City Council Announcements
October 23, 2012
Information Needed by Council Staff 8:39:01 PM
A. Metropolitan Water Board Vacancy
Salt Lake City appoints five of the seven board members to the Metropolitan Water Board. One of those positions has become vacant with the resignation of Dave Buhler due to his work commitments.
Ø If Council Members have suggestions for a potential replacement, please let staff know. Ms. Gust-Jenson said board members were selected entirely by the City Council. She said normally three recommendations were made by Council Members. She said the board typically did not have a lot of members that were female, westside residents, or people with technical engineering expertise and asked Council Members to consider that in making recommendations. She said Lehua Weaver was the staff contact.
B. Project Scope for Golf Consultant (provided below)
Project Scope for Golf Consultant – The Administration has prepared a scope for an independent study of the City’s Golf Program. A copy of the scope is provided below.
Note: Council Staff reviewed the project scope with the Mayor’s Golf Citizen Task Force (CTF) Recommendations. Council Staff comments are included in red underlined text within the project scope.
Ø Does the scope meet the Council’s requirements and is it okay for the Administration to proceed with the Golf study? Does the Council feel that the scope, as written, will produce the information needed for the Council to make policy and budget decisions related to the golf fund? Ms. Gust-Jenson said Karen Halladay was staff contact for this item. She said the Administration provided a draft scope of services and Karen had included some comments in (red). She asked the Council to provide any comments they wanted to have included. Councilmember LaMalfa said the scope provided by the consultant was much larger than he anticipated. He said he understood the Council was just looking at Bonneville and whether it was going to take on a new clubhouse or something like that and also some kind of program involving students. Ms. Halladay said the scope was based on a prior legislative intent and she would provide that language to the Council. Councilmember LaMalfa said he understood part of the scope was to look at selling some under-performing golf courses and he wanted it known that he was opposed to that. Ms. Gust-Jenson said staff would take more time to meet with Councilmember LaMalfa to understand his concerns/thoughts and then circulate that information to the entire Council.
B. Student Video Contest for SLCTV Broadcasting (provided below)
Attached is a memorandum from the Council staff communication team with guidelines for a video contest for Salt Lake City School District High School students. The purpose of this proposal is to expand content for SLCTV and to increase SLCTV viewers. Council staff communication team has asked the Council some questions (highlighted in yellow) on the attached memorandum dated October 8, 2012.
Ø Please let Council staff know if you have any changes or questions to guidelines or have feedback for staff.
Ø Does the Council support staff to proceed with this contest? Ms. Gust-Jenson said this was just getting off the ground and asked Council Members to provide feedback.
PROJECT SCOPE FOR THE GOLF CONSULTANT
The City recommends that an independent study performed by an experienced golf consultant would include the following:
1. An evaluation of the courses and projects critical to the success and long-term financial viability of the City’s golf course.
•The consultant will gather financial data from each course including but not limited to an analysis of rounds played, the revenue from rounds of golf played, the revenue from all operations, costs associated with operations, etc. and create a financial pro forma for each course.
Council Staff Comment: The Council may choose to be more specific about the financial information being created and what is expected from the financial pro forma.
•The consultant will gather data from publicly and privately owned courses in the local and regional golf market to determine if and how they have impacted the City’s courses.
Council Staff Comment: After gathering market data from both the public and private courses in the greater Salt Lake area, the Consultant could make recommendations about the steps Salt Lake City Golf could take to achieve competitive advantages and, possibly, greater market share.
•The consultant will do a broad assessment of the physical condition of each course.
•The consultant will thoroughly review the proposed capital improvements from the Golf Division, costs associated with those improvements, the proposed funding sources for those improvements and the estimated year each project would commence.
Council Staff Comment: Per the CTF recommendations, the study of the golf program should study each course’s capital improvement needs and whether or not there would be a financial return to the City if such capital improvements were implemented.
2. Creation of a cost/benefit analysis of the proposed improvements and funding sources.
•The consultant will use pro formas, the proposed capital improvement recommendations and funding sources from the Golf Division, the assessment of the physical condition of each course to determine whether the proposed improvements are necessary and whether they can be tracked to a reduction in costs and/or an increase in revenue per course.
