforce
it
and
is
it
enough?
Maybe
our
hands
are
tied,
I,
don't
know.
The
second
piece
you
said
about
not
doing
further
permit
sounds
like
it
would
be
quite
an
incentive
to
play
by
the
rules.
So
thank
you
for
that
piece.
It
helps
me
feel
a
little
more
comfortable.
A
R
Typically
in
the
city,
the
City
Council
would
set
the
policy
guidelines
in
the
ordinance,
which
is
I,
think
what
we're
doing
now.
Other
programs,
where
you
have
the
day-to-day
enforcement
and
the
technical
details,
I
think
those
are
typically
left
to
the
administration
to
exercise
their
expertise
in
generating
those
those
standards.
For
example,
in
engineering
engineering,
has
a
whole
slew
of
different
standards.
They
apply
in
a
permanent
situation,
and
so
we
think
that
it
follows
that
same
typical
pattern.
R
M
If
I,
if
I,
could
address
that,
it
is
up
to
the
council,
though,
if
they
want
to
see
that
detail
and
I
understand
that
everybody's
going
as
fast
as
they
can
and
that
they
may
be
able
to
get
that
to
the
council
before
the
hearing.
Excuse
me
so
I
think
that
it's
a
matter
of
just
wanting
to
see
what
type
of
things
right.
M
Clarity
of
it
and
that
type
of
things,
because
these
council
members
are
the
ones
who
will
hear
the
complaints.
So
there
are
some
cases
like
with
the
design
guidelines
of
historic
landmarks,
I
think
that
they
were
first
in
ordinance
and
then
were
moved
to
an
administrative
document.
They
there
they've
been
in
different
places
over
the
years,
so
it's
I
think
a
matter
of
seeing
those
right.
R
M
Knowing
that
the
administration
has
a
process
in
place,
we
do
have
had
over
the
years
a
few
cases
where
the
administration,
previous
administrations
haven't,
had
transparent
processes
in
place,
and
therefore
people
feel
like
it's
inequitable
and
that
kind
of
a
thing.
So
so
those
are
the
kinds
of
things
I,
don't
think
council
members
would
be
interested
at
all
in
knowing
how
many
inches
this
is.
F
A
E
Number
two
gets
to
what
criteria
will
be
used
to
evaluate
provider
requests
to
install
new
utility,
poles
and
residential
zones.
The
state
law
states
that
city
must
provide
discretionary,
non-discriminatory
and
written
consent
when
the
adjacent
uses
to
the
monopole
are
residential
and
it
gets
a
bit
into
the
weeds
about
measuring
the
public.
Right-Of-Way
60
feet
is
what
is
mentioned
in
the
state
law,
but
our
typical
residential
right-of-way
is
66
feet
and
part
of
what's
important.
Is
the
non-discriminatory
requirement
states
that
how
you
treat
one
provider
and
their
request
to
install
in
residential
areas?
E
R
We
view
that
as
an
ability
that,
when
it's
not
a
permitted
use,
so
we
can
put
some
additional
requirements
from
a
design
standard
process
on
that.
I.
Think
that
the
way
it's
written,
we
believe
that
the
street
measurement
so
between
the
curb
is
the
operative
place
to
measure
for
the
60
feet.
So
I
think
the
design
guidelines
will
address
what
the
criteria
are
for
allowing
a
new
pole.
E
This
is
when
the
council
might
recognize
from
franchise
agreements
in
the
past.
The
standard
franchise
agreement
for
the
city
lists
for
locations
and
what's
proposed
in
the
ordinance,
is
so
in
franchise
agreements.
We
typically
see
the
duty
to
underground
in
new
residential
subdivisions,
the
central
business
district,
any
area
where
the
existing
utilities
are
already
underground
and
whenever
other
utility
companies
are
under
grounding
their
cables
and
lines.
R
I
think
when
I
went
back
and
reviewed
this
question
with
City
Council
staff,
I
think
the
couple
of
definitions
just
caused
confusion.
The
state
statute
says
that
we
can
only
require
wireless
facility
can
providers
to
underground
if
all
the
other
users
of
the
right
away
are
required
to
underground,
and
we
can
never
require
them
to
underground
their
antennas.
Obviously
they
wouldn't
work
underground.
So
our
recommendation
on
this
is
were
to
just
rely
on
the
state
statute
requirements.
E
R
Think
our
response
would
be
that
we
think
that
we
should
allow
the
utilities
to
remain
in
place
at
the
city's
discretion.
So
you,
engineering
right
now
has
requirements
for
when
utilities
have
to
be
removed
and
when
they're
not
removed
and
leave
it
in
that
that
same
box,
rather
than
trying
to
create
a
different
process
here.
So
in.
R
R
This
is
a
provision
that
would
that's
used
in
our
franchise
agreements
and
probably
I,
think
is
not
as
directly
applicable
because
they
wouldn't
be
installing
I,
like
facilities
under
a
small
Wireless
agreement,
so
I
think
we're
gonna
delete
that
the
exception
for
the
ilyich
and
then
just
leave
the
abandoned
facilities
to
engineering
when
they
have
to
be
removed
and
when
they
can
be
left
in
the
right
away.
I
think
that
oh,
the
above-ground
facilities
are
always
required
to
be
removed.
We're
just
talking
about
underground
fiber.
E
And
then
there's
one
more
policy
question
to
bring
up
policy
question.
7,
8,
&
9
were
also
included
during
the
council's
May
briefings
and
we
included
them
here
again
since
those
seem
to
be
ongoing
discussions,
especially
the
staffing
level,
based
on
the
number
of
applicants,
applications
received
but
number
six.
