►
From YouTube: Redevelopment Agency (RDA) of Salt Lake City - 10/12/21
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
A
B
B
B
B
We
are
accepting
your
comments
through
webex
and
for
those
whose
only
option
is
to
call
in
staff
will
be
monitoring
a
separate
telephone
line.
I
want
to
mention
the
rules
of
the
quorum.
These
are
guidelines
to
help
our
meeting
progress
in
an
orderly
civil
efficient
way.
We
will
move
through
the
agenda
and
want
to
give
everyone
the
opportunity
to
voice
their
opinions
without
feeling
intimidated.
B
In
order
to
achieve
this,
our
rules
of
the
quorum
begin
from
the
moment
when
you
arrive
into
our
virtual
meeting.
The
rda
board
respects
all
points
of
view,
and
we
welcome
new
insights.
Please
be
respectful,
avoid
yelling,
profanity
or
making
racial
slurs,
obscene
or
defamatory
remarks.
If
you
use
profanity
during
your
comment,
your
line
will
be
muted.
B
In
any
comments
that
reach
a
level
of
disrespect,
I
will
ask
that
you
be
muted
and
you
will
forfeit
your
opportunity
to
address
the
word
today
if
you're
not
able
to
complete
your
comments
this
afternoon,
you're
welcome
to
email
the
word
or
call
our
comment
line.
In
addition,
our
staff
will
request
for
your
name
during
the
registration
process
to
limit
disruption.
B
Your
name
cannot
include
a
message
or
violate
the
rules
of
the
quorum
if
you
register
name,
if
your
registered
name
doesn't
meet
this
requirement,
then
our
staff
will
use
the
chat
feature
to
gather
that
information
from
you,
taylor,
hill
from
our
staff,
is
helping
to
moderate
the
meeting
and
will
be
messaging
with
the
attendees
to
coordinate
on
any
questions
with
your
commenting.
Registration
staff
is
handling
a
number
of
tasks.
Please
limit
messages
to
technical
issues
and
minimal
changes
to
your
registration.
B
Taylor
hill
will
be
calling
the
names
of
those
who
wish
to
comment
and
unmuting
lines.
When
taylor
unmutes
your
line
and
lets
you
know
it's
your
turn,
please
take
your
first
and
last
name
indicate
the
topic
you're
speaking
on
and
the
two-minute
timer
will
begin
at
the
two-minute
remark.
We
will
announce
time
and
your
microphone
will
be
muted.
A
Madam
chair,
taylor's
audio,
is
having
some
issues
so
I'll
just
call
names
for
right
now.
Just
isaac,
kevin
emerson
is
first
and
I'll
unmute
him
in
a
second.
A
Oh,
can
you
hear
me
hello
yeah,
I
could
hear
you
isaac.
Okay,
sorry,
I
might
have
been
muted.
Taylor
is
having
some
issues
with
their
audio,
so
I'll
be
calling
names
for
now
I'll
be
on.
Kevin
emerson
is
here
for
general
comments.
C
A
Kevin
you
are
unmuted,
hello,
hi,
everyone.
This
is
kevin
emerson
and
I
actually
I
just
logged
in
with,
in
the
way
that
I
thought
I
needed
to
I'm
just
here
to
to
listen
in
and
answer
possible
questions
about.
One
of
the
agenda
items.
B
B
Now
we
before
we
begin
taking
comments,
I
will
first
turn
the
time
over
to
ben
lucky
council
staff
policy
analyst
to
give
a
short
introduction.
Thank
you.
Ben.
E
A
Great,
so
we
have
three
people
here
today
we're
we'll
begin
with.
I'm
sorry,
I'm
pulling
up
the
participants
peter
nelson
peter.
You
are
now
unmuted,
okay,
yeah
thanks
everyone.
This
is
peter
nelson
from
salt
lake
city
sustainability
and
similar
to
kevin
emerson.
I'm
just
here
to
answer
any
possible
questions
on
an
agenda
item
for
later
on
in
the
meeting.
So
thank
you
for
having
me.
F
This
is
lauren,
I'm
here
with
the
rda.
I
think
we
all
must
have
gotten
the
incorrect
link
to
participate
in
the
meeting,
but
yeah
no,
no
comment
we'll
be
presenting
later
thanks.
A
Okay,
in
that
case,
we
have
no
comments.
My
apologies
for
that.
B
Problem,
thank
you,
isaac,
so
we're
going
to
move
on
to
item
c,
which
is
really
nominations,
business
and
a
motion
for
to
me
remotely
without
an
anchor
location.
E
E
There
is
a
motion
sheet
for
your
consideration.
A
D
B
All
right,
we
have
a
have
a
motion
by
remember
dugan
in
a
second
executed
by
board
member
paris,
I'm
going
to
roll
call.
Madam.
D
D
I
ask
a
question
before
we
vote:
I
I
see
that
this
item's
also
number
five
on
our
agenda
today.
Are
we
discussing
this
again
after
we
adopt
it?
Is
that
what
I'm
seeing.
E
So
that
that's
up
to
you,
there
were
no
further
questions
after
the
first
briefing,
but
if
there
are
new
questions
we
have
it
listed
as
tentative
in
case
you
would
like
a
follow-up
discussion,
but
it's
totally
up
to
the
board.
If
you
are
comfortable,
you
can
vote
and
adopt,
or
you
can
just
close
the
public
hearing
and
talk
about
it
at
the
briefing.
B
G
B
B
Not
present,
okay
wharton
is
absent.
Mano.
H
B
A
B
Fowler,
yes,
yes,
and
so
it
passes.
Thank
you.
We
are
moving
on
to
now
we're
moving
on
to
item
c
one
motion
meeting
remotely
without
an
anchor
location.
B
A
H
D
B
Yes,
yes,
and
I'm
a
yes
that
passes
moving
on
to
item
number
two:
it's
the
project
area,
extensions
follow-up
at
the
table.
We
have
ben
latkey,
council
office
policy,
analyst
and
danny
walls,
rda,
ceo,
so
ben
go
ahead
or
danny.
Whoever
will
present
today
on
that.
E
This
is
the
second
briefing
about
extending
the
project.
Excuse
me:
the
property
tax,
increment
collection
period
for
project
areas.
You
may
remember,
at
the
last
briefing
that
you
took
a
straw
poll
and
supported
a
two-year
extension
for
four
of
the
project
areas
that
would
include
the
central
business
district,
north
temple,
the
granary
district
and
the
depot
district.
E
The
extension
can
be
done
unilaterally
by
the
board
without
approval
of
other
taxing
entities.
This
is
allowed
by
state
law.
The
administration
stated
they
will
coordinate
with
the
other
taxing
entities
like
the
school
district
and
the
county
about
the
extensions
and
discuss
potential
shared
priorities
for
the
use
of
that
additional
property
tax
increment
funding.
E
The
extensions
would
impact
seven
taxing
entities,
including
the
city,
the
attorney's
office,
prepared
a
resolution.
It's
in
your
packet.
The
resolution
would
authorize
those
four
project
area
extensions.
