►
From YouTube: Redevelopment Agency (RDA) Meeting 5/8/18
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
We
have
four
so
we're
gonna
get
started,
I'd
like
to
welcome
everybody
to
the
Redevelopment
Agency
meeting
of
Salt
Lake
City
for
tooth
out
for
May,
seventh
2018
May
8
2008
een.
Excuse
me
we're
gonna
start
this
meeting
with
general
comments
to
the
board
of
directors,
so
anybody
in
the
audience
that
would
like
to
speak
to
the
board
tonight
or
today,
nobody,
okay,
if
anybody
who's
tuning
in
online
or
Channel
17,
you
can
always
submit
your
comments
to
the
board,
to
our
offices
at
451,
South,
State
Street,
or
to
the
board
electronically
via
email.
A
We're
gonna,
move
right
along
to
item
B,
which
is
the
public
hearing
for
the
RTA
budget,
amendment
for
CRT,
a
budget
amendment
number
four
for
fiscal
year,
2017
2018,
who
do
we
have
at
the
desk
today?
Excuse
me
this
is
public
hearing
and
I.
Imagine
we
don't
have
anybody
here
for
that
either
easy
enough.
Okay,
on
to
item
C,
the
Redevelopment
Agency
business,
we're
gonna
start
off
with
item
c1,
which
is
the
approval
of
minutes
board
members.
Any
questions
comments
concerns
good.
C
A
Carries
we
are
onto
item
c2
notice,
of
funding
availability
and
for
those
who
are
tuning
in
this
is
an
opportunity
that
the
RDA
created
a
couple
about
a
year
and
a
half
ago
with
the
car
out
of
21
million
dollars
for
affordable
housing.
This
is
one
of
the
components
of
that
funding.
We've
got
Danny
Waltz
the
director
of
the
RTA
and
Tammi
Hunsaker
at
the
desk,
so
I'll.
Let
you
two
go
ahead
and
kick
it
off
for
us
great.
D
Thank
you
so
I
think
I
believe
it
was
last
December
the
RTA
board,
out
of
that
set-aside
of
21
million
to
carve
out
10
million
for
the
RDA
to
administer
a
notice
of
funding
availability
for
affordable
housing
and
of
that
10
million
for
point.
5
of
that
is
earmarked
for
housing
in
high
opportunity
areas.
So
today's
packet
includes
a
policy
resolution
that
once
adopted,
will
establish
guiding
policies
for
the
NOFA
and
once
adopted,
the
RDA
will
utilize
these
policies
to
finalize
and
administer
the
NOFA
process.
D
So
the
draft
policy
sets
forth
sets
forth
the
nofa's
purpose,
eligibility
and
requirement
standard
terms
and
conditions,
an
application
review
and
approval
process.
So
if
I
may
I'll
just
go
over
some
highlights
of
the
policy,
I
won't
go
through
all
of
the
details,
but
just
a
few
highlights.
So
the
purpose
of
the
NOFA
is
to
provide
low-cost
financial
assistance
to
incentivize
the
development
and
preservation
of
affordable
housing
within
salt
lake
city
municipal
boundaries.
D
Funding
shall
be
distributed
according
to
a
competitive
and
transparent
application
process,
so
essentially,
as
part
of
this
NOFA
we're
requesting
applications
from
any
developer.
Who
really
can
demonstrate
their
ability
to
construct
or
rehabilitate
affordable
housing
who
shows
a
track
record
record
of
maintaining
affordable
housing
developments
and
those
projects
that
align
with
current
policy
objectives?
So
the
NOFA
policy,
the
notice
of
funding
availability
policy,
sets
forth
what
eligible
costs
can
be
covered
which
are
property
acquisition,
hard
construction
costs,
site
improvements
and
related
soft
costs.
D
D
Generally,
we
want
funding
to
be
provided
in
the
form
of
low
interest
loans,
repayment
it
could
be
deferred
or
cash
flow
payment
loans,
depending
on
the
project's
ability
for
repayment
and
we're
looking
at
stipulating
a
minimum
affordability
period
of
30
years
or
less
it
could
be
higher,
but
we
kind
of
wanted
to
set
that
threshold
at
30
years.
The
policy
also
sets
forth
a
five-step
approval
process
which
begins
with
an
application
process.
Then
RDA
staff
will
do
an
eligibility
review
to
make
sure
that
all
the
threshold
requirements
are
being
met.
D
Then
RDA
staff
will
go
through
and
evaluate
projects
and
rank
them
against
one
another
and
also
the
rank
them
against
the
policy
priorities
that
have
been
established
by
the
board.
There
would
be
a
project
selection
process
that
would
include
a
review
and
a
recommendation
by
the
RDA
Finance
Committee,
so
the
RDA
Finance
Committee
is
made
up
of
five
city
staff
members,
so
the
director
of
the
RTA
of
economic
development
of
community
and
neighborhoods
of
finance
I
think
I'm
missing.
D
Two
members
of
RAC-
that's
community
in
neighborhoods
it'll,
come
to
me.
I'll
come
back
to
that,
so
a
recommendation
by
the
RTA
Finance
Committee
body
and
then
a
project
selection.
We
would
actually
bring
those
recommendations
forward
to
the
RTA
board,
so
the
RDA
board
would
actually
get
to
make
the
final
funding
decisions.
D
We
had
proposed
a
12-month
conditional
commitment
period,
which
would
give
time
for
the
applicant
to
get
all
legal
and
regulatory
and
financial
commitments
in
place
for
loan
closing.
However,
the
RTA
finance
or
the
Redevelopment
Advisory
Committee
wanted
one
change
to
that
conditional
commitment
period
which
I'll
talk
about
in
a
minute.
So
it's
also
important
to
note
that
the
RTA
Board
felt
strongly
that
projects
funded
through
the
NOFA
should
align
with
current,
affordable
housing
priorities.
D
However,
we
felt
like,
within
the
the
NOFA
policy,
we
wanted
flexibility
to
adjust
policies
as
they
change
over
time,
so
we
have
prepared
and
placed
project
priorities
in
the
memo,
but
they're
not
in
the
actual
policy,
and
these
priorities
were
adapted
from
those
policy
statements
and
guideposts.
The
Salt
Lake
City
Council,
discussed
last
fall
so
briefly.
D
B
B
B
They
are
policy
issues
they're,
not
memo.
They
become
administrative
discretion
to
me
when
they're
in
a
memo
and
they
become
letter
of
the
law
when
they're
in
the
policy
so
I'm
when
we
get
into
it.
The
discussion
I'll
be
asking
my
peers
to
look
at
giving
feedback
on
including
them
in
the
policy
itself.
But
do
you
want
to
respond
to
that?
That.
D
And
that
definitely
can
be
done,
I
think
as
Danny
and
I
talked
through
this
one
of
the
thoughts
was
that
maybe
there
would
be
another
pot
of
our
DEA
funds
set
aside
in
a
future
fiscal
year
to
carry
out
the
same
sort
of
competitive
process.
So
we
kind
of
thought.
Maybe
we
should
make
this
policy
flexible
enough
to
carry
it
over
to
different
fiscal
years
as
Paul
as
project
priorities
change,
but
I
can
definitely
see
the
benefits
of
including
the
project
priorities
in
the
policy.
So
yeah.
E
I
mean
we
looked
at
it
from
two
different
standpoints
number
one.
We
felt
that
the
city
policies
for
housing
are
basically
that
governing
document
that
we
would
refer
to
with
in
the
NOFA
policy,
so
that
document
as
it's
changed
and
updated
and
reflects
the
city's
current
goals.
If
this
policy
just
reflected
to
that,
then
we
knew
we're
always
reflecting
and
pointing
people
to
what
the
Curt
excuse
me.
E
What
the
current
city
goals
and
policies
are
for
housing
and
then
number
two
as
Tammy
said
by
setting
the
NOFA
up,
is
a
ongoing
policy
and
not
just
a
one-time
distribution
of
these
funds.
It
allows
it
to
be
something
that
you
can
continue
to
reuse
and
we
wanted
to
have
that
flexibility.
So
if
you
did
use
it
again,
you
could
say:
okay
in
the
future,
this
five
million
dollars.
E
We
wanted
to
focus
on
Tod
housing,
and
then
you
could
put
an
oaf
out
for
that
and
so
that
flexibility
would
be
built
in
that's
not
to
say,
there's
one
right
or
wrong
way
to
do
it.
That
was
just
our
motivation,
is
to
point
to
the
set
policies
and
then
have
the
accessibility
within
issuing
of
this.
But
we
can
certainly
have
that
conversation
if
you
want
to
go
in
a
different
direction
board.
F
Agree
with
board
member
Mendenhall,
and
then
it
always
worries
me
to
have-
and
you
know
this
because
we've
had
these
discussions
to
have
discretion
outside
when
there's
not
as
cool
of
council
as
we
are
or
there's
some
other
thing
happening
and
I.
Look
at
this.
This
NOFA
would
be
particularly
housing
right
correct.
F
So
it
seems
to
me
that
all
of
these
priorities,
whether
it
be
now
or
honestly,
10
years
from
now
I'll,
would
probably
still
be
the
same
priorities
as
we're
looking
at
affordable
housing
right
I
mean
I.
Just
don't
really
see
those
changing
that
much
as
we're
looking
at
what
we
care
about
as
far
as
affordable
housing
goes
a
mixed
income
diversity,
equity
I
mean
we
want
those
to
continue
throughout
forever
as
we're
creating
affordable
housing.
F
So
to
me
at
this
point,
I
don't
see
a
downside
or
a
con
for
putting
it
in
policy,
but
there
might
be
one
that
I'm
missing.
So
if
there
is,
let
me,
besides
just
that
flexibility
but
again
I
think
somebody
can
always
come
and
change
the
policy
right
and,
and
so
there
is
still
room
for
flexibility
in
the
sense
that
that
can
always
be
changed
right.
D
We
had
proposed
12
months
unless
otherwise
approved
by
the
board,
and
they
felt
like
12
months
could
be
a
short
time
frame
for
complicated
projects
or
larger
projects.
So
they
wanted
additional
flexibility
and
the
policy
to
actually
provide
for
RDA
staff
and
the
RDA
board
to
set
different
conditional
commitment
periods
based
on
the
project
type.