The
propose
to
new
fees
are
created
by
the
this.
R
M
A
R
A
Okay,
council
members,
anything
else,
I
know
that
took
a
long
time.
I'm
gonna
recap
some
expectations.
It
sounds
like
we've
come
up
with
the
councilmember
Johnston.
Had
the
question
about
the
toothiness
of
the
enforcement
and
I
had
a
question
about
our
staffing
level
ability
if
we
could
get
a
little
bit
of
feedback
on
that,
please
we've
decided
to
bring
the
design
guidelines
to
the
Council
for
adoption
that
the
design
guidelines
are
going
to
address
that
Street
with
question.
A
A
Design
guidelines
addressing
the
street
width
was
that
it.
Thank
you
yeah
welcome.
Thank
you.
So
tonight
we're
gonna
set.
A
public
hearing
will
hold
public
comment
on
Tuesday,
August,
14th
or
tentatively
scheduled
to
take
action
on
Tuesday
August
21st,
with
our
September
1st
deadline
just
a
few
days
away.
Thanks
for
the
collaborative
work
amongst
all
the
divisions
and
departments
in
our
own
office
and
the
rapid
time
line,
you're
working
under,
we
appreciate
it.
F
A
All
right,
friends
you've
been
waiting
for
it.
The
dogs
are
back
Alison
Roland.
Please
lead
us
and
guide
us
as
we
walk
through
the
dog
off
leash
ordinance
amendments.
This
is
item
11
on
our
agenda.
I
think
Jan
or
Maki
is
our
dog
expert
and
Kristin
Rikers
here
from
Park
fans,
thanks
for
being
with
us,
Kristin
good.
J
J
Dog
off
leash
issues
for
the
four
of
you
who
were
not
here
in
2014-2015
when
these
discussions
went
on
or
before,
then,
when
Jan
worked
on
these
discussions,
it
has
been
a
long
road
and
really
I.
Think
part
of
the
reason
it's
been
so
complicated
for
for
the
city
in
general
is
that
this
reflects.
This
issue
reflects
the
changing
demand
that
people
have
for
recreation
options
in
this
case
with
their
dogs.
J
But
obviously
these
kind
of
changes
are
things
that
and
public
lands
deals
with
on
an
ongoing
basis
that
the
use
of
parks
changes
over
time
and
that's
something
that
I
think
the
became
clear
to
the
council.
As
these
discussions
went
on
the
council
in
2014-2015
treated,
this
issue
quite
extensively
set
up
a
community
working
group
to
try
to
get
both
administration.
J
The
public
council
members
involved
in
sort
of
figuring
out
a
way
through
these
discussions
to
make
sure
that
all
all
parties
were
involved
and
that
their
their
concerns
were
expressed,
and
public
services
department
really
responded
very
promptly
to
these
to
the
requests
of
council
members.
Since
2015,
there
are
five
new
off-leash
areas
that
have
been
approved
by
the
administration
that
are
actually
working,
but
they
are
not
included
in
the
ordinance,
and
then
there
are
another
five
that
are
planned
and
in
their
test
period.
J
So
this
is
a
major
change
from
the
number
at
least
that
was
included,
or
that
was
available
in
2014
and
2015.
The
administration's
current
proposal
includes
two
major
aspects:
one
is
repeal
of
resolution
52,
which
is
the
term
the
jargon
we
used
for
the
public
process
that
establishes
that
allows
new
dog
off
leash
areas
to
be
established.
So
that
would
be
one
element
of
this.
It
is
a
rather
complex
process.
J
That
may
involve
something
like
preserving
some
sort
of
council
role
for
dog
off
leash
areas
or
perhaps
including
status
reports
requesting
status
reports
from
public
services
on
issues
that
may
come
up.
So
those
are
the
basic
issues
at
play.
Here
we
have
a
number
of
policy
questions
that
the
council
may
wish
to
address,
and
perhaps
Kristen
would
like
to
speak
a
little
more
about
them.
If
the
chair
has
that
in
mind,
could.
F
S
Thank
you,
part
of
this
proposal
comes
out
of
our
parks
and
public
lands,
lack
of
ability
to
follow
the
ordinance.
At
this
point,
we've
added
dog
parks
that
are
not
in
ordinance
so
we're
outside
ordinance.
There
we've
had
a
really
difficult
time
following
resolution
52,
just
because
of
some
of
the
requirements
and
I
can
share
some
of
those,
so
each
new
off
leash
area
has
to
be
designated
in
ordinance.
That's
one
area
we're
having
a
following
as
we've
added,
so
many
new
time-limited
off
leash
parks.
S
S
A
S
Would
love
to
have
sponsors
and
with
each
of
the
new
dog
parks,
we've
gone
to
community
councils
and
ask
them
for
sponsors,
we've
asked
them.
It
also
requires
us
to
do
a
petition
and
we
have
gathered
those
petitions.
That's
one
area
where
we've
been
able
to
implement
the
resolution
52
where
we
haven't
gotten
25
signatures.
We
have
not
implemented
those
time-limited
dog
parks,
which
is
why
some
of
them
are
still
on
hold
and.
S
Send
them
our
way,
please
we
actually
have
so
we
have
a
new
position
in
parks
and
public
lands.
It's
our
communications
coordinator
and
she
is
heading
up
the
adopt
a
park
and
the
Friends
of
program,
and
so
we
would
love
to
have
those
sponsors
be
part
of
that
program
and
help
us
with
educating
most
of
our
dog
parks.
