►
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
welcome
to
the
RDA
budget
meeting
and
we
should
be
hopefully
pretty
quick
I,
don't
know
we're.
Just
jen
is
gonna
kind
of
run
through
some
of
the
policy
questions
that
had
been
brought
up
in
Prior
RDA
budget
meetings.
To
answer
we're
not
gonna
call
anyone
to
the
table
unless
there
are
specific
questions
that
Danny
may
need
to
answer,
but
I
think
the
information
that
was
provided
in
your
staff
report
kind
of
gets
at
it
and
it
really
at
this
point
I
think,
boils
down
to
just
decisions
being
made
by
the
board.
A
So
if
there's
further
information,
obviously
we
have
everyone
in
the
audience
that
can
answer
that,
but
I
think
it's
more
discussion
time
on
these
issues,
so
Jen's
just
gonna
run
through
those
bullet
points
in
the
in
the
beginning
and
you're
the
part
that's
blue
and
your
staff
report,
that's
newly
added
and
we'll
go
from
there.
Thank.
B
You,
madam
chair,
there
were
also
a
handful
of
questions
that
our
DA
staff
provided
answers
to,
and
that
was
included
as
an
attachment
to
your
staff
report.
So
if
you
want
to
reference
that
the
first
maybe
issue
of
business
for
the
council
or
they
started
a
board
to
strawpoll,
is
the
concept
of
funding
the
administrative
budget
using
a
portion
of
fund
balance,
as
we
dug
into
this
a
little
bit
more.
B
It
turns
out
that
it
was
a
timing
issue
with
building
in
proposed
salary
adjustments
that
were
included
in
the
mayor's
recommendation
for
2020
and
not
sort
of
any
policy
decision
from
the
RDA
staff
to
fund
that
portion
of
administrative
fees
and
you'll
see
that
on
page
three,
it's
about
three
hundred
and
eighty
thousand
from
fund
balance.
That's
helping
to
fund
the
administrative
budget,
yes
yeah,
I'm,
chair,
sorry
in.
C
B
Sorry
so
on
page
three,
it
talks
about
the
in
that
chart
shows
the
amount
that's
going
to
the
administrative
budget
from
fund
balance.
A
typical
budget
practice
would
be
to
fund
your
ongoing
expenses
with
your
ongoing
revenues.
If
the
board
wanted
to
do
that,
our
DEA
staff
has
said
that
they
could
essentially
distribute
that
$380,000
kind
of
on
a
pro-rata
basis
for
the
rest
of
the
project
areas.
It
would
mean
that
maybe
some
of
the
specific
projects
would
have
to
be
tweaked.
B
An
alternative
is
for
the
board
to
say
this
fund
balance
is
available
and
available
to
use
this
year
and
we'll
do
this
for
this
year
only
but
request
that
in
future
years,
the
RDA
staff
billed
in
a
placeholder
for
the
mayor's
compensation
potential
compensation
increases
and
then
that
way,
it's
an
easy
adjustment
downward.
Instead
of
you,
know
kind
of
doing
it
upward
at
the
last
minute.
So
either
way
it's
fine.
B
A
D
C
E
B
What
the
RTA
staff
indicated
the
last
time
we
took
them
about
this,
is
that
they
would
sort
of
go
through
each
project
area
and
assess
what
projects
are.
What
allocations
were
sort
of
the
obvious
places
to
take
it
from
and
I
don't
know.
If
RTA
staff
has
thoughts,
we
didn't,
we
didn't
tell
them
that
they
would
need
to
answer
this,
so
we
could.
What
we
could
do
is
we
could
get
back
with
them
and
then
for
next
week's
budget
adoption.
We
could
tell
you
exactly
what
those
changes
would
be,
but
Danny.
G
G
Item
and
I
think
the
only
one
that
you
have
maybe
more
than
one
choice
is
CBD,
and
that
would
be
whether
you
wanted
it
to
come
from
the
infrastructure,
and/or,
the
commercial
loan
fund
and
all
the
others
I'm
happy
to
go
through.
