The City Council met in Work Session on Tuesday, May 26, 2015, at 1:19 p.m. in Room 326, Committee Room, City County Building, 451 South State Street.
In Attendance: Council Members James Rogers, Luke Garrott, Erin Mendenhall, Lisa Adams, Charlie Luke, and Kyle LaMalfa.
Absent: Stan Penfold.
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; Alden Breinholt, Operations Division Director; Gina Chamness, Finance Director; Rick Graham, Public Services Director; Greg Davis, Public Services Deputy Director; Sean Murphy, Council Policy Analyst; Lehua Weaver, Council Senior Policy Analyst; Russell Weeks, Council Senior Policy Analyst; Jan Aramaki, Council Community Facilitator; Council Ben Luedtke, Council Constituent Liaison; Mary Beth Thompson, Finance/Revenue Audit Manager; Garth Limburg, Financial Analyst; John Vuyk, Budget Manager; Tim Doubt, Deputy Police Chief; Butch Kucher, Fleet Management Director; Jill Love, Community & Economic Development Director; Mary DeLaMare-Schaefer, Community & Economic Development Deputy Director; Robin Hutcheson, Transportation Director; Brian Dale, Deputy Fire Chief; Ryan Mellor, Fire Marshall; and Cindi Mansell, City Recorder.
Guests in Attendance: Hal Johnson, Utah Transit Authority.
Councilmember Garrott presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 1:19 p.m.
AGENDA ITEMS
#1. 1:20:15 PM RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING ABOUT BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 4 FOR FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2014-15. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. This amendment contains a number of proposed adjustments to the Fiscal Year 2014-15 Budget, including:
•$1 million for City fleet replacement;
•$473,900 for the Regional Athletic Complex, which will open in 2015. Funds will be used to hire a superintendent and purchase additional supplies and equipment;
•$380,000 for Police Department laptop replacement; and other amendments. (H1) View Attachments
Jennifer Bruno, Gina Chamness, Lehua Weaver, Margaret Plane, John Vuyk, Tim Doubt, and Alden Breinholt briefed the Council with attachments. Discussion followed regarding redirected funding for police laptops, various lighting projects, capital improvement funding requests, fleet replacement, energy savings, and lighting replacement due to deterioration (similar to deferred maintenance). Mr. Breinholt said the pedestrian lighting project entailed energy savings that were not included in the previous Energy Savings Company (ESCO) projects.
Councilmember Garrott said there was need to track budget amendment changes to the General Fund balance. Ms. Bruno discussed the level of fund balance information included in the report and said fund balance was increasing. Councilmember LaMalfa requested these types of proposals be submitted along with Budget and Capital Improvement funding requests versus during a budget amendment. Discussion followed regarding staff processing information, with Ms. Bruno stating the issue could be straw-polled and added to an issue for the end-of-year fund balance consideration. Ms. Gust-Jenson said action could be deferred on those items until Council held a CIP discussion or until the next fiscal year.
Ms. Bruno discussed Council authority relative to Administrative fees charged to Golf (or any Enterprise Fund) by the General Fund. Ms. Bruno said Council time spent for golf Fiscal Year FY 15 was $97,055 (compared to FY 2014 - $10,000). She said the Council could choose from a variety of options to charge hours to the Golf Fund to offset Administrative fees. The Council discussed removing items from the proposed budget amendment. Ms. Plane addressed a potential Administrative/legal issue associated with fee waivers in not following generally accepted accounting principles. She clarified the issue was whether or not Council Staff would charge for staff time.
A 2-4 Straw Poll was taken and failed to support removing City & County Building Pedestrian Lighting from the budget amendment, with Council Members Garrott and LaMalfa voting “aye”, Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Rogers, and Luke voting “nay”.
A 4-2 Straw Poll was taken in support of the City Council charging the Golf Enterprise Fund for Administrative fees with Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Luke, and LaMalfa voted “aye”, Council Members Garrott and Rogers voted “nay”.
A 5-1 Straw Poll was taken in support of charging full cost recovery ($336,411) to subsidize Administrative fees for staffing hours relative to the Golf Fund, with Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, LaMalfa, Rogers, and Luke voting “aye”, Councilmember Garrott voted “nay”.
Discussion followed regarding fleet vehicles and the separation of police vehicles. Councilmember LaMalfa suggested verifying the vehicle lists for duplicates/overlap. He said he preferred to consider a larger appropriation in the General Fund in effort to put Salt Lake City (SLC) on a path to having a first-class fleet. He suggested phased replacement versus one-time funding. Mr. Breinholt explained the Fleet Budget discussion would address this concept. He said in the meantime, the budget amendment allowed staff to order vehicles and get them into service quicker.