So
for
a
rehab
project.
It
might
only
be
six
months,
but
for
a
complex
project
it
might
be
18
so
that
they
have
their
specific
language
provided
to
you
on
their
recommendation.
B
You
mr.
chair
so
I'm
talking
to
you,
my
my
peers
on
the
council
and
I'm,
hoping
to
walk
us
through
the
housing
priorities
and
as
councilmember
council
member
our
board
member
Fowler
talked
about
I
would
like
us
to
strawpoll
or
do
whatever
mechanism
you
mr.
chair,
feel
like
is
necessary
to
put
these
into
the
policy
so
I'm
looking
at
housing
priorities,
which
is
section
2
on
our
page
2
of
10
and
I,
want
to
on
the
very
first
one.
B
B
Okay,
so
then
my
my
straw
poll
would
be
that
we
include
in
the
policy
the
priority
of
transit
proximity
and
that
it's
state
to
encourage
access
to
public
transit.
Priority
will
be
given
to
projects
that
are
located
within
a
half
mile
walking
distance
of
a
track
station
s-line
station,
other
fix
line,
transit
or
frequent
transit
network
lines.
A
A
B
Two
equity
and
geographic
distribution.
The
word
high
opportunity
areas
I
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong,
but
my
feeling
my
memory
is,
that
in
hand,
language
high
opportunity
areas
are
those
which
are
we're
currently
allocating
CDBG
dollars
to
and
focusing
am
I
wrong.
So
those
are
still
low
opportunity
areas.
But
do
you
remember
all
this
link
this
conversation
that
we
had
in
a
lot
about
a
year
ago
around
calling
them
areas
of
high
opportunity?
Because
there's
a
lot
of
opportunity
for
us
to
improve?
Does
anyone
else,
I?
Think.
C
D
And
the
foundation
of
that
was
from
the
fair
housing
equity
assessment
that
Jim
would
did
and
then
he
recently
updated
the
data
for
the
mayor's
office,
which
is
what
we'd
be
using
in
this
current
NOFA.
So
it's
it's
primarily
neighborhoods
kind
of
jogs
around
but
generally
east
of
7th
or
13th,
and
this.
C
D
A
D
A
D
B
B
Asked
that
the
language
around
equity
and
geographic
distribution
be
included
in
the
policy
which
is
to
encourage
geographic
distribution
of
affordable
housing
throughout
so
well
Salt
Lake
City
priority
will
be
given
to
projects
located
within
high
opportunity
areas
in
a
minimum
of
four
point.
Five
million
in
funding
shall
be
earmarked
for
qualifying
projects
along.
A
Difference
yeah
all
right,
favorite.
E
C
E
B
G
B
These
are
guiding
principles,
but
they
don't
bind
the
funding,
not
I'm,
not
talking
about
the
snow
feathers,
a
brand
new
thing
or
about
you
personally,
but
that
we
don't
bind
the
funding
necessarily
to
our
priorities
unless
it's
in
the
policy
and
I'm
looking
to
bind
our
values
here
to
the
policy
and
the
money.
This
is
part
of
the
21
million
that
we
set
aside
really
intentionally
for
affordable
housing
and
I
want
to
be
clear.
I
want
us
to
be
clear
through
the
policy.
What
we
want,
this
money
to
be
used
for.
G
A
H
D
G
So
I
guess
my
my
question
comes
from.
If
we
have
a
housing
policy
for
the
city,
this
is
a
separate
housing
policy
that
should
be
aligned
for
RDA
right
with
their
overall
city.
Why
wouldn't
we
just
say
that
the
Rd
has
got
to
be
bound
by
the
Paul
Housing
City
Housing
Policy?
That
way,
if
we
ever
update
the
head
city
housing
policy,
it
applies
to
both
without
having
to
say
at
some
point
we
change
one
or
not
the
other
and
then
they're,
not
in
alignment.
That.
H
The
Housing,
Policy
and
really
all
master
plan
type
policies
are
so
broad
that
really
you
can
interpret
them
in
hundreds
of
different
ways.
So
the
guideposts
were
the
key
things
that
the
council
kept
going
back
to
and
that's
why
we
we
listed
them
so
specifically,
so
it
sounds
like
the
RDA
staff
has
picked
those
things
up,
modified
them
slightly,
so
that
they
fit
into
this
format.
But
you
you
could
get
something
that
the
administration
says
hey.
H
This
is
consistent
with
the
housing
plan
and
it
might
be
consistent
with
a
minor
point
in
the
housing
plan,
but
it
might
not
address
you're,
diverse
types
of
housing
or
the
near
transit
or
those
key
things
that
were
important
to
you.
So
if,
if
those
key
things
are
the
most
important
things
to
you
still,
then
you'd
want
to
include
them.
So.
G
G
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we're
in
the
Aaron's
POI
I
mean
Mendenhall's.
Point
is
well-taken
that
I
think
these
last
the
policy
makes
sense.
I
also
know
how
confusing
it
gets.
When
we
have
multiple
policies
that
were
not
quite
sure
match
up.
We
think
they
should
now,
because
we've
done
a
lot
of
work
and
you
made
sure
they
fit,
but
if
we
changed
either
one
of
those
without
changing
the
other
one
we
run
into
this
issue
again.
So
how
do
we
make
sure
consistent
across
them,
important
members,
Fowler.
F
In
this
way,
and
that
this
is
a
request
for
a
project
and
if
we
have
policy
within
here
that
we
all
agree
with
on
right
now,
then
it
creates
a
clearer
picture
for
what
we're
looking
for
and
how
we're
going
to
spend
that
and
so
I
think,
even
if
your
housing
policy
changes,
if
this
is
sort
of
order,
is
altered
a
little
bit.
I
think
if
this
is
specific
to
our
goals
as
to
what
we
want
housing
through
this
RDA
funding.
F
To
look
like
you,
don't
have
to
change
one
and
then
automatically
change
the
other
if
this
is
all
written
in
a
policy,
because
this
is
what
we
out
of
this
money
that
me
and-
and
that
way
it's
clear
to
to
developers
that,
if
you're
not
willing
to
do
this,
then
even
if
it
aligns
with
you,
know
our
other
priorities,
if
it's
written
in
policy
I
feel
like
it's
much
clearer
for
applicants
to
be
able
to
say
well.
This
is
a
project
that
I
really
want
to
undertake.
A
Agree
with
you
and
I
think
that
when
we
were
talking
about
tax
increment
dollars
there
on
this
list,
for
instance,
I
see
some
additional
goals
that
we
want
to
achieve
with
this.
These
resources
that
we
may
not
if
we
were
just
using
general
fund
dollars
in
following
the
housing
policy,
so
neighborhood
revitalization,
for
instance,
I,
don't
know
I,
don't
recall
if
that's
in
the
housing
policy,
at
least
in
this
way.
So
just
adding
on
to
that
Aaron
did
you
want
to
reframe
or
rephrase
what
you
those.
G
B
B
I
don't
have
changes
in
everyone.
My
changes
to
number
three
are
that
I'm
uncomfortable
with
any
allowance
for
non
mixed
income
projects
with
this
money
and
I
feel
that
the
way
this
is
worded
with
to
encourage
mixed
income
developments
in
prioritizing
those
that
are
mixed
income
leaves
the
door
open
for
the
possibility
that
some
wouldn't
be
and
I'm
not
comfortable
with
projects.
A
C
B
B
Four
I
just
want
to
add
the
word
existing
households.
I
know
it's
probably
silly,
but
displacement
prevention
at
the
very
end
there
it's
well,
it
says,
to
avert
low-income
households
from
being
impacted
by
development
activities
prior
to
priority
will
be
given
to
projects
that
limit,
prevent
or
successfully
mitigate
the
displacement
of
existing
households.
I'm,
not
sure
why,
when
I
read
this
I
felt
like
that
was
necessary,
maybe
it's
not
necessary.
Well,.
C
B
C
Just
rather
brothers
to
have
it
say
something
about
displacement
prevention
of
the
projects.
You
know
it's
just
states
that
will
do
everything
that
we
possibly
can.
You
know
to
include
every
you
know:
people
if
there
is
a
displacement
but
to
say
that
we're
going
to
highlight
projects
that
limit,
prevent
or
successfully
yeah.
D
H
Just
to
refresh
back
to
that
conversation,
one
of
the
things
that
was
concerning
is
taking
a
unit.
That's
that's
in
fairly
decent
shape
or
a
set
of
units
has
low-income
people
taking
those
folks
out
and
then
modifying
the
units
and
putting
lower-income
people
in.
So
the
idea
of
displacing
one
set
of
low-income
people
for
another
set
of
low-income
people
didn't
make
a
lot
of
policy
sense
when
what
we
need
is
more
units
that.
B
G
Think
it's
always
clear-cut,
though,
because
there
may
be
times
when
private
money
wants
to
come
in
and
renovate
a
dilapidated
place
and
they
may
have
a
different
population
they're
trying
to
serve
they're,
not
necessarily
more
or
less
needing
of
housing.
But
it's
a
different
population
and
making
sure
we're
clear
that,
are
we
gonna
be
very
specific
and
say
no
or
we're
gonna
lose
some
latitude
to
say
if
it
hits
the
intention
port
number
feller.
F
I
think
that
this
is
a
good
policy
to
have
in
there,
but
I
think
that
there
is
a
lot
of
confusion
clearly
around
it
and
I'm
I.
Think
too
bored
of
a
member
Johnson's
point
and
something
that
you
said
Tammy
was
that
the
the
intent
behind
this
was,
if
you're
going
to
propose
a
project,
you
also
need
to
propose
a
solution.
If
your
project
is
going
to
to
create
some
issue
that
we're
concerned
about,
then
you
need
to
be
able
to
propose
a
solution
and
I'm
wondering
if
there
is
either
we
sort
of.
F
Reword
this
a
little
bit
or
rework
it,
but
we're
kinda
I,
because
it
does
seem
like
there's
a
lot
of
confusion
there,
and
maybe
we
could
come
back
to
that
with
a
different
proposal
of
wording
there
and
then
just
before.
We
continue
with
what
we
were
doing.
I
also
had
a
suggestion,
as
I
was
listening
to
this.
