►
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).
B
B
We
welcome
the
members
of
the
public
who
are
in
person
and
who
may
be
watching
our
usual
videos
feeds
online.
I'm
happy
to
share
that.
We
have
returned
this
hybrid
meeting
approach,
it's
nice
to
see
faces
in
the
crowd
instead
of
faces
on
our
screen,
but
it
is
kind
of
interesting
because
I'm
not
sure
where
I
should
be
looking,
because
it's
normally
just
right
in
front
of
you.
B
B
It's
nice
to
be
meeting
again
in
person
and
to
be
here
with
our
members
of
the
public
fellow
board
members
and
the
city
staff.
B
Therefore,
we
are
asking
everyone
to
keep
your
face
coverings
on
at
all
times
for
city
staff
and
people
here
briefing
items
when
you're
addressing
the
board,
you
can
remove
it
to
ensure
that
we
can
hear
your
comments.
Our
staff
is
also
here
to
help
with
seating
in
the
audience,
so
that
social
distancing
can
also
be
maintained.
B
If
you've
been
here
a
number
of
times,
you've
probably
heard
this
once
or
twice.
Your
feedback
is
always
welcome
and
you
can
share
that
with
your
board
anytime
by
mailing
the
council
office
at
p.o
box,
145,
476,
salt
lake
city,
utah,
84114
or
emailing
us
at
council
dot
comments
at
slcgov.com
or
by
calling
our
24-hour
phone
comment
line
at
801,
535-7654.
B
B
B
B
In
addition,
our
staff
will
request
your
name
during
your
registration
process
to
limit
disruption.
Your
name
cannot
include
a
message
or
violate
our
rules
of
decorum.
If
your
registered
name
doesn't
meet
this
requirement,
then
our
staff
will
use
a
chat
feature
to
gather
that
information
from
you,
delaney
silman
from
our
staff,
is
helping
to
moderate
the
meeting
and
will
be
messaging
with
the
attendees
to
coordinate
any
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
isaac.
B
Canado
will
be
calling
the
names
of
those
who
wish
to
comment
and
then
muting
the
lines
when
isaac
mutes
your
line
and
lets
you
know
it's
your
turn.
Please
state
your
name
indicating
the
topic
you're
speaking
on
and
a
two-minute
timer
will
begin
at
the
two-minute
mark,
we'll
announce
time
and
your
microphone
will
be
muted.
B
B
Second,
I
have
a
motion
from
board
member
fowler,
a
second
from
board
member
ferris,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
aye
aye
opposed
that
motion
passage
unanimously
was
board
member
voldemort's
absent
I'm
c2
rda
audit
review
and
approval
for
fiscal
year
2020
to
2021.
at
the
table.
I
have
mary
beth
thompson
and
michael
michaels.
Well,
I
don't
see
oh
they're,
probably
up
there
there
we
are
mary
beth
thompson
and
michael
michelson
from
eddie
bailey.
A
A
A
This
is
our
auditor's
report
in
the
financial
statements.
The
financial
statements
are
the
organizations
in
the
culmination
of
a
year's
worth
of
financial
transactions.
A
A
We
gain
and
document
an
understanding
of
internal
controls
and
we
establish
a
materiality
threshold
and
that
materiality
threshold
is
defined
in
our
auditing
standards
as
the
threshold
above
which
we
believe
a
misstatement
will
change
the
financial
statement,
users
judgment
and
the
misstatement
below
that
threshold.
The
financial
statement,
user
won't
change
their
judgment
and
it
can
likely
be
passed
on
or
not
made.
A
A
I'll
have
a
lower
sample,
there
may
be
fewer
procedures
performed
and
when
we
perform
all
those
procedures
and
gather
our
audit
evidence,
we
determine
what
kind
of
auditor's
opinion
we'll
issue
and
I've
put
in
a
red
box
there,
our
auditor's
opinion,
so
it's
easier
to
see,
but
we
have
issued
an
unmodified
opinion
for
the
year
ended
june,
30
2021
and
that's
a
the
clean
opinion.
The
opinion
that
states
that
the
financial
statements
are
fairly
presented
in
all
material
respects
in
relation
to
generally
accepted
accounting
procedures.
A
As
you
can
see
in
that
top
paragraph,
where
I've
underlined
in
red,
we
do
not
express
an
opinion
on
that
requires
supplementary
information.
We
perform
a
few
minor
procedures
where
we
read
that
and
make
sure
that
it's
consistent
with
everything
we
gathered
during
our
audit,
but
we
do
not
express
an
opinion
on
that.
We're
not
required,
but
that
information
does
accompany
the
financial
statements
in
our
auditor's
report.
So
we're
required
to
let
the
reader
know
what
level
of
assurance
would
provide.
A
A
We
provide
an
in
relation
opinion
that
says
that
those
schedules
at
the
back
are
fairly
stated
in
relation
to
the
financial
statements
taken
as
a
whole.
So
that's
our
auditor's
report.
It's
an
unmodified
opinion
in
looking
at
internal
control.
During
the
course
of
our
audit,
we
did
not
have
any
control
deficiencies
to
report
to
you
this
year.
A
And
so
with
that,
that's
what
I'll
say
about
the
financial
statements
or
the
auditor's
opinion.
We
did
not
have
any
audit
adjustments,
so
the
financial
statements
that
you
looked
at
during
the
course
of
the
year
periodically
do
not
differ
from
what's
provided
in
our
in
the
packet
with
our
auditor's
opinion.
A
Maybe
the
format
looks
a
little
bit
different
because
it's
in
a
format
that's
consistent
with
gaap
and
with
the
city's
acfr
that
they
will
be
rolled
up
into,
but
there
were
no
audit
adjustments,
so
it
doesn't
look
different
from
what
you
have
already
reviewed.
A
A
Okay,
there,
it
is
so
in
this
letter.
As
I
said,
I've
already
talked
about
this
whole
first
section
and
that's
our
auditor's
responsibility.
So
I'm
going
to
scroll
to
the
second
page,
some
things
that
were
required
to
communicate
to
you
or
whether
or
not
there
was
any
changes
in
accounting
principles,
and
so
the
top
section
refers
to
note
1,
where
the
accounting
principles
selected
by
the
organization
are
disclosed
in
the
financial
statements.
A
The
second
thing
I'd
like
to
point
out
is
in
the
middle,
the
significant
accounting
estimates
section
if
they're
well.
Most
of
the
information
in
the
financial
statements
is
some
level
of
an
estimate
and
we're
required
to
communicate
to
you
what
we
feel
is
more
significant
and
that's
based
on
the
subjectiveness
or
the
difficulty
in
determining
the
estimate.
A
So
the
most
significant
estimate
in
the
rda's
financial
statements,
in
our
opinion,
is
the
net
pension
liability
that
is
provided
to
you
by
utah
retirement
systems
in
which
the
city
participates,
that
is
determined
by
utah
retirement
systems
and
by
their
internal
and
their
third
party
actuaries.
So
that's
an
actuarially
determined
number.
So
there
are
a
lot
of
assumptions
that
go
into
that
note.