Councilmember Mendenhall discussed an Enterprise Rental contract to evaluate fleet usage being undertaken and utilized by the Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) and potentially other state offices and universities. She suggested the City investigate the potential to lease necessary vehicles and not own them by conducting this type of study.
A 5-1 Straw Poll was taken in support of keeping the police items in the budget amendment proposal, with Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Luke, Rogers, and Garrott voting “aye” and Councilmember LaMalfa voting “nay”.
A 4-2 Straw Poll was taken in support of leaving the remainder of the fleet budget amendment items, with Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Rogers, and Luke voting “aye”, Council Members Garrott and LaMalfa voting “nay”.
A 5-1 Straw Poll was taken in support of keeping Police laptop replacement for new Police recruits as well as current officers ($408,500 combined) within the budget amendment, with Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Rogers, Garrott, and Luke voting “aye”, Councilmember LaMalfa voting “nay”.
Discussion followed regarding requested funding for the Versaterm Contract. Mr. Vuyk said this was maintenance on an existing contract. Councilmember LaMalfa inquired as to the necessity when the entire 911 system could be changed. He discussed the law for the entire county to operate from the same 911 system and ongoing process to facilitate that change. Mr. Doubt discussed current need as well as administrative procedures ongoing to evaluate the system proposals and timing associated.
A 5-1 Straw Poll was taken in support of keeping the E-911 Versaterm Contract in the budget amendment as proposed, with Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, Rogers, Luke, and LaMalfa voting “aye”, Councilmember Garrott voting “nay”.
#2. 2:14:19 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.
a. Public Services View Attachments
The Public Services Department provides many of the direct, day-to-day services SLC residents and visitors utilize. Public Services repairs streets, maintains parks and public open spaces, provides culture, education & recreation activities for youth and families, removes snow, removes graffiti, trims trees, sweeps streets, maintains traffic signs and signals, enforces parking ordinances, maintains the City’s buildings among other services.
Rick Graham, Greg Davis, Alden Breinholt, and Sean Murphy briefed the Council with attachments. Mr. Graham said this fall represents the first season for the Regional Athletic Center (RAC) operations. He addressed the request for an additional mobile license plate reader and other parking upgrades. Councilmember Mendenhall expressed concern with parking enforcement performing police-like duties and encouraged balance of parking enforcement versus revenue enhancement. Councilmember Adams inquired why efforts should be duplicated if parking citations were able to identify vehicles and alert police. Councilmember Rogers said the equipment would pay for itself in a few years with potential revenue.
The Council discussed whether this was the correct type of revenue to be generating, need to streamline the parking process, how long license plate reader information was kept in the database, and whether purchase of handheld enforcement devices could be subsidized by previous providers. Mr. Graham said the revenue estimate was based on current collection from the existing license plate reader.
Mr. Graham discussed the new Energy Facility Commissioning Agent position, Pioneer Park initiative, crossing guard program, service level objectives, and street maintenance (sidewalk/gutter repairs and crack/slurry seal). Inquiry was raised about Pioneer Park funding, whether one-time money would be part of systematic implementation, private management of public spaces, potential for matching grant programs/opportunities, capital improvements to the park without reliance on SLC, fund leveraging, sponsorship, programming resources/consultants, and future governance. Councilmember Garrott requested follow-up information on timing mechanism disconnect following street maintenance. Mr. Breinholt provided an update on the work order management software system status. He stated the first target was Parks District 2 by the end of June, followed by remaining Park Districts before the end of summer.
Inquiry was raised relative to 7-Peaks/Raging Waters revenue and parking. Mr. Graham said they did not reach revenue levels that would require revenue payments. He said the current agreement would lapse in 2017 but there had been interest/ negotiation in extending the agreement.
Councilmember LaMalfa said he was interested in exploring new governance review structure or network of supporters for Pioneer Park but not exploring small items that would not add up to enough program. Mr. Graham said the intent was to earmark funds for a consultant to make progress for continual operating issues and programming ideas.
Mr. Murphy further referenced tree maintenance and said the budget (including CIP) did not result in a full replacement rate. The Council requested additional tree ratio and partner engagement/donation information from staff. Mr. Murphy referenced cost benefit analysis relative to the commissioning agent and said detailed Full Time Employee (FTE) expectation questions would be a follow-up item.