Council Staff Comment: Per the CTF recommendations,”… the study of the golf program should study each course’s capital improvement (its) needs and whether or not there would be a financial return to the City if such capital improvements were implemented. If a course does not meet established criteria, the course would be repurposed or sold to the private sector.”
Council Staff Comment: This aspect of the project scope proposes that the Consultant use the Golf Division’s proposed capital improvement recommendations and proposed funding sources. The Council may want to consider a more arms length or more independent review of the capital improvement projects needed at each of the golf courses. The CTF recommends that the consultant examine the assumptions and verify the data used in the Golf Division’s projections.
•The consultant, after assessing the proposed funding sources, will recommend other viable funding recommendations that have been successfully used on public courses in similar golf markets.
3. Create a 5-year economic model for the golf program that will reflect individual course needs; identify course financial strength; and outline measures that will correct problems, strengthen financial position, and increase playability.
•The economic model created by the consultant would state the needs of each course in the City; track the assessed need for repairs, upgrades, required modifications, modernization of equipment and technology; reflect appropriate, viable and cost effective green business practices that lead to more environmentally sound business strategies; and assist in identifying options to address these issues as they appear.
Council Staff Comment: The Council may choose to be more specific about the financial information or economic model being created. For example, the Council may want to request income statements, cash flow statements, and balance sheet projections for the next five years. In other words, be more specific about the information expected from the 5-year economic model.
Council Staff Comment: Per the CTF report, the CTF concluded that the irrigation system changes should be the top infrastructure priority at each course so that there can be an immediate increase in savings, as well as a beneficial impact on the City’s water use. However, the CTF does not recommend the City move forward with the approval of the ESCO contract or the bond until a more thorough analysis is performed on the actual costs of these programs, what the debt service will be, and how much will actually be saved by making these improvements.
•The model is recommended to better track progress in spending, benefit to the general population, monitor any environmental impacts, and determine whether the courses are fulfilling their purpose and maintaining viability.
4. An evaluation of alternatives and profitable uses of golf course property, including privatization.
•The consultant will make recommendations regarding other potential uses of the golf course properties such as the sale of property to the private market, change of use to parks or other open space uses, lease of property within the courses, etc. and determine the financial impact of such uses.
•In determining potential other uses for the land the consultant should measure any alternative against the City’s vision, goals and blueprints for community recreation, open space preservation and other core quality of life programs.
5. Sequencing, including funding, of the Capital Improvement Program for each course.
•The consultant will create an updated project sequencing plan for the projects and funding of each project.
Council Staff Comment: The CTF report indicates the developed economic model would prioritize the needs of each facility and would outline measures needed to be put in place to correct issues affecting the financial condition of the courses as well as the playability.
MEMORANDUM
______________________________________________
DATE: October 8, 2012
TO: City Council Members
FROM:
Council staff
communication team
Lehua Weaver, Dan Weist, Amber McClellan, Nick
Tarbet,
Molly Farmer, Brian Fullmer, Jan Aramaki
SUBJECT:
Video contest proposal: Salt Lake City School District
High
School Students to submit a video for SLCTV broadcasting
CC: City Council staff
The purpose of this proposal is to expand content for SLCTV and to increase SLCTV viewers. Council staff met earlier with Dr. McKell Withers and his staff to discuss ideas on how to roll out a video contest involving Salt Lake City School District students. The School District suggests the best approach is to invite high school students to participate rather than junior high or elementary students to avoid steps associated with obtaining permission from parents to broadcast students’ videos.
The following are some general guidelines outlined by the Council staff communication team to help launch this video contest:
§ A limit of two minutes long for each video submission – submit electronically
§ Topic of the video will be generated focusing on the Council’s seven philosophy statements
§ Run the video contest on a quarterly basis; students will have ___ days to submit videos each time the video contest takes place
§ Video contest prize: winning video will broadcast on SLCTV (would the Council like to include something additional that is more tangible – i.e., gift certificate, gift card?)
o Is the Council interested in choosing the video topic/question for video contests – i.e.: what does sustainability mean to you?