A
The
footnote
that
discusses
that,
I
think
it's
note,
7.
talks
about
a
lot
of
the
assumptions
that
go
into
determining
that
liability
so
and
then.
Finally,
at
the
bottom,
I've
underlined
the
sentence
that
says
there
were
no
corrected
or
uncorrected
misstatements,
which
I've
already
disclosed.
A
So
with
that,
if
you
want
to
read
the
rest
of
that
at
your
leisure,
you
can
it's
fairly
boilerplate
and
we've
presented
this
letter
every
year.
So
at
this
time,
I'd
be
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
you
might
have
about
our
audit
process
or
our
audit
this
year
or
any
of
the
letters
or
reports
that
we
issued.
B
B
E
B
Second,
I
have
a
motion
from
board
member
fowler,
a
second
from
board
member
mono,
all
in
favor,
say
aye
aye
aye
opposed
that
motion
passes
unanimously
with
board
member
baltimore's
absent.
Thank
you
very
much.
We
move
on
to
number
three
item.
Number
three
is
informational.
It's
the
release
of
the
nine
line,
project
area,
seed
funds,
the
table.
I
have
a
host
of
people,
ben
lutke
from
the
council
office
policy
analysis
from
rda.
I
have
danny
walls,
tracy
tran
lauren
parisi,
and
I
should
have
on
the
online
court
and
tom.
F
The
board
originally
appropriated
almost
2.2
million
dollars
of
seed
funds
for
both
the
nine
line
and
the
state
street
project
areas.
The
funds
were
intended
to
be
flexible
and
available
to
both
project
areas.
Depending
on
what
opportunities
came
forward
in
each
area,
the
current
available
to
spend
balance
is
almost
493
thousand
dollars.
F
F
The
second
request
is
for
26
000
for
environmental
testing
and
remediation
at
a
recently
acquired
rda
property
at
the
southeast
corner
of
900,
west
and
400
south
the
two
requests,
with
the
total
cost
of
96
000.
This
is
coming
to
you
outside
of
a
budget
amendment.
This
is
because
the
board
previously
appropriated
the
seed
funds
and
then
the
rda
staff
returned
to
the
board
with
proposed
uses
for
the
board's
approval.
So
you
would
be
approving
these
two
proposed
uses
today.
If
you
support
them.
F
B
F
G
Great,
thank
you
so
I'll
just
quickly
go
over
the
the
proposed
mid-block
crosswalk
and
I
think
ben
covered
actually
a
lot
of
that.
So
I
will
just
turn
it
over
to
tom
to
see
if
he
has
anything
to
add
to
that
project.
It
is
a
project
that
is
being
run
by
transportation
and
engineering.
H
How
about
now
good
good
all
right
thanks,
so
the
original
project
we
had
hoped
would
include
budget
for
mid-block
crossings
for
most
blocks
along
the
900
south
reconstruction
project,
extents,
which
are
from
900
west
to
lincoln
street
945
east
due
to
cost
increases,
construction
cost
increases,
labor
and
materials.
H
However,
this
one
mid
block,
crosswalk
between
700
west
and
800
west,
as
ben
outlined,
was
still
very,
very
much
desired
by
this
developer
of
the
west
end
development,
which
is
that
adaptive
reuse
project
of
those
two
buildings
on
the
north
side
of
900
south
at
that
same
approximate
address,
so
in
discussing
it
with
them,
we've
been
discussing,
probably
for
about
eight
or
nine
months,
now
ways
that
we
could
still
include
this
one
mid-block
crosswalk.
H
That
would,
I
think,
primarily,
connect
their
development
to
the
destinations
on
the
south
side
of
the
street,
as
well
as
provide
some
traffic
calming
and
in
one
of
those
funding.
Opportunities
or
funding
methods
was
through
the
rda
project
area.
Seed
funds,
so
that's
why
we're
here
asking
you
today
for
the
funding?
H
If
the
funding
is
not
approved,
it
wouldn't
delay
our
project
at
all.
It
would
simply
remove
that
part
of
the
project
that
mid-block
crossing
from
the
construction
plans.
It
could
be
built
again
in
the
future.
It
would
probably
be
a
little
bit
more
expensive,
as
we
wouldn't
have
our
contractor
out
there
already
mobilized
to
do
that.
Work.
I
I
The
second
request
is
for
environmental
re
remediation
study
on
the
site
located
at
877,
west
400
south.
The
rda
recently
purchased
this
property
back
in
july.
If
you'll
remember,
and
this
property
is
identified
as
a
community
node
in
our
westside
master
plan,
which
we
hope
to
develop
with
some
sort
of
community
serving
use
in
the
future.
I
But
there
what
was
a
former
gas
station
on
this
site
and
therefore
the
state
is
requiring
us
to
do
this
initial
study,
with
a
total
cost
of
about
26
000
before
any
development
can
occur,
and
the
previous
owner
did
agree
to
pay
for
half
of
environmental
remediation
costs.
So
that's
why
we're
asking
for
about
18
000
dollars
at
this
time
for
the
study,
which
includes
a
little
buffer
in
case,
there's
a
cost
increase
or
there's
future
environmental
work.
That
has
to
be
done.
So
that
is
that
project.
C
One
quick
question:
what
does
what's
the
design
of
the
crosswalk.
H
Yeah,
the
crosswalk
includes
rectangular
rapid
flashing
beacons,
which
are
the
kind
of
the
strobing
yellow
lights
on
both
sides
of
the
street,
as
well
as
in
the
median
of
the
street.
It
would
also
construct
a
new
medium
that
would
occupy
the
space
that
the
center
turn
line.
Two
way
left
turn
lane
typically
occupies,
and
then
it
would
pardon
and
then
it
would
be
a
a
brick
patterned.
H
It's
not
actually
brick,
it's
a
colored
concrete,
but
a
brick
patterned,
concrete
crosswalk
that
that
spans,
the
the
two
lanes,
one
in
each
direction
of
900
south
in
that
future
design.
So
imagine
that's.
H
Very
and
would
would
approximately
equal
that
that
product.
J
I
It
hasn't
started.
We
officially
acquired
the
property
this
past
july
and
our
first
step
really
is
to
complete
this
environmental
remediation
work,
but
it
is
zoned
residential
mixed
use.
So
we
anticipate
kind
of
ground
floor,
commercial
and
housing
above
to
activate
the
that
corner,
but
we'll
get
working
on
the
details
of
that
soon.
F
I
would
just
add
two
things:
it's
a
key
intersection
for
that
community,
because
it's
one
of
the
only
east-west
streets
that
has
a
bridge
that
goes
over
the
train
tracks.
So
that's
one
of
the
reasons
it
was
a
targeted
node.
The
other
thing
is,
it
was
originally
purchased
with
the
seed
funds.
So
this
is
another
use
of
the
seed
funds
for
the
same
property.
B
Any
other
questions
I
have
one
question
on
the
the
study
and
the
remediation
of
the
area:
does
it
go
all
the
way
out
to
the
street?
