The City Council met in Work Session on Tuesday, June 9, 2015, at 4:10 p.m. in Room 326, Committee Room, City County Building, 451 South State Street.
In Attendance: Council Members Luke Garrott, James Rogers, Erin Mendenhall, Charlie Luke, Kyle LaMalfa, Stan Penfold, and Lisa Adams.
Staff in Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Jennifer Bruno, Executive Council Deputy Director; David Everitt, Mayor’s Chief of Staff; Margaret Plane, City Attorney; Russell Weeks, Council Senior Policy Analyst; Padma Veeru-Collings, City Prosecutor; Jill Love, Community and Economic Development Director; Michael Akerlow, Housing and Economic Development Director; Alden Breinholt, Operations Division Director; Sean Murphy, Council Public Policy Analyst; Gina Chamness, Finance Director; Mary Beth Thompson, Finance/Revenue Audit Manager; Lehua Weaver, Council Senior Public Policy Analyst; Mary DeLaMare-Schaefer, Community and Economic Development Deputy Director; Krista Dunn, Deputy Police Chief; Randi Hillier, Budget Policy Analyst; Tara Hasenoehrl, Public Services Customer Service Liaison and Special Projects Coordinator; Karen Krieger, Arts Council Executive Director; Fred Ross, Deputy Police Chief; Vicki Bennett, Sustainability/Environment Division Director; Neil Lindberg, Council Legal Consultant; Cindi Mansell, City Recorder; and Scott Crandall, Deputy City Recorder.
Guests in Attendance:
Councilmember Rogers presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 4:10 p.m.
AGENDA ITEMS
#1. 4:09:46 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING ON ITEMS RELATED TO THE PROPOSED FISCAL YEAR 2015-16 ANNUAL BUDGET. The briefings include budget proposals for departments, separate funds, and other budget related items. Although the briefings will focus on the items listed below, any budget related matter may be discussed, including the budgets and ordinances associated with all enterprise funds and special funds subject to adoption by the Salt Lake City Council. (Items C1a-C1s)
g. 4:10:02 PM Attorney’s Office. View Attachments
The Office of the Salt Lake City Attorney includes a section responsible for civil matters and administration, a section responsible for prosecution of criminal matters and the Office of the City Recorder. The City Attorney also administers the Risk Management and Governmental Immunity functions.
Margaret Plane, Cindi Mansell, Padma Veeru-Collings, and Lehua Weaver briefed the Council with attachments. Comments included drug offense re-classifications, capacity to handle increased case-load, on-going evaluation, funding issues relating to drug court/treatment, domestic violence victim services, in-house counsel/services, electronic information management, allocation of staff resources to address record requests, base purpose statements/measurements, annual litigation report, and additional workload/burden relating to processing rape cases/kits.
Councilmember Garrott asked Council Members to inform staff of any questions/concerns before next week.
h. 4:34:10 PM Legislative Intents and Interim Study Items for Fiscal Year 2015-16. View Attachments
Legislative intents are formal requests the Council makes of the Administration. The briefing will go over the Administration’s responses to Council requests on a variety of topics contained in a semiannual report, including:
•management of community improvement grants;
•revenues from fines and forfeitures;
•City Cemetery study; and
•other topics.
Lehua Weaver, Randi Hillier, Michael Akerlow, Mary Beth Thompson, and Alden Breinholt briefed the Council with attachments. Mr. Hillier reviewed the following Intent Statements.
1. Management of Community Improvement Grants.
Mr. Hillier said the review and final update regarding the Community Improvement and Outreach Grant Pilot Program (CIOG) would be transmitted to the Council later in the year with recommendations regarding program continuation and utilizing a third party for management. Ms. Weaver said the program had a remaining balance of $20,000 which could be made available for neighborhood matching grants for private lighting. She said a budget appropriation was needed if Council wanted to allocate additional funding. She said Council could clarify how the $20,000 should be handled. Straw Poll: Council support for Administration to come back to the Council in a budget amendment with funding proposals. All Council Members were in support.