If
we
are
going
to
put
this
into
policy,
if
we
could
come
back
and
say
and
start
everything
with
more
of
the
priority
will
be
given
and
not
the
because
first,
but
just
a
priority.
F
A
A
If
I
may
add
to
this
really
quick
I
would
like,
for
some
reference
to
language
around
adding
a
net
increase
in
affordable
housing.
More
than
just
mitigating
and
displacement
prevention,
I
think
adding
to
the
housing
stock
in
it
in
numbers
is
important
here
as
well.
So
as
long
as
is
it
okay,
if
we
just
drop
all
that
rough
language
and
let
staff
include
it,
okay,.
C
Let's
do
this
one
more
time,
because
I
kind
of
still
want
to
if
we're
gonna
do
that,
it's
still
tie
it
to
projects
will
be
given
priority
on
on
the
affordability
in
higher
areas
of
opportunity
or
something
to
that
to
that
effect.
So
we're
not
mitigating
it
in
the
same
place
over
and
over
increasing
it
we're
actually
looking
for
better
places
of
this
affordability
to
go.
That's.
B
A
good
question
about
priorities
because
on
one
point
we
say
we're
going
to
give
priority
for
RDA
areas
and
then
another
point
we
say
we're
going
to
give
high
opportunity
areas
and
those
are
possibly
very
different
areas
of
the
city
right.
So
what's
the
these
weighted
priorities?
I,
don't
think
so,
based
on
what
you've
presented,
but
well.
D
We
were
in
the
actual
administrative
NOFA
document,
anticipating
potentially
giving
weight
and
ranking
criteria
to
each
of
these.
So
these
would
be
the
priorities.
That's
that
developers
would
look
at
as
they're
proposing
projects.
So
so,
for
example,
if
you
add
one
on
a
net
increase
of
affordable
housing,
is
that
an
overarching
policy
of
this
pot
of
money?
Or
is
that
project
specific,
because
that
could
rule
out
substantial
rehab
of
of
units
which
is
currently
ineligible
use
under
the
NOFA
like
if
there's
a
really
dilapidated
apartment
building?
D
A
G
Think
we
we
bind
ourselves
in,
do
you
have
to
increase
the
net
when
sometimes
we're
trying
to
protect
historic
sort
of
places
or
things
that
add
to
the
community,
the
wouldna,
so
they
have
more
affordable
afterwards,
but
I
have
much
better
experience
for
the
affordable
people
living
there.
I
hate
binding
us
that
much
we're
trying
to
bind
ourselves
enough
to
make
sure
it
still
happens,
but
not
so
much
that
we're
gonna
restrict
a
lot
of
things
that
may
not
fit
exactly
mister.
B
Feel
like
one
of
those
balancing
tests
where
I'm
like
Cindy
was
saying
reflecting
our
previous
conversation,
where
we
don't
want
to
displace
one
set
of
affordable
just
to
move
in
another
set
of
affordable,
not
increased
the
net
number
of
housing
units
and
recognizing,
on
the
other
side
that
we
might
actually
want
to
do
that.
Sometimes
there
there
may
be
some
historic
building
context
that
makes
us
want
to
and
I'm,
not
sure,
there's
a
perfect
language
scenario,
except
that
there's
a
whole
list
of
priorities
that
you
can
take
some
and
leave
some
different
projects.
You.
G
A
G
I
think
an
example
is
we're
we're
doing
a
project,
that's
an
existing,
affordable
housing.
It
needs
some
rehab
and
we're
going
to
put
money
into
it
and
replace
the
people
who
are
living
there.
Now,
there's
federal
restrictions,
you
have
to
make
sure
they
have
a
place
to
go
and
you
have
a
certain
amount
of
time.
You
have
to
help
them
out
and
there's
laws
about
that
and
I
think
it's
written
in
here
about
this
place.
G
That
means
you
have
to
put
them
up
another
place,
but
the
people
moving
in
are
seriously
and
persistently
mentally
ill
and
it
serves
a
big
need,
but
it
doesn't
necessarily
keep
the
same
folks
were
there
before,
and
it
doesn't
increase
the
number
and
that's
where
I'm
concerned
about
restricting
those-
and
they
may
be
far
fewer
number
of
these.
But
that's
where
I'm
concerned
about
restricting
it
to
some
extent
all
right.
G
G
Way,
but
this
is
the
point
that
there's
a
balancing
act
between
allowing
them
flexibility
to
adapt
to
all
these
interesting
scenarios
and
still
helping
us
to
feel
comfortable
with
the
knot
of
oversight
right.
So
it's
where
I
I
tend
to
rely
on
tour
to
them
a
little
more
and
the
other
folks
wouldn't
and
know
how
to
find
that
balance.
Exam.
D
F
Was
just
thinking
about
this,
so
I
mean
right
now.
What
we're
doing
essentially
is
creating
a
policy
surrounding
our
priorities
right
and
what
I
think
we
could
do
as
we
saw
with
the
displacement
prevention
as
we're
seeing
with
the
the
net
increase,
is
create
another
sort
of
with
each
of
these
very
specific
policies
that
it
that
we're
all
on
board
with
there
could
be
another
piece
of
that
policy.
That
says
you
know.
F
There
could
be
kind
of
a
catch-all
policy
phrase
at
the
bottom
of
that
saying
that
you
know
if
it's
in
line
with
all
of
these
other
priorities,
and
you
have
a
tie
and
one
is
increasing
the
net
stock
of
our
housing,
then
that
might
get
priority
over
the
other
one
right,
because
it
has
more.
Does
that
make
sense
I
mean
there.
B
Think
that
that
that
is
what
the
board
is,
that's
what
we
do
when
they
bring
us
the
project
proposals,
the
funding
opportunities
that
we
look
at
all
of
the
documents
that
we
have
in
our
policy
and
overlay
that
that
that
will
happen,
even
if
there
isn't
language
I,
think
just
that's
the
process
of
the
board.
I
just
had
I
had
one
more
change
to
these
ten,
which
was
on
point
seven.
The
last
three
words
are
long-term
affordability
and
I
wondered
how
we
define
long-term
affordability
for
this
money.
B
D
A
A
And
I
don't
know
that
we
want
to
prioritize
every
project
like
this,
but
I
think
it's
important
that
we
start
talking
about
owner-occupied,
affordability
and
I,
don't
know
if
where
this
would
fit
in
this,
you
know
these
these
ten
points,
but
it
would
be
nice
if
we
could
at
least
reference
that
it's
important
to
us
to
have
owner-occupied,
affordable
housing
constructed
in
our
city.
Do
you
have
any
thoughts
on
that
Cindy.
A
A
B
It
in
there
I
think
it's
a
great
one,
great
I
think
it's
hard
to
imagine
a
owner-occupied,
but
I
have
no
idea
coming
to
ask
for
loans
from
this
ten
million,
but
maybe
it
is
okay.
So
my
motion
is
that
the
housing
priorities,
one
through
10,
be
adopted
as
we've
discussed,
to
be
included
in
the
policy.
A
C
B
Know
I'm
sorry
I
really
like
our
DAC
lately,
yes,
so
this
is
in
the
policy
under
22.5,
which
is
the
minimum
affordability.
It's
page
5
of
10.
For
us,
the
last
sentence.
There
reads
that
the
RDA
funding
shall
be
sized
in
proportion
to
the
affordable
component,
but
I'd
that
language
to
me
doesn't
say
that
it
would
be
sized
in
proportion
to
the
ami
depth.
It
sounds
like
it's
number
of
units.
Is
that
correct.
D
B
C
B
G
B
C
G
A
Yes,
I
have
to
keep
in
mind
that
when
we're
talking
areas
of
opportunity,
you
know
it's
going
to
cost
more
to
develop
over
there
as
well,
and
so
I
mean
we
just
have
to
be
mindful
of
how
the
economics
of
a
project
are
going
to
shake
out
the
board
member
Fowler.
Do
you
have
something
to
offer
as
well.
F
F
Now
that
we're
sort
of
asking
to
put
those
priorities
into
policy
I'm
wondering
if
it
would
be
helpful
to
sort
of
where
we
say
that
projects
are
complying
with
affordability
and
other
requirements.
If
that
we
sort
of
define
what
that
looks
like
as
far
as
as
that,
monitoring
goes
meaning
some
sort
of
language
that
says
that
we're
going
to
monitor
the
projects
as
to
how
they're
living
up
to
these
policies
that
we've
created
right.
These
10
priorities,
slash
policies
that
we've
just
created
and
kind
of
monitor
making.
F
Those
may
be
the
parameters
that
we're
monitoring
so
that
we
can
keep.
We
can
make
sure
that
we're
funding
and
I
think
that
was
just
some
security
for
us
as
board
members
of
like
oh
yeah.
We
did
fund
that
project
and
it's
actually
reaching
all
of
these
priorities
and
parameters
that
we
listed
prior
to
that,
or
maybe
maybe
just
expanding
that
language.
A
little
bit,
however,
seems
realistic,
but
or
does
that
make
sense.
F
C
F
E
F
Have
a
quick
clarifying
question,
so
do
you
mean
that
before
we
give
the
funding,
we
would
have
determined
what
the
time
the
conditional
timeline
would
be
before
we
approve
the
project,
so
you'd
say-
and
this
would
be
conditional
for
six
months,
because
it's
gonna
only
be
this
much
or
you
to
come
to
us
and
say
yeah.
This
is
a
really
big
project.
They're
gonna
need
three
years.
You.
E
D
D
This
gives
us
good
direction,
so
we
can
continue
working
on
the
actual
NOFA
document.
We
won't
lose
any
time,
I,
don't
believe
in
getting
that
out
and
just
going
back
to
one
of
the
policy
priorities
that
you
actually
proposed
the
net
increase
in
affordable
housing.
We
could
actually
try
to
work
that
in
as
well,
because
I
don't
think
that
that
would
necessarily
exclude
rehab
projects,
but
we
would
just
use
that
in
our
ranking
criteria
that
you
would
see
project-by-project,
it's.
D
A
A
D
Yes,
I
believe
last
December,
when
you
appropriated
money
for
the
or
set
aside
money
for
the
NOFA,
you
also
directed
RDA
staff
to
come
back
with
an
affordable
housing
funding
policy.