Are
they
function
fairly?
S
Well,
it's
the
parks
where
you
cannot
have
your
dog
off
leash
that
are
not
functioning
well
and
that's
where
we
have
most
the
issues
where
people
are
not
following
our
dog
park
rules
in
particular
memory
grove
park
where
it's
everybody
thinks
it's
an
off-leash
park,
but
it
is
actually
an
Unleashed
park
in
the
southern
end
of
the
park.
Only
the
northern
end
has
on
the
Freedom
Trail.
Is
there
off
leash
Cindy.
M
Just
a
little
bit
of
information,
the
there's
been
and
I
think
still
is
a
very
active
organization
that
had
served
as
sponsor
in
a
lot
of
the
locations,
and
they
they
welcome
that.
The
the
relationship
sort
of
went
crosswise
with
the
previous
administration
and
they
were
not
then
included.
It
wasn't
a
collaborative
situation,
so
I
think
I'm
knowing
a
lot
of
those
people
that
seems
like
they
would
probably
be
open
to
that.
If
the
collaboration
could
be
restored,
it's
at
least
worth
checking
my
DOS
uh-huh.
M
S
S
I
think
here
with
with
this
change,
is
the
closure
and
I
guess
I
just
like
to
share
that
some
of
the
examples
of
where
we
have
dog
park
closures.
One
is
the
parlays
historic,
Nature
Park,
and
that
is
closed
through
ordinance.
A
section
of
that
Park.
Another
area
is
the
Wasatch
hollow,
preserve
and
Wasatch.
Hollow
Preserve
is
has
a
management
plan
that
was
approved
by
council
in
2011
that
restricts
dog
use
or
dogs
in
a
portion
of
that
area.
S
However,
that's
not
an
ordinance
and
part
of
the
problem
with
not
having
something
like
that
in
ordinance
is
Salt
Lake,
County,
Animal,
Control
cannot
or
and
or
will
not
enforce
those
rules
unless
it's
in
ordinance
and
they
can't
write
a
ticket
unless
it's
an
ordinance,
and
so
we
get
people
with
dogs
in
that
area.
All
the
time
and
animal
control
is
not
enforcing
the
preservation
plans,
as
the
management
plan
calls
for
for
that
area.
S
Other
reasons
why
we
might
like
to
close
an
area
for
two
dogs.
We
have
a
new
bike,
jump
Park
and
it
would
be
a
conflict
of
interest
to
have
dogs
on
or
off
leash
in
that
area,
and
so
those
areas,
bike
parks
would
be
closed
to
dogs
and
even
Herman.
Frank's
park
was
closed
to
dogs
on
July
24th
when
we
were
setting
off
fireworks,
and
so
there
are
times
when
it's
just
for
safety
reasons
that
we
need
to
have
that.
It
would
be
great
to
have
that
authority
and
to
be
able
to
enforce
that
authority.
A
A
Councilmember
Wharton:
well
your
while
you're
pulling
it
up.
It's
okay,
Kristen
I
know
that
the
resolution
52
is
cumbersome
and
has
been
difficult
to
navigate
from
an
administration
perspective,
but
I
gotta
say
that
some
of
the
complaints
feel
like
public
outreach
is
difficult.
So
let's
take
this
out
and
I
I
can
I
have
more
of
a
sympathetic
ear
to
the
the
bureaucratic
challenges
of
you
know,
temporarily
needing
closures
and
areas,
and
that
not
every
Park
necessarily
fits
off-leash
dogs
at
all
times
and
that
kind
of
agility
that
that's
a
conversation
I'm
open
to.
A
S
I
I
I
feel
like
we
have
done
the
public
outreach
going
out
to
the
community
councils.
We
do
do
some
tabeling
at
different
fairs
and
that
kind
of
thing
we
haven't
found
the
folks
that
want
to
volunteer
the
time
needed
to
educate
and
to
be
a
part
of
that
I'm
not
saying
they're
not
out
there.
I
would
love
for
them
to
come
to
us
and
where
we're
trying
to
reach
out
to
them.
But,
as
you
know,
some
of
the
community
council
meetings
are
not
well
attended
and
I.
B
J
Alison,
if
I
could
add
just
echoing
some
of
Kristen's
comments
with
things
that
happen
before
Kristin
was
actually
at
the
city.
I.
Think
in
our
previous
conversations,
there's
been
a
concern.
If
you
look
on
page
three
of
the
staff
report,
the
list
of
approved
part-time
areas,
the
ones
in
trial
phase
and
the
ones
that
the
ones
that
are
planned,
you'll
notice,
that
two
of
the
three
that
are
still
in
planning
in
planning
phases
are
on
the
west
side.
J
And
that
was
a
complaint
we
heard
several
years
ago
as
well,
that
it
seems
to
be
more
difficult
on
the
west
side
to
find
people
who
are.
You
know,
for
whatever
reason,
have
the
time
or
the
resources
to
sponsor
off-leash
parks,
so
that
that
may
be
a
consideration
as
well
and
it
sort
of
sounds
similar
to
what
Kristen
has
just
mentioned.
Council.
L
Oh
I
also
I'm
concerned
about
how
the
lack
of
him,
or
whether
there'll
be
a
lack
of
input
from
community
groups
under
this
new
structure.
So
how?
How
could
is
there
a
way
that
we
could
incorporate
them
more
into
the
process
that
you
can
see
so
that
there
would
be
adequate
like
public
input
before
there
was
a
closure
or
additional
openings,
or
any
anything
like
that?.
