The City Council met in Work Session on Tuesday, October 8, 2013, at 5:00 p.m. in Room 326, Committee Room, City County Building, 451 South State Street.
In Attendance: Council Members Carlton Christensen, Kyle LaMalfa, Luke Garrott, Jill Remington Love, Charlie Luke, Stan Penfold, and Søren Simonsen.
Staff in Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; David Everitt, Mayor’s Chief of Staff; Russell Weeks, Council Senior Policy Analyst; Lehua Weaver, Council Research/Policy Analyst; Margaret Plane, City Attorney; Michael Akerlow, Housing and Neighborhood Development Director; Gina Chamness, Budget Director; Dan Bergenthal, Transportation Trails Coordinator; Sylvia Richards, Council Research and Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Greg Davis, Public Services Finance Director; Nick Tarbet, Council Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Rebecca Roolf, Transportation Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator; Mary Beth Thompson, Revenue Analyst/Audit Manager; Nick Norris, Planning Manager; Wayne Mills, Senior Planner; Neil Lindberg, Council Legal Director; Cindi Mansell, City Recorder; and Scott Crandall, Deputy City Recorder.
Guests in Attendance: Jerry Benson, Utah Transit Authority (UTA) Chief Operations Officer.
Councilmember LaMalfa presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 5:23 p.m.
AGENDA ITEMS
#1. 5:23:51 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING PROGRESS ON THE BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN MASTER PLAN, WHICH OUTLINES POLICIES SPECIFIC TO BICYCLING AND WALKING. The plan focuses on an enhanced bike connection from the University of Utah to Downtown, and a network of low-stress bikeways for Downtown. View Attachments
Dan Bergenthal and Rebecca Roolf briefed the Council with attachments. Ms. Roolf said preliminary plan recommendations would be transmitted to the Council in late October. Councilmember Penfold said the plan needed to discuss/analyze existing ordinances relating to the use of City sidewalks by cyclists. Councilmember Garrott said an education/publicity component was needed to promote a civility campaign similar to what the University of Utah was doing so people felt safe walking on City sidewalks. The Council said analysis/revisions were needed to address how other devices like roller-skates, skateboards, wheelchairs, etc. impacted pedestrians/sidewalks. Councilmember Garrott asked for information regarding ownership along the northern portion of West Temple. He said bike lanes needed to be a priority on West Temple and 300/400 West. He said every City street needed to adhere to the “complete streets” policy.
Councilmember Christensen asked the Administration to explore ways to have schools encourage students to start biking. Councilmember Love suggested utilizing student government classes to encourage additional participation.
#2. 5:51:57 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 1 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2013-14. View Attachments 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 FY 2013-14 budget, including funding for: a new program to allow City residents to purchase affordable annual Utah Transit Authority (UTA) passes, land purchases for Fire Station #6 access and a new Fire Station #14, and renovations needed for a new evidence storage and crime lab facility.
Sylvia Richards, Gina Chamness, Greg Davis, Mary Beth Thompson, David Everitt, Michael Akerlow, Margaret Plane, Lehua Weaver, and Jerry Benson briefed the Council with attachments.
Ms. Thompson briefed the Council on data relating to parking, traffic, and criminal revenue.
6:06:24 PM Discussion was held on the following categories/items:
SECTION A: NEW ITEMS
•A-1: Attorney’s Office E-Discovery Hardware ($40,000 – General Fund)
No concerns were raised.
•A-2: Police Department – Recognizing Revenue and Budget for Operation Thunderbird ($3,000 - General Fund) No concerns were raised.
•A-3: WITHDRAWN FROM TRANSMITTAL
•A-4: Sport Complex/Steiner East HVAC Improvements ($35,087 CIP Fund) No concerns were raised.
•A-5: Increase in Utilities Cost in Public Service Budget ($409,338 – General Fund, and $180,020 – Golf Fund) Ms. Richards said projected costs were reduced from $409,338 to $144,000 and from $180,020 to $99,000. Mr. Davis said $96,000 was still needed from the General Fund for (Facilities electrical component).