Looking
at
specific
issues
like
how
we,
as
RDA
staff,
work
through
our
budget,
the
setting
set
aside
of
money
for
the
housing
trust
fund
and
for
affordable
housing
in
general.
D
So
it's
not
the
current
code,
it's
the
code
under
which
the
project
area
was
adopted.
So
currently
we
have
a
20%
requirement
from
Depot
granary,
north
temple,
a
10%
requirement
for
northwest
quadrant,
and
we
do
not
have
a
requirement
with
the
central
business
district
or
West
temple
gateway,
because
those
project
areas
were
established
before
there
was
a
housing
allocation
requirement,
and
then
we
do
have
a
few
project
areas
with
a
restricted
budget
like
the
ballpark
blocks,
70
and
the
North
Temple
viaduct.
D
So
as
per
the
budget,
we
can't
really
allocate
any
funds
from
those
project
areas
to
housing.
So
to
give
you
an
idea,
we
were
looking
at
numbers
before
the
meeting.
The
current
set
aside
for
Depot
granary
and
North
temple
you're,
looking
at
just
under
nine
hundred
thousand
in
a
budget
year
for
those
required
set
asides
and
then
traditionally
the
RDA
has
set
aside
10%
from
those
project
areas
where
we
can
set
aside
housing
funds,
but
there's
no
requirement
and
to
give
you
an
idea,
that's
about
with
the
non
obligated
funds
from
the
central
business
district.
D
So
they're
required
housing
allocations
so
as
per
Utah
statute,
we're
required
to
set
aside
the
20%
from
Depot,
North,
temple
and
granary
and
now
northwest
quadrant,
and
you
have
to
use
that
housing
fund
very
specifically
to
pay
part
of
the
cost
of
land
for
rehab
construction
of
housing.
You
can
lend
grant
or
contribute
money
to
a
person
public
entity,
Housing,
Authority
business,
non
profit
for
housing.
You
can
use
it
for
planning
for
housing
or
make
payments
on
a
bond
for
housing.
You
can
also
use
it
within
project
areas.
D
This
is
kind
of
an
interesting
piece
of
the
code.
You
can
actually
use
the
affordable
housing
set-aside
allocation
from
any
ami
housing
within
project
areas
where
blights
found
to
exist.
The
RDA
hasn't
traditionally
done
this,
but
you
can
use
your
affordable
housing,
set-aside
for
a
market
rate
say
in
north
temple,
because
blights
been
found
to
exist
there.
We
replace
housing
units
lost
as
a
result
of
project
area
development
or
relocate
mobile
home
park
residents.
As
an
alternative.
You
can
take
all
of
your
required
housing
set
aside
and
allocate
the
funds
to
the
community.
D
B
A
A
C
C
D
The
affordability
restriction
for
this
pot
of
money
is
80%
ami
on
below
it
can
be
used
citywide
and,
as
I
stated,
before,
there's
kind
of
a
caveat
if
you're
using
the
funds
within
a
project
area
where
AB
lights
been
found
to
exist
and
blights
been
found
to
exist
in
all
of
our
project
areas,
except
for
this
special
like
the
block,
70
CDA
and
the
ball
park,
not
the
cdas
and
not
the
North
temple
or
the
northwest
quadrant
project
area.
Light
has
not
been
found
to
exist
there.
D
So,
on
top
of
the
required
housing
fund,
we
can
allocate
additional
housing
funds
and
we're
kind
of
looking
at
these
funds
is
more
discretionary,
because
there
are
additional
eligible
activities
for
these
funds.
So
you
can
provide
housing
activities
and
project
areas,
even
project
areas
where
blight
has
not
been
found
to
exist.
You
can
do
market
rate
housing,
you
can
increase,
improve
or
preserve,
affordable
housing
supply
anywhere
within
municipal
boundaries
and
affordable
housing,
as
per
17.
C
is
defined
as
what
the
municipality
defines
affordable
housing
as
as
per
resolution.
D
So
you
could
define
affordable
housing
as
a
higher
or
lower
AMI
and
use
these
funds
citywide
for
that
ami.
So
we
can
do
a
discretionary
housing
fund,
so
historical
and
ongoing
practices,
as
I
mentioned
at
the
top.
We
have
not
only
been
allocating
the
required
housing
funds,
but
we've
been
doing
10%
from
the
project
areas
where
we
don't
have
wheat,
there's
no
requirement,
so
that's
been
West
temple
gateway
and
the
central
business
district
and,
as
Katie
stated,
we've
kind
of
been
dividing
these
between
citywide
and
project
area.
D
D
Just
looking
at
program
and
tools,
we
can
RDA
can
use
housing
funds
pretty
much
citywide,
except
for
the
tax
increment
reimbursement
program
that
we
do
support
affordable
housing
through
that
can
only
be
used
with
currently
within
designated
RDA
project
areas.
Just
because
that's
where
we're
collecting
the
tax
increment,
that
would
then
be
reimbursed
to
the
project,
but
I
know
mr.
chair
I
believe
you
asked
RTA
staff
to
look
into
a
citywide
policy
to
do
that,
which
we
are
working
on
great,
so
essentially,
as
RTA
staff
works
to
develop
this
draft
policy
for
your
review.
D
We
there
are
a
lot
of
nuances
to
affordable
housing
funds
and
we
have
some
policy
questions
you
may
want
to
consider
in
addition
to
the
required
housing
allocation.
Does
the
board
wish
to
continue
the
historical
practice
of
allocating
that
10%
set
aside
from
those
project
areas
where
we're
not
required
to
so
since
Wes
temple
gateways
expiring?
This
would
pretty
much
be
the
central
business
district,
which
is
that
does
add
up
quickly
of
the
amount
designated
for
housing.
D
Does
the
board
wish
to
continue
the
historical
practice
of
designating
a
portion
of
these
two
citywide
activities
and
a
portion
to
project
area,
and
then
a
new
policy
question
that
recently
came
up
is
what
guidelines
should
we
use
when
designating
funding
to
the
Housing
Trust
Fund?
How
may
the
designation
of
other
funding
sources
to
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
impact
the
funding
level
from
the
RTA?
This
is
a
question
with
the
recent
sales
tax
allocation.
A
A
B
Growing
in
the
growing
SLC
plan
and
and
actually
there's
a
part
in
here
under
the
policy
questions
and
considerations
under
item
4
3,
where
it's
a
your
question
about
what
guidelines
should
already
I
use.
I
think
that
the
if
we
do
set
guidelines
that
I
I
want
them
to
go
beyond
today's
board
and
today's
RDA
staff
and
today's
hand
staff
and
be
able
to
understand
the
department's
respective
roles
and
overlap
where
necessary,
but
not
replicate
work
right
that
we
I
don't
want
to
create
products.
B
Financial
products
within
the
RDA
that
are
already
have
been
happening
and
functioning
well
within
hand
or
vice
versa.
So,
if
we're
going
to
set
up
thresholds
for
that
allocation
or
evaluation
criteria,
then
I
think
a
foundational
part
of
that.
That
policy
would
need
to
be
in
defining
roles
and
defining
intersections
so
that
that
is
because
I
think
right.
Now,
it's
more
of
a
relationship
and
it's
not
in
policy.
So
I
would
like
to
us
to
create
a
policy.
B
F
I
have
a
couple
of
things
one
to
piggyback
on
what
board
member
Mendenhall
said.
I
do
think
that
there's
a
policy
discussion
and
it
doesn't
need
to
happen
today,
but
I
think
we
need
to
get
that
for
my
other
board
members
policy
discussion
regarding
what
the
role
is
for
RTA
in
housing
and
what
that
role
is
for
hand
in
housing
and
how
we
can
work
together.
F
Those
two
organizations
can
work
together,
but
I
think
there
might
be
slightly
different
goals
and
objectives
and
I
just
think
that
we
need
to
figure
out
what
those
goals
and
objectives
are,
so
that
we're
not
so
that
everybody
can
have
all
of
their
pieces
of
pie
and
do
the
best
they
can
with
it
and
I.
Just
think
it's
more
of
what
board
member
Mendenhall
was
saying:
kind
of
defining
some
of
that
and
understanding
what
those
roles
and
objectives
are.
D
Don't
think
it's
ever
been
based
on
a
certain
percentage,
which
is
one
of
the
methods
we
were
actually
looking
at,
whether
it's
a
percentage
or
a
flat
amount
each
year
or
if
we're
trying
to
determine
what
thresholds
are
proposed
to
you
through
our
budget.
Is
it
based
on
a
minimum
and
then
a
percentage
over
if
tax
increment
increases,
we
don't
know,
but
I
mean
it's.
It's
varied
the
allocation
of
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
anywhere
from
a
few
hundred
thousand
to
several
hundred
thousand.
It's
been
all
over
the
place.
I
think.
F
For
me,
it
would
be
helpful
if
I
could
maybe
see
those
numbers
and
look
at
that
as
far
as
why
the
trend
is
what
it
is
that
why
it
was
what
it
was
that
year
and
and
then
it
changed
and
what
we
saw
as
an
increase,
because
that
might
help
that
policy
discussion.
If
there
is
some
sort
of
pattern
or
some
sort
of
we
can
look
at
this
is
basic.
You
know
this
is
the
foundation,
and
then
we
do
10%
above
that,
but
or
maybe
that's
not
the
answer.
C
I
would
like
to
actually
have
policy
discussion
in
regards
to
possibly
bonding
with
this
money,
doing
a
public-private
partnership
with
outside
sources
that
we
could
see
what
we
could
actually
do,
and
that
would,
of
course,
go
back
to
the
attorney's
office
to
discuss
that
and
then
have
that
policy
discussion
here
as
a
board.
So.
E
We
can
take
a
look
at
that
I'm
I,
think
that
depends
on
you
would
have
to.
You
would
have
to
really
memorialize
a
commitment
for
for
the
housing
and
what
you
hope
to
accomplish
with
the
upfront
cash
of
bonding
right,
so
I
think
the
difficulty
in
that
would
be.
You
don't
have
a
set
payment
stream
as
much
as
what
would
that
range
be
in
terms
of
bonding
and
in
that
capacity.
I.
Think.
A
C
A
G
B
E
It's
it's
been
a
case-by-case
basis
every
year
and
and
it
it
spans
across
different
ways
that
the
RTA
has
done
their
budget
over
the
years
as
well.