It's
a
two-year
extension
for
each
of
the
project
areas,
the
pandemic
related
negative
impacts
are
listed
in
the
resolution
and
those
are
the
basis
for
extension.
E
A
B
All
right,
we
have
a
motion
by
board
member
fowler
and
seconded
by
board
member
dugan,
correct.
Okay,
I'm
going
to
roll
call
ferris.
H
B
Yes
and
I'm
a
yes
that
motion
passes,
that's
awesome.
B
B
C
Right
yeah
today
is
just
we
hope
to
have
a
briefing
and
a
discussion
with
the
board
about
some
potential
revisions
to
the
guiding
framework.
C
The
board
has
had
a
number
of
discussions
lately
that
has
made
us
feel
like.
We
should
really
return
to
the
guiding
framework
and
revise
it
a
little
bit.
C
Those
discussions
have
included
the
discussions
about
housing
funding
priorities
as
well
as
conversations
last
month,
tammy
gave
a
presentation
about
alignment
and
realignment
of
agency
strategy
and
resources,
and
then
ashley
presented
on
equity
and
inclusion,
and
those
three
topics
in
particular
sort
of
had
us
want
to
reach
back
and
make
sure
that
the
guiding
framework
was
really
up
to
date,
and
so
we've
discussed
it
at
length
of
staff.
We've
had
conversations
with
our
advisory
committee.
We
have
some
potential
revisions
to
that
document
that
we'd
like
to
share
with
you
today.
C
C
Yes
great,
so
this
is
the
guiding
framework
document
and
what
it's
showing
there
is
in
red
line
form
the
struck
out
in
red
would
be
sort
of
the
the
items
we
would
like
to
delete
and
then
underline
in
red
would
be
items
that
we're
proposing
to
add,
and
you
can
see
as
you
look
at
this,
that
there
are
a
couple
of
little
changes
to
the
mission
statement
and
really
it's
just
these
two
words
we'd
like
to
replace
the
word
revitalize
with
the
word
strengthen,
and
that
is
because
we
felt
like
the
word
revitalize
was
a
little
bit
of
a
value
judgment
that
maybe
a
neighborhood
wasn't
vital
to
begin
with,
and
really
what
we're
doing
is
we're
investing
in
and
we're
strengthening
these
areas
of
the
city.
C
So
that's
would
be
the
reason
for
that
and
then
the
other
change
would
be
to
these
conversations
around
equity
and
inclusion.
We
really
wanted
to
get
equity
into
the
mission
statement,
and
so
you
can
see
there
that
we've
set
we've
added
the
word
equitable
in
front
of
communities,
so
that
the
mission
statement
now
reads
that
the
agency
strengthens
neighborhoods
and
business
districts
to
improve
livability,
spark
economic
growth
and
foster
authentic
equitable
communities.
And
then
the
rest
of
the
mission
statement
would
remain
unchanged.
C
So,
just
a
couple,
little
tweaks
to
the
mission
statement
there,
one,
I
think,
is
just
to
make
the
language
a
little
more
clear
and
then
one
clearly
to
incorporate
equity
there's
some
changes
to
the
values
as
well.
C
As
I
mentioned
earlier,
the
values
really
state
the
economic,
the
social
and
the
physical
outcomes
that
we
expect
from
agency
projects
and
work,
and
with
regard
to
economic
growth,
the
value
of
economic
growth.
We
would
like
to
change
that
to
economic
opportunity
to
reflect
the
principles
of
equity
and
inclusion
and
change
the
language
there
to
be
a
little
more
broad.
C
What
we
would
like
to
do
is
sort
of
zoom
out
a
little
if
you
will
and
state
that
really
the
economic
opportunity
value
is
that
we
would
invest
in
the
long-term
prosperity
and
growth
of
our
local
economy,
so
that
would
be
new
language
on
on
that
value,
to
replace
the
the
old
language
under
community
impact.
This
was.
We
would
like
to
totally
rename
this
value
to
equity
and
inclusion.
C
C
This
is
an
acknowledgement
that
our
we're
doing
our
best
work
when
we
are
out
in
the
community
when
we
are
listening
to
them
carefully
and
we
are
doing
projects
that
they
want
to
see
in
their
communities
to
make
their
lives
better
and,
and
hence
the
sort
of
people-focused
projects
and
programs
element
to
the
language
there
and
then
over
on
neighborhood
vibrancy.
Just
a
little
tweak
there
to
we
felt,
like
the
word
built
environment,
might
be
a
little
jargony
for
like
real
estate
development
work.
C
So
we
change
that
to
places
and
then
the
word
resilient.
We
change
to
durable,
since
this
particular
value
is
about
the
the
built,
the
built
environment
and
places
that's
really
about
materials
and
buildings
themselves,
and
so
we
wanted
to
just
be
a
little
more
direct
on
that.
C
So
those
are
the
those
are
the
changes
to
the
mission
statement
and
the
values
be
down
under
the
the
project.
Evaluation
process
and
scroll
down
here.
C
C
C
With
regard
to
the
benchmarks,
I
I
won't
go
through
them
individually,
but
I
will
say
that
we
haven't
lost
anything
with
the
exception
of
targeted
resources,
and
the
reason
for
that
is
is
that
the
intent
behind
a
benchmark
for
targeted
resources
was
that
we
would
sort
of
evaluate
a
project
that
was
within
proximity
to
another
rda
project
favorably,
and
we
sort
of
feel
like
that.
The
boundaries
of
a
project
area
are
already
giving
us
a
geographic
focus,
and
so
we
don't
necessarily
need
that
as
a
benchmark.
C
And
so
that's
the
only
removal.
We
have
added
some
benchmarks,
particularly
to
reflect
the
principles
of
equity
and
inclusion
and
an
example.
There
would
be
right
here
under
ownership
and
that's
an
acknowledgment
that
home
ownership
or
a
business
owning
their
building
or
their
space
is
an
important
part
of
economic
opportunity,
the
wealth
building
and
the
that
can
come
from
the
equity.
There
is
a
really
important
part
of
economic
opportunity,
so
that
would
be
an
example
of
an
addition.
C
We've
also
done
additions
to
with
regard
to
housing
and
displacement
mitigation
and
affordable
housing
and
missing
middle
and
unique
building
types
in
the
benchmarks.
We've
also
just
kind
of
taken
some
of
these
and
kind
of
merged
them
together,
an
example
of
that
would
be
previously.
C
We
had
a
benchmark
for
quality
materials,
we
had
one
for
sight
and
urban
design,
and
then
we
had
one
for
building
design
and
architecture
and
what
what
we
think
we
can
do
is
kind
of
merge,
those
into
a
single
benchmark
that
we're
calling
architecture
and
urban
design
whereby
we
can
use
the
rda's
design
review
process
and
create
some
design
guidelines
to
sort
of
address,
quality
materials
and
site
and
urban
design
as
an
example.
C
So
those
would
be
some
of
the
changes
there
to
the
livability
benchmarks,
there's
much
more
detail
for
them
in
attachment
b
to
your
memo,
where
we
actually
identify
the
description
and
intent
for
each
of
them
and
for
the
sake
of
time
I
won't
delve
into
each
and
every
one
of
those.