•A-6: Property Management Ongoing Maintenance and Professional Services ($56,854 – General Fund, and $262,271 – CIP Fund). Mr. Akerlow said a Request for Proposal (RFP) was being prepared to address issues with the Barnes Bank property. He said some space at the Celtic Bank property was leased which would bring in revenue while plans were being developed for the site.
•A-7: WITHDRAWN FROM TRANSMITTAL
•A-8: Principal and Interest Expense on Bonding, Taxable G.O. Bonds Series 2013B (Regional Sports Complex Project ($70,936 – General Fund). Councilmember Christensen asked if additional interest expenses could be made up in later years. Ms. Chamness said she thought that was a good suggestion.
•A-9: Dump Truck Bed Repair ($90,000 – General Fund) No concerns were raised.
•A-10: Land Acquisition for Fire Station #14 ($1,015,605 – Impact Fee) No concerns were raised.
•A-11: 2008 City Creek Canyon Wild Land Fire Costs ($182,339 – General Fund) No concerns were raised.
•A-12: WITHDRAWN FROM TRANSMITTAL
•A-13: Land Acquisition for Fire Station #6 ($65,000 – CIP Fund). No concerns were raised.
•A-14: Salt Lake City Resident UTA Pass ($1,590,000 – General Fund) Discussion included payment options, distance-based fares, no limit on number of passes, subsidies for low income/elderly, provide passes to City boards/commissions members, passes only available to City residents, implementation timeline, restore eliminated bus routes, utilize current ECO pass program, and seek more public transportation funding.
Councilmember Christensen asked the Administration to explore options including utility bills to help residents pay for passes. Mr. Everitt said they would study the issue through the fall and develop a variety of options. Councilmember Christensen suggested looking at how the Justice Courts payment system was structured.
Councilmember Simonsen said he wanted to explore options/costs to provide passes to people serving on City boards. A majority of the Council was in favor of having staff provide cost analysis. Councilmember Penfold asked the Administration to explore options to provide subsidies to help low-income/elderly residents obtain passes.
Councilmember Luke said he wanted to explore ways to restore bus routes eliminated by UTA. Councilmember Garrott said he wanted the City to continue efforts with UTA/Legislature to find better public funding to help reduce transit fares.
SECTION B: GRANTS FOR EXISTING STAFF RESOURCES
•B-1: State of Utah, Department of Public Safety, FY2013 Emergency Management Performance. No concerns were raised.
•Grant (EMPG) ($35,000 – Misc Grants). No concerns were raised.
SECTION C: GRANTS FOR NEW STAFF RESOURCES
None
SECTION D: HOUSEKEEPING
•D-1: Revenue and Interest on Safe Streets Task Force ($97,504 – Special Revenue)
•D-2: FBI Leasing of Task Force Building ($187,740 – Special Revenue)
•D-3: Grants and Other Special Revenue Carryovers (Misc Grants)
•D-4: General Fund Interest Expense Reduction ($11,111 – General Fund)
•D-5: E-911 Fund Carryover ($602,284 – E-911)
•D-6: Recapture Surplus Land Sales Funding on Completed/Closed Projects ($16,652 – CIP Fund)
•D-7: Sidewalk Replacement SAA Budget Adjustment ($4,714 – CIP Fund)
•D-8: Regional Sports Complex Donations – Budget Adjustment for Donation ($5,500 – CIP Fund)
•D-9: Open Space Land Trust Budget Adjustment ($22,678 – CIP Fund)
•D-10: Recapture Remaining General Fund CIP and Class “C” CIP Completed and Closed Projects (Eleven general fund projects totaling $376,041 and five Class “C” projects totaling $91,426 - CIP)
•D-11: FY 2013 CIP Cost Overrun Budget Adjustment ($86,626 – CIP Fund)
•D-12: Garfield School Rental Revenue Recapture ($5,944 – CIP Fund)
•D-13: Public Safety Building Rental Income ($231,638 – CIP)
•D-14: Recapture of Remaining U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development Block
•Grant Budgets ($499,106 – CDBG, $58,432 – HOPWA, and $1,654 - ESG)
•D-15: Police Department – Recognizing Revenue and Expense for Utah Highway Safety Office
•($10,600 – General Fund)
•D-16: Governmental Immunity – Claims and Damages ($150,000 – Governmental Immunity Fund). No concerns were raised on items listed in Section D. Councilmember Christensen said the staff report contained directions to “reference the Administration’s transmittal for more information” and asked for that information to be included in future documents. He asked Public Utilities to hold a discussion about advancing CIP projects with positive cash flows in order to get a head start on the construction season.