As
long
ago,
we
used
to
accept
funding,
requests
for
all
of
our
budget
needs
and
in
fact,
we
as
staff
would
actually
have
to
apply
to
use
our
own
funds
that
has
changed
over
the
years
to
where
now
we
have
the
current
policy
that
that
is
in
place,
and
so
that's
kind
of
where
we're
at
right
now
is.
G
Would
be
in
favor
of
one
here,
I
think
it
lines
with
what
the
Chamber
of
Commerce
and
others
have
talked
about
housing
being
a
priority
for
them.
At
this
point,
therefore,
unless
you're
had
a
look
at
as
much
I
think
it's
fine
going
half
and
a
half
in
my
opinion,
I
think
we're
still
flexible
and
moving
funds
around
as
needed
as
well.
If
I
remember
correctly,
housing.
G
Yeah,
but
the
one
thing
that
does
come
into
play
is
that
our
talk
about
affordable
housing
from
the
sales
tax
increase,
we
haven't,
disclose
exactly
how
that's
going
to
be
used
to
where
and
that
could
have
an
impact
on
how
we
allocate
these
funds.
So
we
may
want
to
come
back
to
that
one
and
coordination.
What
their
discussion
about
the
the
sales
tax
increase.
E
What
then
do
you
want
to
prioritize
your
RDA
funds
for,
and
primarily
that
should
be
within
the
project
areas
to
build
the
tax
base,
because
without
that
you
don't
have
the
tax
increment,
and
so,
if
you're
not
continuing
to
grow
that
base,
you
were
talking
about
a
depreciating
amount
of
money
over
time,
rather
than
putting
those
funds
to
something
that
continues
to
grow
it.
So
we
will
continue
to
bring
that
up.
E
A
E
E
You've
been
seeing
over
the
past
few
months
and,
most
importantly,
what
you
have
in
and
board
member
Mendenhall
is
not
here,
but
the
major
changes
that
you
have
and
I
won't
even
say
major
other
than
the
majority
of
them
are
just
incorporating
board
member
Mendenhall
comments
from
the
last
we
came
and
then
essentially
changing
that
map
to
reflect
what
that
conversation
was.
So
what
you
have
within
these
two
plans
is
what
we
feel
is
the
final
draft
incorporating
all
of
those
changes
and
comments
and
with
the
board's
consent.
D
I
think,
as
Danny
said,
we're
looking
for
just
preliminary
approval,
so
we
can
move
forward
with,
as
Danny
said,
the
30-day
required
public
comment
period.
We
would
also
like
to
go
back
out
to
stakeholders
and
community
councils
to
make
sure
that
we
got
it
right
with
their
initial
input
that
they
provided
about
a
year
and
a
half
ago
and
we'd
also
look
to
finalize
the
boundary
legal
descriptions
which
are
pretty
complex
and
we're
estimating
that
all
of
that
work
would
take
about
a
two
month,
time
period
to
complete
and
also
just
to
point
out.
D
The
two
plans
are
based
on
kind
of
maximizing
tax,
increment
revenues
in
the
area,
so
they're
based
on
a
75
percent
collection
rate
from
all
of
the
taxing
entities
over
a
25
year
period.
So
this
equates
to
about
twenty
six
point:
five
million
for
the
nine
line
over
the
twenty
five
year
period
and
fifty-nine
million
for
State
Street.
So,
as
I
said,
that's
maximizing
the
tax
increment
as
we
negotiate
with
taxing
entities.
D
Those
amounts
could
go
down,
but
that's
what
the
plans
are
based
on
right
now
and
we
wanted
to
keep
the
two
plans
on
a
similar
track
just
for
efficiencies
with
taxing
entity,
partners
and
negotiations,
but
State
Street's
been
pretty
stable
for
a
while
and
Sue's
has
done.
Some
recent
changes,
so
nine
lines
Wednesday
well
State
Street's
had
some
changes.
Yes,.
I
I
think
the
last
time
I
was
here
to
talk
about
State
Street
was
when
we
decided
to
modify
the
boundary
for
the
project
area,
so
that
was
done
in
February
during
the
February
board
meeting
and
as
is
shown
in
the
map.
That's
in
the
project
area
plan.
We
have
now
included
the
section
of
the
900
South
off-ramp.
That's
now
included
in
the
State
Street
project
area.
So
that's
from
about
from
3rd
west,
over
to
Main
Street
from
900
south
or
between
about
10,000
900
south
is
what's
been
added
there.
F
I
I
Absolutely
so
it
adds
the
area
of
the
900
South
off-ramp,
so
that
is
the
area
from
third,
it's
a
long
third
west
on
the
western
edge
between
the
off-ramp
itself
and
900
South,
and
then
it
goes
east
as
far
as
Main
Street.
So
we
added
three
blocks
there
great
does
that
work
that
works
and
then
we
removed
as
you'll
see
in
kind
of
the
southern
like
the
south
east
corner.
I
So
that
was
a
modification
that
was
done
based
on
the
conversation
from
February
board
meeting
and
and
then.
In
addition,
there
were
comments
that
I
received
that
we
received
from
the
December
2017
board
meeting,
which
were
and
I'm
happy
to
address
any
changes
to
the
plan
that
anyone
wants
to
talk
about.
But
the
highlights
were
mostly
the
idea
that
crime
wasn't
represented
clearly
enough
and
that
tactics
to
address
crime,
weren't
included.
So
I
wanted
to
point
out
that
trying
to
represent
the
crime
was
done
in
the
background.
I
I
C
E
E
A
One
I'd
like
to
add,
maybe
really
quick
on
the
9
line
under
changes
in
land
use.
I
am
very
interested
in
adding
to
it
talks
about
multifamily
and
single-family
I'm,
trying
to
scroll
to
my
location,
so
I
apologize
for
my
delay,
but
I
would
like
to
incorporate
some
language
about
adding
accessory
units
page.
A
You
know
we
have
a.
We
have
not
yet
adopted
that
policy,
but
we
will
hear
soon
and
I'm.
It's
been
indicated
that
this
whole
project
area
will
be
included
in
the
updated
policy.
So
I
would
like
for
us
to
call
out
accessory
dwelling
units
as
a
housing
type
in
this
neighbor
or
in
this
project
area.
All
right,
my
dad
he'll
go
ahead.
Good.
B
Call
I'm
on
page
54
of
117
Thank,
You
RDA
for
listening
to
my
comments
and
our
previous
meetings
about
recognizing
human
trafficking,
and
so
I
have
a
few
little
tweaks
in
there.
So
I'm
page,
one
of
the
State
Street
CRA
draft
plan,
if
we
could
change
the
language
of
commercial
sex
to
human
trafficking
and
which
would
then
include
labor
trafficking
and
sex
trafficking,
which
is
boat,
which
we
know
later
in
the
plan,
are
both
happening
in
this
district,
that
businesses
and
on
the
street
yeah.
B
I
I
agree
with
that.
The
only
thing
the
my
only
hiccup
is
that
in
this
particular
sentence,
I'm
referring
to
exhibit
a
which
lists
the
crime,
types
and
commercial
sex
is
one
of
the
types
that
the
police
department
tracks,
but
they
don't
throw
a
labor
trafficking.
They
they
don't
actually
because
they
consider
that
to
be
like
a
victim
rather
than
a
crime.
I
B
I
B
B
Let's
get
the
trees
in
now,
because
they
need
to
grow
and
it's
gonna
take
time
and
we're
not
there
yet
and
I
want
to
really
just
point
that
out
to
thank
you
all
for
participating
in
the
Main
Street
in
life
on
state
and
doing
such
awesome
public
outreach
for
our
own
project
area
plan,
because
this
is
a
sensitive
area
in
a
lot
of
ways:
we're
not
ready
for
grassy
knolls
right
on
State
Street.
Yet,
okay,
then
on
page
13
under
objective
for
for
housing,
where
you
were
keen
to
incorporate
my
requests.
B
G
Generally,
social
service
agencies
provide
support
on
in
a
housing
complex.
There
are
times
when
they
own
a
housing
complex
but
depends
on
how
its
licensed
essentially
so
generally,
housing
is
housing
unless
it's
like
a
treatment
setting
which
is
licensed
differently.
So
you
have
to
go
to
the
probably
licensing
definitions.
If
you
want
to
clarify
those
two
things.
B
E
B
I
E
G
A
E
Everything,
and
so
your
comment
about
housing
as
long
as
its
housing
and
everything
else,
you
want
to
make
sure
you're
not
limiting
yourself,
because
you
could
have
someone
who
just
wants
to
build
the
building
and
provide
the
services,
and
it
may
not
include
a
housing
component.
But
as
long
as
this
within
the
project
area,
you
can
participate
in
that.
G
B
I
had
one
more
question
under
the
employment
centers
objective:
that's
page
12
or
65
of
117.
The
very
last
one
is
to
work
with
existing
major
employment
centers
and
it
lists
a
few
I
wonder
how
we're
looking
at
that
and
if
you,
if
ideas
or
conversations
already
started
in
this
outreach
process,
because
I'm
unaware
of
those
opportunities,
I.
I
Did
with
Salt
Lake
Community
College,
we
did
they
expressed
interest
in
trying
to
have
some
sort
of
partnership
about
creating
more
student
housing
near
the
school,
so
that
was
kind
of
the
main
partnership
idea
that
came
out
of
conversations
with
those
potential
partners,
but
we
didn't.
We
didn't
think
that
was
the
last
conversation
we
were
having
with
any
of
with
any
of
these
major
employment
centers.
It
was
just
sort
of
a
you
know
when
we
first
got
started,
so
we
can
keep
those
conversations
going.
Okay,
that's
the
project
area,
Thanks.
A
I
H
A
A
Great!
It's
about
time!
Thank
you
guys
very
much
for
accommodating
us
all
right
board
members
we're
moving
on
to
item
c5,
which
has
been
a
long
time
coming
as
well.
This
is
the
stodla
rail
tax,
increment
reimbursement,
so
we're
going
to
be
briefed
today
by
staff
members
about
the
the
rail,
the
stodla
rail
tax,
increment
reimbursement
request,
which
would
help
pay
for
infrastructure
improvements
at
the
new
facility
out
in
the
northwest
quadrant.