But
it's
you
should
know
that
it's
there
for
your
reference,
and
we
can
talk
about
any
of
them
that
you
would
like.
C
We
would
like
to
identify
particular
benchmarks
that
are
a
priority
for
the
redevelopment
of
that
particular
property
or
whether
we
are
doing
a
a
notice
of
funding
availability,
for
example,
and
we
would
like
to
identify
particular
public
benefits
or
livability
benchmarks
that
we
would
like
to
achieve
through
that
process.
We
would
like
to
pull
them
from
this
list,
and
we've
done
some
of
that
in
the
plot
in
the
past.
C
We
would
like
to
continue
doing
that
in
the
future
and
even
sort
of
enhance
that
sort
of
referencing
back
to
the
guiding
framework
and
the
livability
benchmarks.
C
So
I
I
think
that's
everything
unless
danny
and
tammy,
unless
you
have
some
comments
there,
maybe
things
I've
missed.
I
I
We
envision
that
these
livability
benchmarks
and
the
framework
in
general
is
kind
of
the
guiding
policy
umbrella
policy
for
the
rda
and
that,
on
an
annual
basis,
you
all
will
adopt
a
set
of
housing
funding
priorities
that
are
more
specific
or
more
applicable
to
community
focus
areas
for
that
year.
So
the
housing
funding
priorities
that
will
be
adopted
on
an
annual
basis
will
be
more
specific
in
in
nature,
but
generally
be
aligned
with
this
overall
umbrella
policy
of
these
livability
benchmarks.
I
B
Right
go
ahead.
Thank
you.
Thank
you.
Courtney
tammy!
This
is
great
and
amy
has
her
hand
up
so
go
ahead.
Amy.
H
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
appreciate
the
the
rework
of
some
of
of
these
things
to
include
some
of
the
missions
and
values
that
we've
been
talking
about
over
the
last
year,
like
equity
and
inclusion.
I
know
this
is
like
so
ridiculously
nitpicky,
but
that's
why
you
guys
love
me.
So
in
the
mission
statement,
it
we
say,
spark
economic
growth,
but
if
we're
changing
the
livability
benchmark
to
economic
opportunity,
can
we
align
those
things,
so
it
says
economic
opportunity
in
the
mission
statement
just
so
we're
consistent
again.
H
This
is
my
like
lawyer
brain
happening
and
then
in
the
mission
statement
where
it
says
foster
authentic
and
equitable
communities.
H
I
feel
like
there
is
maybe
a
I
know
what
we're
getting
at
there,
but
it
feels
like
we
can
say
it
differently.
We
were.
I
haven't,
figured
that
one
out
yet,
but
I
might
come
back
to
you
and
be
like.
Can
we
just
change
this
line
a
little
bit
because
I'm
hoping
that
communities
in
and
of
themselves
are
already
equitable
like?
I
don't
know
that.
H
H
I
really
do
appreciate
the
changes.
I
know
court,
how
long
you
and
your
team
and
and
tammy
and
danny
and
everyone
at
rda-
have
worked
on
this
document
for
a
year
and
a
half
or
longer
two
years
at
this
point.
But
I
truly
appreciate
that
it
is
a
sort
of
living
document
that
we
get
to
come
back
to
it
and
say
you
know:
what
really
are
our
benchmarks?
H
What
really
is
the
mission-
and
that
was
the
whole
point
of
all
of
this-
is
that
we
had
sort
of
a
livable,
breathable
living
document
that
that
kind
of
helped
guide
the
rda
and
and
more
so
people
who
come
to
the
rda.
Looking
looking
for
something
right,
and
I
appreciate
that,
as
our
conversations
continue
to
evolve,
you
keep
this
in
mind
and
continue
to
evolve
it
as
well.
So
thank
you
for
that.
I
think
it
was
exactly
the
intent
of
what
we
all
were
hoping
for
with
this,
so
truly
appreciate
it
thanks.
B
Thank
you,
amy
darren.
D
Yeah,
thank
you,
madam
chair.
I
agree
with
amy
I
I
was
that
same
economic
growth
versus
economic
opportunity
being
jumped
out
of
me
as
well,
and
I
wonder
if
it's
not
worth
trying
to
just
include
the
three
values
in
the
mission
statement
verbatim
like
have
the
words,
equity
and
inclusion
and
neighborhood
vibrancy
built
into
that
mission
statement
just
as
written,
so
that
there's
that
clear
one-to-one
relationship
from
this
step
to
that
step,
and
then
from
that
step
down
to
the
benchmarks
so
but
yeah
I
actually.
B
C
You,
madam
chair
quick
question
under
the
livability
benchmarks,
we've
crossed
out
local
business.
A
Opportunities
supporting
locally
owned
and
independent
businesses
and
nonprofits.
C
No,
that
that's
a
good,
a
good
question,
so
is
we
thought,
through
about
local,
independent
business,
small
local
business?
One
of
the
things
that
we're
seeing
is
a
barrier
to
that
in
neighborhoods
is
the
affordability
component.
It's
the
affordability
of
the
commercial
space,
and
so
that
particular
benchmark
has
been
sort
of
folded
into
the
affordable
commercial
space
as
a
way
to
sort
of
address
that
need
can.
B
A
A
You
it's
always
good
to
reflect
and
kind
of
review.
You
know
our
our
framework
and
how
we
do
business,
and
you
know
taking
this
one
along
with
the
housing
funding
priorities.
You
know
it's
a
good
review
and
it's
a
good
practice
for
all
of
us
to
kind
of
you
know,
look
back
and
make
sure
that
we
are
on
the
right
track
and
that
we're
we're
actually
following
these
frameworks
when
we
do
business.
So
I
appreciate
that-
and
I
love
all
the
comments
from
everybody
else,
so
I
won't.
B
I
I
agree
with
with
a
vice
chair.
I
think
it's
great
practice
that
we,
you
know
it
might
might
be
a
two-year
thing
that
will
review
it,
but
at
least
we
can
reflect
back.
We
can
see
where
we've
made
some.
You
know
we
moved
a
little
the
needle
a
little
bit
or
where
you
know
things
change
right.
The
economy
changes
things
happen
we
had
pandemic.
We
had
no
idea
that
you
know
the
the
opportunity
presenter
itself
to
extend.
B
You
know
what
we
just
voted
on,
so
it's
nice
to
keep
looking
at
what
we
want
to
do
if
we're
accomplishing
or
things
have
changed,
and
then
we
just
adapt
so
great
stuff.
I
had
a
question
on
just
a
clarification
on
the
people
focused.
I
think
it
was
on
the
second
or
third
column.
I
can't
remember
what
does
that
exactly
mean
people
focus
opportunity?
I
can't
remember
what
it
said
exactly.
C
Yeah
the
phrase
people
focused
was
a
way
for
us
to
sort
of
highlight
that
the
the
outcomes
of
the
work
really
is
are
to
benefit
the
quality
of
life
for
the
people.
You
know
for
the
residents
and
the
businesses
in
salt
lake
city,
and
so
that
that
phrase
or
that
those
two
words
are
really
meant
to
sort
of
just
focus
that
value
on
who
benefits
from
from
the
work.