SECTION E: GRANTS REQUIRING NO NEW STAFF RESOURCES
•E-1: U.S. Department of Justice, 2013 Bureau of Justice Assistance Annual Grant (JAG)($302,369 – Misc Grants) No concerns were raised.
SECTION F: DONATIONS
None
SECTION G: COUNCIL CONSENT AGENDA – GRANT AWARDS
•G-1: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration - Ticketing Aggressive Cars and Trucks (TACT) Readiness Grant – ($302,369 – Misc Grants)
•G-2: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration – Ticketing Aggressive Cars and Trucks (TACT) Readiness Grant ($309,966 – Misc Grants)
•G-3: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services SAMHSA – Sober Truth on Preventing Underage Drinking ACT (STOP ACT) Grant ($48,258 – Misc Grants)
•G-4: Utah Commission on Criminal and Juvenile Justice (CCJJ), State Asset Forfeiture Grant (SAFG) ($36,175 – Misc Grants)
•G-5: U.S. Department of Justice pass through from West Valley City – Project Advance FY2012 – Project Safe Neighborhood Program Grant ($45,400 – Misc Grants)
•G-6: Executive Office of the President, Office of National Drug Control – Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Area (HIDTA) Grant ($37,292 – Misc Grants)
•G-7: State of Utah Department of Human Services, Crisis Intervention Team (CIT) Program Grant ($474,313 – Misc Grants)
•G-8: State Office of Crime Victim Reparations, FY 2013 VAWA Grant ($14,273 – Misc Grants)
•G-9: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration – Ticketing Aggressive Cars and Trucks (TACT) Readiness Grant ($88,566 – Misc Grant)
•G-10: Utah State Office of Education Child and adult Care Food Program – YouthCity Afterschool Programs Grant ($19,000 – Misc Grants)
•G-11: State of Utah Department of Workforce Services Child Development Fund, YouthCity Programs Grant ($262,444 – Misc Grants)
•G-12: Salt Lake County YouthCity Summer Program Extension Grant at Liberty, Fairmont, Ottinger and Central City Sites ($60,000 – Misc Grants)
•G-13: Department of Workforce Services, Safe Passages 2013 Afterschool Program YouthCity Grant ($70,000 – Misc Grants)
•G-14: Utah State Office of Education, Child and Adult Care Food Program – YouthCity Afterschool Programs Grant ($24,828 – Misc Grants)
•G-15: State of Utah Department of Environmental Quality, Clean Fuels Vehicle Technology Grant ($91,857 – Misc Grants)
•G-16: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration – Ticketing Aggressive Cars and Trucks (TACT) Readiness Grant ($151,185 – Misc Grant) No concerns were raised on items listed in Section G.
SECTION I: COUNCIL ADDED ITEMS
•I-1: CIP Budget – Following the Council’s adoption of a final CIP budget, there may be some adjustments to be made for Class C and Impact fee allocations. If those are finalized in time to include in this budget amendment, staff will include them. However, there is a chance it will be handled in Budget Amendment #2. No concerns were raised.
•I-2: Placeholder - Dead Sea Scrolls Exhibit – Leonardo’s Donation Request ($60,000 – General Fund). Councilmember Christensen said the Council needed to develop a policy about how special events were defined/chosen. Discussion was held on whether or not public benefit analysis/public hearings were needed. Ms. Plane said she would review the statute but believed those requirements were excluded when donations were part of a budget appropriation process.
Mr. Everitt said the Administration had similar issues with certain types of conferences and wanted to explore ways to handle those. Councilmember Love asked if Council Members objected to having their staff work with the Administration to prepare recommendations. A majority of the Council was in favor.
Councilmember Love said this was a new item and asked Council Members to get back to Ms. Richards with concerns or to add other issues. Ms. Gust-Jenson mentioned a potential policy issue/question about whether this was an appropriate role of local government.