§ Create a selection committee to pick the winning video to be shown on SLCTV
o Would the Council like to be involved in selecting the video winner?
o Would the Council like to involve someone from the School District?
o Others?
§ Announce the contest rules on SLCTV, twitter, facebook, Council’s webpage, Council’s periodic/weekly email updates, and through the School District and community councils
§ Catchy name for this video contest – “SLC Rocks” or “MySLC”
o Does the Council have a suggestion on what to name this video contest?
§ Invite the winner of video contest to attend “opening ceremonies” at a Council meeting and recognize the winner.
Additional City Council Announcements
October 23, 2012
Information for Council Members
A. Following are the Council Meeting dates through the end of the year:
•Tuesday, November 13 - RDA / Work Session / Formal
•Tuesday, November 20 – Work Session Only
•Tuesday, November 27 – Work Session / Formal
•Tuesday, December 4 – Work Session / Formal
•Tuesday, December 11 – RDA / Work Session / Formal
The first meeting of the new year is Tuesday, January 8.
Information Needed from Council Members
B. Legislative Breakfast
Need to find a date for the Legislative Breakfast that works for council members in January before the session starts on January 28th. In 2011 we held the meeting on Friday and last year it was Monday. The breakfast has been from 7:30 to 9:00 am.
Possible dates:
•Tuesday January 8, 2013
•Tuesday January 22, 2013
Other suggested dates:
o Friday January 4, 2013
o Monday January 7, 2013 (not ideal – hard to remind people over the weekend)
o Wednesday January 23, 2013
o Thursday January 24, 2013
o Friday January 25, 2013
Ø All – please let Council Staff know which date works best. Ms. Gust-Jenson asked if Council Members wanted to hold the Legislative Breakfast on January 8th which was the date recommended by the Administration. She said other potential dates were listed/available. Councilmember Simonsen said there was a standing informal caucus breakfast on that date that involved many of the democratic legislators and suggested clearing that date with them. Ms. Gust-Jenson said staff would follow-up on that and get back to the Council.
C. Utilizing the Public Utilities Mailings for a Citywide Council Insert
Each of the Council Members who had reserved a spot in the November utility mailings have elected to take advantage of the December slot instead. The Council might consider using the space in November for a citywide insert focusing on encouraging residents to comment on issues. Staff has laid out a possible insert that would include 1) methods of providing input and 2) a brief mention on some of the larger projects that the Council and/or City will be working on in the coming months.
Ø Is the Council supportive of using the November mail slot for this purpose? Preliminary draft attached. Ms. Gust-Jenson said more information/choices would be provided for Council Members consideration/approval.
D. Council Calendar for 2013 (see below)
Ms. Gust-Jenson said the 2013 calendar needed to be published and now was the time for Council Members to review the schedule and provide input. She said this would be back on Announcements on November 13th. Councilmember Simonsen said as Redevelopment Agency business grew, that Tuesday became less useful as a Council business day and suggested exploring other options including adding an additional meeting.
Ø Please let Council Staff know if you see any problems with next year’s calendar.
2013 COUNCIL MEETING DATES
(Updated:
10/23/12)
Please
note: Meeting dates are subject to change
January 8, 2013 – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
January 15, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA Meeting & Council Work Session
January 22, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
January 29, 2013 – TENTATIVE COUNCIL RETREAT
February 5, 2013 – Tuesday– Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
February 12, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA Meeting & Council Work Session
February 19, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
February 26, 2013 – TENTATIVE COUNCIL RETREAT
March 5, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
March 9 – 13, 2013 NLCT Congressional City Conference, Washington, D.C.
March 19, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING & Council Work Session
March 26, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
April 2, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
April 9, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING & Council Work Session
April 10 – 12, 2013 ULCT Mid-Year Conference, St. George, UT
April 13 – 17, 2013 APA’s 2013 National Planning Conference, Chicago, IL
April 23, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
May 7, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
May 14, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING & Council Work Session
May 21, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
May 28, 2013 – Tuesday – TENTATIVE Work Session (as needed for Budget)
June 4, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
June 6, 2013 – Thursday – TENTATIVE Work Session (as needed for Budget)
June 11, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
June 13, 2013 – Thursday – TENTATIVE Work Session (as needed for Budget)
June 18, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING (May switch due to budget) & Council Work Session
July 16, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING, Work Session & Formal Meeting
July 30, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
August 6, 2013 – Tuesday NO MEETING: NIGHT OUT AGAINST CRIME TENTATIVE COUNCIL RETREAT A.M.
