PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1982
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ON TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1982, AT 5:00 P.M. IN ROOM 211 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
ON ROLL CALL THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD J. WHITEHEAD ALICE SHEARER GRANT MABEY IONE M. DAVIS SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER PALMER DEPAULIS.
Council Chairperson Sydney R. Fonnesbeck presided at and Councilmember Palmer DePaulis conducted this meeting.
POLICY SESSION
Items were discussed relating to budget consideration: Leigh von der Esch discussed scheduling times for the Council Members to meet with department heads and Budget Office personnel to answer questions on the budget. Leigh von der Esch discussed items appearing on the Council’s agenda.
The Council adjourned at 5:55 p.m. to begin the Council meeting in Room 301.
THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, MET IN REGULAR SESSION ON TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1982, AT 6:00 P.M. IN ROOM 301 CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING.
ON ROLL CALL THE FOLLOWING COUNCIL MEMBERS WERE PRESENT: RONALD J. WFIITEHEAD ALICE SHEARER GRANT MABEY IONE M. DAVIS SYDNEY R. FONNESBECK EDWARD W. PARKER PALMER DEPAULIS.
Mayor Ted L. Wilson and Roger F. Cutler, City Attorney, were present at this meeting.
Council Chairperson Sydney R. Fonnesbeck presided at and Councilmember Palmer DePaulis conducted this meeting.
Invocation was given by Police Chaplain Allen Roden.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Approval of Minutes:
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of the Salt Lake City Council for its meeting held Tuesday, May 11, 1982, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(M 82-2)
DEPARTMENTAL BUSINESS
CITY ATTORNEY
RE: Proposed amendment to Traffic Code concerning vehicle owner’s responsibility for parking violations.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council consider amendments to Section 155 of the Salt Lake City Traffic Code.
DISCUSSION: Difficulties in enforcement of parking laws require legislative clarification of vehicle owner responsibilities for illegal parking. This ordinance has been upheld in other jurisdictions to establish clear responsibility on vehicle owners for the parking of their vehicles.
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to adopt Ordinance 33 of 1982, regarding owner’s responsibility for parking violation, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(0 82-25)
CITY COUNCIL
RE: Recognition of snowfighters of Salt Lake City.
Councilmember DePaulis read from a plaque recognizing the outstanding snow removal service during the winter of 1981-82. Craig Posselli thanked the Council and stated that he was just one part of the operation, there were 15 to 18 other people involved. These members stood and were recognized by the Council. Councilmember Whitehead stated that the citizens of the northwest quadrant appreciated the work of the snowfighters; Councilmember Mabey stated that his district felt the same.
The Mayor stated that he could not remember a tougher winter yet the Mayor’s office received many complimentary telephone calls; the snowfighters did an extraordinary job. The Mayor stated that he appreciated the care and concern that was shown for property. Councilmember Davis thanked the snowfighter crew on behalf of the east-bench residents; she stated that the hills are difficult to plow and the residents appreciated the fine job that was done. Bernice Cook stated that she read in the newspaper that the Salt Lake City snowfighter crew was second in the United States.
Councilmember Whitehead moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to approve the presentation of this plaque, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(G 82-17)
CITY RECORDER
RE: Proposed redistricting of City Council boundaries.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the proposed changes in boundaries as they have been realigned in accordance with County voting district changes using 1980 Census data.
DISCUSSION: It is recommended that Salt Lake County voting districts 2016 and 2074 be included in Council District 1 and that voting district 2064 be included in Council District 3. Other variations in boundaries reflect little or no population variations and follow voting district boundaries. Councilmember Davis stated that she did not receive several figures regarding this redistricting until 4:00 p.m. and in reviewing these figures she had some questions; she requested that this item be on the Council agenda for May 25, 1982.
Ms. Davis stated that this issue needed to be resolved by June 1, 1982. Councilmember Shearer stated that she was concerned about district 1010 being divided. Councilmember Davis stated that she had discussed this issue with Kathryn Marshall and suggested that she contact Kay Llewellyn at the County Election Service about this question.
