City Council Announcements
April 8, 2014
C. For Your Information:
1. 5:04:20 PM Council Legislative Subcommittee
As a reminder, the Council Members included on the Legislative Subcommittee will rotate now that the State Legislative Session is over. Staff will work on setting up a subcommittee meeting.
Future Policy amendments: This year, the Subcommittee identified a Chairperson. Staff will draft an update to the Policy Manual to reflect that the Chair is selected by the subcommittee. Also, the Council did not specify the term for the third member, but staff will draft an update to the policy for that as well so that the Council can select an approach.
C.18 LEGISLATIVE SUBCOMMITTEE (12/13)
A subcommittee of the City Council shall serve as a point of contact for the Administration and City’s Legislative staff members. The subcommittee shall be available for meetings and coordination prior to and during the Utah Legislature’s session. Information and updates will be reported back to the full Council during a briefing during the Work Session, which is normally included throughout the legislative session.
d. The subcommittee shall be made up of the respective City Council and RDA Board chairs, plus a third Council Member elected by the Council.
e. If any of the subcommittee members defer serving, another Council Member will be appointed with the advice and consent of the rest of the Council.
f. The term of the Legislative Subcommittee runs annually from April through the March adjournment of the Utah Legislature.
The Legislative Subcommittee, since it is not a quorum of the City Council, is not entitled to make decisions for the City Council, but is available to work with the Administration to identify options and positions consistent with past Council positions. Recognizing that the State Legislative process shifts rapidly, the Legislative Subcommittee will make every effort to inform the full Council of significant changes that are inconsistent with previous policy direction the Council has given.
No discussion; Staff to return with information as outlined.
2. 5:05:51 PM Constable Nominating Commission
In November 2013, the Council adopted an ordinance pertaining to the nomination and appointment of a City Constable. Per the ordinance, a nominating commission is to be established to review applications received and make a recommendation, by majority vote, to be considered by the Council.
The nominating commission consists of one Council Member, one judge, the City Attorney, the Police Chief (or his designee), and a private citizen. The judge and private citizen are to be appointed by the Mayor with the advice and consent of the Council, similar to a board/commission applicant.
Staff has begun coordinating with the Administration to form the commission. The Council Chair and Vice Chair have asked staff to add this information to the announcements to begin the discussion of which Council Member will sit on the nominating commission.
Council Members Adams and Rogers expressed interest.
Additional Announcements
1. 5:07:10 PM Sugar House Fireworks Funding Gap
The Council has received a letter from Scott Workman describing a funding shortfall Sugar House 4th of July Fireworks display, and requesting that the City appropriate an additional $25,000 to bridge the funding gap. The City currently allocates $15,000 annually to the Sugar House Park Authority for the Sugar House Fireworks display, in addition to the annual funding provided for other Sugar House Park Authority Activities, shared by the County. The $25,000 request is in addition to City funds already appropriated for this purpose. Salt Lake County has not provided any additional funding for the fireworks display; it appears that a formal request has not been made of the County.
Ø Does the Council wish to direct staff to bring this issue back to the Council?
Discussion followed regarding the need for participation from other entities and the need for long-range planning and fund raising strategies for this event versus relying on the City as has been historically done. Inquiry was raised as to whether the City has also contributed by decreased or waived fees for required permits and security. Council Executive Director Gust-Jenson said Staff was unaware and could return with that information if necessary. The suggestion was offered for the group to investigate or consider application to the Signature Event Fund which was designed to displace some of those fees.
A Straw Poll was taken as to whether the Council would be interested in spending more time in considering the request in addition to the annual $15,000 allocation; Council Members Rogers and Garrott voted aye; Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Penfold, LaMalfa and Luke voted no (5-2 against).
2. 5:16:32 PM Legal Services
Council Staff has been working with the legal firm of Miller, Guymon & Toone to provide independent legal services to the Council Office.
Ø Please let staff know if you have any concerns. There was the request for a cost breakdown between the two variables (i.e. part time/contract versus full time on staff).
A Straw Poll was taken with unanimous Council support of the Chair signing the contract.
3. 5:18:26 PM Scheduling for 289 North Almond Street Petition
The petitioner is anxious to get this item processed and asking to have it put on the agenda as soon as possible.
The proposal would amend the development agreement to reduce the number of units from 34 to 33, reduce the number of internal parking stalls from 80 to 60 and close the eastern portion of West Temple where it intersects at 300 North, with the landscaped island becoming part of the development as on-street parking. They will also be asking for modifications to development standards regarding grade change and setbacks. The Planning Commission voted unanimously to forward a favorable recommendation. If this is approved, the petitioner can then proceed to get the plans reviewed by the Historic Landmark Commission.
Proposed schedule:
Set date April 22
Briefing April 29
Public Hearing May 6
Potential Action May 20
Ø Would the Council support this quicker timeline in order to help avoid as much of the budget season as possible. Clarification was offered that no steps of the public process would not occur.
Concern was expressed as to the expedited timeline for one specific item and whether there were others with similar time considerations that should also be considered. Councilmember Luke said there was nothing known at this point; however, Staff would investigate to ensure fair practice. Once assured there were no other projects, the Council appeared comfortable with the timeline as outlined.