Council straw polls support $3 million for 2100 South utility work and new staff positions in budget work session
June 6, 2024, 1:00 p.m.
The Council received budget briefings on Sustainability and the Refuse Fund, Economic Development, Governmental Immunity and the Capital Improvement Program, then took straw polls on unresolved budget items. Members supported $3 million from Funding Our Future fund balance to be repaid by future development along 2100 South, most new positions, and several legislative intents. Council Member Sarah Young was absent.
From the approved minutes. Updated October 14, 2026.
Decisions at a glance
Agenda, item by item
Item 1 · Budget
Fiscal year 2024-25 budget: Sustainability Department and Refuse Fund
Discussed
Sustainability staff presented a department with 65 full-time employees and a Refuse Fund expense budget down 7.9 percent. Waste and recycling fees would rise 10 percent across the board, with a 3 percent increase for curbside glass recycling, and billing system costs would rise by $889,104, including $670,000 over three years for a billing upgrade. A study of electric vehicle charging stations was in its final stages.
- Budget$889,104 to Public Utilities
Item 2 · Budget
Fiscal year 2024-25 budget: Department of Economic Development
Discussed
Staff presented requests of $77,000 for a part-time Sister Cities position, $200,000 for Arts Council programs and arts grants, $400,000 ongoing for Open Streets, $115,000 one-time for a Main Street Promenade economic study, and $100,000 one-time for construction mitigation for small businesses. A $45,000 Arts Council shortfall was being covered by rainy day funds. Council Member Victoria Petro suggested holding the $400,000 for Open Streets in a holding account until a policy discussion on the program's expectations.
- Budget$400,000
- Budget$115,000
Item 3 · Budget
Fiscal year 2024-25 budget: Governmental Immunity
Discussed
Deputy Director Jennifer Bruno explained that the fund is the city's self-insurance for liability claims, with excess coverage bought privately. It is about $4 million for fiscal year 2025, with increases tied to 10 full-time Attorney's Office positions, and is paid by a standalone property tax since fiscal year 2023.
Item 5 · Budget
Fiscal year 2024-25 budget: Capital Improvement Program overview
Discussed
Staff reported 72 applications totaling $90 million, 32 from city departments and 40 from residents, with 31 projects recommended, nine from residents. Capital Asset Planning asked for one more position to manage impact fees. Council Member Chris Wharton asked whether the city still honors agreements to maintain monuments at Memory Grove. Council Member Alejandro Puy asked what $2 million at the International Peace Gardens would fund. Council Member Eva Lopez Chavez asked about unfunded street lighting projects and funding for the Central 9th neighborhood. Council hearings were set for July 9 and August 13, with tentative action August 20.
Item 6 · Parks
Semiannual update on Public Lands bond projects
Discussed
Staff gave status on projects funded by the voter-approved Parks, Trails and Open Space Bond and the 2022 sales tax revenue bond: cemetery irrigation and roadways, Pioneer Park (construction planned 2025), Glendale Park phase I starting soon and lasting 9 to 10 months, Liberty Park playground design, Fairmont Park concept work, and an Emerald Ribbon action plan for the Jordan River corridor.
Item 7 · Budget
Fiscal year 2024-25 budget: unresolved issues follow-up and straw polls
Discussed · 3-1
Council staff said final state property tax numbers were pending. Straw polls: $500,000 from Funding Our Future in a holding account for matching funds for a Jordan River safety team (Council Members Mano, Puy, Wharton, Petro and Lopez Chavez in favor; Dugan and Young absent for that poll); new positions on lines 44 to 76 except lines 48 and 51 (unanimous of those present), line 48 (unanimous), and line 51 (Wharton, Puy and Petro in favor, Lopez Chavez opposed); $3 million from Funding Our Future fund balance for 2100 South utility work in Sugar House, to be repaid by future development, after bids pushed the not-to-exceed amount from $7 million to $10 million (unanimous of those present); and moving an Engineer IV position to Community and Neighborhoods (unanimous of those present). Members kept the full Water Assist funding at $100,000 despite steady use of $15,000 to $20,000 a year, and asked for more outreach. The Council also supported adding legislative intents on Public Lands budget balancing, public safety alternative response evaluation, staffing vacancy analysis, compensation plan evaluation, noise enforcement, a consolidated fee schedule evaluation and water quality, all unanimously among those present; electric vehicle charging station evaluation (Wharton opposed) and neighborhood district signs (Mano opposed). Council Member compensation was deferred to a later work session.
- Budget$3.00 million
- Budget$500,000
- Council Member Dugan left at 2:30 p.m. and rejoined at 3:00 p.m. during this item; Council Member Mano joined for this item
What residents said
2100 South utility costsJordan River water qualityNeighborhood district signs