2. Revenues from fines and forfeitures.
Mr. Hillier said due to economic changes, it would be difficult to break out fines and forfeitures as one-time money. He said the Administration would continue to study different budgeting approaches to reduce the impact of revenue changes. Councilmember LaMalfa said Seattle dedicated 100% of its moving violation fines to pedestrian safety and suggested the City follow their lead. Councilmember Penfold suggested having Administration explore options to align specific fine and forfeitures revenue streams with specific expenses rather than consistently putting that revenue in the General Fund. The Council expressed interest in exploring options to dedicate funding streams in specific ways.
Additional discussion was held on obtaining a more detailed revenue format (multi-layered), potential to utilize a percentage of revenue to fund specific programs related to specific revenue sources, and holding a future policy discussion. Ms. Thompson said Administration could provide a more detailed breakdown of both revenues and expenditures related to specific categories such as traffic, criminal issues, parking, ground transportation, etc. The Council expressed interest in receiving that information.
Councilmember Penfold said he did not want to modify the current budget proposal but felt going forward, it would be helpful to have an understanding of how expenses related directly to each category and then make a decision whether to have a policy discussion about restricting a percentage of the revenue to specific programs.
Councilmember Garrott said he thought there was Council interest in pursuing a policy approach/discussion and asked Ms. Weaver to schedule a follow-up discussion after the Council received updated information (existing revenues/expenses only) from the Administration.
3. City Cemetery Study.
Mr. Hillier said staff was working on developing a new master plan to address a variety of issues indentified in the attachment. He said the study would include a civic engagement component. Councilmember Penfold asked for follow-up to ensure the scope of work included exploring the potential to utilize historic designations as a potential funding source (non-profit component) and the need to change current practices to avoid additional burden on the General Fund (include concept for creative/innovative solutions).
4. Living Wage.
Councilmember Penfold expressed interest in defining “living wage” because that would be an important component of ongoing discussions (tie “living wage” to some threshold/cost-of-living indicator that could give the Council a more accurate feeling for what an actual living wage was). Council Members felt the Citizen Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) needed to take responsibility to obtain that information.
5. 1% Operational cuts.
Mr. Hillier said Community and Economic Development (CED) achieved reductions through vacancy savings. He said the Police Department achieved reductions through Administrative vacancies held open which temporarily reduced civilian support in the department as well as postponing a recruit class for eight weeks.
6. Maintenance of Business districts.
Mr. Hillier said Public Services provided Council staff with information regarding business district areas, scope-of-services, and cost estimates for each district except Sugar House. He said Facilities was currently developing a map and cost estimates for the Sugar House Business District which would be forwarded to Council staff when complete. Councilmember Garrott asked Ms. Weaver when/if staff received information about business district areas. She said she would check and get back to the Council.
Discussion was held on various types of maintenance issues to be included in the “scope-of-service” such as chipped paint on park benches, re-painting light poles, local business funding participation, etc. Mr. Breinholt said those types of maintenance issues were typically handled on an as-needed basis mainly due to lack of resources. Ms. Gust-Jenson said a past Council made a policy decision to fund the Central Business District (CBD) at a higher maintenance level and Council could chose to fund other districts the same way.
Councilmember Penfold expressed interested in exploring more property owner participation in ongoing improvement district maintenance. Council Members requested information about what the City was actually spending in CBD that was considered above and beyond normal maintenance. They also expressed interest in holding a policy discussion about the potential to increase other business districts budgets to the same level as CBD or potentially reconfiguring/identifying other funding sources. Councilmember Penfold said the policy discussion needed to include how to maintain areas where in the City made enhanced or significant investment (such as North Temple). He said it would be helpful to have the information in conjunction with the upcoming renewal of CBD and Sugar House districts.
i. 5:27:24 PM Unresolved Issues. View Attachments
This includes all ideas Council Members have for altering the proposed budget. It could include restoring funding for a program that was proposed to be cut, or changing the number of employee positions a department is allotted. The Council reviews and discusses these kinds of potential changes during the "unresolved issue" portion of Council meetings in May and early June before taking action on the budget.