If
you
want
to
kind
of
have
an
idea
of
where
that
would
be
taken
from
specifically.
G
Speaking
through
it,
just
real
fast
from
a
standpoint
of
each
fund,
as
I
said
with
in
CBD
you'd,
be
looking
at
probably
reducing
the
commercial
loan
program
contribution
within
Depot
district
you'd
probably
be
reducing
the
amount
of
the
station
center
shared
parking
allocation,
West
Capitol
Hill
would
reduce
the
amount
going
to
300
West
within
granary.
It
would
reduce
the
amount
going
to
the
adaptive
reuse
program
and
within
North
Temple
your
capital
expenditure.
There
would
be
the
catalytic
project
and
then
outside
of
that.
G
The
only
other
adjustment
you
would
have
would
be
within
the
North
Temple
viaduct
project
area,
which
would
then
just
offset
the
amount
of
debt
service
payment
going
to
Salt
Lake
City.
So
it
wouldn't
be
a
huge
impact.
The
dollar
amount
would
really
only
be
significant,
probably
within
the
central
business
district
project
area,
but
other
than
that.
It
would
just
be
a
matter
of
making
small
adjustments
to
those
amounts
at.
D
G
The
fund
balance
at
that
point
it
pretty
much
is
a
shell
game,
because
the
fund
balance
at
that
point
within
the
admin
budget,
then
just
be
redistributed
right
back
to
all
those
funds
and
correspondingly
would
go
back
in
the
same
proportion
as
you're
bringing
money
in,
and
you
probably
just
do
a
budget
opening
and
put
it
right
back
to
those
line.
Items.
D
A
Bigger
question
I
think
for
the
board,
I
mean
I
agree,
it's
all,
as
Jen
said,
I
think
that's
the
perfect
way
to
put
it.
It's
moving.
Chess
is
on
this
and
chess
pieces
on
the
same
board.
The
bigger
question
is
the
amount
of
time
that
it
would
take
staff
to
do
this
because
we
you
know
I
would
need
to
be
done
before
next
Tuesday
and.
A
So
that
that's
a
question
for
you
and
then
I
think
if
we
understand
that
where
this
came
from
how
it
came
about
this
isn't
a
precedent
that
anybody's
trying
to
set
it
was
a
timing
issue.
We've
talked
about
it
all
at
length
under
you
know,
and
some
some
ideas
in
moving
forward
and
doing
all
of
it
next
year.
You
know
so
for
me.
A
If
it's
going
to
take
staff
five
hours,
it
doesn't
seem
worth
it
there's
probably
five
hours
they
could
spend
on
something
else,
and
if
we
know
that
it's
a
we're
not
trying
to
set
a
precedent,
but
we
have
options
moving
forward
and
we
understand
where
it
all
came
from.
Then
I
don't
want
a
staff
person
to
spend
five
hours
moving
the
chess
pieces
if
it's
gonna
take
an
hour
or
something
you
know
so
I
guess
that
would
be
my
question
to
you,
Danny
and
I.
Think
for
the
for
the
board.
Yeah.
G
E
G
Think
moving
forward
as
we've
had
conversations
with
council
staff,
one
of
the
things.
Obviously,
that
makes
the
most
sense
in
terms
of
best
practices
and
policies,
including
that
within
just
our
normal
admin
budget,
just
put
in
that
that
cushion
so
that
we
have
that
ability,
and
we
don't
have
to
make
these
last-minute
adjustments
and
then
I
think
we,
as
staff
have
received
the
message
very
clear
that
from
a
precedent
and
a
policy
standpoint,
this
is
not
something
that
the
board
wishes
to
do
on
an
ongoing
basis.