A 4-2 Straw Poll was taken in support of new mobile license plate reader hardware/software upgrades and handhelds as proposed, with Council Members Adams, Rogers, Luke, and LaMalfa voting “aye”, Council Members Mendenhall and Garrott voting “nay”.
A 4-2 Straw Poll was taken in support of bringing parking back to further discuss policies after budget, with Council Members Adams, Garrott, Mendenhall and Luke voting “aye”, Council Members Rogers and LaMalfa voting “nay”.-
A 4-2 Straw Poll was taken in support of exploring solutions and new public/private governance review structure for Pioneer Park versus not exploring more small branches that do not add up to enough program, and along with the potential to earmark funds (amount to be determined later) for a consultant for consideration and progress towards operating issues, with Council Members Adams, Garrott, LaMalfa, and Rogers voting “aye”, Council Members Mendenhall and Luke voting “nay”.
A unanimous Straw Poll was taken in support of the Council’s Urban Forest priority and not have the Administration approach the Council for funding without providing recommendation on how to consistently plant more trees than removing.
Discussion followed regarding the need for ongoing tree planting ((not being a CIP project), and that it should be funded by expanding the operating budget. Further discussion followed regarding the potential to work with Administration to create a sustainable fund/fee for ongoing maintenance. Councilmember Rogers expressed concern about funding requested within the budget and the request to add 24 FTE’s, and how to maintain this type of increase and continue to balance the budget. Mr. Davis said the decrease in funding would not be attributed to service-level decrease and might have been a result of staffing changes.
A unanimous Straw Poll was taken in support of restoring/matching crossing guard funding levels to match the 2013 budget.
A 3-3 Straw Poll was taken and failed to study/investigate expanding the program to include Junior Highs, and to discuss long-term solutions for pedestrian safety, with Council Members LaMalfa, Mendenhall, and Garrott voting “aye”, Council Members Rogers, Adams, and Luke voting “nay”.
A 1-5 Straw Poll was taken and failed to explore an FTE to seek public/private partnership opportunities or donations citywide, with Councilmember Garrott voting “aye”, Council Members Adams, Mendenhall, LaMalfa, Luke, and Rogers voting “nay”.
A unanimous Straw Poll was taken in support of exploring a consultant in this budget to seek public/private partnership opportunities or donations citywide.
A 2-4 Straw Poll was taken and failed to support funding allocation and direct Staff investigation into a full-time position (Dog Czar) that would work on dog-related program expansion, with Council Members Luke and Mendenhall voting “aye”, Council Members Adams, Rogers, Garrott, and LaMalfa voting “nay”.
Further debate followed regarding a new board or focus group to consider these issues and produce recommendations. It was noted the Parks & Trails Board was equipped to consider these types of items and a group should not be produced to only consider one issue. Ms. Gust-Jenson said early focus group recommendations were not strongly in favor of a board, but staff sensed the Council might desire quick action on having dog-off-leash areas implemented quickly into parks on an area basis. She said in making this a higher priority, a way to do so would be to provide the position. The Council determined to retain this item for unresolved issues.
b. 4:07:16 PM Fleet Division
The City’s Fleet Management Internal Service Fund provides vehicles, fuel, and vehicle maintenance and repair services for all City departments. View Attachments
Jennifer Bruno, Alden Breinholt, Butch Kucher, and Greg Davis briefed the Council with attachments. Discussion followed regarding Fleet inventory, funding requests for maintenance and replacement Fleet Fund budget, fuel usage, and other budget changes. Specific inquiry was made regarding police vehicles, existing and replacement numbers. Councilmember LaMalfa inquired as to process/procedure utilized to determine type/model/make/numbers of equipment. Mr. Kucher explained the point/use method utilized and associated with age, condition, value, air quality/reduced air carbon, and need. Councilmember LaMalfa said he would discourage CIP funding to maintain the fleet and would encourage a more sustainable General Fund appropriation.