B
Yes,
but
I'm
not
sure
if
it's
very
clear
like
just
just
by
reading
it
like
I'm,
not
sure,
if
maybe
it's
just
me
that
don't
completely
comprehend
it
like
or
or
at
least
I
have
a
different
perspective
when
we,
if
I
was
bringing
these
people
focused
to
me,
would
be
non-profits
that
work
we
know
with
with
groups
of
people
more
directly
than
what
we
do
so
is
that
what
we're
focusing
on
or
we're
focusing
on
individuals
right,
but
not
necessarily
business
related.
B
But
anyway,
if
it's
clear
for
the,
I
don't
see
anybody
else
that
has
like
confusion.
So
it
must
be
clear
for
everybody
else,
so
that
would
be
fine
and
then,
on
the
first
column,
you
had
one
that
says
opportunities
and
that's
it
like
just
as
a
world
opportunities.
B
And
so
what
do
you
mean
by
that?
Or
should
we
add
something
else
to
what
type
of
opportunities
we
were
looking
at.
C
Yeah,
maybe
that
was
the
it
doesn't
look
like
I'm
able
to
share
anymore,
but
under
the
when
we
were
looking
at
the
livability
benchmarks,
and
we
were
looking
at
three
columns.
The
far
left
column
was
economic
opportunity
is.
That
is
that,
where
you
were
seeing
the
word
economic.
C
So
really
that
the
word
economic,
the
opportunity
was
to
replace
the
word
growth,
so
the
category
there,
the
name
of
the
of
the
value,
would
be
economic
opportunity
to
tie
back
to
the
value
up
above
in
the
guiding
framework.
It
must
have
been
a
formatting
issue
and
what
you
were
looking
at
all
right.
B
Okay,
all
right
great!
Well,
thanks
for
the
clarification
I
don't
have,
I
don't
have
any
other
questions.
I
think
we
all
said.
I
Just
to
make
it
clear
the
plan
is
to
incorporate
your
feedback
and
bring
it
back
at
a
future
meeting
in
the
form
of
a
policy
resolution
that
you
can
consider
and
potentially
adopt
at
that
time.
Right.
B
So
if
there's
any
other
feedback,
what
you
say,
what
you're
saying
tell
me
is
send
them
your
way
before
you
know
soon,
so
that
they
can
incorporate
it,
and
then
we
can
vote
on
this.
B
Great
well,
thank
you
so
much.
We
are
moving
on
to
item
number
four,
which
is
also
informational,
and
it's
about
the
draft
sustainable
development
policy.
At
the
table.
We
have
alison
roland
council,
office
policy,
analyst
ashley,
ogden,
rda
project
manager
and
kara
nainsley.
Are
the
project
manager
go
ahead?
Alison.
A
First
correction:
I
believe
it's
going
to
be
lauren
perezi
who's
at
the
table,
rather
than
ashley
ogden.
I'm
not
sure
how
that
happened,
but
just
so
no
one's
surprised,
I'm
not
going
to
really
give
an
introduction
to
this
document
or
to
this
briefing
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
I
was
able
to
come
up
with
some
policy
questions.
I
sent
them
to
all
of
you
very
late
at
about
11
25
this
morning
and
on
that
email
you'll.
J
Okay,
too,
so
I
will
turn
it
over
to
rda
staff.
J
J
Okay.
So
if
we
could
go
to
the
next
slide,
we
could
get
started.
We
wanted
to
start
by
giving
some
context
for
the
creation
of
the
rda
sustainable
development
policy.
J
The
2020
census
showed
that
utah's
population
grew
by
18
and
a
half
percent
over
the
past
10
years,
faster
than
any
other
state
in
the
country
and
over
two
times
faster
than
the
national
average,
and
we
know
that
that
population
growth
brings
economic
opportunities,
but
the
growth
also
brings
new
depend,
new
demand
for
housing,
new
commercial
industrial
buildings
and
that
those
have
consequences
for
air
quality,
public
health
and
climate
change.
J
I
wanted
to
mention
that
representatives
from
utah,
clean
energy
and
sustainability
are
both
here
today
to
answer
any
questions
you
might
have
after
the
presentation
and
that's
kevin
emerson
and
peter
nelson,
that
we
heard
from
earlier
in
the
meeting
next
slide.
Please.
J
A
J
J
J
J
The
salt
lake
city
is
working
to
grow
in
a
smart,
sustainable
manner
and
we
recognize
that
buildings
in
our
city
directly
impact
our
ability
to
meet
our
community's
climate
and
air
quality
goals,
with
buildings
constructed
to
last
30
to
50
years.
Our
decisions
about
how
we
build
today
will
determine
our
emissions
for
decades
to
come
and
next
slide.
J
We
want
to
put
this
into
the
context
of
other
sustainability
efforts
in
the
city.
Salt
lake
city's
climate,
positive
2040
plan,
which
was
published
in
2016
calls
for
100
net
renewable
energy
for
the
community's
electricity
supply
by
2030,
and
that
is
to
help
us
meet
a
goal
of
the
80
reduction
in
greenhouse
gas
emissions
by
2040.
J
and
salt
lake
city
isn't
alone
in
this
effort.
We're
one
of
23
communities
in
utah
that
have
set
100
net
renewable
energy
goals
for
their
communities
by
2030,
and
that
program
is
being
developed
by
the
utah
100
communities
program.
J
F
Thank
you
kara,
so
yeah
under
these
overarching
city-wide
goals,
the
rda
rda's
more
specific
target
that
comes
from
the
direction
of
mayor
mendenhall
is
to
be
emission
free
by
2023,
and
so
what
we
really
mean
by
this
is
we
hope,
to
support
only
projects
without
on-site
emissions
by
the
year
2023
or
all
electric
buildings,
as
cara
has
been
describing
so
additionally
we'd,
like
salt
lake
city,
to
become
even
more
of
a
leader
in
sustainability
and
have
models
of
different
building
types
and
sustainable
development
projects,
whether
it
be
mixed
use,
commercial
or
missing
middle
housing,
projects
that
others
can
look
to
across
utah
and
even
across
the
us,
as
these
models
of
sustainable
building
projects
next
slide.
F
So
I
did
want
to
kind
of
mention
that,
and
so
looking
at
our
proposed
policy,
it's
really
broken
down
into
two
components
and
those
are
our
threshold
requirements
and
then,
secondly,
our
rda
program,
specific
requirements.
F
So
this
could
be
commercial
renovation
projects,
housing,
rehab
projects
that
aren't
new
construction
but
receive
over
this
dollar
amount,
and
so
the
requirement
here
is
that
projects
will
have
to
earn
a
designed
to
earn
energy
star
score
of
90
or
above
or
an
equivalent
energy
use,
intensity
score
or
value
rather,
and
this
threshold
really
aims
to
encourage
the
use
of
more
efficient
systems
for
things
like
heating,
cooling,
lighting
appliances,
insulation
and
more
energy.