G
D
A
So
can
I
get
a
straw
poll
on
this
if
I'm
just
gonna
present
the
straw
poll
as
I've
kind
of
heard
it
if
you're
in
favor
of
moving
forward
as
it
is
budgeted
right
now
with
the
intent
that
this
is
not
a
precedent.
This
is
not
how
we
want
to
do
it
in
the
future,
but
we're
at
kind
of
a
deadline
and
we're
moving
forward.
Does
that
seem
like
a
decent
straw
poll?
Does
anybody
have
anything
to
that
down
to
that
yeah,
Aaron
and.
F
B
B
Is
that
similar
to
the
board's
process
for
consideration
of
all
the
capital
improvements,
the
board
could
elect
to
delay
allocating
these
funds
until
a
more
in-depth
conversation
can
be
held
regarding
priorities,
the
RTA
staff
informally
met
with
council
staff
and
that
discussed
that
they
are
actually
working
on
a
process
based
on
their
mission
and
values,
document
that
would
help
them
sort
of
facilitate
gathering
and
prioritizing
different
projects.
So
that
seemed
to
be
kind
of
a
good
timing,
although
not
ready
for
this
budget
year.
B
B
What's
proposed
in
the
budget
is
that
the
hundred
thousand
dollars
would
be
proposed
for
Gallivan
incubator
project
and
that
about
three
hundred
thousand
been
had
the
exact
amount
up
there.
Just
a
minute
ago
was
like
two
hundred
ninety
something
thousand
for
infrastructure
improvements
on
first
south
and
unless
the
board
changes
that
that's
what
would
be
approved
so.
C
The
incubator
project
idea
is
really
interesting
and
I
want
to
know
about
the
like
measurables.
When
are
we
going
to?
What
are
we
measuring
it
against
and
I'm
worried
about
which
isn't?
This
is
sort
of
separate
from
the
budget
discussion,
but
what
are
we
incubating
them
into
when
there
doesn't
seem
to
be
another
City
space?
That's
big
enough
to
grow
into
since
we're
at
capacity
for
events
at
our
own
Washington,
Square
and
galavan
is
proving
to
be
too
small
for
some
of
the
grown
events
that
are
leaving
galavan
this
year.
C
A
That,
if
I
may
again,
if
you'll
remember,
these
allocations,
came
out
of
no
good
deed
goes
unpunished.
Right
that
Danny
heard
some
ideas
from
council
members
that
were
thrown
out
there
and
said
well,
we
have
some
of
this
discretionary
discretionary
fund.
This
is
what
I've
heard
from
board
members.
Let's,
let's
do
that
a
couple
of
weeks
ago,
board
member
Mendenhall
brought
up
that
you
know.
A
Did
we
get
enough
information
on
this
and
that's
a
really
valid
question
and
the
incubator
idea
just
stemmed
from
some
conversations
that
I
had
in
the
past
and
to
be
fair,
some
policy
conversations
that
I
think
we
still
need
to
have
regarding
events
in
our
city.
So
for
me
the
because
of
some
of
the
concerns
you
brought
up
Aaron
the
idea
of
just
saying.
Well,
we
have
this
this
$300,000
and
there
was
also
ideas
that
well
are
there
other
projects
in
the
CBD
area
that
that
we
haven't
thought
about
that
board.
A
Members
might
want
more
right.
So
that's
why
this
idea
of
just
putting
it
sort
of
gonna
say
it
in
the
lockbox
and
putting
it
aside
for
now
and
allowing
this
sort
of
middle
ground
where
the
idea
of
an
incubator,
maybe
galavan,
doesn't
even
want
it.
I,
don't
know
they
it
like
came
out,
and
it
was
like
this
seems
like
a
good
idea.
So
I
understand
the
concern.
The
idea
was:
where
are
we
gonna
put
this
money
when
we're
gonna
budget
it
somewhere?
A
A
Taking
that
putting
it
aside
having
the
other
issue
was
how
do
we
come
up
with
a
process
for
some
of
this
discretionary
funds
throughout
the
different
districts
right?