Councilmember Davis moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to place this redistricting issue on the Council agenda for May 25, 1982, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(R 82-12)
FINANCE & ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
RE: Industrial Revenue Bond application: Six States Distributors.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council consider the approval of an inducement resolution for an Industrial Revenue Bond for Six States Distributing in the amount of $750,000. The following conditions have been met: 1. That the City Attorney approve the resolution as to form. 2. That the application meet all necessary financial requirements of the city. 3. That Six States Distributing pay the established non-refundable fee for processing.
DISCUSSION: The applicant proposes to construct a combination warehouse and office facility at approximately 1700 South between 2nd and 3rd West.
Councilmember DePaulis referred this Industrial Revenue Bond application to the Budget Committee; referred without objection.
(Q 82-21)
RE: Proposed resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of approximately $17,700,000 of tax anticipation notes, the approval of an Official Notice of Sale and the scheduling and providing notice of the sale. Also a proposed resolution awarding the sale of approximately $17,700,000 of tax anticipation notes, providing for their issuance and setting forth the note form.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Parker seconded to refer this item to the consent agenda for June 1, 1982, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(Q 82-22)
FIRE DEPARTMENT
RE: Memorandum of understanding and an agreement providing for mutual exchange of fire protection and rescue services between Salt Lake City and West Valley City.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council approve this agreement so that the two cities will be able to mutually help each other in case of emergency.
DISCUSSION: The Salt Lake City Fire Department and the City of West Valley have worked out a mutually agreeable contract and it has been signed by the Mayor of West Valley. It has been approved by the Salt Lake City legal department.
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to adopt Resolution 49 of 1982, authorizing the execution of an interlocal cooperation agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and West Valley City, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(C 82-251)
OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
RE: Appointments to the Central Business Improvement District Advisory Board.
DISCUSSION: The Mayor recommends that the following individuals be appointed to this Board: Jess Agraz, Kent Money, Stewart Hanson, Jr., Richard Schubach, Fred Wheeler, Phyllis Steorts, Clinton P. Mott, Ronald Carnago, and Fred S. Ball.
Councilmember DePaulis referred these appointments to the consent agenda for May 25, 1982, pending receipt of financial disclosure statements; referred without objection.
(T 82-8)
PARKS DEPARTMENT
RE: Proposed ordinance of fees and charges at the Wild Wave swimming pool.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Council consider the following fees and charges to be put into ordinance form.
DISCUSSION: It is proposed that the admissions and fees charged by Wild Wave be increased from $2.50 for adults (12 and over) to $3 and children from $1.75 to $2. The family season pass be increased from $750 a year to $125 a year, and a new single pass be sold at $65 a year. It is also proposed that the $2 deposit required to rent a raft be dropped and a one-time deposit of $2.50 be charged with $1 being returned when the raft is brought back.
1. Wild Wave has not raised its admission fee since it was built in 1979. It is now necessary to do so to meet ever increasing operational, maintenance and service expenses. 2. Raising admissions and fees will aid the Parks Department in meeting financial obligations to the City. 3. The Parks Department feels the new charges are still very low compared with the cost of recreation offered by other facilities, not only locally but nationwide. Wild Wave admissions are among the lowest of any wave pool in the country.
4. Last year the pool sold 136 family passes, resulting in $10,200 revenue. Those passes were used 9,235 times throughout the summer, resulting in an average cost per admission of only $.90; far below what is necessary to make Wild Wave self supporting. Therefore, an increase in season pass price is necessary to make the season pass program profitable. Last year (1981) there was an increased demand for single passes from young adults and single persons who worked and lived close to the pool. For this reason it is proposed that a single season pass be offered.