F
Star
is
a
well-known
industry
metric
that
was
created
by
the
environmental
protection
agency
and
the
department
of
energy
and
applicants
can
utilize
the
energy
star
portfolio
manager,
tool,
that's
online,
and
it's
free
to
calculate
this,
designed
to
earn
energy
star
score
and
for
reference.
A
building
with
an
energy
star
score
of
75
and
above
indicates
that
it
performs
in
the
top
25
percent
of
similar
building
types
nationwide.
F
Oh
sorry,
if
you
could
go
back
to
the
other
slide,
but
I
can
explain
we're
also
going
to
require
that
projects
participate
in
the
city's
art
or
our
sustainability
department's
elevate
buildings
program,
and
this
is
an
energy
benchmarking
program
that
requires
property
managers
to
submit
energy
use
data
to
the
city
on
an
annual
basis,
and
this
way
we'll
be
able
to
review
whether
or
not
buildings
are
meeting
their
projected
energy
star
score,
and
now
you
can
flip
to
the
next
slide.
Thank
you.
F
So
the
second
part
of
the
threshold
requirement
will
again
reply
to
all
apply
to
all
new
construction
projects
and
also
projects
that
receive
over
nine
hundred
thousand
dollars
in
rda
funding,
and
these
buildings
must
be
designed
to
operate
without
any
on-site.
Fossil
fuel
combustion
or
natural
gas
used
for
things
like
heating
and
cooking
and
the
intent
of
this
requirement
and
building
electrification.
F
F
Okay!
So
now
next
slide,
please
so
moving
on
to
the
rda
program
requirements-
and
this
will
be
in
addition
to
achieving
those
threshold
requirements,
certain
rda
programs
will
either
require
or
further
incentivize
what
we're
calling
off-site
and
on-site
net-zero
standards.
F
But
right
now
in
utah
there
are
two
existing
programs
that
a
project
could
participate
in
to
meet
this
standard,
including
rocky
mountain
power's,
blue
sky
program
and
rocky
mountain
subscriber
solar
program
and
the
utah
100
communities
program
that
kara
touched
on
is
currently
in
the
works
to
establish
more
renewable
energy
sources
that
consume
consumers
can
potentially
utilize
to
meet
the
standard
in
the
future.
F
Additionally,
with
this
off-site
net
zero
requirement
and
of
course
it's
to
promote
net
zero
buildings
and
so
projects
must
either
meet
the
2021
international
energy
conservation
codes,
zero
energy,
appendix
standards
or
receive
a
net
zero
certification
such
as
passive
house
enterprise,
green
communities,
interla
international
living
future
institute
or
lead
zero,
okay
and
next
slide.
Please.
F
And
then
the
second
level
of
the
rda
program
requirements
is
the
on-site
net
zero,
and
this
is
the
highest
requirement
in
our
policy,
and
it
requires
that
buildings
source
their
energy
needs
with
on-site
renewable
energy
by
either
supplying
at
least
50
percent
of
the
project's
total
estimated
annual
electricity
consumption
with
on-site
renewables
or
utilizing
at
least
50
percent
of
the
project's
available
roof
space
for
on-site
renewable
generation.
F
So
really
looking
at
solar
and
utilizing
half
of
the
roofs
area
for
solar
and
any
any
electricity
that
can't
be
sourced
with
on-site
renewables,
for
various
reasons
can
be,
someone
could
utilize
the
off-site
for
whatever
can't
be
sourced
by
on-site.
If
that
makes
sense
and
again
here,
projects
will
be
required
to
meet
the
iecc
zero
energy
appendix
or
obtain
a
third-party
certification
next
slide.
Please.
F
So,
for
example,
for
the
tax
increment
reimbursement
program,
someone
receiving
over
five
hundred
thousand
dollars
that,
if
they're
receiving
a
tier
up,
they
would
be
required
to
meet
that
the
highest
standard
or
the
on-site
net
zero
building
status,
as
we
feel
that
this
is
the
highest
incentive
that
the
rda
could
offer
a
project
and
we
did
set
it
at
500
000,
because
we
could
potentially
provide
micro,
tiff
or
smaller
amounts
of
tiff
in
the
future.
With
future
programs
that
we've
thought
about
before,
but
typically
tax
increment
reimbursements
are
over
500
000.
F
So
most
of
those
projects
would
have
to
meet
that
on-site
standard
for
land
dispositions.
We
would
require
the
off-site
and
highly
encourage
or
rank
projects
higher,
that
risk
that
utilize
on-site
renewables
and
then
for
the
rda
low
loan
program.
It's
not
a
requirement,
but
we
would
give
you
a
one
percent
interest
rate
reduction
for
off-site
net
zero
and
a
two
percent
interest
rate
reduction
on
your
loan
for
on-site
net
zero,
and
we
wanted
to
make
these
a
little
bit.
F
Bigger
or
larger
incentives
than
the
half
a
percent
interest
rate
reduction
to
to
really
encourage
projects
to
utilize
this
and
yeah.
So
moving
on
to
the
next
slide,
please.
F
So
we
did
want
to
mention
that
we
held
three
round
table
discussions
back
in
may
and
in
attendance
in
attendance,
where
local
developers,
architects
and
affordable
housing
professionals,
and
they
really
gave
us
a
lot
of
great
feedback,
some
of
which
I've
included
on
this
slide,
but
just
to
highlight
a
few
of
the
changes
we
made
based
on
their
feedback
was
we
removed
the
renewable
energy
utility
tariff
as
a
threshold
requirement
and
instead
made
it
one
of
these
higher
requirements?
F
F
We
also
as
a
way
to
ensure
that
these
buildings
are
meeting
the
design
to
earn
energy
star
score.
We
are
requiring
that
again.
They're
they'll
participate
in
this.
F
Our
sustainability
department's
established
elevate
buildings
program
and
that's
something
that
we
didn't
originally
have,
but
we're
glad
we
we've
come
up
with
a
way
to
kind
of
track
that
and
then
finally,
we
received
a
lot
of
feedback
that
it
would
be
really
helpful
to
provide
trainings
in
the
future
to
go
over
this
policy
with
local
developers
and
people
that
will
be
utilizing
it
once
it's
once
or
if
it's
approved
next
slide.
Please.
F
So
to
to
end
the
presentation,
we
just
wanted
to
go
over
a
few
examples
of
sustainable
building
projects
of
many
of
which
might
even
meet
this
new
policy.
So
the
first
you
might
be
familiar
with
is
diamond
rail,
which
did
receive
some
rda
funding.
It's
an
all-electric
project
and
they
have
80
units.
F
Some
are,
I
believe,
are
affordable
and
the
interesting
thing
about
this
project
is
the
developer.
Had
two
plan
sets
one
with
traditional
energy
systems
and
one
that
was
all
electric
and
they
actually
saved,
had
a
cost
savings
of
1.1
percent
percent,
utilizing
the
all-electric
building
plans.
So
that's
something
that's
interesting
and
I
think
that
we've
found
in
our
research
you
know,
there's
not
always
the
cost
savings
electric
isn't
always
cheaper,
but
sometimes
it
is.
It
can
vary
project
to
project,
but
it's
definitely
not
always
more
expensive.