S
The
yes
to
answer
your
question:
yes,
the
the
the
Wasatch
shallow
area
that
is
administratively
closed,
not
by
ordinance
closed,
had
extensive
public
involvement.
Ibi
consultants
worked
with
the
community,
held
public
workshops
and
went
to
the
community
council
and
involved
the
community
in
that
decision
to
preserve
that
area
for
natural
habitat.
So.
S
Any
time
we
make
a
change
sometimes
like
the
Herman
Frank's
change.
People
are
very
familiar
and
used
to
that
that
closure
on
July
24th
every
year,
and
so
we
don't
go
to
the
community
council
for
that,
but
any
other
types
of
closures.
If
it's
more
permanent,
we
would
certainly
do
a
lot
of
public
outreach
in
order
to
make
the
decision
so
that
they
don't
come
back
to
you
and
complain.
Yeah.
L
N
S
A
S
Pretty
much
we
would
like
to
treat
dog
parks
like
we
treat
any
other
amenity
in
our
parks,
so,
for
example,
the
pathway
at
Liberty
Park.
We
last
fall,
we
added
a
stripe
around
the
middle
and
we
added
a
sign
that
said
pilot
program,
we're
going
to
try
going
one
direction
and
we
got
a
lot
of
negative
feedback.
S
We
got
some
positive
but
a
lot
of
negative,
and
so
we
put
it
up
there
for
a
pilot
program
and
we
decided
to
let
it
try
to
run
through
the
summer
to
see
how
it
would
go,
but
likely
we
will
change
that
based
on
public
feedback.
Again,
the
parks
are
for
the
public
and
the
community
that
uses
them,
and
if
it's
not
working
for
that
community,
it's
our
responsibility
to
change
it.
I.
A
Guess
the
it
sounds
like
the
public
process
isn't
necessarily
predictable
if
it
isn't
done
through
the
established
public
processes
here
that
there
they
made,
that
parks
department
may
just
put
a
pilot
out
there
and
wait
to
hear
back
from
people
or
there
may
be
community
outreach,
but
that,
as
you
answered,
councilmember
Wharton,
there's
no
requirement
to
go
out
to
the
community
councils
for
changes
and
and
I
think
that
that
may
be.
If
any
I
don't
know.
If
my
peers
feel
any
of
that
has
a
like,
we
do
here
from
the
community.
A
They
know
we
have
public
hearings.
We
hear
from
Polly
at
our
general
comment
section
every
couple
months,
because
that's
the
established
process
and
taking
it
out
of
the
what
people
know,
which
is
that
the
City
Council
members
take
their
calls
and
that
influences
our
decisions
and
we
take
their
comments
and
that
influences
our
decisions
in
putting
it
on
to
a
director
that
nobody
may
know
and
may
have
to
do
some
work
to
find
out.
Who
that
decision-maker
is
it?
A
Doesn't
it's
not
as
transparent
and
I'm,
not
trying
to
say
the
parks
department
is
not
doesn't
work
to
be
engaging.
You
guys
do
some
of
the
best
public
outreach
of
the
community
councils
of
any
department
or
division
in
the
city
you're.
You
are
there,
but
it's
not
necessarily
a
given
is
what
we're
hearing
councilmember
Luke
thank.
G
You,
madam
chair
I,
also
want
to
say
that
I
think
that
there
is
a
there
needs
to
be
a
continued
role
for
the
council,
not
only
to
hear
feedback
but
to
be
a
part
of
these
discussions,
because
when
we
look
at,
for
example,
the
the
pilot
programs
and
Wasatch
holo
and
some
of
the
other
parks
that
you
know
where
we
tested
different
things,
those
ideas
were
generated.
You
know,
through
the
council,
led
process
rather
than
at
an
administrative
process
and
I.
G
I
will
argue
that
that
you
know
for
us
as
council
members
with
the
you
know
the
proximity
that
we
have
the
close
proximity
with
our
constituents
that
you
know
where
we're
going
to
community
council
meetings
every
month
where
we're
having
those
interactions.
You
know
I
agree
with
councilmember
Mendenhall,
where
you
know
it's
changing
an
established
process
that
doesn't
seem
to
be
broken
so.
S
S
So
those
are
some
of
the
things
if,
if
I
followed
ordinance
to
the
tee
yeah
with
resolution,
52
and
I
can't
find
the
volunteers
or
have
the
people
to
reach
out
to
the
public
to
get
those
volunteers
I
fear
that
those
dog
parks
might
not
get
opened
or
established
and
fight.
I've
talked
with
Poli
hard
about
this,
and
she
supports
that.
Yeah.
G
I'm
not
I'm,
not
saying
that
you
know
that
we
that
all
of
this
is
bad
I'm,
saying
that
excluding
the
council
is
the
part
that
I
have
concern
with
and
I
and
and
changing
that
part
of
the
process.
I'm,
not
saying
that
you
know
the
the.
What
we
have
in
place
is
the
the
perfect
solution,
because
it
clearly
is
not,
but
you
know
for
some
of
these,
the
other
pilots
and
some
of
the
other
you
know
uses
that
we've
been
able
to
do.
We've
been
able
to
do
that
because
of
the
proximity
to
us.
G
As
council
members,
you
know
responding
to
our
constituents.
Looking
at
you
know,
trying
to
figure,
you
figure
out
different
solutions
and
things
to
try
and
some
some
things
don't
work.
Some
things
do
and
I
just,
and
so
you
know,
while
I
don't
necessarily
have
a
problem
with
with
them
all
of
the
things
that
are
included
at
the
amendments.