Does
it
go
further
than
just
the
zoning
boundary
of
the
property,
because
the
property
doesn't
just
want
to
make
sure
that
the
remediation
problems
and
the
seeping
doesn't
go
out
and
we're
missing
that
part.
I
B
K
Most
of
you
will
remember
that
the
extensive
process
earlier
this
year-
sorry
most
of
you,
will
remember
the
extensive
process
earlier
this
year
for
the
board
to
adopt
the
new
housing
development
loan
program
or
hdlp
framework.
The
hdlp
offers
low-cost
loans
as
an
incentive
for
developers
to
build
affordable
housing
in
salt
lake
city.
The
board's
work
this
spring
included
approving
the
housing
funds
allocation
policy,
the
housing
development
loan
program
or
hdlp
policy,
and
the
fiscal
year
2022
affordable
housing
priorities.
K
That
sounds
like
a
lot
of
the
same
words
over
and
over
again,
but
those
are
three
distinct
approvals
that
you
did
earlier
this
year
today.
The
board
will
review
and
potentially
approve
rda
staff
recommendations
for
allocating
5.3
million
or
more
in
affordable
housing
funds.
These
were
offered
through
the
most
recent
nofa
or
no
notice
of
funding
availability.
K
G
I
Okay,
so
to
start,
a
total
of
eight
million
dollars
was
released
for
affordable
housing
projects.
On
september
8th
of
this
year,
again,
there's
5.3
million
available
for
projects
city-wide
and
2.7
available
for
projects
located
in
high
opportunity
areas
to
market
this
opportunity.
We
posted
the
application
on
utah's
public
procurement
website,
the
rda's
website
social
media
and
sent
out
a
mass
email
and
press
release.
Staff
also
held
an
informational
session
for
developers
on
september
24th
and
the
application
period
closed
on
october
29th.
I
I
I
So
here
is
a
map
of
the
high
opportunity
areas,
moderate
areas
in
light,
blue
and
high
in
dark
blue
again.
These
areas
indicate
where
residents
have
a
greater
chance
of
upward
mobility.
However,
we
didn't
receive
any
projects
in
the
high
opportunity
areas,
but
you
can
see
highlighted
in
yellow
where
we
did
receive
our
eight
submittals
this
year.
So
now,
tracy
will
go
over
the
review
process
and
the
review
committee's
funding
recommendations.
G
So.
After
conducting
an
initial
threshold
review
and
project
evaluation
staff
forwarded
all
the
applications
to
a
review
committee
that
comprised
of
members
of
the
housing
trust
fund
advisory
board,
the
redevelopment
of
few
members
of
the
redevelopment
advisory
committee
and
representatives
from
the
rda
can
and
housing
stability.
So
the
review
committee
considered
the
following
in
their
review.
G
They
looked
at
the
funding
priorities,
the
project,
readiness,
the
content
and
quality
of
the
application,
qualifications
and
experience
of
the
applicant
and
the
development
team,
the
content,
effectiveness
and
appropriateness
of
the
financial
details,
building
and
site
design,
and
so
the
the
applications
that
were
recommended
for
funding
in
this
round
did
meet
a
lot
of
these
criteria.
The
top
four
that
were
recommended
for
funding
met
the
threshold
requirements
and
the
funding
priorities.
They
have
also
secured
financing
and
tax
credits,
and
they
are
ready
to
be
built
soon.
G
So
if
they
were
ready
to
break
ground
within
six
to
nine
months
and
the
costs
they,
the
review
committee
also
looked
at
the
cost
per
unit
cost
per
affordable
unit
for
these
projects-
and
one
thing
that's
not
noted
on
here-
is
they
also
considered
the
ami
mix
of
the
applications
next
slide.
G
So
here
is
a
chart
of
all
of
the
recommended
applications
or
projects
recommendations
for
funding
for
through
the
housing
development
loan
program.
So
they
ranked
the
projects
one
two
and
then
two
projects
are
tied
for
third,
so
you
can
see
here
we
have
the
silos
144,
south
500
east,
the
nest
and
schmidt
apartments.
G
The
first
two
projects
were
recommended
for
their
full
funding
amount
due
to
the
5.3
million
dollar
funds
that
we
had
the
remaining
amount.
They
just
split
between
the
the
two
projects
were
that
were
tied
for
three,
so
the
nest
and
the
schmidt
apartments
were
were
not
fully
funded,
so
they
were
partially
funded.
G
But,
as
you
can
see
from
this
chart,
these
these
projects
would
produce
almost
600,
affordable
units.
All
of
these
projects
have
received
their
tax
credits
and
they
have
secured
financing,
so
they
are
really
close
to
being
ready
to
go
so
they
also
have
a
mix
of
you
can
see
the
ami
mixes
and
the
bedroom
mixes
here
in
the
next
slide,
and
then
this
slide
just
shows
all
of
the
applications
that
we
received,
and
it
also
shows
what
amounts
were
funded
and
what
amounts
were
not
funded.
G
And
so,
as
you
can
see,
with
these
recommendations,
the
entire
5.3
million
would
be
would
be
used
and
none
of
the
high
opportunity
none
of
the
2.7
high
opportunity
funds
would
be
used
so
for
the
board's
consideration
today,
just
a
few
things.
So
through
the
annual
housing
development
funding
strategy,
it
was
noted
that
this
that
rda
staff
would
make
available
three
nofas,
so
one
focused
on
citywide
one
focused
on
emergency
gap,
financing
and
then
emergency
gap
funding
and
then
a
high
opportunity
in
office.
G
So
we
had
asked
the
housing
development
loan
program
review
committee
that
if
there
were
additional
funds
that
became
available,
what
would
their
priority
be
in
funding
these
projects
and
they
they
agreed
that
the
two
projects
that
only
receive
partial
funding
should
be
fully
funded.
That
was
their
recommendation
so
for
the
already
for
the
rda
boards
consideration
tonight
we
are
looking
at
whether
or
not
you
want
to
approve
the
review
committee's
recommendation
for
the
5.3
million
dollars
in
funding
and
whether
or
not
you'd
like
to
allocate
some
emergency
funds
towards
this
round
of
applications.
G
One
thing
I
wanted
to
know,
I
think,
in
the
staff
report
there
was
just
something
I
wanted
to
clarify.
The
staff
reports
mentioned
that
there
was
1.8
million
dollars
of
fund
balance
that
was
rolled
into
this
snow
fund.
That's
that's
not
accurate.
So
what
what
had
happened
is
we
had
a
previous
loan
that
were
that
was
committed,
but
they
didn't
they
that
loan
expired.
That
commitment
was
expired.
G
Sorry,
so
those
amounts
were
just
rolled
back
into
those
funds,
so
there
would
be
an
extra
1.5
million
available
on
top
of
the
1
million
we
have
in
the
emergency
fund,
so
there
would
be
up
to
two
and
a
half
million
available
for
emergency
funds,
but
it
would
be
up
to
the
board
whether
or
not
you
would
like
to
allocate
some
of
that
two
and
a
half
million
towards
some
of
these
applications
or,
if
you'd
like
to
just
continue
keeping
about
two
and
a
half
million
for
the
emergency
notice,
the
funding
availability
that
we'd
have
next
year.