5. The Parks Department has found that there is a loss of potential revenue by charging an hourly rental for the use of a raft. Unnecessary labor also results in keeping track of the amount of hours each raft is used. By charging a flat $2.50 fee for each raft rented and returning $1 of that fee when the raft is returned will result in increased raft rental revenues and greater efficiency. 6. With the proposed admission increases mentioned above, the Wave Pool as shown below will generate approximately $77,000 each year to meet the financial obligations to the city.
TYPE OF INCREASE BUDGET PERIOD -January 1st -June 30, 1982 BUDGET PERIOD
1982/83
Increase Adult to $3.00 $ 8,250 $22,996
Increase Child to $2.00 4,000 9,408
Increase Season Pass from $75.00 to $125.00 6,000 6,000
Institute a new Single Season Pass for $65.00 6,500 6,500
Change the Raft Rental System to a one-time charge 2,000 5,381
TOTAL $26,750 $50,285
Councilmember Mabey stated that John Gust had indicated that the use of a family pass brought the cost down to $.90 per person but he wondered if more would be lost than gained by increasing the fee of the family pass by $50. John Gust, Director of Parks, addressed the Council and stated that he did not feel the Wave Pool would lose by increasing this fee; he indicated that the cost of golf passes for senior citizens was raised and the Parks Department has sold over 800 passes, when in the past the sales have never been more than 700 passes. Councilmember Mabey also asked about extending the evening hours of the Wave Pool. Mr. Gust replied that most people leave the pool at about 5:00 p.m.; the Wave Pool is currently open until 8:00 p.m.
Mr. Gust stated that he would not want the pool to be open much later than 9:00 p.m. because there is no lighting. Mr. Gust did not feel that revenue would be increased by extending the hours. Councilmember Mabey stated that the majority of the complaints he receives are from people who pay their admission and only have 1 1/2 hours to swim because they cannot get to the pool until 6:30 p.m. Mr. Gust stated that the pool opens at 11:00 a.m. and 95% of the admissions are between 11:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.
Mr. Gust stated that the Parks Department did a survey to give the Council an idea on municipal pool facilities (the figures are rounded): 1. South High School - spends $117,000 on operating costs and generates $10,700 in revenue for a net loss of $106,000 each year. 2. Murray City - spends $60,000 in operating costs and generates $52,300 in revenue for a net loss of $7,700 each year. 3. Bountiful City (this pool is covered) - spends $95,277 and generates $69,800 in revenue for a net loss of $25,500. 4. Ogden City - will spend about $500,000 on recreation which is 3% of their total budget. 5. Provo City - will spend about $86,000 on recreation which is 1% of their budget. 6. Salt Lake County - will spend $1,300,000 on recreation which is 1% of their budget. 7. Salt Lake City - 1981-82 spent .0013% of the budget on recreation; Salt Lake recaptures about half of that in user fees.
Mr. Gust further stated that the Wave Pool generates enough money to pay for its operating costs; the pool is probably the only true enterprise fund that the city has. He stated that the pool is managed very well and it is clean and well maintained. Councilmember Mabey stated that he drives by the pool at least once a week and the pool, as well as the parking lot, is always clean. The Mayor stated that he was concerned that employees may be using the pool for their own recreation after hours; if this is true, the city needs to be cautious.
The perception of citizens who are leaving the pool may be awkward; if this is happening, it may be wise to reach a management decision concerning this practice. Mr. Gust stated that the employees have been allowed to swim the last half hour of the day since they have been in the sun all day for six or seven hours. However, employees’ relatives are not allowed this privilege; Mr. Gust stated that he did not feel this was out of line. The Mayor felt it was awkward if people are getting in the pool when the patrons have been told it is closing. Councilmember Whitehead stated that if the employees were using the pool the last half hour of the day there should not be a problem because when the pool closes everyone will get out; but if they are using the pool after closing then this is a different situation. The Mayor stated that he agreed with Mr. Gust that the pool has been managed extremely well.