L
L
S
Because
we
are
building
one
on
a
Superfund
site,
now
that's
very
costly
and
that
one
is
about
two
hundred
and
twenty
thousand
dollars.
So
in
general
it's
probably
going
to
be.
It
depends
on
the
size
which
will
determine
the
amount
of
fencing
that
we
need
and
that
kind
of
thing,
but
in
general,
anywhere
from
I,
really
depend
the
Fairmont.
Park
would
be
a
fairly
good
example,
and
if
my
recollection
is
correct,
it's
it
was
about
a
hundred
thousand
dollars
that
we
had
to
build
that
Park.
L
S
S
S
This
time
we
are
above
the
national
average
for
the
number
of
dog
parks
for
the
number
of
people
that
we
have
in
the
city.
That
being
said,
we
also
have
more
homes
with
dogs
in
them
than
we
do
with
kids
right,
and
we
hear
all
the
time
that
people
would
love
to
have
more
dog
parks
and
I
think
that
another
dog
park
would
be
well
used
in
the
city
yeah.
S
L
I
have
like
okay,
so
I
have
constituents
right
now
that
I've
come
to
me
about
Warm
Springs
and
say
that
they
they
think
that
they
can
raise
enough
money
to
put
a
dog
park
into
Warm
Springs
and
that
there's
enough
community
support
for
it.
So
how
would
that?
How
would
the
process
for
those
constituents
change
under
the
proposal,
and
they
just
I
mean
they?
Wouldn't
they
wouldn't
come
to
me
their
City
Council
member
at
all?
They
would
just
go
directly
to
you
and
you
would
write
yes.
S
L
S
L
And
because
a
lot
of
that
brings
me
back
into
the
volunteer
questions
that
I'm
sorry,
if
you
already
answered
this,
but
in
the
situations
where
you're
saying
that
there
aren't
the
volunteers
there
to
help
that
were
anticipated,
what
do
we?
What
do
we
do?
We
in
the
situation,
like
that
happens,
do
we
then
reach
out
to
another
group
like
fidos
and
say
that
this
this
neighborhood
is
is
not
supporting
it?
Can
we
get
some
other,
you
know.
What
do
we
do?
What's
the
process
like.
S
K
It
sounds
like
the
ordinance
is
written
is
untenable.
Frankly,
I
mean
if
we're
gonna
go
and
not
change
at
this
point,
then
they
have
the
right
to
shut
them
down.
That's
that's!
Where
we're
at
right,
I
know,
there's
gonna,
be
a
process.
I
hope
that
we
have
a
process
in
the
next
year,
perhaps
period,
because
we
have
major
funding
issues,
major
funding
issues,
even
if
we
create
a
new
dog
park
that
doesn't
pay
for
ongoing
maintenance,
it
doesn't
pay
for
any
of
that.
So
it's
still
another
unfunded
amenity.
K
That
being
said,
I
would
favor
some
amendment
to
to
the
resolution
at
this
point
so
that
it's
clear
for
everyone
about
what
the
authority
is,
how
it
works
and
I'm
sure
we're
gonna
have
to
keep
talking
about
this
going
forward.
I
can
go
into
Madison,
Park
or
those
things,
but
details
that
we
can
hit
another
time.
K
So
I
would
favor
a
change
to
the
resolution,
at
least
at
this
point
to
allow
some
of
the
concerns
they
have
to
be
addressed,
and
maybe
we
need
to
keep
having
a
longer
conversation
about
the
balance
between
the
administration
and
our
roles.
Here.
I
have
ongoing
concerns
about
the
the
workload
of
the
City
Council
staff
and
the
council
itself
and
taking
everything
in
the
city
I
understand.
We
don't
want
to
abdicate
issues
that
are
sensitive
to
our
neighborhoods.
K
L
J
Can
certainly
talk
about
it
and
what
would
I
guess?
My
question
would
be
whether
the
council
would
like
to
move
in
that
direction.
Today,
saying
you
know
we'd
like
to
keep
the
part
about
repealing
resolution
52
if
I'm
understanding
you
really
and
talk
more
about
the
closure
issue,
whether
you'd
like
to
move
on
that
today
or
whether
you
and
then
have
us,
follow
up
with
the
options
with
the
administration
or
whether
we'd
like
to
do
it.
The
other
way
around
have
the
discussions
first
and
then
potentially
adopt
an
amendment.
B
A
We're
gonna
create
this
snappy
new
access
portal
or
what
something
I
don't
I'm
making
this
up,
but
there's
some
there
smarter
people
who
do
this
all
the
time
for
the
city
who
could
say
we're
gonna
create
this
really
engaging
permanent
fixture
on
the
parks
website.
That
has
give
us
your
feedback
about
dog
parks
in
a
bigger
way
than
we
do
today.
So
as
to
capture
people
who
come
looking
and
don't
and
there's
nothing
here
anymore.
We.
S
Actually,
when
we
started
the
time-limited
off-leash
dog
parks
created
what
we
called
the
dog
log
and
it
is
an
online
communication
with
the
public
and
we
have
advertised
it
at
all
of
the
time.
Limited
off-leash
dog
parks
to
get
their
feedback,
and
so
we
still
it's
open
and
our
staff
collect
that
information.
S
A
L
K
S
S
Right,
yes,
and
it
could
be
done
Park
by
park
because
closing
an
area
of
a
park.
Two
dogs
certainly
is
a
rare
occasion,
but
there
are
some
already
that
we
have
administrative
ly
closed
to
dogs,
so
we
just
can't
enforce
it
and
we're
getting
a
lot
of
heat
from
the
neighbors,
in
particular
up
at
Wasatch
Hollow,
that
the
dogs
are
up
there
in
the
preserve
and
it's
intended
to
be
a
wildlife,
habitat,
I
guess.