G
Hopefully
that
wasn't
too
confusing,
but
if
so
I
just
want
to
note
here.
So
if
you
wanted
to
fund
the
two,
the
remaining
amounts
for
the
two
projects
tied
for
third,
it
would
be
1
million
225
000
and
that
would
leave
a
balance
of
about
1
million
275
thousand
for
the
emergency
nofa.
J
Member
mono
thanks
mr
chair
okay,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
understanding
what
you're
saying
tracy
the
2.5
million
is
what's
remaining,
that
could
be
allocated
as
emergency
anofa
for
emergency
gap
financing,
and
that
would
mean
that
a
project
is
running
into
financing.
Trouble
or
construction
costs
got
too
high
and
they
need
some
additional
money
kind
of
on
a
short-term,
quick
basis.
That
makes
sense
as
a
priority.
Now
does
the
nest
and
the
schmidt
apartments
have
they
indicated
that
without
their
full
financing
they
are
in
an
emergency?
J
Have
both
of
them
said
that
or
what
indication
do
we
have
that
that
those
are
in
need
of
emergency
financing.
G
Yes,
so
the
both
of
those
projects
have
already
received
tax
credits
and
they
have
senior
commitments
from
senior
lenders
and
so
they're
pretty
ready
to
go
and
with
just
a
partial
commitment.
They
would
still
need
to
fill
that
gap
somehow,
so
they
would
either
need
to
go.
Look
for
other
sources
of
funding,
whether
through
the
county
or
the
state
or
they'd
have
to
kind
of
play
around
with
their
budget.
J
And
what
is
the
typical
process
for
us
to
approve
requests
of
that
emergency
funding
stream?
Is
there
what
does
that?
Typically
look
like
because
my
question
is:
are
we
bypassing
a
sort
of
set
of
predetermined
standards
that
we're
we're
already
looking
at
like?
Does
the
project
actually
need
a
pool
to
be
successful
or
not
like
is
that
I
mean
what
what
are
the
standards
that
they
would
have
to
go
through?
If
we
said
no,
you
have
to
wait
for
this
future
nofa
as
opposed
to
just
approving
it
now.
J
G
I
believe
it
would
go
through
kind
of
a
similar
process,
as
we
were
kind
of
going
through
now,
but
instead
of
being
a
competitive
process
where
you're
reviewing
you
know
eight
projects
against
each
other,
you
would
just
be
reviewing
the
one
against
kind
of
the
priorities
that
you've
set
to
today
or
through
the
earlier
this
year
and
then
kind
of
the
housing
development
loan
program
that
was
approved
by
the
board
earlier
this
year.
So
there
are
some
standards
and
requirements
within
there,
so
it
would
kind
of
go
through
a
similar
process.
L
And
just
to
clarify
just
from
a
staff
perspective,
I
think
this
is
the.
Is
this
the
first
time
we've
used
kind
of
that
strategy
of
emergency
funding
versus
standard
funding,
and
is
that
can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
that?
I
mean
I
could
see
from
the
construction
market
volatility
that
maybe
from
a
strategy
perspective.
It
makes
sense,
but
this
is
the
first
time
I'm
aware
of
that.
We've
done
it
that
kind
of
bifurcated
way.
M
Yeah,
I'm
I'm
happy
to
speak
to
that.
I
think
I
think
if
you
look
at
last
year,
was
a
good
example
where
we
didn't
expend
all
of
the
nofa
funds.
So
we
did
have
some
funds
remaining
and
then,
as
a
result
of
that,
we
did
receive
an
application
from
colony
b
and
that's
how
we
funded
that
as
kind
of
an
emergency
gap
financing
loan.
So
looking
forward
to
this
year,
and
when
we
came
to
the
board
and
approved
you,
you
allocated
that
5.3
to
go
on
the
nofa
and
then
a
million
set
aside.
M
So
the
the
policy
itself
lays
out
those
different
options,
and
I
think,
as
we
propose
it
as
part
of
this
year's
budget,
it
was
just
to
have
that
million
dollars
or
an
amount
set
aside
available
for
loans
like
colony
b,
that
could
be
coming
in
costs
have
gone
up.
Funding
has
gone
down,
we
could
respond
to
those
so
that
that
was
the
original
intent
is
just
to
have
a
set
aside
of
funds
available
throughout
the
year
and
not
spend
it
all
through
this
nofa
process.
B
And
more
questions
about
this
whole
process.
So
would
we
just
say
we'll
do
a
nofa
for
the
emergency
gaps
out
of
the
house
in
six
months,
and
that
would
give
other
applicants
time
and
also
these
two
applicants
the
time
to
maybe
look
at
other
finances
and
other
emergencies
that
they
could
possibly
have,
and
then
they
basically
go
through
the
same
iteration.
Just
on
that
two
point:
whatever
million
dollars
that
we
have
for
the
emergency
gap
and
that
would
just
be
the
emergency
gap,
nofa
not
other
nofa.
B
G
No,
I
was
just
going
to
bring
up
kind
of
the
the
emergency
kind
of
first.
Come
first
serve
aspect
of
it
that
I
didn't
know
before.
So
it
would
be
different
than
this
round
in
that,
if
you,
if
you,
if
you
send
in
a
complete
application
first
we'll
review
that
one
first,
so
that
would
go
through
the
process
first
and
it
wouldn't
be
a
process
where
we'd
see
all
of
the
applications
at
once.
J
Mr
chair,
I
guess
it
strikes
me
that
those
two
different
methods
of
funding
projects
make
sense,
because
projects
have
different
timelines
and
different
things
happen
during
the
process
of
a
development.
But
it
seems
like
there
should
be
some
different
standards
like.
Why
would
I,
as
a
developer,
wait
for
the
annual
nofa
to
come
out
and
apply
when
I'm
going
to
be
competitive
against
seven
other
projects,
as
opposed
to
just
applying
for
the
emergency?
J
It
seems
like
there
should
be
some
different
threshold
of
like
what
qualifies
as
an
emergency,
thereby
allowing
me
to
apply
for
funding
outside
of
the
typical
nofa
schedule.
And
so
maybe
that's
the
question
I
was
trying
to
ask
earlier,
but
is
there
a
different
standard?
Is
there
a
different
qualifier
that
says
this
is
an
emergency
and
therefore
we
can
use
this
emergency
process
versus
the
typical
process,
and,
if
so,
does
the
nest
and
the
schmidt
apartments
meet
that
threshold
standard
of
being
considered
an
emergency
yeah.
M
I
think
the
other
function
of
that
is
the
amount
amount
of
money
that
we
make
available,
obviously,
with
the
nofa
you're,
looking
at
over
five
million
dollars
versus
whatever
you
as
a
board,
decide
to
keep
and
hold
on
to
as
emergency
gap
financing,
and
so,
if
we
as
staff,
if
you
would
like
us
to
further
clarify
that
or
if
you
would
like
to
give
that
direction
as
part
of
what
you
allocate
today
versus
what
you
roll
over,
we
can
certainly
take
that
and
apply
that
to
any
request
we
get
throughout
the
rest
of
the
year.