Lehua Weaver, Jennifer Bruno, David Everitt, Jill Love and Karen Krieger briefed the Council with attachments. Discussion was held on issues related to base property taxes, property tax equalization, new growth, Capital Improvement Program (CIP), and judgment levies. Ms. Bruno explained various scenarios for Council consideration.
Discussion was held on prioritizing issues for Council focus. Councilmember Garrott asked staff to review existing Council priorities. Ms. Bruno said the list included impact fees, CIP, West Salt Lake Master Plan, Urban Forestry, Recreation Bond, and Economic Development.
Discussion was held on the following items to identify potential savings:
Item 22: S line operational funds – recapture excess funds. The terms of the agreement caps the City’s S-line contribution at $800,000. If $400,000 was appropriated this year as proposed in the Mayor’s recommended budget, $1 million would have been appropriated. Straw Poll: Support to only contribute the required amount ($200,000 savings). All Council Members were in favor.
Item 23: Re-consider funding amount for the Structural Safety Program - $500,000 - Because details of the program have not yet been finalized, the Council could elect to fund this at a lower amount. The Council could also consider providing policy direction about how this funding could be directed (matching funds, revolving fund, etc). The Administration invited Council participation in developing this program. Councilmember Garrott suggested only funding enough to develop a plan. Ms. Love explained aspects of the proposal. Straw Poll: Council support to fund the proposal at $250,000. Council Members Adams, Rogers, Luke, LaMalfa, and Garrott were opposed. Council Members Mendenhall and Penfold were in support. Straw Poll: Council support to fund the proposal at $50,000. Council Members Adams, Rogers, Luke, and Garrott were in favor. Council Members LaMalfa, Mendenhall, and Penfold were opposed. (Re-capture $450,000)
Item 24: Consider funding 100% of Mountain Accord contribution with Public Utilities - Currently funding was proposed to be split $150,000 (Public Utilities)/$50,000 (General Fund). Straw Poll: Support to have Public Utilities pay the entire amount – ($50,000 in savings). All Council Members were in favor.
Item 25: Reconsider funding for enhanced Ground Transportation enforcement originally requested by the Council. If the Council has a new policy direction this funding could be re-appropriated. Alternate – this funding could be shifted to a secret shopper position for another City service. Alternate – this funding could be shifted to hire a consultant to recommend policy directions for regulating Ground Transportation in Salt Lake City. Councilmember Garrott said it was important to solve ground transportation/taxi issues in Salt Lake City (SLC) and suggested allocating funding to hire a consultant. Mr. Everitt said the Administration was working on a proposal (short & long-term solutions) that would be presented to the Council shortly. Councilmember Garrott asked if Administration still recommended keeping the $50,000 proposed for the Secret Shopper position. Mr. Everitt said yes. He said increased enforcement was important.
Discussion was held on hiring a Secret Shopper to investigate the Building Services department/permit process. Councilmember Garrott said he thought that would be better accomplished by conducting a full audit which would include permits, plan review, counter/customer service, etc.
Straw Polls:
•Support for the budget as proposed by the Administration. Council Members Adams, Rogers, Luke, and Garrott were opposed. Council Members LaMalfa, Mendenhall, and Penfold were in favor.
•Support to pull/earmark funding for later consideration. All Council Members were in favor.
Item 26: Fund pay-station collection vehicle within the Fleet allocation - Current proposed Fleet Fund transfer is $750,000 (in addition to $1 million in proposed funding in Budget Amendment #4). The Council could suggest that funding for this vehicle come from within these appropriations (if approved). Straw Poll: Support to keep this in the budget as proposed. All Council Members were in favor, except Councilmember LaMalfa who was opposed.