K
My
concern
about
this
is
making
sure
there's
some
ability
to
do
that
in
some
areas.
I,
don't
think
my
intent
is
not
dog
parks.
My
intent
is
a
bike
park,
while
such
a
preservation
area
places
that
it
clearly
shouldn't,
but
we
don't
have
anything
to
help
enforce
that
current
sort
of
restriction
and
I'd
like
to
see
that
address
fairly
quickly.
If
we
could,
the
enforcement.
K
K
K
S
Can
put
something
together?
Okay,
it's
so
we
are
happy
to
change
the
language.
So
it's
not
a
department
director,
somehow
what
we
our
goal
is
to
be
able
to
enforce
those
rules.
That's
our
goal
and
it
is
hard
to
come
to
Council
and
change
ordinance.
Every
time
a
new
Park
is
added
or
a
a
section
of
a
park
become
something
different
where
it
is
inappropriate
to
have
dogs
in
that
area.
We
certainly
can
do
it.
It
just
changing
ordinance
sometimes
takes
up
to
two
years.
A
A
L
They're
separate
so
so
I
would
say:
eliminate
52
and
I'm
just
trying
to
see
if
councilmembers
are
in
favor
of
going
this
direction
and
then
I
I
would
change,
I'll,
say
temporary.
Well,
let's
make
it
two
weeks
how
about
that
14
days
and
if
people
are
are
interested
in
that
or
if
people.
If
there's
anyone
on
the
council
that
thinks
we
need
to
keep
resolution
52
I.
A
A
K
K
A
G
Uwah
we
didn't
address,
we
didn't
address,
it
was
the
last
trap
hole.
We
just
said
that
you
know
that
that
would
include
the
public
process,
but
I'm
talking
about
I
specifically
want
to
see.
You
know
that
there
is
still
not
just
a
public
process,
but
there
is
a
council
role
in
the
public
process,
because
I
do
think
that's
important,
especially.
B
A
That
mean
that
it
may
be.
It
may
not
be
a
decision-making
authority
because
that
our
straw
poll
that
we
may
support
the
repeal
of
resolution,
52
kind
of
says
that
we
are
looking
at
letting
that
go.
But
are
you
saying
that
they
could
come
back
to
us
with
other
okay?
Other
steps
that
the
council's
other.
G
Steps
and
that
we
may
want
and
that
we
may
want
to
look
at
that-
there's
a
potential
for
oversight
or
if
you
know,
if
not
this
administration,
but
a
future
administration.
Just
like
we
talked
about
future
councils.
If
there's
a
future
administration
that
says
we
don't
want
to
do
anything
dog-related
that
that
doesn't
just
shut
the
process
down
for
four
years
or
eight
years,
but
there
is
still
a
mechanism
that
that
a
future
Council
could
come
back
and
do
something
and
at
least
push
the
issue
a
little
bit.
I
just
don't
want
it.
A
S
However,
when
we
have
a
closure
or
an
opening
that
council
might
have
to
approve
that
type
of
use
or
or
restricted
use
in
the
park,
is
that
does
it?
Does
it
have
to
be
an
ordinance
for
your
involvement?
I
guess
is
my
question
named
by
park,
because
that
that
is
really
the
hardest
part
of
this
whole
process.
I.
M
Us
work
with
you
and
take
a
run
at
looking
for
a
way
to
remain
or
to
become
nimble,
but
still
address
the
public
input,
the
volunteer
opportunities
and
the
the
council
interest
in
from
the
public
policy
point
of
view,
I
I
think
that
we
can
probably
come
up
with
something.
We
know
there
isn't
anybody
that
wants
it
to
linger
for
ten
years
and
there
isn't
anyone
that
wants
to
not
have
dog
off
leash
areas.
So
I
I
think
that
together
we
can
figure
out
just
a
few
tweaks.
Okay,.
S
M
J
J
The
second
is,
we
do
have
a
policy
question.
It's
actually
number
three
that
talks
about
the
council,
the
venn
councils
policy
goal
and
some
policy
statements,
a
pretty
large
number
of
policy
statements
that
staff
recorded
from
conversations
our
policy
question
is
whether
the
council
might
be
interested
in
adopting
those
policy
statements.
This
may
and
in
fact,
formally
adopting
the
off-leash
policy
goal.
I
don't
want
to
take
up
more
time
than
we
have
obviously,
but
I
thought
that
might
be
a
point
of
departure.
A
G
You,
madam
chair,
my
only
comment
was
I.
You
know
this
is
always
you
know.
Dogs
are
always
a
very
controversial
topic
and
it's
never
one
that
that
you
know
where
we
don't
have
easy
solutions
for
if
we
did,
we
wouldn't
be
talking
about
it
over
and
over
and
over,
but
at
the
same
time
I
mean
the
the
concern
that
I
have
again.
It
is
not
directed
towards
this
administration.
It's
about
the
fact
that
we
have
seen
dogs
and
dog
owners
targeted
unfairly
or
fairly,
depending
on
you
know
who
you're
talking
to
by
previous
administrations.
G
G
That's
really
I
think
the
what
I'm
concerned
about
it's,
not
Kristin,
with
with
your
your
staff,
it's
it's
really
with
the
fact
that
this
has
been
very,
very
politicized
in
the
past
I.
Imagine
it
will
continue
being
politicized
in
the
future
and
I.