A
E
H
Know
I
would
like
to
start
because
it's
a
need
to
start
with
the
mayor
cool
in
the
reline
in
the
staff
report,
as
well
as
the
motion
sheet.
There's
a
typo.
So
that's
a
pretty
basic
problem.
It
should
read:
Stadler
Rail
Community,
Reinvestment
area,
consideration
of
terms
of
a
participation
and
tax
increment
reimbursement
agreement,
knot.
F
H
A
And
just
to
point
out,
it
looks
like
we
have
some
guests
with
us
in
the
audience
we
have
Martin
Ritter,
who
was
the
CEO
of
styler
he's
visiting
us
from
Switzerland
hello
as
well
as
Jacob
splaying.
The
project
lead
here
in
Salt,
Lake
City.
Welcome
to
you
both
thanks
for
joining
us
today
and
I
will
kick
it
back
to
Danny
and
Jill.
Please
and.
J
It
to
Jill
great
and
I've
been
kicked,
so
here
we
go
so
before
you
have.
The
term
sheet
term
sheet
is
split
into
basically
four
different
categories:
the
payment
terms,
the
permitted
uses
the
policy
requirements
that
are
in
our
tax
increment
reimbursement
policy
and
also
the
reporting
requirements
that
we
are
recommending
the
board
consider
for
approval.
As
far
as
this
term
sheet,
I
can
go
through
these
terms
in
a
summary
fashion.
If
that
would
be
helpful,
that
would
be
great,
okay,
great.
J
So
the
payment
terms,
the
maximum
tax
increment
reimbursement
over
a
20-year
term,
is,
at
approximately
nine
point,
six
million
dollars.
The
RDA
will
withhold
5%
for
administrative
costs
and
10%
for
a
housing
which
is
required
by
statute.
The
permitted
uses,
as
we've
discussed
previously
or
for
certain
infrastructure
improvements
that
Staller
will
build,
including
on-site
work,
public,
roads
and
utilities,
test
track
and
a
real
spur.
J
Our
policy
requirements
require
that
phase
1
must
be
completed
and
a
CFO
must
be
issued
and
the
property
must
be
on
the
tax
rolls
is
completed
before
they
are
eligible
for
the
tax
current
reimbursement.
The
reimbursement
must
run
with
the
land.
That
means
that
the
owner,
that
must
occupy
a
property
and
operate
the
project
in
order
to
receive
the
tax
increment
reimbursement.
J
We
need
notification
of
any
tax
appeal
in
case
they
decide
to
protest,
protest,
their
taxes
that
year
and
the
project
must
meet
the
threshold
requirements.
As
you
know,
we
have
gone
through
our
Finance
Committee
and
we
have
determined
that
it
meets
the
threshold
requirements
for
annual
reporting.
What
we're
suggesting
the
report
include
is
that
they
report
every
year
the
number
of
full-time
employees
that
they
have,
which
is
supposed
to
increase
every
phase
that
they
built
they're
gonna
build
four
phases
within
a
ten
year
time
frame.
We
require
wage
information
for
each
job.
J
We
also
would
like
some
information
on
the
construction
status
of
phase
one
and
the
actual
costs
that
are
related
to
the
permitted
uses
subject
for
the
to
receive
the
reimbursement
funds
and
that
we
also
get
some
information
on
the
number
of
construction
jobs.
What
we
really
want
to
see
is
just
you
know.
J
We
want
some
metric
information
on
how
much
impact
the
project
will
have
not
just
as
a
permanent
use,
but
also
as
it's
being
built
for
our
own
information,
and
we
can
that
the
RDA
may
reduce
this
tax
increment
reimbursement
if
it
doesn't
meet
the
requirements
that
we're
asking
them
to
provide
it
to
us
annually
or
those
in
our
policy.
So
that's
just
a
review
of
the
term
sheet
that
we've
attached
for
your
review
and
consideration
all.
A
F
E
The
the
way
we
proposed
and
the
the
term
and
the
way
the
agreement
would
be
written
is
if
they
don't
meet
a
threshold.
The
Rd
has
the
option
of
decreasing
the
increment,
and
what
that
would
do
is
that
would
then
kick
it
to
essentially
a
conversation
with
Sadler
in
terms
of.
Why
did
they
not
hit
the
threshold
and
or
is
that
a
one-time
hit?
Is
that
something
we
should
be
concerned
with?
E
E
F
How
would
we
suggest
softening
that
I
mean
it
does
seem
like
pretty
hard
numbers
that
yeah
that
seemed?
If
we
don't
have
the
workforce,
I
mean
there's
so
many
variables
along
that
line,
that
there.
E
Are
and
that's
that's
the
difficulty
in
the
conversation
of
we,
we
have
expressed
those
jobs
from
day,
one
that
that's
what
they
have
represented
and
that's
what
the
reasons
are
for
getting
this.
What
we
usually
lean
to
in
that
instance
is
the
state
has
a
very
similar
program
that
they
utilize.
It's
toddler
is
utilizing
also
for
a
sales
tax
participation
from
the
state
which
is
totally
separate
from
our
deal.
E
We
can
obviously
go
with
what
what
the
state
uses
so
there's
consistency
or
we
could
do
it
in
such
a
way
that
we,
we
just
soften
our
language
a
little
bit
and
create
our
own
little
floor.
That,
maybe
is
not
that
low
and
so
I
would
be
happy
to
have
a
Martin
and
Jacob
come
up
and
speak
to
that,
but
I
think
that's
kind
of
what
they
we
have
talked
to
them
about.
E
F
E
E
B
Came
up
it's
not
in
our
packets
today,
but
there's
a
process,
a
timeline,
flowchart,
there's
reasoning
and
there's
dialogue
with
obviously
with
the
participant
throughout
all
of
this
I.
Don't
think
I
am
comfortable
with
these
numbers.
I
am
comfortable
with
us
having
the
ability
to
have
a
conversation
if
they
aren't
fulfilled
and
that
it
isn't
necessarily
all
comfortable
for
our
first
adler
in
this
case
or
for
whomever
it
might
be
in
the
future.
B
I
think
this
is
a
90%
commitment,
we're
making
contingent
upon
SB
234
blah
blah
blah,
but
my
goodness
this
is
a
big
deal,
and
this
is
a
long-term
commitment.
We're
making
and
and
I
feel
comfortable
with
us
having
very
clear
thresholds
that
were
worked
out
with
with
our
partner
and
will
be
worked
out
with
every
future
partner,
so
I'm
uncomfortable
with
us
at
the
last
minute
here,
looking
at
a
justing.
C
C
B
B
A
C
A
Johnston,
yes
and
I'm,
a
yes
as
well,
so
that
carries
unanimously
six
votes
in
favor
with
a
board
member
Luke.
Not
here
today.
Congratulations
and
thank
you
to
stodla
and
their
team
for
working
with
us
and
for
your
patience
as
we've
waded
through
the
complexities
that
have
presented
themselves
with
SB
234.
But
we
appreciate
your
interest
in
Salt,
Lake
City
and
your
investment
in
our
community.
So
thank
you
for
for
that.
A
D
A
E
This
is
for
our
fiscal
year.
19
budget
I
have
a
PowerPoint
that
I
am
happy
to
go
through
in
the
interest
of
time
all
run
through
a
little
bit
quicker.
Some
of
the
background
and
the
mission
statements
each.
If
that's
all
right.
Thank
recap.
This
is
what
I
was
referring
to
earlier
in
terms
of
the
mission
of
the
RDA,
which
is
to
improve
areas
of
the
city
targeting
that
within
project
areas
and
carrying
out
the
city's
master
plan
goals.
E
Generally,
we
like
to
remind
everyone
that
the
RDA
set
up
by
state
statute
and
as
such,
there
are
different
provisions
and
rules
that
come
into
play
in
terms
of
the
RDAs
budget
and
use
of
funds.
Our
objectives
I'm
happy
to
share
these
and
come
back.
If
there's
any
questions
highlight
of
the
the
project
areas,
the
two
larger
ones
on
the
bottom
here
are
obviously
the
new
ones
that
we've
just
discussed
nine
line
in
State
Street,
here's
kind
of
what
we're
focusing
on
just
jumping
right
into
the
goals
for
2019.
E
First
and
foremost,
our
priority
is
the
creation
of
the
two
project
areas.
We
discussed
the
implementation
and
finalization
of
the
northwest
quadrant
project
area,
we're
also
focused
on
the
RDA
properties
that
we
have
being
offered
in
for
development
and
then
the
other
item
we
discussed
is
the
NOFA
getting
that
ten
million
dollars
out
the
door
in
terms
of
projects
and
creating
development.
And
then
the
other
thing
that
you're
going
to
see
come
up
as
a
theme
within
this
budget
is
the
utilization
of
our
loan
program
funds.
We
have
some
allocations
to
build
that
up.
E
Our
priorities
will
be
carrying
out
the
agreement
for
Utah
that
we
have
an
existing
contract
with
the
developer
for,
and
so
we
will
be
bringing
that
to
you.
Utah
paper
box,
property
disposition,
that's
under
contract
and
they're
in
the
final
stages
of
wrapping
up
their
design
and
working
towards
getting
permitting
for
that
255
South
State,
which
is
our
property,
offering
that
just
expired
a
few
weeks
ago.
Just
as
a
quick
update,
we
got
nine
responses
from
developers
for
that
RFQ.
E
So
that's
it
extremely
encouraging
we're
in
the
process
of
setting
up
that
selection
committee
and
then
reviewing
those
and
then
carry
over
from
last
year,
which
is
the
downtown
place
making.
This
is
the
capital
project
within
CBD,
that
is
in
our
budget,
essentially
looking
to
either
leverage
with
a
private
development
or
promote
some
kind
of
open
space
and
pedestrian
scale
improvement.
Downtown
here
are
the
key
changes
within
central
business.
District
first
and
foremost,
is
the
decrease
in
tax
increment
revenue.
E
That
is
a
decrease
of
over
five
million
dollars
from
last
year.
This
is
something
that
we
actually
took
the
hit
this
year
as
part
of
our
assessment
and
our
distribution
of
increment.
We
are
in
the
process
of
working
both
with
the
county
assessor
and
the
state
tax
commission
to
try
to
figure
out
why
that
happened
to
the
level
did
and
then
we,
as
the
RTA,
are
also
going
to
engage
a
consultant
to
help
us
address
that
as
it
relates
to
not
only
Salt
Lake
City,
but
redevelopment
agencies.