Item 27: $50,000 for Arts Council/twilight concert series (TCS) – potential contingent appropriation language. Councilmember Garrott said this was a subsidy for the Twilight Concert Series but the City did not have access to the Arts Council’s financial records. Discussion was held with the Administration regarding the Arts Council’s non-profit status, transparency issues, and records access/availability. Straw Poll: Support to advance $50,000 appropriation with attached legislative intent language to include a request that the Arts Council submit a business plan for TCS, identify standardized non-profit financials, and make records available to the general public. All Council Members were in favor.
Discussion was held on addressing revenue issues including property tax equalization, new growth, judgment levy, CIP, and Capital Asset Management (CAM) issues. Straw Poll: Support to accept the $4.5 million proposed for property tax equalization, adjust for the $1.8 million in new growth, and accept judgment levy (take $93,127 shortfall from savings previously identified/recovered). All Council Members were in favor, except Councilmember Garrott who was opposed.
Councilmember Mendenhall suggested having Council Members identify their top three priorities/categories so staff could work on them during the break between meetings.
Note: The Work Session meeting resumed following the Formal Session.
8:00:26 PM Councilmember Rogers said staff e-mailed information about the prison relocation issue and asked Council Members to review the information and let staff know if any corrections or additions were needed.
Ms. Bruno reviewed the list of priorities identified by individual Council Members during the break. She said (Item 8) adding police patrol officers received the most votes. She said the next two were Golf ESCO (Energy Savings Company)(Item 35) and Urban Forestry (Item 12). She said the following two were funding for a planning cost estimator and parking rates for expired meters (Item 1). She said the next three were the transfer amount to CIP, Redwood Meadows Park, and recruiting female firefighters (Item 6). She said some items were not titled/numbered on the Unresolved Issues list.
Discussion was held on the following priorities identified by the Council.
Item 12: Urban Forestry - Add on-going funding for tree replacement. The City loses 700-1000 trees per year; between Sustainability, proposed CIP and the General Fund, the City will be able to plant approximately 750 trees this year; in order to fund an extra 250 trees (at an average cost to install of $250), the Council could appropriate an additional $62,500; if this funding was added to the on-going Public Services budget, it would be included in the base FY 2017 budget as well. Straw Poll: Support to fund additional $62,500. All Council Members were in favor.
Item 6: Fire - Funding for building fire fighter recruiting program for female athletes - add funding to contract for enhanced training for Police and Fire Departments on Sexual Harassment (would be added to the Human Resources Budget). Councilmember Mendenhall suggested redlining the recruiting activity and apply funding toward sexual harassment training (reduce funding from $50,000 to $25,000). Councilmember Garrott asked staff to make that modification.
Item 8: Police – Add patrol officers to Police Department (PD) budget. Discussion included modifying bike patrols to more directly address resident desires for increased police presence/crime prevention, addressing homeless issues/long-term services, PD visibility/trust, identify a funding source to address officer’s salaries when grant expired, grant only covered 75% of costs, recruiting class, require social workers to use public transit, social outreach support in a non-police function, identify gaps before committing resources, community policing, and grant application timeline.
Councilmember Mendenhall suggested adding eight additional bike squad officers (four new & four existing)(four for each side of the City)($552,000 1st year and $332,000 for ongoing)
Councilmember Penfold suggested adding eight social case workers specifically within PD to perform work currently being done by sworn officers (mainly for homeless services in the downtown core)($740,000 1st year & $600,000 ongoing from General Fund)
Councilmember Luke suggested adding 20 new patrol officers (15 officers from the proposed grant) and potential use of CAM funding as a placeholder in case the grant funding failed. He said intent language was needed requiring a percentage of new officers to be assigned to bike squads/patrol. Councilmember Penfold suggested adding additional intent language to identify specific components (patrol officers, bike squads, police visibility, community officers, etc) that could produce results Council wanted. He said he thought the intent language would help during next year’s budget process so Council would have better information about evaluation measures and resource allocation. Councilmember Mendenhall said she wanted to include an evaluation component about public perception (obtain community feedback).
Discussion was held with the Administration on various scenarios for utilizing new/existing officers, managing case workers, and identifying potential costs/resources that might be needed such as vehicles, etc.