So
we
we
put
it
in
a
safe
I,
got
sick
it
to
say
in
lockbox
we
put
it
in
a
safe
and
RDA
kind
of
works
through
their
process
of
that
they've
already
been
working
through
comes
to
us
with
a
budget
amendment
with
ideas
that
we
can
I'll
discuss
at
that
time.
It's
a
way
to
to
know
that
we're
gonna
put
this
towards
projects
in
the
CBD.
A
B
And
just
to
add,
I
mean
there's,
there's
no
timing.
There's
no
expiration
date
on
this
kind
of
capital
account.
Maybe
that's
another
way
to
put
it
lockbox,
and
so,
if
the
board
did
not
feel
comfortable
allocating
any
of
these
funds
and
a
budget
amendment
before
seeing
a
process
for
how
it
will
be
going
forward.
I
think
you
could
hold
that
in
perpetuity.
B
Of
course,
then
you
have
the
challenge
of
wanting
to
get
stuff
done
with
money,
and
so
that's
its
own
challenge,
but
it
seemed
that
the
RDA
staff
was
going
to
be
working
on
that
kind
of
process
based
on
the
mission
and
values
that
the
Board
reviewed
in
the
last
meeting
yeah
and
whatever
that
was
so
there's
not
a
there's,
not
necessarily
you
wouldn't
necessarily
be
precluded
from
seeing
a
potential
process
or
policy
before
allocating
the
funds.
It's
just
one
other
option.
F
F
B
And
that
was
unanimous
for
the
recorders
office.
If
we
need
that.
The
next
item
is
allocation
to
the
Housing
Trust
Fund.
In
the
proposed
budget.
In
the
fiscal
year
2020
proposed
budget,
there's
$250,000
proposed
to
go
to
the
Salt
Lake
City
housing
trust
fund,
managed
by
the
general
fund
and
through
discussing
with
the
RDA.
We
discovered
that
the
allocation
from
fiscal
year
nineteen
hasn't
been
transferred
yet
in
part
because
it
wasn't
built
into
the
revenue
budget
of
the
Housing
Trust
Fund
in
fiscal
year.
B
Nineteen,
so
a
little
bit
of
an
accounting
technicality
but
changes
what
can
and
can't
be
accepted
in
different
budgets.
Fiscal
year,
nineteen
s
budget
was
put
together,
I
think
before
there
was
a
contemplation
of
the
funding,
our
future
dollars
for
housing,
and
so
it's
a
little
bit
of
a
different
world
now
than
it
was
then,
and
so
there
was
a
thought
that
maybe
the
board
might
want
to
hold
off
on
allocating
both
these
funds
and
the
funds
from
fiscal
year.
B
Nineteen,
until
either
the
housing
work,
housing,
working
group
reviews
and
recommends
options
or
an
outside
review
of
housing
programs
in
the
city
or
the
board
could
just
say
you
know
in
reevaluating
these
dollars,
we'd
rather
the
NOFA
be
larger
or
the
loan
fund
in
the
CBD
or
one
of
the
other
housing
related
purposes
in
the
RTA.
So
there's
just
a
couple
options
and.
D
Excuse
me,
the
the
question
I
think
is
important
to
talk
about
the
housing
working
group
prep
for
a
quick
second
and
see
if
the
scope
of
that
needs
to
increase
to
have
this
discussion
there
before
we
come
back.
I
would
be
in
favor
of
that.
But
I
want
to
be
clear
about
the
scope
of
that
discussion,
so
it
would
include
it
I
think.
B
D
F
H
Thank
you,
Matt
I'm
sure
at
some
point,
I
think
we
ought
to
have
a
bigger
disguise
I.