A unanimous Straw Poll was taken in support of including budget intent language to explore/study options for lease/rental/sharing/decreasing cost of light vehicles and equipment.
c. 4:40:38 PM Refuse Fund
The Refuse Fund includes the two enterprise fund budgets for the City’s collections services and the Office of Sustainability. The budget for collection services funds includes weekly curbside waste and recycling collections, glass recycling, and the neighborhood clean-up. The Office of Sustainability budget funds the City’s environmental and sustainability efforts, such as open space management, outreach, and development of sustainability projects relating to food policy and energy efficiency. View Attachments
Item not discussed.
d. 4:41:00 PM Capital Improvement Projects (CIP) Overview
Capital improvements involve the construction, purchase or renovation of buildings, parks, streets or other physical structures. Generally, projects have a useful life of five or more years and cost $50,000 or more. View Attachments
Sean Murphy, Mike Akerlow, Robin Hutcheson, Mary DeLaMare-Schaefer, David Everitt, and Jill Love briefed the Council with attachments. Mr. Murphy said 2014 Council Priority projects were included but there had not been time to include projects determined for 2015. He said however, there was some overlap of the priority projects included. Discussion followed regarding funding sources/ revenues, types of encumbrance, trigger recommendations (new growth/Mayor’s expenditure recommendation), ongoing items, and obligations. Mr. Akerlow clarified the new spreadsheet format, and new information this year. Discussion followed regarding different boards that review applications, with Mr. Akerlow stating he would send an updated log including changes or any funding approved through Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) that might apply. Inquiry was raised as to whether there was a board (or boards) that have a chance to look at actual numbers, with Mr. Akerlow stating applicants go before the Community Development Capital Improvement Projects Board (CDCIP). Ms. Hutcheson further stated Transportation projects were taken before the Transportation Board before submittal to CDCIP.
Councilmember LaMalfa expressed concern with relying on this CIP chart when there were constant updates and recommendations throughout the budget process. Mr. Everitt said it was important that ongoing conversations included up-to-date data and said staff would keep all new information coming forward as to available funding.
Councilmember Luke said Items 13 and 62 were the same project and listed in two different places. Mr. Akerlow said it was not accounted twice but shown twice as a separate item for impact fees.
Councilmember Mendenhall referenced Item 4 (Tree Projects) citywide park tree pruning and planting and referenced an earlier request to fund a position for tree planting and inquired about park strips. Mr. Murphy said he would work closely with Administration to determine what was in the General Fund for tree upgrades, tree maintenance, and meeting Council priorities. He said he understood the Council’s proposal to request full replacement of removed trees, and said it took time to determine how various budgets overlapped and/or complimented. He said he received confirmation that $40,000 of the $250,000 was for tree replacement. He said there were citywide projects that could be funded including a large number of west side master plan areas and might provide opportunity for funding that could be tied closely with priority areas. He encouraged the Council to request follow-up on specific projects to include that were not within the log as soon as possible.
Discussion followed regarding the new CED position intended to implement master plans. Ms. DeLaMare-Schaefer said the Housing and Neighborhood Development (HAND) position would help coordinate a number of activities but a plan would take more than one person, and included the need for a great deal of time to grow and expand. Councilmember LaMalfa discussed bringing forward a financing plan in coordination with a master plan. He asked Mr. Murphy to find a place in the budget to insert financial planning and inquired how long (once funded) it should take to get a project completed. Ms. Love said that depended on the project/status, and whether it was a priority. She said the delay in results was not because they were short-staffed or not functioning, but involved large collaborative projects that were touched by many groups.
Councilmember LaMalfa asked if it made sense to recapture monies from CIP projects that were more than four-five years old. Ms. Gust-Jenson said in many cases it would but there were some cases that were six or more years old. She said Council could request Staff review and add columns of information to determine when funding would be appropriated as part of the CIP priority or reason for delay.
Councilmember LaMalfa discussed the previous Council goal of moving 9% of the CIP budget to the CIP account for construction of capital projects. He discussed the need to be disciplined and find funding to create a fully-funded CIP Program and requested that action.
e. 4:40:51 PM Human Resources Department-Written Briefing
The Department of Human Resources (HR) is funded by both the General Fund and Insurance and Risk Management Fund (which collects and distributes employee premiums and benefits).The Department provides numerous services for all City employees. HR Department programs include: Compensation and Employment Recruiting; Benefits and Wellness Management; Insurance and Risk Management; Training and Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Regulatory Compliance; Departmental Payroll and Administrators; Departmental Consultants and Administrative Support; Citizen Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) Administration and the Civilian Review Board Administration. View Attachments
Written Briefing Only - Updated to regular briefing to be conducted at a future meeting.
f. Compensation for City Employees-Written Briefing
Personnel and Payroll costs make up 66% of the City’s General Fund budget. View Attachments
Written Briefing Only – no discussion.
g. 4:40:43 PM Insurance and Risk Management
The Insurance and Risk Management Fund accounts for costs associated with employee health insurance, dental insurance, disability insurance, life insurance, unemployment compensation, risk management insurance, and workers compensation. View Attachments
Item postponed.
h. 5:23:05 PM Fire Department – Recreational Fire Regulations Ordinance – Update and Third Party Inspection Program View Attachments
1. The Fire Department provides fire and medical services to residents and visitors.
2. Proposed changes to the City’s regulations for recreational fires and procedures for enforcing the International Fire Code relating to system inspections.