Councilmember Garrott said the Council did not have the $2+ million for the proposal and suggested moving on to other priorities.
Discussion was held on other items until 9:02:34 PM when Councilmember Mendenhall made a proposal on Item 8 (Police). Straw Poll: Support to not fund/hire 15 new officers if the City did not receive federal grant, request Administration move forward with grant application, hire eight social workers without vehicles, hire four newly funded officers for bike patrol, and bring two officers (freed-up in the Mayor’s proposal budget) and two officers (from new recruitment class) to make eight. She said the $415,000 needed for her proposal would come from Fund Balance. She said the remaining $1,015,000 would be taken from new growth. Councilmember LaMalfa asked if Councilmember Mendenhall would agree to wait until October 1st to hire the bike patrol. Councilmember Mendenhall said yes.
Discussion was held on potential hire dates. Mr. Bruno said if hiring officers was delayed until September and hiring case workers was delayed until October (no vehicles for case workers), $809,677 would be needed from ongoing funds and $315,000 from Fund Balance (one-time funds). Straw Poll: Council Members Mendenhall, Adams, Penfold, and LaMalfa were in favor. Council Members Luke, Rogers, and Garrott were opposed. Straw Poll: Support to have the Administration continue pursuing the Federal grant application. A majority of the Council was in favor.
Item 35: Golf ESCO - Re-consider scope of the ESCO that was approved in September 2014, to address concerns of residents and concerns for City Trees - Consider expanding the irrigated area at Bonneville by 13 acres - Staff prepared new matrix of options for the Council to consider relating to this topic, that range from preservation of trees only, to the neighborhood recommendation that preserves trees and a certain minimal level of turf maintenance. Discussion included hand water trees, upfront/ongoing costs, effect of rolling project into ESCO, identify separate financing mechanisms, comparison between previous and revised ESCO including interest rate/term, debt service, monitoring costs, number of trees impacted, and include this in recreation bond. Straw Poll: Support for (new matrix-Option 2a) (water trees and perimeter turf per resident recommendation (13 acres) rolled into current ESCO). Council Members Luke, Adams, Rogers, and Garrott were in favor. Council Members Mendenhall, LaMalfa, and Penfold were opposed. Mr. Breinholt said he wanted the Council to be aware there was a $50,000 refinance fee and there were only certain times when the refinance could take place (June 30 & September 30).
Discussion was held on Councilmember Penfold requests to re-straw poll Cost Estimator funding. Councilmember LaMalfa said this position would help the Council understand potential costs associated with developing City master plans. Straw Poll: Support to fund $50,000 (CED budget). Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Garrott, LaMalfa, and Penfold were in favor. Council Members Luke and Rogers were opposed.
Item 1: Parking Meters - Consider reducing the increase for expired parking meters - current proposal increases fine from $15 to $25 - Staff was working with the Administration on additional options to consider. Not all options may generate the amount of the original proposal, in which case the Council may have to find offsetting expense reductions. Additional discussion was held on earlier priorities identified by the Council including CIP, Redwood Meadows Park, and recruiting female firefighters/sexual harassment. Straw Poll: Support to accept the Mayors parking proposal, move Redwood Meadows Park to CIP for discussion/decision, fund sexual harassment training, and move remaining balance ($840,000) to CIP. Council Members Mendenhall, Rogers, Penfold, Luke, LaMalfa were in favor. Council Members Garrott and Adams were opposed.
Councilmember Mendenhall said she thought the Council had a unanimous vote in favor of the following intent statement “One Council Member has raised the idea that the Council may want to ask the Administration to establish by policy appropriate timeframes for responding to a complaint that is sustained. The Council Member also raised the idea that the City may want to establish by policy, parameters for violations of City Policy that rise to the level of termination”. (Straw Poll 4-3 against). Some Council Members did not remember voting on the issue. Ms. Bruno said staff could research the vote or the Council could take a new straw poll. Councilmember Garrott said this was a policy issue not a budget issue and the Council would bring it back for further discussion.
