Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Interlocal Agreement Project Area Transfer topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Salt Lake County RDA approves transfer of two Magna project areas to Magna CRA
Summary
The Salt Lake County Redevelopment Agency approved an interlocal cooperation agreement transferring two Magna project areas — Magna Main Street and Arbor Park — to the Community Reinvestment Agency of Magna, including 10 parcels, contract assignments and remaining fund balances; exact vote counts were not specified.
The Salt Lake County Redevelopment Agency on May 20 approved an interlocal cooperation agreement (ILA) transferring two redevelopment project areas and associated assets to the Community Reinvestment Agency of Magna.
Kirsten Swinyard, redevelopment agency executive director, told the board the agreement is "the culmination of about the last 6 months worth of work" between the county and Magna and that the transfer would include property, contract assignments and an accounting of remaining funds and contingency. "With approval of this ILA, that will be kind of the end of the Salt Lake County redevelopment agency's involvement with these project areas," Swinyard said.
Why it matters: The resolution transfers everything associated with the Magna Main Street project area and the Arbor Park urban renewal area — both of which, Swinyard said, are still receiving tax increment. According to Swinyard, the county RDA will convey 10 parcels it owns to the Magna CRA, assign contracts that govern incoming and outgoing payments tied to the project areas, and transfer the remaining fund balances and contingency to Magna.
Board action and process: A motion to approve the ILA was made and seconded on the record. The board chair called for the ayes; the motion "passed," with the meeting record indicating unanimous vocal approval but not listing individual vote tallies. Earlier in the meeting, the board also approved the March 25, 2025 minutes on a motion by Board Member Pinkney and a second by Board Member Newton; that motion likewise passed with recorded vocal approval and no specific tally provided.
Discussion highlights: Swinyard summarized the ILA as containing three main components: (1) conveyance of real property by quick-claim deed to Magna CRA, (2) assignment of contracts and participation agreements that allocate incoming tax-increment and outgoing payments for projects in the areas, and (3) an accounting and transfer of remaining fund balances and contingency. She invited questions; none were recorded in the transcript before the board moved to vote.
What was not specified: The ILA was described in general terms and the transcript did not list dollar amounts for the remaining fund balances or contingency, nor did it identify the individual parcels by parcel number in the public remarks. The transcript also records different spellings for one board member's name ("Winder Newton" and "Winwood Newton"); the meeting record identifies that person only as board member Newton when casting and seconding motions. Exact vote counts were not provided in the verbal record.
Next steps: With the board's approval, Swinyard indicated the county RDA's formal involvement in the two project areas will conclude once the transfers in the ILA are completed. The transcript did not specify implementation dates or further reporting requirements.