F
So
the
next
is
an
existing
condo
building
the
stansberry
condos,
and
this
was
an
all-electric
multi-family
retrofit
with
75
units,
and
so
they
had
a
savings
of
about
35
000
in
an
annual
energy
cost,
so
that
has
a
project
payback
period
of
about
nine
years,
including
that
cash
rebate
from
rocky
mountain
power.
F
So
we
just
wanted
to
highlight
that
this
is
this
can
be
applied
to
rehabs,
as
well
as
new
construction.
Next
slide,
please.
F
And
finally,
here
was
another
kind
of
mid-rise
apartment
building
with
48
units
in
tooele
and
again
here
they
had
a
project
savings
of
about
thirty
thousand
dollars
in
annual
energy
costs
and
looking
at
the
project
cost
of
about
two
hundred
and
thirty
thousand
to
install
these
high
efficiency,
heat
pumps
and
things
of
that
nature,
they
had
a
payback
period
of
about
five
years
again
utilizing
utility
incentives,
and
so
that's
another
thing
to
look
at
is
these
projects
when
they
install
energy
efficient
systems,
they
can
get
these
utility
incentives
to
factor
into
their
overall
project
costs
and
operating
costs,
which
is,
we
feel
a
great
benefit,
and
I
think
that
wraps
up
our
presentation-
and
I
know
we
went
through
a
lot
of
information.
B
H
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
First
off,
can
I
just
say
that
I
love
you
guys.
I
love.
I
love
the
rda
team
and
staff.
H
H
I
do
want
to
say
that,
as
we
look
at
it's
on
my
what
I'm
looking
at
is
this
slide,
that
is
the
rda
program,
sustainability
measures
and
sort
of
the
like
incentives
that
we'd
be
giving
based
on
on
what
program.
What
rda
program
it
is,
and
I'm
I'm
just
wondering.
H
How
do
we
move
from
an
incentive
to
more
of
a
mandate,
and,
and
is
that
something
that
we
want
to
do,
which
you
kind
of
think
it
is?
Are
we
like
easing
people
into
this,
and
then
we
get
to
say
oh
ps,
by
the
way?
Now
you
know
three
years
later,
four
years
later,
this
is
like
you
have
to
have
this
in
order
to
participate
in
one
of
our
rda
programs.
H
F
I
can
try
to
respond
to
that
and
so
the
threshold
requirements
which
again
is
meeting
that
energy
star
target
and
then
going
all
electric.
Those
are
mandates
for
all
new
construction
projects
and
projects
that
receive
over
four
hundred
thousand
and
the
the
amount
there
or
that
dollar
amount
threshold
was
because
we
thought,
maybe
adaptive
reuse
type
projects
might
might
not
be
able
to
hit
that.
F
Although
I
think
as
we
go
along
and
roll
this
out,
we'll
try
to
look
at
that
and
see
if
maybe
they
could,
and
that
should
be
a
mandate
for
them
as
well.
But
anyhow,
so
those
first
thresholds
are
mandates
and
then
the
program
specifics
requirements.
We
realize
that
some
of
our
incentives
are
larger,
and
so
they
should
go
above
and
beyond
the
threshold
requirements
and
we're
going
to
mandate
like
for
the
tierra
or
a
tax
increment
reimbursement
that
they
have
on-site
renewables
and
then
for
the
land,
dispositions
or
rfps.
F
We're
going
to
mandate
that
they
at
least
have
the
off-site
net
zero
and
we
would
bring
them
higher
with
on-site.
The
incentive
here
or
the
one.
That's
really
still
an
incentive
is
the
are
those
interest
rate
reductions,
but
they
still
any
any
new
construction
would
still
have
to
meet
the
thresholds,
and
we
would
hope
that
by
increasing
the
percentage
of
a
reduction
projects
would
choose
to
utilize
those
tools.
H
F
Yes,
you
have
to
meet
those
thresholds
and
if
you
get
a
larger
incentive
from
the
rda,
then
you
have
to
do
more
and
the
the
interest
rate
reduction
is
cut,
is
yeah
kind
of
a
bonus
sure.
H
I
I
I
really
do
appreciate
it
like.
I
said
you
literally
from
our
presentation
the
last
presentation
that
court
gave
to
this
presentation.
It's
really
you
take
an
inkling
of
something
that
one
of
us
is
thinking
and
run
with
it
and
create
something
fabulous,
and
I
really
appreciate
this.
So
thank
you.
A
On
the
land
disposition
and
on
the
loan
program,
why
are
you
advising
that?
We
just
make
those
like
strong
recommendations
instead
of
requiring
either
on-site
or
off-site
not
zero?.
F
I
would
say,
because
I
think
there
is
cost
associated
with
the
on-site
and
off-site,
and
so
when
we're
giving
a
larger
incentives,
I
think
definitely
these
projects
can
bear
that
cost,
but
if
it's
alone,
we
weren't
sure
if
they
would
want
to
bear
that
cost,
and
I
think
we
found
there's
kind
of
a
balance
we
need
to
achieve
in
terms
of
not
pushing
too
too
hard
to
detract
people
from
utilizing
our
incentives.
F
You
know
we
still
want
to
fund,
affordable
housing
and
there's
still,
you
know
all
these
initiatives
that
the
city
has,
and
so
there
was
kind
of
a
we
wanted
to
strike
a
balance
between
integrating
sustainable
development
and
still
having
people
utilize
our
tools
and
instead
of
turning
to
other
funding
sources.
A
Okay,
I
think
that
makes
sense.
My
follow-up
question
is
and
then
in
the
areas
where
we're
not
where
we're
just
highly
encouraging
that
zero
are
there,
what
are
the
other
sustainability
requirements
that
or
other
sustainability
things
that
we're
requiring
so.
F
So
that
really
looks
at
the
energy
efficiency
of
a
building.
They'll
have
to
participate
in
the
elevate
buildings
program,
which
is
the
sustainability's
benchmarking
program,
energy,
benchmarking
program
and
finally,
they'll
have
to
be
all
electric
and
then
the
net
on-site
and
off-site
net
zero
are
the
above
and
beyond
that,
depending
on
the
program.
A
F
So
yeah-
and
I
think
when
we
looked
at
other
cities,
sustainable
development
policies,
they
typically
had
some
sort
of
threshold
and
it
did
really
range.
For
example,
I
know
portland,
I
believe,
set
portland
which
is
similar
to
the
rda.
They
set
a
threshold
at
200
000,
but
it's
not
going
net
zero.
The
incentives
are
a
little
different.
The
city
of
chicago
sets
it
at
1
million
that
you'll
have
to
implement
sustainable
development.
F
So
I
think
we
kind
of
talked
about
this
a
lot
and
landed
on
400
000,
because
maybe
there
are
these
smaller
projects
that
need
maybe
some
emergency
type
commercial
funding
and
they
aren't
able
to
integrate
these
sustainable
design
tactics
last
minute.
So
that's
kind
of
where
we
why
we
landed
on
that
number.