•Recreational fires. Currently, the City considers fires up to 8 feet in diameter to be recreational fires. Under the proposal, the regulations would be changed to mirror the International Fire Code’s, which defines a recreational fire as those 3 feet by 2 feet or smaller.
•International Fire Code enforcement. This proposal would allow a third-party system to provide oversight on the status of suppression, detection and notification of systems throughout the City. All buildings are required to have fire systems installed, inspected and deemed operational, but currently, only the Fire Department can provide inspections and enforcement.
Jennifer Bruno, Brian Dale, Ryan Mellor, and John Vuyk briefed the Council with attachments. Ms. Bruno said the annual budget briefing was being combined with two ordinance adjustments; one relative to third party inspections to comply with International Fire Code and the other relating to recreational fire regulations. Deputy Chief Dale briefly described the proposed ordinance changes which enabled a third-party vendor to report to the Fire Department. Councilmember Garrott expressed concern about including the actual fee amount in the ordinance in the case of future or ongoing requests for change. Deputy Chief Dale said this process was already ongoing and the request was to report findings through a third-party vendor. Mr. Mellor said businesses were required to have inspections available upon request. He said currently, the biggest issue was fire escape inspections.
Councilmember Mendenhall said there was the need to be proactive and have a more transparent and accessible system for business owners who needed to have their business inspected. Mr. Mellor said the intent was to start regular communications and include information relative to specific law changes or updates. Councilmember Mendenhall requested a written briefing or some type of information be provided to the Council outlining how the process would occur (who communication was coming from, what type of communication).
Deputy Chief Dale addressed the proposed conversion of two sworn firefighter positions to civilian positions to serve as Technology Services Manager and Warehouse Technician. He discussed the move from paper to technology devices and said the Fire Department had to maintain those themselves without the assistance of Information Management Services (IMS) dedicated staff (who maintain the back-end items only). He said this change would be a great partnership and would improve the ability to move forward with the mobile devices currently being used. He further discussed different tiers of inspection process, squads, safety, Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), security, number of fire calls, staff coverage, equipment quality, use of lights and sirens, and other items to increase efficiencies.
Inquiry was raised as to reduction in fire prevention budget during a time of increased number of reported fires. Deputy Chief Dale said Staff would have to research that budget decrease and report back. He further discussed public messaging, fire reduction strategies, and awareness campaigns. Further discussion followed regarding the combined 911 dispatch, with Deputy Chief Dale stating the cross-training/one-stop shop was a positive step but there was still a learning curve associated with logistics and improvements to be made.
#3. 6:07:30 PM INTERVIEW BRIAN A. DALE, PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF THIS APPOINTMENT AS THE SALT LAKE CITY FIRE CHIEF. (ITEM H1) View Attachments
Councilmember Garrott said Mr. Dale’s name was on the Consent Agenda for formal consideration.
#4. 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.
a. Finance and Consolidated Fee Schedule View Attachments
1. 7:37:32 PM Finance Department
Legislative Sponsor: Budget Related Item
The Finance Department includes Revenue Auditing, Accounting Financial Reporting, as well as Business Licensing, the Purchasing and Contracts Division, Civil Action Unit, and the Office of the Treasurer. As part of the Finance budget, the Council may discuss 2015 annual assessments for Special Lighting District L03 that involve some significant increases for property owners.
Ben Luedtke, Gina Chamness, Mary Beth Thompson, Jan Aramaki, Cindy Gust-Jenson, Garth Limburg, and Lehua Weaver briefed the Council with attachments. Ms. Chamness reviewed departmental goals, transparency, technology, and staffing efforts. Councilmember Adams discussed the Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Hotline memo and said she fully supported outsourcing and funding this function. She said she would further support a similar hotline available to all departments and citizens under a broader reach.
Ms. Thompson provided an update on new parking software and projected revenues. Discussion followed on parking fees and whether those should be raised or lowered to free up or create more use downtown. Ms. Chamness said Finance could work with Transportation to make that determination. Ms. Thompson said 44 pay stations had been eliminated, but block-by-block analysis could be done to determine areas of highest utilization. She further referenced the “parkslc” application for increased public service. Councilmember Adams encouraged a broader outreach to promote this product and stated many of the pay stations also did not have a contact phone number.