August 13, 2013 – Tuesday – NO MEETING: PRIMARY ELECTIONS
August 20, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING, Work Session & Formal Meeting
August 27, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
September 3, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
September 10, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING & Council Work Session
September 11 - 13, 2013 ULCT Annual Conference, Salt Lake City, UT
September 17, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
October 1, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
October 8, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING & Council Work Session
October 20 – 23, 2013 Rail~volution, Seattle, WA at the Westin Hotel
October 22, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
November 5, 2013 – NO MEETING: GENERAL ELECTION
November 12, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING, Work Session & Formal Meeting
November 12-16, 2013 NLCT Congress of Cities Exposition, Seattle, WA
November 19, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
November 26, 2013 – Tuesday – TENTATIVE Work Session and Formal Meeting
December 3, 2013 – Tuesday – Council Work Session & Formal Meeting
December 10, 2013 – Tuesday – RDA MEETING, Work Session
8:47:35 PM Discussion was held on how to address/moved forward with Council retreat issues. Potential ideas included subcommittee meetings and/or scheduling work session briefings. Councilmember Simonsen asked if any Council Members objected to scheduling a follow-up discussion for the November 20, 2012 work session. No objections were raised.
October 18, 2012
TO: City Council Members
FROM: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Director
Office of the City Council
SUBJECT: Master Plan Process Evaluation and Re-tooling
Below is a first draft of an “outline of expectations” for the Council to review and modify. The purpose of an “outline of expectations” is to give Council Members the opportunity very early in the process to articulate their expectations and confirm whether the staff has a clear understanding of those expectations before a project is commenced.
PROJECT: Master Plan Process Evaluation and Re-tooling
TIME FRAME: Initial observations and recommendations reported to the Council in November / December 2012
PUBLIC PROCESS: Following report on initial observations and recommendations
Staff understands there are differing views on the approach. Clarity on this “outline of expectations” will help assure that the Council’s interests are understood. Please consider each of the items below as questions for clarification.
Work with the Administration to establish a work group re: Master Planning process:
1. Initially include the following participants:
•Administrative representatives
•Three Council Members (question – as available? Or identify times when all are available?)
•Council staff representatives`
2. Confirm whether the Council Members all have the same understanding, and what the goals of this process are, such as:
a. Council Members owe it to their constituents to assure their initial feedback is included in the process so that doors are not closed for later discussion, and the constituent input remains meaningful.
b. Balance the desire to have in-depth policy documents with broad, deep and meaningful community input with the desire to be more efficient in producing the plans – is it possible to have both?
c. Streamline the Master Plan process to:
•Reduce the amount of time it takes to develop and process plans
•Ultimately create plans that are simple, understandable, easy to read and reference but are still flexible, current, dynamic and illustrative of the true surrounding amenities and conditions.
•Focus City-wide policy statements in the City-wide plan (the Plan Salt Lake effort), rather than duplicating them in localized plans
•Make the plans more user-friendly so that they can inform the development process and make the City’s processes more predictable
•Help assure that the workload is manageable so that smaller, more localized plans can be kept current (updated more frequently)
•Assure that the documents are policy-driven
3. Enhance the public process for Master Plans to:
•Continue to broaden public input
•Retain and enhance ‘deep’ participation from constituents familiar with the City
•Use technology in creative ways
•Learn from ‘best practices’ in other cities
4. Be open to an entire re-engineering of the public process that could include significant changes to the current process, to the point that the proposed process may not resemble the existing process. It may or may not include all of the same elements.