F
B
D
A
B
A
Yeah,
I
I
mean
I
don't
want
to
make
it
so
low
that,
like
that
we're,
we
know
we're
gonna
lose
opportunities
and
projects,
but
I
don't
really
wanna
go
with
400
000,
just
because
it's
in
the
middle,
like
I,
I
want
us
to
be
a
little
bit
more
aggressive
and
make
it
so
that.
J
A
So
it
made
sense
to
me
the
first
answer
to
the
question
that
I
asked
of
saying
you
know
why:
don't
we
require?
Why
don't
we
require
on
or
off
siding
at
zero?
And
the
answer
was
that
it
it's.
It
gets
to
a
point
where,
like
the
the
return
on
investment,
you
know
they're
not
going
to
actually
be
gaining,
it
doesn't
benefit
them
to
participate
in
the
program
because
the
cost
is
it's
going
to
be
cost
prohibitive.
A
So
I
don't
want
to
do
that,
but
I
want
to
be
just
like
on
the
in
the
black
on
on
that
line
so
that
we're
pushing
forward
but
we're
not
making
it
prohibitive.
A
F
We
can
definitely
look
into
fine-tuning
that
number
and
providing
more
support
as
to
or
or
lowering
it
if,
as
we
kind
of
research
that
specific
number
some
more
okay.
A
B
I
I
appreciate
that
too
thanks,
lauren
darren,
you
have
your
hand
up.
D
Thanks,
I'm
confused
about
that
thing.
Chris
was
just
talking
about
the
threshold
requirements.
D
Am
I
understanding
this
correctly
that
any
new
construction
project
that
even
gets
a
dollar
of
funding
must
meet
those
and
re
adaptive,
reuse,
projects
that
receive
over
400
or
900
000
in
funding
we'll
have
to
meet
that
a
and
or
b
threshold?
Is
that.
F
D
So,
no,
I
think,
that's
smart.
I
think
it's
good
to
do
that.
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that's
clear
that
any
new
construction
project
there
is
no
no
dollar
amount.
It's
on
the
dollar
amount
only
applies
to
adaptive,
reuse
projects,
so
I
don't
know
if
that
changes,
chris's
concern
or
not,
but
I
do
also
want
to
ask
a
question.
So
what?
If
it's
a
new
construction
project
that
has
a
lot
of
things
that
we
value
in
the
project
and
it
comes
to
us
for
emergency
gap
financing.
D
After
all,
the
plans
are
kind
of
baked
and
set.
Do
we
just
say
no
and
is
that
a
decision
we
want
to
take,
or
is
there
a
carve
out
for
that
emergency
gap?
Financing
where
we're
maybe
only
10
of
the
financing
staff
or
whatever
the
case
may
be,
and
we
really
do
like
the
project
for
all
the
reasons
except
for
the
sustainability
ones?
D
Do
we
have
an
exception
for
that,
and
I
I'm
not
saying
that
we
should,
but
I
I
just
I
mean,
is
that
anticipated
and
if
so,
I
guess
that's
a
policy
question
for
the
board.
A
And
I
was
just
popping
on
to
say
that
the
board
has
frequently
received
requests
and
sometimes
initiated
requests
to
waive
policies
in
certain
circumstances
and
the
board
retains
that
ability
to
waive
a
policy
or
I
don't
know
the
technical
term-
is
wave
or
exempt
question
exemption.
I
know
that
would
probably
be
an
attorney
question,
but
the
board
does
have
that
ability.
It
probably
makes
it
more
rare
if
you
don't
build
it
into
the
policy
itself,
and
so
maybe
that's
a
consideration
as
you
go
forward
of.
Do
you?
A
F
So
it
actually
is
in
there
we
built
an
exception
in
there.
For
those
reasons
exactly
there
may
be
other
community
benefits
that
outweigh,
I
suppose,
these
sustainability
requirements,
and
so
we
did
definitely
think
of
that
and
and
we
number
five,
the
very
last
part
of
the
policy
has
some
language
that
the
rda
board
can
improve
an
exception
to
this
policy
and
it's
it's
written
kind
of
generally,
and
we
thought
about
listing
specific
reasons
for
exceptions.
F
For
example,
if
the
site
is
too
small
and
doesn't
have
enough
space
to
accommodate
on-site
or
something
of
that
nature.
But
for
now
it's
just
kind
of
this
general
exception
and
staff
would
analyze
it
and
bring
it
to
you
on
a
case-by-case
basis.
B
Does
that
satisfy
your
question
darren
like
or
do
we
need
to
be
any.
D
Yeah,
I
think
so
and
again
I
mean
I
wouldn't
be
entirely
opposed
to
just
being
really
strict
on
this,
because
I
mean
it's
our
environment
and
it's
the
air
quality
and
those
are
things
that
if
a
building
goes
in
that
contributes
to
poor
air
quality,
that's
there
for
30
years
or
50
years
or
longer,
so
I'm
not
entirely
opposed
to
being
really
strict.
Now
I
just
want
to
be
clear
about
if
that
carved
out
exists,
and
so
I
I
would
be
okay
with
that
in
terms
of
we
have
proven
on
a
case-by-case
basis.
D
Programs
where
we
are
giving
a
one
or
two
percent
interest
rate
reduction,
I've
never
been
a
fan
of
those
policies
where
it's
like.
This
is
the
percentage
of
interest
rate.
We
reduce
for
doing
this
thing,
because
this
thing
may
cost
x
amount
of
dollars
for
the
developer
or
it
may
be
x,
amount
of
benefit
to
the
city,
but
the
interest
rate
reduction
is
a
totally
variable
benefit
to
the
developer,
because
it
depends
on
how
big
that
loan
is.
D
So
if
it's
a
very
small
loan,
a
two
percent
reduction
is
not
really
that
beneficial
and
they
may
not
do
that
thing.
We're
trying
to
get
them
to
do,
whereas
if
it's
a
very
large
loan,
then
maybe
we're
giving
away
too
much
of
it
of
a
tax
or
interest
rate
reduction
for
something
that's
relatively
small.
So
I've
always
felt
like
interest
rate
reductions.
D
Just
like
a
blanket
percentage
reduction
is
not
right,
sized
necessarily
to
the
incentive
we're
trying
to
to
the
activity
that
we're
trying
to
incentivize
so-
and
I
know
that
that
goes
through
like
all
of
our
policies
and
that's
not
just
in
this
one.
But
I
would
be
interested
in
a
little
bit
of
analysis
as
to
is
that
really
the
right
amount
of
percentage
reduction?
Or
do
we
need
to
say
a
reduction
worth
this
value?
Or
something
like
that
because
it
seems
like
that
is
either
a
super
good
incentive
or
a
really
bad
incentive.
A
Yeah
this
is,
they
can
ask.
I'm
gonna
follow
up
later
on,
just
been
writing
about
the
if
they
don't
achieve
their
sustainability
goals,
but
they
got
a
loan.
You
said
the
24
to
30
months.
You
don't
have
to
answer
it
now,
but
if
you
could
give
us
an
answer
on
that
and
the
penalties
for
that-
and
maybe
also
you
know
deep
in
dive
into
the
the
reasons
why
they
missed
that
mark
when
they
did
the
their
design,
because
they
should
have
been
able
to
hit
in
the
design.