B
M
Yes,
if
you
wanted
to
allocate
the
entire
two
and
a
half
million
right
now
available
for
emergency,
you
could
do.
That
certainly,
would
not
be
what
we'd
recommend,
but
you
you
have
that
authority
as
part
of
this
approval.
Yes,
right
thanks.
B
Any
further
questions
about
this
funding.
D
I
do
please,
mr
chair,
so
I
am
looking
at
like
the
score
sheet.
If
you
will
can
call
it
the
score
sheet,
and
I
mean
it
appears
that
while
there
are
priority
points
that
that
some
of
the
projects
that
had
more
priority
points
were
not
recommended
for
funding,
because
we
took
in
to
account
other
things,
I'm
assuming,
and
so
what
are
those
other
things
that
the
committee
took
into
account?
Besides
those
priority
points.
G
Yeah,
so
a
big
part
of
that
was
like
project
readiness,
the
their
financial
stack.
Some
of
those
projects
didn't
have
commitments
for
tax
credits
or
senior
lenders
and
whatnot,
so
those
were
actually
really
like.
The
committee
was
actually
really
focused
on
that
because
there,
I
think
the
thought
behind
that
was
well.
G
We
could
fund
it,
but
that
would
just
drag
out
that
they
wouldn't
be
built,
for
you
know
a
couple
years
or
whatnot,
so
they
were
thinking
of
funding
projects
that
were
ready
to
go,
and
you
know
we
could
get
the
money
out
and
then
hopefully
get
that
money
back
at
some
point
you
know.
Does
that
answer
your
question?
D
C
I
it
doesn't
have
to
do
so
much
with
the
funding.
I
just
I'm
really
stressed
out
by
how
little
family
housing
like
there's
four
three
bedroom
units
that
are
going
to
go
for
below
1200
a
month
from
what
I
saw
in
here-
and
I
mean
our
school
district-
is
counting
on
us
to
solve
this,
and
I
don't
know
what
the
key
is.
But
I
just
want
it
to
be
on
record
that
that's
a
really
big
source
of
stress
with
this.
B
D
We
keep
seeming
to
run
into
this
problem
with
our
nofa's
in
the
high
opportunity
areas.
Can
someone
tell
me
why?
What
do
we
need
to
do
to
get
people
to
build
in
our
high
opportunity
areas,
and
today
I
mean
we're
offering
money
here:
go:
go
build
in
take
our
money
and
build
in
these
areas.
G
G
A
lot
of
the
high
opportunity
areas
are
located
within
single
family
zones
and
areas
that
are
already
built
out,
and
so
there
there
is
very
little
kind
of
very
few
areas
that
have
multi-family
zones
where
an
affordable
project
could
be
built,
and
another
part
of
it
is
there
are
it's
also
within
like
a
lot
of
it
is
within
historic
district,
which
those
are
already
really
established
and
like
trying
to
convert
you
know
build
something
new
is,
is
challenging,
go
ahead!
Anything
sorry
if
I
could
just.
M
Add
to
that
real
fast
I'd
like
to
remind
the
board
not
getting
into
the
details
of
the
property
itself,
but
if
you
remember
we
were
trying
to
pursue
an
opportunity
of
buying
a
property,
and
so
we
were
actively
working
to
try
to
spend
those
funds
and
unfortunately
it
doesn't
look
like
that
opportunity
is
going
to
come
through.
So
I
think
we're
at
the
point
now
that
we
can
go
back
out
and
see
what
we
can
do
so
we're
trying.
J
Thanks
no,
I
agree
with
board
member
fowler
on
this
sort
of
frustration
with
why
we
can't
get
anything
built
in
hyper
juniors.
My
question
is:
when
was
the
high
opportunity
area
set
and
do
we
review
that
annually
because
some
of
those
areas,
I
think,
are
fairly
high
opportunities
that
are
technically
outside
of
that
boundary?
So
is
that
something
that
we
just?
G
I
don't
have
it
directly
in
front
of
me,
but
I
know
it
was
done
around
2017.
I
think
it
was
hand
at
the
time
worked
with
kemp
c
gardner
and
kennedy
gardner
policy
institute
helped
develop.
That's
that
criteria.
Is
that
correct.
L
Yeah
yeah,
it
was
a
an
index
developed
with
in
partnership
with
the
kemp
c
gardner
institute,
and
I
think
the
intention
was
to
update
it
with
the
census
numbers
this
year.
I
think
that
it's
not
updated.
I
know
that
it's
not
updated
annually,
which
is
a
challenge
of
the
data
set,
but
it's
sort
of
the
best
indicator
we
have
than
to
otherwise
just
draw
arbitrary
lines
in
the
city
where
we
think
yeah.
J
M
I
think
that
would
be
something
we'd
want
to
work
with
the
housing
stability
division
on
one,
how
to
update
it.
What
the
extent
of
that
would
be,
and
then
also
do
you
look
at
expanding
or
changing
some
of
the
criteria
that
make
up
what
how
a
high
opportunity
area
is
defined.
So
I
think
it's
a
good
opportunity
to
probably
do
all
of
those.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
would
ask
that,
if
we're
working
with
housing
instability
that
we
do
also
work
or
to
see
if
we
can
work
with
the
kem
gardner
institute
as
well-
and
I
think
I
would
be
supportive
of
allocating
some
dollars
towards
that
to
update
it
if
we
needed
to
work
with
them,
I
know
that
we
haven't.
L
If
we
kind
of
have
a
contract
with
that,
we
have
an
existing
contract
with
them,
and
I
you
know
the
in
the
bells
of
my
memory
we
did
discuss
once
the
census
was
complete,
that
that
would
be
a
good
opportunity
to
update
them.
I
know
that
dr
perlick
raised
some
concerns
when
the
census
was
not
collecting
the
level
of
data
that
that
they
were
hoping
for
that.
L
It
may
impact
indices
like
this,
because
some
of
it
relies
on
some
of
that
deeper
dive
data,
but
we
haven't
engaged
with
them
recently
about
that,
specifically,
but
you're
scheduled
to
have
a
briefing
from
them
in
the
first
meeting
in
january,
and
I
think
that
that
would
be
a
great
opportunity
to
renew
the
conversation
so.
D
Well,
somebody
flagged
that
for
us
so
that
I
don't
forget
to
to
ask
them
about
that,
and
then
the
other
thing
I
was
just
thinking
of
it
would
be
interesting.
D
Maybe
after
we
update
this
or
now
depending
on
how
long
that
indices
might
take
to
update,
is
to
look
at
the
zoning
and
overlay
of
what
the
where
the
high
opportunity
zones
are
and
if
there
is
a
way
to
do
some
rezones.
I
know
that
nick
norris
is
probably
cringing
right
now
and
wanting
to
punch
me,
but
because
we
still
haven't
dealt
with
our
mf30,
but.
D
K
B
Thank
you
very
much
and
just
on
the
map
side
of
the
house.
The
high
opportunity
zone
is
a
nice
square
box,
and
I
know
it
just
doesn't
stop
on
whatever
street.
That
is
so.