Item 29: Increase funding for SLCTV – Council requested feedback on whether this could be funded through CIP. Staff said they would check with Finance. Ms. Bruno said during the break, staff found out this item would not work under the current CIP policy. She said the Council could revise the policy or use fund balance. Straw Poll: Support to fund $200,000 (funding source to be determined). Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Penfold, Garrott, and Luke were in favor. Council Members Rogers and LaMalfa were opposed.
Ms. Bruno said at this point the budget was balanced but the Council could still discuss remaining unresolved issues. Further discussion was held on the following items.
Item 2: Consider funding Urban Forestry-related items with Sustainability Budget: 3 FTEs - $240,000 – Urban Program Forestry Enhancement, $160,000 – One-time Urban Forestry Program Enhancement Pruning Contract. Note: this would reduce the one-time savings from hiring delays by $60,000. Discussion with the Administration included employee jobs duties, right-of-way tree maintenance, and performance goals. Straw Poll: Support to leave the $400,000 as proposed (not funded from Sustainability). Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Penfold, Garrott, Luke, and LaMalfa were in favor. Councilmember Rogers was opposed.
Item 5: The Council could schedule a discussion later in the year to discuss options to enhance resources for independent auditing (independent of the hotline). Councilmember Adams explained the proposal and suggested moving the item to a future budget amendment. No objections were raised.
Item 7: Re-appropriate funding from FY 2015 for training. Ms. Bruno said $38,000 would drop to fund balance in fiscal year 2015 (housekeeping item). She said the fund was for sexual assault victim training. Straw Poll: Support to re-appropriate funding based on it dropping to Fund Balance (needed to be included in next year’s budget) All Council Members were in favor.
Item 9: Convert CIU officers to civilian positions. Ms. Bruno said a related idea could be to add civilian positions to the CIU function as support staff for consistency. She said Council could do a legislative intent requesting follow-up information. Councilmember Penfold suggested a legislative intent because there was also a brief proposal to look at combining CIU with public relations staff to address community issues. Straw Poll: Support for intent language requesting a proposal from the Police Department on combining CIU with public relations staff to address community issues. All Council Members were in favor.
Item 10: Add funding to purchase body cameras for remainder of Police Department - Assumes funding for 93 cameras at $3,368 per camera (including storage, warranty, and maintenance) Note: The department is applying for a grant that may provide an additional 20-40 cameras. Straw Poll: Support to delay the item to a future budget amendment. All Council Members were in favor.
Item 11: Add funding to enhance Citizen access to crime reporting data - estimate $50,000 per year (adds modules to existing system). Straw Poll: Support for proposal (ongoing expense). Council Members Garrott, Luke, Penfold, and Rogers were in favor. Council Members LaMalfa, Mendenhall, and Adams were opposed. Councilmember LaMalfa requested information on the number of citizens accessing data per day.
Item 13: Add funding for crossing guard program to match FY 2013 level – Note: clarified information from Public Services may make this item not needed. Straw Poll: Support to leave proposal as is provided service levels did not decrease. All Council Members were in favor.
Item 14: Add funding for consultant to identify revenue/donation/naming opportunities throughout the Department/City –Administration recommends a three phased approach. Straw Poll: Support for proposal (funding to be added – not in recommended budget). Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Garrott, and Penfold were opposed. Council Members Luke, Rogers, and LaMalfa were in favor.
Item 15: Add funding for pilot dog off-leash areas (per Council straw poll during off-leash policy discussion) - One in each Council district - early morning and evening hours – cost per district initially estimated at $1,000 per district plus supplies for a total recommended amount of $10,500. (funding to be added – not in recommended budget) (ordinance revisions still needed) Straw Poll: Support for proposal. All Council Members were in favor.