Councilmember Davis stated that the Cottonwood Community Center pool saves about $25,000 by covering the pool with a solar tile cover (similar to a blanket); this would save on heating costs. Ms. Davis asked if money could be earmarked for the wave pool to purchase a heat-saving device; the solar cover retains the heat at night and then the reheating costs are less. Albert Haines stated that this idea is worth pursuing; however, it seems the only way to do this would be to forgive the note that the wave pool is paying.
Councilmember Shearer stated that there is not an actual cost estimate so the Council could open the budget at a later time when there are firm bids; by that time there could be an estimate on the energy savings which might make it possible to pay the interest and buy the solar cover. Mr. Gust stated that this year the Parks Department has undertaken an extensive promotion campaign. They will be advertising on several billboards throughout the valley and there is an extensive radio and television program; on-the-spot shows will be done at the pool. Also three extensive mailings have been sent to church leaders, personnel directors, principals, and special groups; discount tickets have been taken to credit unions and banks.
Councilmember Mabey stated that he thought the Parks Department was doing a good advertising job and these types of innovative ideas are needed to promote the pool. The Council asked about having raft prices included in the ordinance. Mr. Gust stated that none of the concessions were going to be included.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Fonnesbeck seconded to adopt Ordinance 34 of 1982, regarding Wild Wave Pool entrance fees, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
Councilmember Shearer moved and Councilmember Davis seconded to amend the motion to include the Council intent that the Wave Pool stay open during practical daylight hours, to be varied according to safety and length of daylight, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(O 82-23)
PUBLIC UTILITIES
RE: Setting a public hearing for final 201 Facilities Report.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council set a public hearing to present final 201 Facilities Report and to receive public comments concerning this document.
DISCUSSION: Salt Lake City Corporation, Department of Public Utilities, received an EPA grant on September 16, 1980 to conduct a 201 Facilities Plan to determine Salt Lake City’s sewage treatment needs through the year 2005. The firm of CH2M Hill was selected to conduct the study and was authorized to proceed on the study on October 9, 1980. As part of the 201 process a citizens advisory group was formed consisting of individuals from each of the City Council district boundaries and various other interest groups. As the study proceeded, various technical memorandums were published with subsequent public hearings on September 22, 1981 and December 8, 1981.
This public hearing is required under EPA regulations and as part of the grant conditions and recommended that it be held on June 15, 1982 in the City Council chambers. The Department of Public Utilities will make the necessary public notification upon approval of this request.
Councilmember Parker moved and Councilmember Mabey seconded to schedule a public hearing for the final 201 Facilities Report for June 15, 1982, at 6:30 p.m., which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(C 82-56)
PUBLIC WORKS
RE: The official Notice of Bond Sale for Salt Lake City, Utah, Curb and Gutter Extensions 38-533, 38-555-1, 38-601-2.
Councilmember Mabey moved and Councilmember Whitehead seconded to approve the official Notice of Bond Sale for Curb and Gutter Extensions 38-533, 38-555-1, and 38-601-2, which motion carried, all members voting aye.
(Q 82-4) & (Q 82-18)
RE: Bid opening for construction of curb and gutter Special Improvement District 38-700. Albert Haines opened and read the bids; the bids are as follows: Special Improvement District No. 38-700 - Phase I Geneva Rock Products $302,557.10; Gibbons & Reed Company 264,252; W.W. & W.B. Gardner 246,704.90; Workman Construction 312,072. (Bid bonds were attached to each bid)
Special Improvement District No. 38-700 - Phase II. Geneva Rock Products $1,071,780.30 (Alt. Bid “B”); Gibbons & Reed Company 936,649 (Alt. Bid “B”); Jay Tuft 1,313,030.54 (Alt. Bid “B”); Larco Excavating 1,053,474.45 (Alt. Bid “B”); 1,323,026.25 (Alt. Bid “D”). (Bid bonds were attached to each bid)
Councilmember DePaulis referred these bids to the Public Works Department for review and recommendation; referred without objection.
(Q 82-12)
The meeting adjourned at 7:00 p.m.