Could
you
either
send
it
out
to
us,
so
we
actually
know
where
it
is
across
the
whole
city.
That'd
be
great
to
have
any
other
further
questions
comments.
B
So
we're
looking
for
a
motion
to
approve
the
funding
of
5.3
million
dollars
to
the
four
projects,
fully
funded
the
top
two
on
the
silos
and
the
500
east
project
and
partial
funding,
the
nest
and
the
schmidt
project.
So
that's
one
motion
and
is
there
a
second
motion
about
the
emergency
gap?
Would
that
be
a
separate
motion.
G
B
So,
let's
just
look
for
the
first
motion
of
the
the
funding
of
the
5.3
million.
C
B
C
B
L
M
D
And
I
know
that
you
answered
this
when
darren
asked
it,
but
they
the
the
two
projects
that
are
not
fully
funded,
would
feel
that
they
are
in
an
emergent
situation
with
funding,
I
mean,
let's
be
fair.
Most
developers
come
to
us
with
in
an
emergent
situation,
but
for
in
reality
they
would
probably
the
project
wouldn't
go
forward,
or
I
mean
that's
where
we're
at.
J
G
I
G
J
My
preference
would
be
that
we
keep
that
in
that
emergency
loan
pot
of
money
because
it
seems
like
they
could
if
they
need.
If
they
need
that
funding,
they
could
come
back
next
week
with
the
emergency
application
right,
because
there's
no
deadline
and
there's
no
calendar
for
that.
So
I
I
say
we
see
which
of
the
two
projects,
if
not
both
come
back
with
that
and
then
analyze
it
at
that
point,
because
that
seems
like
the
process
that
we've
already
outlined
again.
M
I
was
oh
sorry,
I
was
taking
notes
and
going
to
recommend
that
maybe
what
we
do
is
we
come
back
with
both.
Maybe
we
come
back
with
more
details
on
those
projects
and
and
if
it
truly
is
an
emergency,
and
we
can
then
forward
at
that
time
their
request
for
funding
and
then
at
the
same
time
we
can
come
back
to
you
as
a
board
with
maybe
some
parameters
of
then
how
the
rest
of
those
funds
would
be
made
available
and
what
those
conditions
would
be
sounds
like
that
would
hit
both
of
your
concerns.
B
So
what
I'm
gathering
from
the
the
board
is
that
we're
not
going
to
make
a
motion,
not
danny
you're,
going
to
go
that
direction
and
we're
all
in
agreement
with
that.
B
K
And
mr
chair,
this
is
actually
there
was
no
staff
report
on
this
item,
and
so
I
I
say
we
leave
the
rda
staff
on
their
own
to
do
it
all.
Thanks.
N
N
I
N
A
great
great
point:
oh
okay,
thanks,
okay,
so
we're
returning
to
the
board
today
with
this
policy
for
potential
adoption,
we've
made
a
few
changes
since
we
presented
to
you
back
in
october
and
heard
your
feedback
after
we
incorporated
your
feedback,
we
returned
to
our
redevelopment
advisory
committee
in
november
and
presented
the
updated
policy
to
them
and
they
voted
unanimously
to
forward
a
positive
recommendation
to
the
board.
N
The
rd
the
idea
for
the
rda's
policy
came
originally
back
from
when
mayor
mendenhall
was
on
the
rda
board
of
directors
and
asked
us
to
look
at
requirements
for
the
environmental
benefits
that
projects
would
bring
if
they
were
earning
the
sustainable
sustainability
incentive
that
the
rda
offered,
which
at
that
time
and
still
today
until
this
policy
is
adopted,
is
at
half
a
percent
interest
rate
reduction
for
loans,
and
she
asked
us
to
look
at
requirements.
N
So
we
started
working
with
utah,
clean
energy
who's
here
today,
and
also
the
salt
lake
city
sustainability
department
to
begin
drafting
a
policy,
and
we
really
wanted
that
policy
to
be
within
the
framework
of
the
city's
sustainability
goals
of
having
100
of
the
community's
electricity
supply.
Come
from
renewable
energy
by
2030
and
for
an
80
reduction
in
greenhouse
gas
emissions
for
the
community
by
2040..
I
So
the
first
is
that
the
board
had
previously
asked
about
lowering
the
dollar
amount
that
would
trigger
compliance
with
this
policy,
specifically
for
rehabilitation
projects
and
to
clarify
all
new
construction
projects
will
have
to
comply
with
this
policy.
No
matter
the
dollar
amount
of
funding,
but
we
didn't
want
to
overburden
kind
of
smaller
rehab
projects
that
tend
to
ask
for
rda
funding
to
cover
costly
building
code
upgrades,
especially
as
these
rehab
projects
have
some
inherent
level
of
sustainability.
I
So
that's
the
idea
with
that
threshold
there.
That
said,
we
did
feel
that
we
could
lower
this
dollar
amount
from
400
000
to
200
000,
to
capture
a
few
more
projects
to
come
into
compliance
with
our
policy
and
also
better
align
with
our
grain
granary,
district
adaptive
reuse
program,
where
projects
can
receive
up
to
200
000,
so
they'll
be
exempt.
Those
of
adaptive,
reuse
projects.
I
And
that
was
yeah.
That
was
on
another
slide
if
we
could
move.
That
was
what
I
just
spoke
about
and
then
on
this
next
slide,
the
next
change
we
had
talked
at
the
last
board
meeting
about.
If
whether
or
not
the
interest
rate
incentives
would
really
you
know,
get
people
to
implement
our
offsite
net
zero
and
onsite
net
zero
requirements,
and
so
we
kept
the
one
and
two
percent
interest
rate
reductions
the
same.
I
However,
we
added
this
language
to
the
policy
in
red
that
gives
staff
kind
of
the
discretion
to
assess
whether
or
not
a
project
should
earn
a
larger
interest
rate
reduction
up
to
up
to
one
percent
more
and
that's,
based
on
whether
they're
in
kind
of
financial
need
or
their
senior
lender
has
requirements
that
they
need
to
comply
with
and
therefore
may
need
a
little
bit
more
incentive
than
the
one
or
two
percent.
So
we
added
that
language.
That's
the
same
language,
that's
in
our
housing
development
loan
program.
So
there's
some
consistency.
There.
I
And
we
also
had
talked
about
last
time
kind
of
looking
at
numbers,
real
numbers
for
these
interest
rate
reductions.
So
we
came
up
with
these
hypothetical
projects,
oh
and
if
we
could
switch
to
the
next
slide.
L
L
J
I
These
these
examples
are
in
your
staff
report
in
case
you
have
that
in
front
of
you,
but
just
real
quickly,
for
example
on
a
hotel
type
project
that
asks
for
a
larger
loan
of
about
seven
million
dollars
with
a
12-year
term.
I
Looking
at
a
one
percent
reduction,
they'll
have
a
savings
around
six
hundred
and
thirty
thousand
a
two
percent
interest
rate
reduction.
They'll
have
a
savings
of
about
875
000,
then
looking
at
a
smaller
loan
request
for
a
community
garden
type
project,
a
request
of
250
000
with
a
30-year
loan
term,
the
one
percent
introduction
reduction
would
give
them
a
50
000
savings.