Item 16: Add funding for staff person to assist Public Services with dog off-leash programs and issues - discussed by Council and not supported for the sole purpose of staffing a board - Public Services has indicated they could not staff a new board without additional resources - Public Services believes a part-time position (2 days per week) or an independent contractor could fill this need: monitor dog parks, review new applications, engage with dog park sponsors, develop educational material, prepare recommendations, and facilitate bi-monthly meetings - Public Services acknowledges the Council’s stated concerns and goals: adding 25 new off leash areas over time, developing new criteria to designate and manage those areas, building collaborative relationships and establishing a peer to peer enforcement program. Funding for dog off leash areas will consider and work towards these goals. Councilmember Mendenhall expressed concern about funding the pilot area without any education or outreach. Straw Poll: Support for proposal ($22,000 – possible contract or part-time position). Council Members Adams, Rogers, Penfold, and LaMalfa were opposed. Council Members Luke, Garrott, and Mendenhall were in favor.
Item 17: Add funding for dog off-leash board to consider issues and make recommendations ($20,000) Councilmember Penfold expressed concern again that the City’s ordinance needed to be amended. Straw Poll: Support for proposal. Council Members Adams, Rogers, Penfold, Garrott, and LaMalfa were opposed. Council Members Luke and Mendenhall were in favor.
Item 18: Fund Energy Efficiency FTE through the Sustainability Fund rather than through the General Fund, or consider not authorizing. Discussion was held with the Administration. Straw Poll: Support for the proposal. Council Members Adams, Penfold, Mendenhall, Garrott, and LaMalfa were in favor. Council Members Luke and Rogers were opposed.
New Item: Add funding for Downtown Clean team to compensate for CITY Bank and GE Capital ending their funding. Ms. Bruno said a base amount of approximately $85,000 was included in Public Services budget ($14,000 increase). Councilmember Penfold he wanted to encourage them to seek additional funding partners. Straw Poll: Support to add $14,000 with legislative intent that the requestors would not come back with the same request next year (maintain $85,000 level). All Council Members were in favor.
Item 19: Increase CIP funding. Ms. Bruno said the item could be addressed during the upcoming CIP discussion. No objections were raised.
Item 20: Add funding to continue Downtown parks festival ($25,000) Councilmember LaMalfa suggested reducing the amount to $20,000 with a 50/50 match. Straw Poll: All Council Members were in favor.
Item 21: Add funding for 2016 Sugar House fireworks - Consider legislative intent to ask the Administration to investigate providing public services at the General Fund’s expense (similar to how services are provided and charged to the General Fund for the Jordan and Liberty Park firework events) ($15,000). Straw Poll: Support for contingent funding (match last year’s wording) with the intent of adopting an ordinance moving forward (Administration already received a request for an ordinance). All Council Members were in favor.
Item 25: Ground Transportation enforcement. Ms. Bruno said the savings portion was previously addressed. Discussion was held on allocating money ($50,000) for a secret shopper or an audit (include secret shopper in Request for Proposal (RFP)) for Building Services. Straw Poll: Support to allocate $25,000. Council Members Garrott, Luke, Rogers, and Adams were in favor. Council Members Mendenhall, Penfold, and LaMalfa were opposed.
Item 28: Funding for Volunteers of America for youth shelter (infrastructure needs). Councilmember Penfold said the RDA was looking at the issue (facility located in RDA area). He said there was a funding gap of approximately $500,000. Councilmember Adams suggested tabling the request to allow time for the RDA to explore funding options and eligibility. Councilmember Garrott said the Council would continue to follow-up.
Item 30: Add funding for Raccoon abatement program through Council of Governments (COG) - Contract coordinated through COG - actual amount will depend on how many cities participate - so far Midvale, SLC, and unincorporated areas were interested, alternative for FY 2016 – fund a contract in while COG issue is worked out. Council Members expressed interest in addressing the issue during a future budget opening.
Item 31: Move funding for IT positions from Police and Fire Departments to IMS - Note: The Administration will be providing a response to this idea, clarifying the proposal in the Mayor’s recommended budget, in time for Tuesday’s discussion. Straw Poll: Support for the item as proposed in the budget. Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Rogers, Penfold, Garrott, and Luke were in favor. Councilmember LaMalfa was opposed.