Do
think
that
you
know
when
something
is
as
political
as
dogs
have
become,
that
we
owe
it
to
all
of
our
residents.
G
G
Think
that
you
know
if
we
are,
we
are
going
to
hear
about
it
and
we're
gonna
have
to
deal
with
it,
and
our
staff
will
deal
with
it,
whether
we
are
part
of
the
process
or
not,
and
because
of
that
I'd
rather
be
a
part
of
the
process,
which
is
why
you
know
I've
made
the
comments
that
I
made
earlier.
So
thank
you.
I.
A
Think
that
we've
exhausted
the
conversation
tonight
so
with
the
straw
polls
asking
for
some
feedback
and
I
think
the
policy
questions
might
be
a
great
place
for
us
to
start
the
next
time
we
come
back
to
this
council
members
off
make
a
space
on
a
future
agenda
when
we
get
that
feedback
from
the
staff
and
the
administration
to
have
another
work
session
on
this.
So
thank
you
for
hearing
us
out,
particularly.
K
A
Appropriate
no
tell
her
not
to
go
to
the
dog
park
just
kidding,
okay,
thank
you
and
then
we're
gonna
move
on
to
our
final
regular
agenda
or
I.
Don't
know
what
you
call
that
folks,
not
our
standing
items
item
12,
the
northwest
quadrant,
an
inland
port
update,
which
has
been
tentative
on
here
and
I,
want
to
thank
and
invite
Laura
Fritz
to
come
up.
A
T
You
thank
you,
council
members.
It's
a
pleasure
to
be
in
front
of
you
and
share
with
you.
The
very
first
inland
port
Board
meeting
that
actually
occurred.
I
am
pleased
to
share
that
the
board
unanimously
elected
Derek
Miller
and
James
Rogers,
as
our
Vice
Chair
for
a
term
of
one
year,
so
it'll
be
a
one-year
term
ending
next
July.
That
being
said,
the
committee
then
set
up
three
subcommittees.
T
So
that
committee
is
looking
forward
to
getting
to
work.
It
was
also
decided
that
we
would
use
the
state
Human
Resources
policies
to
go
ahead
and
start
that
process
of
finding
the
executive
director,
but
we
also
created
a
business
plan
and
Budget
Committee
on
that
committee
is
representative
Gibson
myself
been
hard
from
the
governor's
office
of
economic
development.
T
I
think
it's
representative,
Ogden
and
Derek
Miller
will
chair
that
committee,
so
a
great
group
we're
looking
forward
to
getting
to
work
on
putting
together
a
plan
of
what
we're
actually
going
to
accomplish
and
then
associated
budget
with
what
we're
looking
to
do.
Last
but
not
least,
we
created
a
tax
incentives.
Committee
I
did
argue,
unsuccessfully
that
this
committee
should
be
part
of
the
budget
committee.
However,
they
decided
to
go
ahead
and
create
the
committee.
Nonetheless,
as
you
can
imagine,
I
felt
it
was
important
that
the
city
have
representation
on
that
committee.
T
Representative
Gibson
Stewart
claisen
from
Salt
Lake,
County
myself
and
Nicole
Caudill,
who
was
not
in
attendance,
but
we
thought
it
would
be
valuable
to
have
her
as
part
of
the
committee
as
well
from
West
Valley
City.
So
we
will
have
been
Hart
chairing
that
committee
from
the
Governor's
Office
of
Economic
Development.
We
had
a
lot
of
discussion
about
these
committees,
but
then
we
also
discussed
a
little
bit
about
having
some
advisory
committees,
specifically
on
things
like
sustainability
and
the
like
and
I.
Ultimately,
the
board
decided
to
evaluate
these
as
they
sort
of
come
to
mind.
T
I
think
it'll
be
really
important
to
think
about
how
we
can
have
committees
as
part
of
our
business
planning
process,
so
I'll
be
advocating
for
that.
As
part
of
the
committee
work,
James
also
shared
a
letter
from
Salt
Lake
City
Council
chairwoman
Mendenhall.
Thank
you
for
sending
that,
and
there
was
also
a
letter
from
the
community
as
well
as
some
ideas
from
going
forward.
T
Councilmember
Rogers
also
requested
that
the
inland
port
meetings
be
held
within
the
inland
port
jurisdiction,
which
the
committee
overall
felt
was
a
really
good
idea
and
so
and
a
quarterly
basis
will
be
meeting
at
the
Salt
Lake
Community
College
West
Point
campus
on
non
quarterly
meetings.
We
haven't
really
identified
a
location
yet
but
watch
for
those
coming
soon.
So
it
was
decided
that
the
committee's
would
meet
on
the
second
Thursday
of
every
month
and
that
the
board
meetings
will
be
the
fourth
Thursday
of
every
month.
T
So
we've
decided
that
every
agenda
should
have
a
report
from
the
committee's
no
surprise
there,
and
then
we
also
will
be
doing
in
the
next
meeting
a
review
of
all
the
projects
that
are
currently
happening
from
UDOT
to
economic
development
projects,
and
then
chairman
chairman
Miller,
felt
it
was
very
important
for
us
to
also
not
sort
of
recreate
the
wheel.
He
felt
that
it
would
be
valuable
for
us
to
take
the
work.
That's
already
been
done
by
Salt
Lake
City
from
the
master
plan.
T
We've
completed
the
implementation
strategy
that
we've
committed
and
build
off
of
that.