A
So
if
they
missed
this
that
much
and
they
have
to
have
24
months,
that
means
somewhere
we
failed
in
the
approval
process
of
their
designer
or
their
building
permit,
or
they
were
just
really
well.
I
won't
say
or
more
than
that,
just
if
you
get
an
answer
on
that
part,
because
I'm
concerned
about
that
and
then
just
another,
maybe
a
question
on
covered
parking
lots.
A
It's
incentives
to
do
covered
parking
lots
because
they're
not
they're,
they
don't
have
a
good
return
on
investment,
but
they
have
a
great
use
of
flat
space
area
there.
So
give
me
an
answer
on
on
the
cover
parking
lots
incentives
to
develop
those.
Thank
you.
B
All
right,
thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you,
lauren,
cara
and
allison.
This
is
great.
We're
super
excited.
Obviously,
as
you
can
see,
you
can
tell
probably
we
are
moving
moving
on
and
I
want
to
double
check
with
ben
lutky
that
number
five
we
are.
We
already
passed
it
earlier.
We're
not
talking
about
this
again
correct.
B
Okay,
so
we're
moving
on
to
item
six,
and
this
is
report
and
announcements
from
the
executive
director.
B
No?
Okay?
I
see
the
director
nodding
head
so
we're
moving
to
item
number
seven
reporter
announcements
from
rda
staff.
G
B
A
G
You,
madam
chair,
just
a
few
quick
updates,
won't
take
much
time
just
wanted
to
inform
the
board
that
the
adaptive
reuse,
commercial
development
loan
to
the
west
end
project
in
the
nine
line.
Project
area
has
received
its
certificate
of
occupancy,
so
they
are
scheduling
a
ribbon
cutting
celebration,
probably
in
late
fall
or
early
winter,
as
they
get
their
tenants
moved
in,
and
we
will
let
the
board
know
about
that.
G
G
That
is
also
posted
on
the
website
for
anything
to
watch
and
that
runs
through
the
end
of
october
before
those
applications
are
due
and
then
just
a
few
comments
on
the
galvan
center.
They
had
an
extremely
busy
september
with
25
events
over
30
days,
including
the
last
of
the
twilight
concert
series.
They
are
currently
working
to
get
the
ice
rink
up
and
going
as
well
as
the
the
lights
for
the
holiday
decorations,
and
they
recently
passed
a
milestone
with
the
excellence
in
the
community
concert
series
surpassing
over
12
million
views
of
that
concert
series.
G
So
that
is
something
that's
pretty
impressive.
Is
that
has
grown
beyond
just
the
physical
nature
of
the
galvin
center
and
and
out
into
online
viewing
and
then
finally,
a
bit
of
sad
news
if
you
are
familiar
with
any
of
the
galvan
staff,
hopefully
you
know
bart
walker.
He
is
retiring
from
the
gallivan
center
after
20
years
of
being
the
rental.
I
know,
after
20
years
of
being
the
rental
supervisor,
for
the
plaza,
as
well
as
the
manager
for
the
ice
rink.
G
I
certainly
hope
he
is
doing
something
more
exciting
right
now
than
listening
to
our
meeting
right
now,
but
I
wanted
to
make
sure
that
we
commemorated
him
and
gave
him
a
lot
of
appreciation
for
his
support
and
time
with
the
city
and
specifically
with
managing
those
aspects
of
the
galvin
center
and
seeing
its
success
over
the
last
20
plus
years,
so
congrats
bart.
I
hope
you
have
some
other
forum
for
telling
your
horrible
dad
jokes
and
find
someone
who
can
laugh
at
those,
but
you
know
bart.
B
So
fine
find
a
day
to
play
with
him
so
to
enjoy
that,
but
no
seriously
I
mean
this
is
impressive
and
obviously,
without
him
we
wouldn't
be
able
to.
You
know
to
succeed
right
with
the
amount
of
events
and
all
the
logistics
that
goes
behind
it.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
the
service
it'll
be
hard
to
find
right.
Somebody
else
to
to
replace
that
position
and
to
do
it
with
such
efficiency,
especially
throughout
the
pandemic.
Throughout
you
know
all
the
things
that
we
had
to
deal
with
so
enjoy
your
retirement.
B
That's
exciting!
Thank
you!
So
much.
I
have
a
question
about
the
west
end.
I
would
love
to
get
an
invite
so
to
the
grand
opening
to
go,
see
it
first
of
all,
but
the
second.
The
second
question
is:
do
they
still
have
some
spots
open
like
not
least,
to
see
if
there's
any
interest
from
local
businesses
to
move
in
there.
G
I
will
I
will
check
on
that,
madam
chair,
it's
my
understanding
that
they
did
have
some
tenants.
They
were
talking
to
last
update.
I
got
I
don't
know
if
those
had
progressed
beyond
just
letters
of
intent,
so
we
can
get
that
information
and
circle
back
to
you
directly
on
on
who
those
are
and
what
we
can
share
at
this
point.
B
Perfect
and
so
for
for
the
board,
you
know
one
of
the
ideas
for
that
project
was
to
to
see
if
we
could
implement
or
help
some
of
the
businesses
there
are
that
exist
in
the
area.
Maybe
they
are,
they
already
exist
or
or
their
neighbors.
That
would
like
to
open
some
a
small
business
where
we
can
keep
them
in
the
neighborhood
and
instead
of
of
displacing
them
at
least
one
or
two
two
spots
to
be.
You
know
separated
for
for
that.
B
As
we
look
at
and
gentrification
strategies
in
the
in
the
neighborhood,
we
obviously
focus
on
a
lot
on
on
housing,
but
I
thought
a
commer.
You
know
commercial
and
I
guess
commercial
anti-gentrification.
It's
also
a
way
that
the
rda
can
help
the
situation.
So
I
think
we
talked
about
this
before.
I
just
wanted
to
remind
everybody
about
that
project
right
there
we're
moving
on
to
thank
you,
danny,
we're
moving
on
to
we've
done
already.
Why
do
we
have
a
hold
on?
B
Am
I
looking
at
this
one
yeah,
I'm
looking
at
this
one
we're
moving
on
to
item
number
d,
which
is
written
briefings
and
we
don't
have
any.
We
don't
have
a
consent
agenda
to
approve,
I
don't
believe
we
have
a
tentative
clause
session
and
so
jen,
okay,
great,
and
so
I
think
we
are
adjourned.
Then.
A
That's
right-
and
I
just
wanted
to
make
a
note
for
the
council-
that,
in
order
to
convene
in
our
council
closed
session,
which
will
be
at
the
beginning
of
council
meeting,
we
need
the
council
to
convene
in
the
public
council
webex
and
then
go
to
the
council
closed
session.
Webex.
So
sorry
for
the
link
jumping.
But
that's
where
we
are.
H
Also,
keep
on
me,
madam
chair,
if
I
may.
H
Let's
take
just
a
five
minute
break
six
minutes.
If
I
look
at
my
my
clock
right
now
and
convene
at
3
35
in
the
work
session
and
then
we'll
switch
to
the
closed
session,
please.