Item 32: Increase funding for innovations team within IMS. Ms. Weaver said this was enhanced funding above the regular IMS budget. Councilmember Garrott asked if anyone wanted to make a pitch for the enhancement. No Council Members volunteered.
Discussion was held on the following category: Other Fund Changes, Fee Changes, or Staffing Document Changes. Councilmember Penfold suggested balancing the category with Fund Balance for $309,500. Straw Poll: All Council Members were in favor.
Item 33: Confirm comfort level with reclassifying former Administrative Secretary to Assistant PR Director in Police Department (further information in PD Budget Staff report), so that position can be hired prior to July 1. Ms. Bruno said no budget implication was associated with this item. Straw Poll: All Council Members were in favor.
Item 34: Golf demand-based pricing tiers and Fees. Ms. Bruno said information was attached to explain the proposal. She said staff suggested scheduling a more in-depth discussion since implementation would not take place until January 2016. She said the proposed budget included a certain amount of revenue generated from this proposal and asked if the Council was comfortable adopting an ordinance setting fees as of January 1, 2016 with the understanding that the Council could amend the ordinance prior to January, 2016. Straw Poll: Support for Ms. Bruno’s suggestion. All Council Members were in favor.
Item 36: Golf Marketing – The Council asked the Administration to propose ways to fund a more robust marketing effort for the upcoming fiscal year. Ms. Bruno said the Administration’s proposal was to use some of the $80,000 to augment marketing. Straw Poll: Support to dictate to the Golf Fund that they spend 2% of their overall budget as recommended by the marketing golf consultant (contingent appropriation). Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Rogers, Garrott, and Luke were opposed. Council Members Penfold and LaMalfa were in favor.
Item 37: Keep Wingpointe Golf Course open. Straw Poll: Support to keep the course open at airport expense. Councilmember Garrott said the vote was three to three which failed.
Item 38: Delegation of authority for other recreation fees – including group reservation and/or recreation program fees. Councilmember Garrott asked staff to bracket the item for next week.
Item 39: A Councilmember raised a concern regarding Public Utilities expenses relating to Google Fiber - Is there Council interest to pursue the proposed $600,000 addition relating to Google fiber using general Public Utilities revenue? Consider structuring fees for permits to cover this cost if the need is truly specific to Google. Councilmember Penfold said this was his item and said he wanted to withdraw it.
Ms. Bruno said staff would clean up legislative intent language and contingent appropriations for next week’s discussion. She asked Council Members to let staff know if there were concerns/changes.
#2. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business.
•Boulder/Denver Transportation Fact-Finding Trip
•Meeting with Council and UTA Transit Academy
•Council/School Board Leadership Meeting
No discussion was held.
#3. REPORT OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.
No discussion was held.
#4. 6:40:39 PM CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE TO DISCUSS ATTORNEY-CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED, UTAH CODE §78B-1-137. (CLOSED SESSION HELD IN ROOM 326)
Councilmember LaMalfa moved and Councilmember Penfold seconded to enter into Closed Session to discuss Attorney-Client matters that are privileged, Utah Code §78B-1-137, Utah Open and Public Meetings Law. A roll call vote was taken. Council Members Mendenhall, Penfold, LaMalfa, Rogers, Adams, Luke, and Garrott voted aye. See File M 15-2 for Sworn Statement.
In Attendance: Council Members Rogers, LaMalfa, Garrott, Mendenhall, Luke, Adams, and Penfold.
Others in Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Margaret Plane, Jennifer Bruno, David Everitt, Neil Lindberg, Nick Tarbet, Jill Love, Lehua Weaver, Sean Murphy, Mary DeLaMare-Schaefer, and Scott Crandall.
The Closed Session adjourned at 7:10 p.m.
The Work Session meeting adjourned at 11:16 p.m.
This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as other items may have been discussed; please refer to the audio or video for entire content.
This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held June 9, 2015.
sc