E
Countywide
number
two
key
change
that
you
see
within
your
budget
well,
number
two
and
number
three
is
essentially
a
two
million
and
1
million
dollar
allocation
for
commercial
and
residential
loans
within
the
central
business
district.
These
are
funds
that
would
be
utilized
through
the
agency's
existing
loan
program
for
commercial
and
residential
development
within
the
central
business
district,
and
then
the
344,000
is
the
capital
project
that
I
referred
to.
That
would
be
utilized
for
placemaking
an
open
space
within
CBD
and
please
I'm
going
to
go
through
this
fairly
quickly.
E
So
if
you
have
any
questions,
please
just
jump
in
and
stop
me
or
any
concerns
jumping
to
West
Capitol
Hill.
This
is
a
project
area
that
has
technically
expired.
However,
we
have
extended
it
for
an
additional
number
of
years
to
collect
money
to
finish
the
300
West
Park,
sorry
300
west
street
improvements,
but
what
you
have
here
is
we
within
the
the
project
area.
E
We
still
have
quite
a
few
projects
that
are
wrapping
up,
and
this
is
the
close
on
the
sale
properties
for
the
mixed-use
project
with
252
units
the
Marmalade
park
within
that
project,
the
renovation
of
the
home
on
Arctic
Court,
that
we
have
the
construction
of
an
infill
home
on
the
lot.
Next
to
it.
On
Arctic
court,
we
have
the
300
West
streetscape
project
that
I
mentioned.
E
That
is
the
only
project
that
is
getting
funding
this
year
as
a
capital
project,
and
then
we
have
the
townhome
project
that
is
nearing
completion
of
the
12
townhomes
right
there
on
500
north.
So
our
key
changes
within
this
is
just
taking
all
of
the
increment
that's
available.
Four
hundred
thousand.
We
feel
that
this
is
hopefully
going
to
be
enough
now
to
do
this
project,
and
so
we
will
wrap
up
the
design
and
hopefully
work
towards
starting
construction.
This
year,
within
West
temple
gateway.
E
Excuse
me,
this
is
the
last
year
that
we
collect
increment
from
West
temple
gateway.
A
couple
of
the
projects
we're
wrapping
up
is
the
900
South,
streetscape
and
utility
undergrounding.
That
is
one
that
we
are
still
waiting
on.
The
final
cost
from
Rocky
Mountain
Power,
and
then
we
plan
to
bring
to
the
board
in
terms
of
the
the
design
and
the
level
of
construction
that
we
want
to
do.
The
streetscape
improvements,
the
property
disposition
for
infinite
scale,
as
well
as
the
property
disposition
for
spy
hop.
E
Those
are
nearing
negotiations
and
completion,
and
we
should
be
closing
on
those
properties.
Soon.
Jefferson
walkway
project
is
essentially
done
from
our
standpoint.
Our
loan
has
been
paid
off
and
if
they
haven't
sold
all
of
the
units,
I
think
they
have
almost
all
of
them
under
contract
right
now,
and
so
that
one
is
wrapping
up.
E
Under
your
West
temple
gateway
fund,
it
shows
it
is
listed
as
a
CIP
900
South
Street
improvements
that
is
incorrect
line
item
should
read
650
South
main
light
rail
station,
and
so
this
is
an
allocation
of
the
five
hundred.
Fifty
eight
thousand
that
we
would
like
to
contribute
towards
the
construction
of
a
light
rail
station
there
on
Main
Street
in
six
fifty
south.
E
As
you
understand,
the
downtown
Alliance
has
indicated
an
interest
to
continue
to
pursue
that
project.
Conversation
with
the
board
also
indicated
that
you
directed
us
to
continue
to
work
with
the
state
on
the
fair
park
type
of
feasibility
study.
You
will
see
that
as
part
of
the
North
temple
project
as
we
get
to
that
we
are
under
the
process
of
looking
at
redesigning
the
500
West
Park
blocks,
and
that
is
going
through
the
stakeholder
committee
meeting
and
we
are
looking
at
alternatives.
E
So
that's
something
we
hope
to
bring
back
this
year
and
then
the
Central
Station
area
plan.
This
is
working
with
the
grant
we
received
from
Wasatch
Front
Regional
Council
to
look
at
not
only
some
of
the
agencies
remaining
parcels
in
the
area,
but
also
you
TAS
and
some
of
the
other
vacant
land
in
terms
of
trying
to
come
up
with
the
plan
of
how
best
those
could
be
utilized
and
marketed
for
development.
Key
changes
within
Depot,
essentially,
what
we
have
available
in
terms
of
tax
increment
is
just
400,000.
E
We
have
set
that
aside
as
a
capital
project
for
both
the
station
center
infrastructure
conversation
as
well
as
as
we
identify
alternatives
for
500
West,
it
could
be
made
available
to
make
those
changes
happen
as
well,
and
so
it's
something
that,
as
we
wrap
up
those
two
projects,
we
wanted
to
set
aside
the
funds
and
have
them
available
to
finish
those
two
projects:
granary,
district
projects
and
goals.
We
just
closed
or
approved
the
latest
adaptive
reuse
loan
program
for
orchid
dynasty
to
renovate
a
5,500
square
foot
building
for
their
location
in
the
area.
E
We
are
finalizing
the
negotiations
with
the
biosuit
collective
for
our
Gail
Street
property.
We
continue
to
work
with
hand
in
terms
of
the
RFP
and
selection
of
consultant
for
the
fleet
block
development,
and
then
we
have
funds
available
at
this
point
with
400
West
reconstruction
project
that
we've
talked
about
in
terms
of
how
to
utilize
those
key
changes
for
granary
214,000
towards
the
adaptive
reuse
loan
program.
This
is
a
combination
of
the
remaining
funds
within
that
program,
as
well
as
a
new
allocation.
E
North
temple,
project
area
overnight
or
motel
property
is
on
the
market.
Right
now,
with
RFPs,
due
at
the
end
of
the
month,
we
continue
to
work
with
public
utilities
and
transportation
to
push
forward
the
Folsom
Corridor
project,
as
well
as
finish
the
pedestrian
improvement
project
as
part
of
the
I-15
and
north
temple,
viaduct,
bridge
construction
and
then
board
member
Rodgers
just
stepped
out,
but
we
have
obviously
the
State
Fair
Park
public
market
study
funds
that
we
are
utilizing.
E
A
E
A
H
That's
new
information
in
terms
of
white
ballpark.
That's
been
a
parcel
that
has
been
on
people's
development
thought
board
for
25
years.
So
I
thought
that
when
the
council
board
appropriated
the
funding,
it
was
utilizing
existing
infrastructure
at
the
fair
park.
I
think
it
creates
a
whole
other
conversation.
If
it's
about
constructing
something
new
across
the
street
on
a
parcel,
that's
pretty
tough
yeah.
E
And
I
apologize
I
didn't
mean
to
get
the
impression
it
was
either
or
the
state
has
just
asked
that
that
could
also
be
included
as
part
of
the
study
to
see,
if
that's
a
potential,
it's
a
scope
that
they
are
working
with
us
on.
It's
a
scope
that
would
need
to
come
back
to
the
board
in
terms
of
whether
that's
the
direction
we
wanted
to
utilize
the
funds.
So
we're
not
seeing
it
as
just
that,
and
not
the
Fair
Park
as
much
as
it's
all
of
their.
A
E
Of
staff
went
to
this
day
and
said
we
have
these
funds
available.
This
is
the
conversation
that
we've
had
with
with
the
board.
We've
asked
them
to
come
back
to
us
with
how
they
would
want
to
utilize
that
for
the
development
of
the
Fair
Park
in
their
property
and
then
see
where
we
can
align
those
goals
and
and
make
that
study
beneficial
to
them
and
also,
hopefully,
address
the
concerns
and
objectives
of
what
we
want
accomplished.
Okay,
I
have.
H
Will
go
back
to
the
minutes
per
your
recommendation,
but
I
think
what
I
remember
from
it
is
that
the
council
didn't
want
to
limit
didn't
want
to
exclude
a
public
market
as
an
activator
for
the
space,
but
to
your
point
wanted
to
broaden
the
idea
of
activation
at
the
market
or
I'm.
Sorry
at
the
fair
park.
We're.
A
H
H
B
G
G
A
E
Income
fund
I
think
it
was
within
the
staff
report.
There
was
a
question
on
the
marketing
and
sales.
The
difference
in
the
amount
for
this
is
a
consolidation
of
the
marketing
accounts
that
we
had
in
several
other
project
area
funds
which
it
didn't
necessarily
seem
the
right
way
to
do
that
in
terms
of
separating
our
marketing
budget
by
project
area.
As
much
as
just
consolidating
it,
as
for
an
overall
agency
use
and
allocation,
our
professional
services
account
went
up
to
350,000.
E
This
is
an
increase
in
funds,
primarily
for
an
obligation.
We
have
as
part
of
the
Utah
theater
agreement
with
the
developer,
that,
to
the
extent
that
we
do
not
choose
to
move
forward
with
that
developer
for
their
proposed
project,
we
have
a
provision
that
we
need
to
reimburse
them
up
to
$100,000
for
their
services,
that
they've
provided
and
then,
ultimately,
we
would
own
that
data
and
information
that
we
could
then
use.
E
H
Chair,
if
I
could
just
note
that
this
is
probably
one
of
the
last
holdovers
of
the
contracts
as
they
were
written
sort
of
under
the
previous
model
of
including
a
dollar
amount
in
a
contract
without
the
budget
for
the
contract.
So
you
guys
hadn't
budgeted
this
previously
and
it's
just
hanging
out
there
as
a
contractual
obligation.
H
A
E
Then
number
three
is
allocation
of
over
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars
again
to
be
available
for
commercial
loans
within
the
RDAs
loan
program.
Ceo
white
housing.
This
ties
into
the
housing
funding
policy
discussion
we
had
earlier.
This
is
taking
our
10%
of
housing
using
it
citywide,
essentially
splitting
it
50/50
between
use
with
by
the
agency
within
the
residential
loan
program
guidelines
and
then
is
an
allocation
to
the
Housing
Trust
Fund.