Ms. Gust-Jenson said a consultant had been working with Administration regarding various Lighting District issues. She said it could take time and funding remained a large unresolved issue that went back many years. Ms. Aramaki said there were several districts that would experience increases due to deferred maintenance. Ms. Gust-Jenson said this was a complicated issue that required a great deal of public disclosure. Mr. Limburg said large increases were one-time and not for 10 years. He referenced the amortization table and said the Finance Office was prepared to work with Public Utilities to get the billing out for L03 for this fiscal year for those with an increase percentage less than 50%. He said only those districts or properties with extraordinary circumstances would be greatly affected.
Ms. Gust-Jenson said billings would not entail the public input process the Council had requested. She said there were many charges to these areas and it was unknown as to whether those were consistent, yet there was the ongoing need to move forward in the process. Ms. Chamness said if L03 did not proceed by June 30, the deficit would be worse by deferring another year. The Council expressed concern regarding the need to correct the inaccuracies provided to the public and the lack of transparency over the years. Ms. Weaver said the L03 determination was immediately needed and discussion followed regarding options at this time.
A 3-3 Straw Poll was conducted and failed for assessments to remain the same and for Staff to work with Administration on creating a letter of explanation relative to increased transparency.
A 4-2 Straw Poll was conducted and passed to move forward in the budget with a percentage change rate not to exceed 33% across the board with Council Members Adams, Rogers, LaMalfa, and Mendenhall voted aye, Council Members Luke and Garrott voted nay. (Councilmember Adams originally voted against this poll but changed her vote to “aye” enabling Staff to move forward) and including Staff working with Administration to create a letter of explanation for increased public transparency.
2. 8:27:22 PM Consolidated Fee Schedule View Attachments
Legislative Sponsor: Budget Related Item
The Consolidated Fee Schedule is a list of fees the City charges to offset administrative service costs and regulatory costs. It is updated annually as part of the budget process.
Ben Luedtke, Gina Chamness, and Mary Beth Thompson briefed the Council with attachments. Discussion followed regarding sponsorships, advertisement and outreach for adopting a crosswalk, with Ms. Thompson stating the ordinance did not remove pedestrian crosswalks but merely enacted a program to adopt a sponsorship. Ms. Thompson said she would have to return to the Council with program specifics. Councilmember LaMalfa suggested the Council consider an additional golf fee schedule tier to delegate authority for the golf system to be dynamic about timing/days for increased charges but would still allow the Council to retain oversight of the fees. Councilmember Garrott said that would entail a larger policy discussion that could be considered under unresolved issues.
b. 8:39:04 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.
No discussion - The Council was asked to take and review the list of unresolved issues for further discussion at a later date.
#5. 8:39:52 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING FROM THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING A POTENTIAL UPCOMING APPLICATION THAT THE UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY (UTA) MAY BE MAKING TO THE FEDERAL DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION IN THEIR LATEST ROUND OF TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENT GENERATING ECONOMIC RECOVERY (TIGER VII) GRANT FUNDING. View Attachments
Russell Weeks, Robin Hutcheson, and Hal Johnson briefed the Council with attachments. Ms. Hutcheson said the City applied for this grant in the past and learned critical lessons on the collaborative process. She said UTA agreed to step forward and apply for the City and distributed a handout entitled Transportation Potential Funding Sources Supporting S-Line Improvements & Tiger VII discussion summary May 2015. Mr. Johnson said UTA built major investments for 2015 and reviewed a list of those projects. He said those projects utilized all capital funds and as a result, UTA was limited on capital resources to take on large projects. He said they were working to eliminate debt over the next few years and although this was considered a good investment, UTA was tapped out within the timeframe to provide capital funds. He discussed future opportunities for additional partnerships.
The Council discussed funding options, who would own the tracks once installed, track surrounding property ownership, estimated completion date for the Transit Master Plan, UTA not providing any funds toward the project, advance notice to business, and overall timeline. Mr. Weeks said he needed any comments/concerns from the Council immediately.
#6. 9:23:05 PM 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.
See file M 15-5 for announcements.
#7. REPORT OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.
No discussion was held.
#8. CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE § 52-4-205, FOR ANY ALLOWED PURPOSE.
Item not held.
The meeting adjourned at 9:25 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 May 26, 2015.
clm