I
The
2
percent
reduction
would
give
them
about
a
70
000
savings,
so
we
just
wanted
to
show
show
those
to
you
as
we
talked
about
as
we
talked
about
that
last
time,
and
we
as
staff,
do
feel
that
both
scenarios
offer
significant
savings
relative
to
the
dollar
amount
being
requested,
and
that-
and
we
do
feel
like
these
interest
rates-
should
incentivize
people
to
implement
those
net
zero
tactics.
L
C
J
I
could
ask
a
quick
question,
of
course,
that
those
assume
that
both
loans
are
held
to
maturity
are
held
year
and
for
the
entire
duration
of
the
12
and
30
year
term.
I
Yes,
this,
the
second
one's
a
cash
flow
loan,
so
it'll
be
until
it's
paid
off,
but
yeah.
I
I
Then
we
do
have
language
in
the
policy
that,
if,
if
approved
the
policy
will
become
effective
immediately.
However,
we
did
add
the
specific
lane
language
that
states
it
will
apply
to
all
projects
that
submit
an
application
after
the
policy's
adoption,
so
it
will
not
apply
to
projects
retroactively
that
haven't
submitted
a
formal
application
to
us.
I
The
policy
also
states
that
threshold
requirements
must
be
met
by
all
projects
that
anticipate
receiving
a
building
permit,
on
or
after
january,
1
of
2023
to
exclude
next
year's
emergency
loan
request
that
will
most
likely
be
really
far
along
in
the
design
process
and
will
be
breaking
ground
in
2022,
so
they'll
be
excluded
if
they're
breaking
ground
in
2022,
which
we
don't
anticipate.
Many
of
those
projects
coming
in
next
year,
but
there
may
be
a
few
and
then
finally,
in
terms
of
compliance
and
this.
L
L
I
You
guys
are
good
okay.
Well,
I'm
almost
done,
but
the
last
thing
that
we
changed
is
we
removed
the
30-month
compliance
period.
This
is
incorrect
on
the
slide,
but
instead
we'll
kind
of
determine
when
projects
have
to
come
into
compliance
per
their
contract
with
the
rda,
so
we'll
really
have
to
kind
of
set
up
a
system
to
monitor
these
projects
and
make
sure
that
they're
implementing
the
sustainability
standards
that
they
plan
on.
I
Additionally,
we
wanted
to
note
that
there
are
a
lot
of
other
incentives
in
utah,
whether
whether
they
be
kind
of
tax
breaks
or
just
funding
in
general
to
implement
sustainable
building
design,
and
I
anticipate
that
we'll
have
trainings
for
developers
to
to
become
accustomed
to
these
new
requirements
and
with
those
trainings
we'll
also.
Let
them
know
that
there
are
these
incentives
outside
of
the
city
that
can
help
them
implement
and
and
meet
the
standards
within
this
policy
so
wanted
to
bring
that
up
quick
quickly.
I
Finally,
since
october,
we
also
sent
the
policy
out
to
other
city
departments
for
review
and
met
with
rocky
mountain
power,
as
there's
some
interlap
between
all
of
us
and
really
we
received
a
pretty
positive
feedback
and
and
no
kind
of
red
flags,
so
we
felt
we
could
move
it
forward
to
you
all
today
to
vote
on
its
adoption.
J
J
L
B
And
I
just
want
to
just
go
back
to
the
non-compliant
projects.
We
need
to
make
sure
we
have
a
very
clear
understanding
and
incentive
for
them
to
comply,
because
I'm
always
worried
about
oh
yeah.
I
got
all
this
energy
sustainability,
but
there's
absolutely
zero
to
it.
So
we
really
need
to
make
sure
that
that
incentive
for
them
to
comply
is
clear
and
we
need
to
do
it
sooner
than
later.
Yeah.
I
I
That's
a
really
great
comment.
I
think
something
karen
and
I
kind
of
talked
a
lot
about
to
ensure
these
projects
are
meeting
the
sustainability
requirements
and
thankfully
we're
teaming
up
with
our
sustainability
department
so
that
projects
will
have
to
submit
to
that
energy
benchmarking
program
every
year
and
then
we'll
have
to
follow
up
on
kind
of
the
higher
net
zero
incentives
and
make
sure
they
do
that.
So
we'll
look
at
that
as
well.
Right.
B
Would
we
would
we
have
a
third
party,
do
the
the
inspection
or
do
we
would
we
do
that
internally.
B
B
All
right,
we're
moving
on
to
item
number,
six,
a
potential
revision
to
the
guiding
framework,
danny
you're
up
on
stage,
and
we
have
danny
wallace
the
rda
chief
operating
officer
on
the
stage.
E
Can
you
guys
hear
me?
Okay,
yes,
all
right
great.
What
we
have
for
you
today
is
a
resolution
to
consider
and
the
resolution
would
make
some
revisions
to
the
rda's
guiding
framework.
E
That's
a
really
important
document
for
us.
It
includes
our
mission
statement.
It
includes
three
core
values
that
articulate
the
economic,
the
social,
as
well
as
the
physical
outcomes
that
are
expected
on
the
projects
that
we
work
on.
E
The
guiding
framework
also
includes
a
project
evaluation
process
and
that
process
helps
us
to
identify
the
public
benefits
that
are
created
by
projects
that
we
participate
in
and
be
able
to
quantify
them
and
to
measure
them,
and
so
we
had
a
presentation
with
the
board
in
october,
where
we
went
over
these
potential
revisions
and
the
catalyst
for
the
revisions
is
the
conversations
we've
been
having
with
the
board
around
the
topics
of
equity
and
inclusion,
as
well
as
sustainable
development.
E
So
that's
kind
of
the
background
and
the
need
for
the
revisions,
and
so
we
had
a
good
conversation
in
october.
E
We,
a
couple
of
comments
were
made
which
I'll
summarize
here
in
a
second,
but
then
we
also
took
those
into
account
and
took
the
document
back
to
our
advisory
committee,
the
redevelopment
advisory
committee,
and
they
they
recommend
unanimously
the
approval
of
the
of
the
document.
That's
in
front
of
you
today,
so
the
comments
that
were
made
back
in
october
were:
could
we-
and
maybe
I
could
just
share
a
screen
here
with
you
really
quickly?
E
You?
Let
me
know
when
you
see
that,
yes,
we
got
it,
and
you
all
see
that
thank
you
zoom
in
here
a
little
bit.
This
is
the
guiding
framework
document
as
proposed,
and
one
of
the
comments
that
came
out
of
the
discussion
with
the
board
on
the
in
october
was:
could
we
change
the
the
wording
of
economic
growth
in
the
mission
statement
to
economic
opportunity,
and
you
can
see
we've
made
that
revision.
E
One
of
the
other
suggestions
was
that
was
made
was
that
we
consider
whether
or
not
we
could
actually
take
the
titles
of
the
values
of
equity,
inclusion
and
neighborhood
vibrancy
and
move
that
language.
