Lehi City Council Work Session: Affordable Housing Overlay and FY 2026 Budget Discussion - May 6, 2025
Lehi City Council Work Session: Affordable Housing Overlay and FY 2026 Budget Discussion - May 6, 2025
On May 6, 2025, at 4:03 PM, the Lehi City Council held a work session in the Council Chambers. All council members were present. The meeting focused on two main agenda items: a discussion of the SHARE (Sustainable Housing and Affordable Residential Environments) affordable housing overlay ordinance and a comprehensive review of the proposed FY 2026 budget. The meeting adjourned around 9:30 PM after extensive deliberation on both topics.
Discussion Items
SHARE Affordable Housing Overlay
- The council revisited the proposed SHARE overlay, which aims to increase affordable housing through density bonuses. Two main approaches were presented: (1) engineering's idea of allowing a 50% density bonus citywide on lots under 6,000 square feet as-of-right, and (2) a designated-location approach with a development agreement.
- Key points of debate included: location (anywhere in the city vs. designated areas), price point (goal of $400,000 vs. $500,000), design standards, and the need for a development agreement vs. as-of-right development.
- Council members expressed positions: Mayor favored a hybrid approach with citywide density bonus but a development agreement for design and quality. Councilmember Michelle supported allowing 50% bonus anywhere but requiring council approval for design. Councilmember Paul emphasized homeownership and deed restrictions. Councilmember Heather highlighted the importance of mixing affordable homes throughout the city, not in isolated pockets. Councilmember Chris argued that $400,000 is unrealistic for Lehigh and suggested $500,000 with more flexibility for developers.
- Staff presented examples of standard subdivisions (Grandeur Estates, Longhorn Meadows) to illustrate potential density increases and market impacts. The council also heard feedback from a developer (Flagship Homes) who expressed reluctance to pursue a development agreement due to risk.
- The council reached consensus on a hybrid approach: allow a 50% density bonus citywide (as of right for density), but require a development agreement to review design, quality, and price point. The price goal is $400,000, but developers may justify a higher price. Staff will rewrite the ordinance and return for another work session.
FY 2026 Budget Discussion
- The council reviewed budget requests from multiple departments. Key discussions included:
- Literacy Center: Requested $73,000 for six months of staffing at a new satellite center; funded at $50,000 for four months (March–June).
- Library: Requested eight part-time staff (later adjusted to six months), increased programming budget, and increased book budget. Only part-time staffing was partially funded; programming and book budget increases were not funded due to budget constraints.
- Police: Current sworn officers: 67. Requested additional officers; only 3 of 6 requested were funded. Council expressed concern about understaffing compared to Orem (104 officers for similar population). The police chief noted that retention has improved and the department is using a shift-bid system to optimize coverage. The motorcycle program was discussed as a cost-effective traffic enforcement tool.
- Fire: Requested an assistant fire chief and fire inspector; not funded. The fire chief noted that opening Station 84 increased administrative burden and slowed progress.
- Parks and Recreation: Discussed purchase of an ice rink ($222,000 ongoing, with $150,000 additional in FY 2026, subsidized by ~$130,000 annually). The council debated whether to continue subsidizing the rink versus funding police. Also discussed phragmites control at Jordan Willows: proposed purchase of an aquatic mower ($263,000) to reduce fire risk and improve wetlands. Council showed interest but noted funding constraints.
- Cycle Track (700 South): Staff presented options to improve the cycle track: concrete curbing ($735,000), precast barriers ($445,000), parking stops ($160,000–170,000), or purchasing a curb-and-gutter machine ($385,000) for future use. Council discussed aesthetics, safety, and resident feedback. No decision made; staff directed to gather more information.
- Other departments: Power and Fiber fully built out. Streets and Water departments had requests for ADA ramps, a salt storage building, and fleet replacement. Fleet replacement of $13.6 million was not funded; only $1.4 million approved. A leasing strategy was discussed.
- Administration: Requests for a communication specialist, website update, and internal auditor were discussed. The internal auditor position was conditionally funded pending sales tax revenue.
- Finance Director Dean noted that the budget uses one-time funds for one-time expenses, and that ongoing items must be matched with ongoing revenue. The proposed budget uses about $1.8 million of the $3.8 million surplus above the 30% reserve policy.
Key Outcomes
- No formal votes were taken; this was a work session.
- For the SHARE overlay: Staff will revise the ordinance to reflect the hybrid approach (citywide 50% density bonus with a development agreement for design and price) and present it at a future work session.
- For the FY 2026 budget: The council will hold a public hearing on May 13, 2025, and may have additional discussion before adopting the budget on May 27, 2025. Council members expressed interest in potentially reallocating funds to add more police officers, but no formal changes were made. The budget as presented includes $50,000 for the Literacy Center, partial police funding, and no funding for ice rink purchase or phragmites equipment, but those items may be reconsidered.
- The council directed staff to provide more data on police staffing ratios and to explore funding options for the cycle track improvements.
- The next meeting will include the public hearing on the budget.
Meeting Transcript
Yeah. I wanted to do South Korean coming around why. But it just drove and sold it. To the May 6th, 2025 Lehigh City Council work session. The time is 403. And we uh as a matter of roll call, all our council members are in attendance uh today. And I have asked Heather Newell if she would give us our opening comment there. Right here, Henley Father, we're grateful for the opportunity we have to gather today as uh city staff and council and be able to go over the request and the budget needs throughout the city. We ask the state of have the spirit to be with us that we can uh show um understanding and know that things that we need to do to best fulfill the needs throughout the city and take care of our residents and those who work for us. Helenly Father, we're so grateful for the opportunity we have to work together in this great city and all the blessings and opportunities that we have living here. And we say you've seen St. Jesus Christ amen. Thank you. Okay. Uh we've got uh some more information on our affordable housing. Uh Kim, I don't know, is Brittany. Oh, Brittany's here. There she is, because I know figured she'd be here to present on this. Uh so this has come up, I think, for the fourth time or something like that. So uh let's go ahead and start. And by the way, I do really like our new acronym for what it's worth share housing, right? Perfect. I prefer SHARE. Okay, we can add an E. It's a silent E. Okay, so my goal for this presentation is just kind of get on the same page on what we want the ordinance to be because I think I've started to realize that there's still just like slightly different opinions, and I just hopefully we can come to okay, this is what we can agree on. Um, and that will make it so much easier. Hopefully, yeah, then we can move forward more on it. Um like this, there are many ways to reach the same destination. I think that's true. Everyone has ideas of something that would work, and it's just we need to be working towards the same goal. So with that, two things I want you to think about, and maybe we can discuss it at the end. Um, because I know this has come up a few times, this idea of like we want to get it right. Um but what is like getting it right mean, right? Um is getting it right mean mean that it actually gets built. The developers want to do it and it's getting built. Is it the median home price in Lehigh starts to go down? Is it stories from individuals of like, yes, we were finally able to live here when we couldn't before? Um is it other cities adopting the same ordinance or something similar? Um just you know, what is our indicator? What are we really trying to go for that's getting it right? That would be super helpful for me to know. And then also the why. You know, what why are we doing this? Is it that we feel like there is a moral ethical responsibility to help the poor, which yeah, I you know, I really don't think we're still talking about the poor, but um you know, is there is there that is it sustainable and resilient communities? Um I think there's an could be an element for that. Is it just to meet the state requirement? Is it just to fulfill our moderate income housing goal? Um yeah, just something for you to think about too. Like what's what is your why?
openpublica.com