5. Include an opportunity for initial City Council check-in and then check-in at various points in the process. This will assure that the full Council’s policy input is included before it would be ‘too late to make changes without the plan going back to the Planning Commission.’ Examples of processes where this check-in approach has worked include:
•Council’s adoption of Philosophy Statements that will help inform the general plan for Salt Lake City;
•Administration’s presentation and Council support of an ‘outline of expectations’ on the small neighborhood business project, to help assure that the Administration and Council were of the same understanding on the project;
•Development of a policy outline for the Historic Plan before the details were re-written. The Council had opportunity to review and endorse approaches and basic concepts;
•Northwest Quadrant Master Plan policy principles were reviewed in advance by the sitting Council before work progressed. (The majority opinion on the Council shifted after this, but the opportunity for the Council to review mid-term may be a good model).
•North Temple Master Plan and Zoning
6. Basic things that can be done to improve current process:
•Use master plans as guidelines or advisory documents, as they are only valuable when they are utilized
•Use master plans as a guiding document for the capital improvement (CIP) process
•Have one citywide master plan that includes high level policy information such as transit, housing, education, quality of neighborhoods, etc.
•Use a timeline for plan completion
•Review and set parameters and initially conduct a broader policy discussion
7. Initial Steps:
•Establish common vocabulary / define terms
•Identify types of master planning documents and consistently communicate the role, scope and level of each.
•Identify which components are included in which plans (i.e. City-wide policy statements are included only in City-wide plans; smaller area plans focus on neighborhood-specific issues.)
•Come to agreement on whether the “scoping process” for a master plan is Administrative, Legislative or can be done jointly between the branches.
8. Assure that the processes established recognize that the policy choices of elected officials should not be inadvertently constrained by early or mid-process scoping conclusions.
Process questions going forward:
•Determine when to include process and policy experts, such as those from the University of Utah, to share professional research on best practices, successful approaches in other communities, etc.
•Determine when to include the general public and other key stakeholders on how master planning in the City may change. Develop a process for how to get comprehensive public input on these proposed process changes.
•Once a process is established, develop a public process component of the master planning process to expand public input opportunities for each plan going forward.
Ideas / Items raised by Council Members since the Retreat (further food for thought as this process is looked at):
•Define the following terms and how they relate to one another:
o Civic engagement
o Transparency
o Accessibility to information
o Citizen participation
o Public engagement
o Good Government Initiative
•Give City Boards & Commissions the opportunity to have input on the scoping of issues
o Taxpayers benefit from expertise of Board/Commission members
o Board/Commission members have a more satisfying experience
o Adds credibility to the project because a broad base of input was gathered
•Broad public input has the following benefits:
o More eyes = richer document
o More diverse world experience = more ideas for mitigating potential problems or for coming up with creative solutions
o On-street perspective may be unique
o Assures that the framework of the issue isn’t drawn so tight that opportunities are lost or potential problems are not recognized
Brainstorming items from initial conversations between Administrative and Council staff members
•Be sure each process has a clear beginning, middle and end
•Consider developing a tool such as a “scope” or “outline of expectations” that clearly spells out the key issues to be addressed during the process.
•Consider a mid-way report. (in the example of Northwest Quadrant, the Council endorsed the policy statements mid-process. This also worked well in the preservation plan – the Council adopted a resolution supporting key components.)
•Schedule briefings in a timely manner to avoid loss of momentum.
•Include stakeholder interviews as an initial step:
o City Council Members
o Professionals
o Constituent experts in the neighborhood
o Community Council leaders
•Include as part of the stakeholder interview process, a follow-up step to promptly give feed back to those interviewed. Staff could note the key points heard and keep the door open for those points to be included throughout the process even though the Administration may not reach the same conclusion initially asserted by the stakeholder. (Clear communication from the beginning, feedback of what was heard, and opportunity for stakeholder to give written follow-up feedback if they believe they ‘were not heard’ or some of their points were missed.)
•Hold a study session mid-way through the process to update the Council and get feedback.
•When issues are before the Council, give the Administration approximately three minutes to review the issue that is before the Council, identify key issues, refresh on what has been decided previously, etc.
Additional Item:
Councilmember Garrott said Lehua would be asking Council Members whether they wanted to sign onto a letter to the Administration requesting a kind of collaborative meeting of the minds on the good landlord program. He asked them to take time to read the letter and make suggestion and decide whether or not to join.