Don't
think
this
is
the
right
place,
but
I
think
we
need
to
have
a
bigger
discussion
about
the
housing
working
group
and
just
figure
out
whether
or
not
that
is
actually
accomplishing
what
we
set
out
to
initially
do
because
I
don't
believe
that
is
the
case,
but
not
being
a
member
of
that
group.
H
A
You
a
question
on
that:
does
the
allocation
are
not
allocating
the
funds
right
now,
for
you
personally
is
that
in
relation
to
the
housing
working
group,
or
would
you
be?
Where
are
you
in
allocating
or
keeping
this
this
money?
Do
you
want
to
know
what's
going
on
in
the
housing
working
group
first
or
move
forward
with
this
first
I.
H
Think
I
would
be
uncomfortable
at
this
point:
moving
money
out
of
the
RDA
and
so
I.
You
know
that's
my
feeling,
regardless
of
you
know
where,
where
things
are
going
at
the
housing
working
group
I
think
the
housing
working
group
had.
You
know,
I
think
if
things
would
move
forward
the
way
that
we
had
hoped
that
they
would,
we
wouldn't
be
having
to
make
that
decision
at
this
point
without
any
sort
of
public
discussion.
E
E
We
should
be
putting
funds.
Is
there
a
reason
why
we're
doing
two
or
three
different
types
of
policies
through
different
departments,
to
make
sure
that
this
is
funded
correctly?
So
for
me,
it's
a
much
bigger
picture
for
us
to
come
together
with
the
housing
money
funding
our
futures,
as
well
as
the
RTA
money
coming
from
the
northwest
quadrant
I
mean.
A
I
agree
with
you
and
one
proposal,
and
so
we're
sort
of
skipping
around
a
little
bit,
but
they
are
also
all
tied
together.
One
thing
that
I've
been
thinking
about-
and
maybe
I've
talked
to
a
couple
of
you
about-
is
the
idea
of
having
an
outside
firm,
come
in
and
look
at
what
we're
doing
for
housing.
What
the
best
practices
are.
What's
our
housing
stock,
how
can
we
be
effective
because
I
I
100%
agree
with
you
James
we're
gonna
have
that
ten
percent
from
the
Northwest
quad?
We
have
this
funding
our
future
money.
A
E
E
C
It's
an
outside
firm,
whether
they're,
local
or
they
national,
and
might
there
be
some
value
instead
in
what
in
talking
with
our
own
development
and
Business
and
Finance
community
who's
going
in
some
ways.
Some
of
them
have
been
engaged
through
the
Blue
Ribbon
Commission
or
our
own.
Our
own
current
working
group,
but
I've
heard
a
lot
of
narratives
from
this
community
about
potential
misses
that
you
know
we
meant
to
do
this,
but
we
ended
up.
C
C
What
I'm,
trying
to
say
is
maybe
the
consultants
job
is
to
carry
this
local
narrative
and
help
us
align
that,
maybe
with
some
recommendations
from
other
cities
who
have
done
a
sudden,
drastic
increase
in
affordable
housing
dollars
and
what
were
some
of
the
pitfalls
or
the
best
or
the
practice
best
practices
that
came
out
of
those
scenarios,
because
I
said
it
before
I
feel
like
we
flung
the
doors
open
on
affordable
housing
and
now
we're
like.
Maybe
we
should
make
the
doors
this
open,
we've
been
sort
of
learning
through
through
trial
and
error.
C
A
My
understanding
and
I
think
this
is
actually
a
discussion
I
to
ask
chair
Luke
to
consider
in
the
because
I
think
again
it
comes
sort
of
out
of
the
council
side
of
things,
but
the
RDA
certainly
obviously
were
a
part
of
it
with
the
housing
but
I.
My
understanding
is
that
there
is
a
local
consultant
that
kind
of
that
there's,
housing
and
and
best
practices
in
housing
is
their
thing
and
and
I
think
that
what
we
need
to
do
is
recognize
that
we
want
to.