So
he's
asked
that
I
briefed
the
board
on
those
items
at
the
next
meeting,
so
I'll
be
working
with
our
team
to
put
that
together,
it
was
also
requested
that
our
team
put
together
a
field
trip
for
the
board
members
of
the
northwest
quadrant,
so
that
they
fully
understand
the
depth
and
breadth
of
the
area,
but,
most
importantly,
also
the
work
that
we've
already
done
to
help
development
occur.
So
looking
forward
to
organizing
that
field
trip.
T
Last
but
not
least,
we
had
public
comment
and
we
didn't
limit
those
comments
to
three
minutes.
The
majority
of
the
comments
really
focused
around
air
quality
and
sustainability
issues,
but
if
you'd
like
more
detail
on
that
I'm
happy
to
share,
but
that's
sort
of
a
super
high
level
overview
of
our
very
first
inland
port
board
meeting.
Thank.
K
T
When
I
inquired
as
to
why
we
were
creating
a
committee
when
it
really
should
be
part
of
the
budget,
I
was
told
that
there
are
some
projects
that
are
imminent.
That
need
to
be
discussed
clearly.
That
I
did
the
same
thing
my
eyebrows
raised
and
that's
when
I
asked
to
be
on
the
committee,
so
I
will
be
sure
to
report
that
on
what
those
imminent
projects
are
so.
K
L
M
That
note
one
of
the
things
as
staff
that
we
were
thinking
would
be
really
important
for
the
city
to
provide
to
that
committee
would
be
the
policies
that
Salt
Lake
City
has
about
tax
increment
spending.
There's
been
some
good
policy
work
done
on
the
individual
CRA
policy,
and
there
are
a
couple
of
others
that
seemed
really
I
mean
having
Lara.
There
is
the
same
thing
as
having
the
policies
there,
but
might
be
nice
to
send
that
officially
to
the
committee
and
then
Salt
Lake
County
does
have
a
very
good
process.
M
A
L
L
M
M
Didn't
they,
they
were
saying
things
in
a
couple
of
different
ways
and
Jennifer
might
be
able
to
help
us
with
this.
They
said
in
the
affirmative.
They
would
follow
the
open
and
public
meetings
law,
but
those
that
are
familiar
would
not
have
the
extra
information
that
you
don't
have
to
have
an
open
meeting.
If
you
don't
have
a
majority
of
your
board,
so
I
think
they
won't
have
their
committee
meetings
open
and
we
could
be
wrong
about
that
and.
J
Be
open
even
though
there
wasn't
a
quorum,
you
would
have
to
sort
of
affirmative
lee
state
that,
and
I
think
there
was
some
reluctance
on
the
rest
of
the
board
to
kind
of
go
that
extra
step,
so
maybe
to
the
extent
that
subcommittees
make
that
decision
independently.
They
could
be
open,
but
they're,
not
I.
Don't
think,
there's
an
assumption
that
they're
open
to
start
with
and.
M
T
T
T
Is
a
phenomenal
question
and
at
this
juncture,
I
think
where
we
landed
and
Jennifer
feel
free
to
jump
in
I
think
there
was
definitely
some
talk
around
policy
and
then
there
were
these
imminent
projects,
so
I'll
be
interested
to
find
out
what
exactly
the
thought
process
was
because
the
committee,
the
board,
was
pretty
adamant
about
creating
this
committee.
Okay,.
L
L
A
J
As
a
follow
up
from
the
information
that
councilmember
Rogers
passed
out
at
the
board
meeting,
what
our
plan
is
staff
is
is
to
draft
some
sort
of
more
official
written
communication
to
each
of
those
subcommittees
to
try
and
memorialize
some
of
the
hopes,
because
obviously
councilmember
Rogers
isn't
on
each
and
every
one
of
the
subcommittee's.
So
as
far
as
we,
you
know,
we
just
kind
of
want
to
memorialize
the
council's
input
for
each
of
those
subcommittees
and
then
we'll
of
course
share
those
with
Lara
and
the
administration
and
kind
of
keep
working.
Thank.
A
You
I
wanted
to
mention
that
the
chair,
Vice
Chair,
we've
been
talking
about
I'm,
creating
some
fact-finding
work
sessions
on
some
of
the
specific
points
that
were
adopted
in
the
statute
during
the
special
session
and
we're
looking
at
well.
I
should
say
that
the
purpose
of
these
briefings
is
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
the
council
in
our
formal
meeting
here
well
for
our
work
session,
particularly
also
to
hear
from
the
community
and
some
of
the
stakeholders
focused
on
certain
areas
also
for
us
to
prepare
for
the
2019
legislative
session.
A
I
think
the
more
information
we
can
get
about
may
be
suggested
changes
or
impacts
to
the
community
to
the
better
prepared
will
be,
and
also
that,
as
we
have
representation
through
councilmember
Rogers
on
the
board,
he's
expressed
his
willingness
to
take
our
suggestions
to
the
to
that
board.
And
so
hopefully
this
be
an
opportunity
for
us
to
do
all
of
those
things.
Invite
stakeholders
and
community
members
and
administrative
staff
to
present
and
listen
and
discuss
information
and
we're
tentatively.
A
So
we
will
extend
those
invitations
and
staff.
Our
staff
is
just
beginning
to
work
on
that.
So
I
just
want
you
to
know
that
while
the
state
had
their
pot
their
process
and
their
timing
that
the
governor
had
the
authority
over
with
a
special
session
now
that
that's
over,
we
have
our.
We
have
time
to
take
our
deep
dive
and
I
want
us
to
do
that
in
anticipation
of
the
special
session
and
as
this
board
gets
off
the
ground,
so
look
forward
to
that
anything
else.
I
guess
we'll
get
into
our
standing
items.