B
A
A
The
budget
is
gonna
fly
by,
as
you
know,
so.
I
think
it
would
be
worthwhile
for
us
to
carve
out
a
little
bit
of
time
for
board
members
to
sit
down
with
RTA
staff
and
City
Council
staff
to
dive
into
some
of
these
questions.
A
little
bit
more
and
I
know
that
there
will
be
projects
and
ideas,
though
certain
board
members
would
like
to
either
include
or
exclude
from
the
budget,
so
I
think
that
may
be
worthwhile,
but
we've
got
them
in
front
of
us
today.
Is
there
anything
that
is
pressing?
H
To
your
point,
mr.
chair
I
think
we've
discussed
in
the
past
to
schedule
additional
RDA
board
meetings
throughout
May
as
needed.
So
maybe
we
can
set
up
a
small
group
meeting
and
hone
in
on
some
of
the
questions
that
might
benefit
from
a
full
board
conversation
and
then
work
with
the
chair
to
figure
out
Council
time
that
that
makes
sense
to
carve
out.
D
A
E
So
the
agency
has
its
existing
loan
program,
which
is
an
adopted
program
and
policy
by
the
board,
which
essentially
drives
any
loan
that
we
do
and
provides
the
approval
of
those
loans
as
well
as
at
what
thresholds.
It
would
come
back
to
the
board.
So
what
we've
done
within
the
budget
here
is
simply
allocate
funds
accordingly
to
be
used
within
that
loan
program
for
either
commercial
or
residential
uses
and.
H
I
did
want
to
flag
for
the
board
just
linking
a
conversation,
strawpoll,
not
sure
if
you
actually
stopped
hold
it
or
just
signaled,
intent
of
allocating
funds
from
CBD
to
the
Housing,
Trust,
Fund,
sort
of
CBD
to
citywide
housing
and
then
to
the
Housing
Trust
Fund.
Currently,
the
only
funding
that
is
in
the
CBD
that's
proposed
to
go
for
housing
is
for
that
residential
development
loan
program,
which
is
not
for
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
necessarily.
A
So
board
member
Rogers
who's,
not
here
right
now
earlier
mentioned
bonding
for
housing
and
I,
see
this
as
number
one
on
the
policy
questions.
So
if,
as
we
set
up
these
small
group
meetings,
if
staff
could
come
prepared
to
discuss
bonding
for
housing
but
as
well
as
the
catalytic
projects
for
the
two
new
project
areas
that
we
are
about
to
create
in
the
nine
line
and
State
Street
just
to
have
to
free
folks
to
be
prepared
to
discuss
that,
I
also
would
appreciate
it.
A
B
Add
one
thing
to
come
back,
hopefully
with
some
information
around
the
items:
six
and
our
staff
report,
the
residential
development
loan
program
at
1.4
million
I
want
to
know
how
this
ties
in
to
our
affordable
housing
priorities
and
if
it
doesn't,
then
I
would
like
to
revisit
our
conversation
that
we
just
had
around
80%
ami
in
below
and
have
a
conversation
with
the
board
around
lowering
that
to
60%
or
lower,
if
we're
putting
1.4
million
dollars
here
and
with
the
state's
option
that
there
be
no
ami
requirements
in
areas
of
blight.
I.
B
F
And
I
I'm
glad
you
mentioned
that
or
remember
Mendenhall,
because
I'm,
looking
at
both
five
and
six,
a
commercial
development
loan
program
in
the
residential
development
loan
program
and
as
we
sort
of
discussed
yesterday.
But
you
know,
I
think
that
we
need
to-
and
we
discussed
earlier
today
have
some
policy
discussion
around.
What
is
the
goal
of
RDA
versus
what
is
the
goal
of
hand
or
other
sort
of
housing?
F
B
A
Or
not,
I
think
what
you're
bringing
up
are
all
really
great
points.
I
think
it
may
be
worthwhile
free
to
map
them
out
and
writing
and
send
them
to
staff.
Before
we
have
our
group
meeting
I,
don't
know
that
it's
necessarily
important
for
us
to
go
and
light
my
line
right
now,
unless,
of
course,
you'd
like
I.
B
A
That
goes
for
all
board
members
as
well
as
you
look
through
this.
If
you
have
questions,
send
them
to
staff
so
that
when
we
do
have
a
small
group
meetings,
they
can
come
prepared
and
we
can
be
as
productive
as
possible.
All
right,
I'd
like
to
move
us
along
just
because
we've
got
a
long
agenda
ahead
of
us
with
the
city
council
staff
Danny.
Anything
else,
you'd
like
to
bring
up
with
regard
to
the
budget
before
we
move
along.
E
Just
to
your
point,
a
question
you
brought
up
yesterday
regarding
project
area
seed
funds
within
our
program
income
fund.
There
is
$200,000
line
item
for
project
area
creation.
We
have
traditionally
used
that
for
both
the
process
of
creating
a
project
area
as
well
as
having
that
potentially
available
seed
funds,
so
that'd
be
the
first
comment.
The
second
comment
would
be.
One
of
the
advantages
of
using
the
RDA
loan
program
is
that
as
soon
as
a
project
area
is
created,
you
can
do
loans
within
a
project
area.
E
A
E
Do
just
real
quick,
a
few
things
we
talked
about
the
RFQ
for
State
Street.
We
also
talked
about
the
RDA
Finance
Committee,
approving
adaptive,
reuse,
loan
for
the
orchid
dynasty,
Clearwater
homes,
the
marmalade
block
in
West,
Capitol
Hill.
They
have
gone
through
and
received
their
certificate
of
appropriateness
from
the
Planning
Department.
So
that's
the
last
step.
They
need
for
them
to
be
able
to
pull
a
permit
and
they
are
still
hoping
at
breaking
ground
this
summer,
and
then
you
had
indicated
Rose
Center
our
fellowship
program.
E
I
was
in
Detroit
last
week
for
that
we
are
about
at
the
midpoint
for
this
process,
of
which
the
Salt
Lake
City
is
one
of
the
fellowship
cities
within
this
program.
To
take
a
look
at
one
of
our
land
use
challenges.
Some
of
you
may
have
participated
in
those
stakeholder
meetings
when
the
group
was
here
a
couple
weeks
ago.
If
you
remember
as
part
of
the
final
presentation,
we
were
given
homework
to
start
carrying
out
and
move
that
forward.
E
So
our
meeting
last
week
in
Detroit
was
to
essentially
follow
up
on
that
homework
and
start
giving
a
status
report
on
where
we're
at.
So
we
have
done
that
and
then
we
also
look
to
have
a
follow-up
meeting
this
summer
in
anticipation
of
kind
of
wrapping
up
the
final
pieces
as
part
of
the.
What
will
be
the
presentation
in
November
at
the
end
of
it.
So
there's
a
great
program.
E
E
A
E
That
and
then
one
final
piece
I'm
happy
to
report
and
announce
the
hiring
of
Corinne
Piazza.
As
our
project
coordinator,
crane
comes
to
us
from
neighbor
works.
She
has
a
background
in
community
and
development,
branding
and
marketing,
and
she
also
has
her
master's
in
land
use
and
planning
and
real
estate
development,
and
so
she
is
eager
and
taking
on
probably
more
projects
than
she
realizes
that
staff
is
willing
to
give
her
right
now,
but
we're
happy
to
have
her
all.
A
C
A
C
B
B
That's
a
really
an
administrative
task
that
we're
asking
the
administration
to
take
on
to
find
us
something
well
that
we
could
learn
from
hands
on
and
it
doesn't
I'm
wondering
how
we
can
expand
the
conversation
so
that
we
can
actually
come
to
a
learning
opportunity
and
perhaps-
and
you
mentioned
Detroit,
which
reminded
me
that
I
wanted
to
say
so.
It's
in
the
minutes,
I
don't
feel
like.
We've
fulfilled
this
request
to
learn
from
a
city.
That's
redeveloped
in
area
similar
to
State
Street.
B
E
Back
up
and
go
back
out
to
the
list
we've
done
and
see
if
there's
one
of
those
that
maybe
we
want
to
go
and
tour
and
visit
cuz
I
would
agree
that
the
streets
we
looked
at
in
Minneapolis
while
they
were
very
interesting
and
very
successful,
and
the
challenge
that
they
sought
out
to
accomplish.
They
were
not
necessarily
directly
relevant
to
what
we
have
on
State
Street.
So
if
you
like
we'd,
be
happy
to
continue
that
conversation
and
look
at
some
of
the
other
streets
and
follow
up
with
you,
I'd.
A
I
will
say
for
what
it's
worth.
We
did
not
go
to
Minneapolis
for
this
purpose.
In
particular,
it
was.
We
were
hoping
to
achieve
an
efficiency
here
by
adding
it
on
to
the
downtown
Alliance
urban
exploration.
If
you
recall
there
was
that
staff
report
from
our
DEA
staff
on
a
couple
State
Street
esque
places
around
around
the
country.
One
of
them
was
Colfax
in
Denver,
for
instance,
we
have
the
budget
coming
up.
A
We
might
consider
setting
some
RDA
funds
aside
for
staff
exploration
if
you'd
like,
and
we
can
have
a
dialogue
as
we
go
along
because
I
think
that
there
are
some
things
to
look
be
learned
from
other
communities
about
State
Street.
So
thank
you
for
bringing
that
up
board
member
Mendenhall
item.
D
is
written
briefings
any
questions
on
the
written
briefing.
The
budget
amendment
final
budget
amendment
for
this
year.
Okay,
now
we
are
at
the
consent
agenda,
which
is
to
confirm
the
dates
for
the
FY
2019
RDA
budget
and
I.
A
Think
I'd
be
important
to
note
that
this
year's
RDA
budget
is
a
lot
cleaner
and
nicer
and
incorporated
in
the
overall
city
budget,
which
I
think
makes
it
a
little
bit
more,
quite
a
bit
more
transparent
for
the
general
public
and
a
lot
easier
for
staff.
So
thank
you
to
RDA
and
the
administration
for
bringing
it
to
us
like
this
this
year.
Thank
you
very
much.
I
know
that
a
lot
of
work
over
the
last
18
months
or
so
went
into
realigning
the
RDA
and
I
think
that
we
have
landed
in
a
really
productive
spot.