A
If
we
want
to
fund
this
put
the
funding
towards
it,
then
of
course
you
know
that
the
process
of
getting
the
right
consultant
or
or
the
right
scope,
or
things
like
that,
but
I'm
hearing
from
board
members
that
this
is
important
from
an
RDA
stance
and
I,
think
we
I
I,
think
it's
council
members.
We
would.
We
would
say
the
same
thing
if
we
were
in
the
council
meeting
right.
So,
madam.
A
H
Chair
to
the
point
earlier
about,
you
know
whether
the
council
would
discuss
this
I
we
definitely
will
be.
Housing
is
a
very,
very
big
issue
in
our
city
right
now.
That
said,
it
is
a
it's
not
a
traditional
core
municipal
function.
This
is
something
that
you
know.
Typically
cities.
You
know
our
city
have
it
has
not
done
that.
H
That
doesn't
mean
that
we
shouldn't
it
doesn't
mean
that
we
that
we
won't
in
the
future,
but
you
know
understanding
that
any
money
that
we
put
towards
housing
is
going
to
have
to
come
from
something
else,
and
the
fact
that
we're
not
putting
money
into
court
municipal
services
is
something
that
does
weren't
a
good
discussion.
I'm
not
saying
I'm
opposed
to
putting
money
into
housing,
but
but
I
do
think
we
need
to
have
that
discussion.
H
We
need
to
be
fully
honest
about
what
that
cost
is
going
to
be
to
other
traditional
municipal
projects,
whether
it's
parks,
whether
it's
streets,
sidewalks
public
safety,
things
like
that,
so
it
does.
We
do
need
to
have
a
broader
discussion,
but
I
think
at
this
point
until
that
discussion
that's
been
had
not
moving.
Money
from
the
RDA
was
the
right
move.
So
thank
you
all
so.
A
D
B
E
A
F
B
F
A
question
so
I'm
still
confused
about
the
I
know
we
really
struggled
for
the
250
and
now
we're
stopped
falling
again
for
another
housing
trust
fund,
a
location
for
395.
So
when
this
happened
in
the
past,
were
we
ever
given
an
idea
of
what
this
money
was
gonna
go
for
and
then
it
just
never
came
through
like
we
never
got
a
plan,
we
never
I
I.
B
B
Being
considered
and
so
I
think
housing
and
neighborhood
development
was
rightly
focused
on
the
funding,
our
future
discussions
and
not
as
focused
on
the
little
bits
of
you
know,
funding
here
and
there
that
was
coming
from
the
RDA
cuz.
That
was
such
a
trickle
of
funding.
You
know
not
this
huge
potential
source
of
funding
and
so
I
think
it
was
complete
oversight,
just
kind
of
which
happens
in
a
two
billion
dollar
budget.
Sometimes
that
there's
an
accounting
step.
B
That's
you
know,
missed
here
and
there
to
not
include
it
last
year
and
then
because
it
wasn't
included
last
year.
Typically,
we
build
the
next
year's
budget
on
the
previous
year's
budget
and
so
I
think
that's
how
it
was
perpetuated.
This
year,
housing,
a
Neighborhood
Development,
did
give
us
a
report
on
their
activities
from
last
year.
But
those
activities
didn't
include
this
funding
because
it
wasn't
built
into
their
budget,
so
I
hope,
I.
Hope
that
answers
your
question.
I,
don't
think
it
was
any
intentional.
You
know
ignoring
of
funding.
B
A
G
B
So
from
a
logistics
perspective
will
prepare
a
motion
sheet
and
a
key
changes
sheet,
reflecting
the
council
of
the
board's
direction
and
then
come
to
you
next
week,
where
you'll
consider
adopting
the
annual
budget
in
the
seven
o'clock
meeting.
The
budget
amendment
will
be
considered
in
your
sort
of
normal
RDA
time
earlier
in
the
afternoon.
So
you're
just
gonna
do
a
lot
of
adoption
adopting
next
week
so
get
ready.
I.