You
know
directly
right
into
the
mission
statement
and
we
gave
that
I'd
say
a
good.
E
But
the
the
exact
wording
is
not
so
wanted
to
make
sure
you
understood
that
and
then
the
third
comment
that
came
out
of
the
the
conversation
with
the
board
in
october
was
some
potential
revisions
to
the
intent
language
around
one
of
these
ability
benchmarks
and
it
has
to
do
with
affordable
commercial
space.
E
And
so
we
have
made
that
you
can
see
that
in
attachment
d
to
your
memo
that
actually
is
kind
of
like
a
red
line,
format
of
all
of
the
benchmarks,
as
well
as
their
their
intent
language.
So
the
intent
language
isn't
something
that
we
include
in
this
particular
document.
So
it's
not
something
you'd
be
considering
adopting
today.
But
I
wanted
to
point
out
that
we
have
made
that
revision.
E
So
that's
kind
of
where
things
stand,
the
the
mission
statement
right
now.
E
And
then
the
values
you
can
see
are
economic
opportunity,
which
is
we
invest
in
the
long-term
prosperity
and
growth
of
our
local
economy,
equity
and
inclusion?
We
focus
or
we
prioritize
people-focused
projects
and
programs
that
encourage
everyone
to
participate
in
and
benefit
from
development
decisions
that
shape
their
communities
and
then,
lastly,
neighborhood
vibrancy.
E
We
cultivate
distinct
and
livable
places
that
are
contextually,
sensitive,
durable,
connected
and
sustainable,
and
then,
outside
of
that
there
were
a
couple
of
changes
to
the
titles
of
some
of
these
livability
benchmarks
and
some
instances
where
those
have
been
merged
into
one.
E
None
of
that
has
changed
since
our
conversation
with
you
in
october.
So
I'm
happy
to
go
into
more
detail
if,
if
that's
appropriate,
but
that's
kind
of
the
overview.
J
E
Yeah
darren
sorry,
mr
board,
member
mano,
let
me
get
and
get
that
straightened
out.
E
I
believe
you
had
made
a
comment
in
the
october
meeting
that
we
take
the
titles
of
the
values,
so
that
would
be
equity
and
inclusion
and
neighborhood
vibrancy
and
actually
used
those
exact
words
in
the
mission
statement,
and
so
we
we
tried
to
do
that
and
kind
of
you
created
a
lot
of
different
versions
of
the
mission
statement
that
incorporated
that
suggestion,
but
when
we
didn't
really
land
on
something
that
we
felt
like
was
as
clear
and
concise
as
what
you're
saying
before
you
now,
so
we
didn't,
we
did
not
make
that
change.
C
I
want
to
say
thank
you
for
prioritizing
this.
I
know
it
seems
like
silly
semantics,
but
this
is
an
actual
invitation
that
protects
the
dignity
of
our
citizens
as
we
grow
together
and
you're
right
words
matter,
because
how
we
process
the
identifying
our
constituents
by
systemic
gaps
is
not
an
awesome
way
to
identify
them.
This
identifies
us
by
potential
and
by
collaboration.
So
thank
you.
It's
a
lot
of
hard
work
to
evaluate
each
syllable.
So
thank
you
for
doing
that.
M
Well,
and-
and
thank
you
for
that
comment,
I
would
I
would
like
to
pass
it
on
to
staff.
They
worked
very
hard
and
there
was
a
lot
of
wordsmithing.
There
were
a
lot
of
meetings
and
they
they
worked
very
hard
to
get
it
right,
and
a
lot
of
that
came
because
of
exactly
what
you
said
and
how
much
they
believe
in
getting
it
right
so
appreciate
that
coming.
D
Mr
chair,
I
would
just
like
to
thank
the
staff
as
well.
I
know
how
hard
they
worked
on
this
document
for
a
number
of
years
now,
and
it
always,
I
think,
began
as
sort
of
a
living
breathing
document,
and
we
see
that
now,
as
we
continue
to
evolve
and
and
really
monitor
and
evaluate
the
the
rda
and
the
agency
itself
and
with
that.
So
thank
you
all
of
you.
D
I
don't
know
if
you're
looking
for
a
motion
to
adopt,
but
I'd
like
to
make
a
motion
to
adopt
the
resolute
this,
whatever
we're
called.
What
is
it
the
guiding
framework.
B
Any
questions.
J
C
M
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
Just
a
few
super
quick
announcements:
number
one
updates
on
projects
both
our
west
end
project
and
jackson.
Apartments
project
have
been
completed.
West
end
is
still
in
the
leasing
phase
and
they
anticipate
holding
a
ribbon
cutting
sometime
next
year.
Jackson
apartments
have
scheduled
their
reopening
for
thursday
january
13th
at
10
a.m,
and
both
mayor,
mendenhall
and
board,
chair
of
baltimore's,
will
be
speaking.
In
that
event,
it's
been
a
while,
since
we've
been
with
you
too,
and
so
we've
had
some
staffing
changes.
M
We've
had
two
new
hires
to
the
rda,
one
of
which
is
sitting
behind
me.
Her
name
is
katherine
hackman
and
she
comes
to
us
to
fill
the
role
of
a
communications
and
outreach
assistant
as
we
expand
our
communications
and
community
engagement
efforts
she's
been
with
the
agency
for
six
weeks,
and
then
we
also
welcome
eric
holmes,
who
is
serving
the
role
as
our
data
manager.
This
is
his
second
day,
so
he
showed
up
to
work
today,
which
means
we
didn't
scare
him
too
much
yesterday.
M
So
we
certainly
appreciate
that
and
look
forward
to
having
him
come
on
board
and
start
coordinating
and
enhancing
our
ability
to
utilize
data
and
help
make
database
decisions
within
the
agency.
So
we're
certainly
excited
to
have
that
on
board
and
then
a
couple
of
announcements
for
gallivan.
I
think
we
updated
you
that
bart
walker,
retired
after
20
years
we've
filled
that
position
with
a
gentleman
named
john
boyak,
who
has
been
hired
and
has
hit
the
ground
running.
M
At
this
point
in
time,
so
ice
rink
is
open
and
doing
great
and
then
talitha
always
wants
me
to
speak
to
excellence
in
the
community
over
the
pandemic.
They
have
now
streamed
over
170
concerts
gathering
13.8
million
views
in
the
process,
so
they
are
going
strong
and
doing
a
great
job.
So
that
is
all
the
updates
for
staff.
Unless
you
have
any
questions
on
behalf
of
all
of
rda
staff,
we
wish
you
happy
holidays.
J
Sorry,
mr
trey,
I
have
so
many
questions
today.
Can
we
get
an
update
either
in
this
meeting
or
in
the
next
meeting
about
the
state
street
project
area
adoption
and
where
we're.
M
M
Quick
update,
as
we
were,
having
meetings
with
county
staff
and
trying
to
finalize
the
information
to
submit
to
get
that
application
processed
and
in
front
of
their
county
council,
and
hopefully,
by
the
next
time
we
meet.
We
might
have
a
little
bit
more
concrete
information
on
where
that
exactly
stands.
So
we
we'll
definitely
do
that.