#3. 6:40:11 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE GOALS, TIMELINE AND SCOPE OF WORK FOR THE EAST BENCH MASTER PLAN. View Attachments The project area includes multiple neighborhoods: East Bench, Bonneville Hills, Wasatch Hollow, Yalecrest, Foothill/Sunnyside, Sunnyside East, the University of Utah, and a portion of Sugar House. The scope of work and project goals include working closely with the local communities in creating the plan. The plan is scheduled to be drafted early next year and reviewed by the Planning Commission in the spring. Master Plans document the values of the community and outline how communities will grow over time. The East Bench Master Plan will focus on land use, mobility, urban design and sustainability.
Wayne Mills, Nick Norris, and Nick Tarbet briefed the Council with attachments. Councilmember Luke said continued community involvement was needed as the proposal moved forward. Councilmember Penfold said the project/community process stalled in 2011 and he did not want Planning to assume that was a sufficient process. He said it might be necessary to go back and replicate the process to ensure everyone was brought up to date.
Councilmember Simonsen said the information/plan presented was general in nature and did not contain direction, goals, or policy recommendations. Mr. Norris said the briefing was just to ensure consistency with the new master plan process and the Council would be given periodic updates prior to the adoption phase. Councilmember Simonsen requested draft documents for Council review and suggested attaching them to the general statement as part of the resolution.
Councilmember Love asked Planning to evaluate zoning in eastside districts. She said some areas might be over-zoned (specifically commercial zones) and wanted Planning to make sure correct zones were in place. Mr. Mills said that was included as part of their process.
Councilmember Love said this proposal got caught in the middle of the new master planning process and Ms. Gust-Jenson suggested staff work with the Administration to fine tune the proposal to include more policy substance/key issues.
#4. 7:32:02 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE SALT LAKE CITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY WEST CAPITOL HILL PROJECT AREA THAT WOULD ALLOW THE AGENCY TO COLLECT OVER SEVERAL YEARS $3.6 MILLION OF ADDITIONAL TAX INCREMENT BEYOND THE AREA’S CAP. View Attachments The additional tax increment would be used to design and build landscaped medians on 300 West and crosswalk and streetscape improvements from North Temple Street to 900 North Street. The proposed improvements are designed to create a safer, more attractive pedestrian crossing so 300 West Street will no longer act as a barrier between the neighborhoods on Capitol Hill and those west of 300 West.
Councilmember Christensen recused himself from the discussion. Russell Weeks briefed the Council with attachments. Councilmember Simonsen said if the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) changed their position, he recommended having them come back to the Council on a monthly basis for further discussion. Councilmember Love said the proposal would be scheduled for formal consideration/resolution adoption.
#5. 7:36:38 PM HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING THE RESULTS OF LOCAL OPINION QUESTION NUMBER ONE. View Attachments The opinion question asked whether respondents agreed with the following statements: "Only human beings, not corporations, are endowed with constitutional rights," and, "Money is not speech and therefore regulating political contributions and spending is not equivalent to limiting political speech." Opinion Question Number One is the first in a new process adopted by the Council that allows citizens to express their opinions through a public vote or other process approved by the Council. (F1)
Neil Lindberg, Cindi Mansell, and Margaret Plane briefed the Council with attachments. Mr. Lindberg reviewed the process and announced voting results. Discussion on the issue included developing a process for soliciting for/against arguments, analyze the State’s process, have City attorneys evaluate/choose best arguments, potential for vote-by-mail process for City elections, mail multiple questions every two or three years, concern about amount of returned mail, ability for provisional voting, inactive voter list criteria, keeping voter lists current, improve/simplify ballot, determine what types of opinion questions should be considered, and potential costs to taxpayers.
Ms. Plane reminded the Council about First Amendment issues and said government was put in a difficult position when they started vetting speech based on view point/content. She said if multiple arguments were received a randomized process was needed to select one. Councilmember Garrott requested follow-up on this subject.
Councilmember Penfold requested follow-up information about the vote-by-mail process/turnout being used by other cities during the current municipal election. He also requested information about how other organizations handled solicitations to obtain for/against arguments. He said he thought a response from the County would be helpful regarding the number of bad addresses/returns and wanted to schedule a future briefing to discuss these issues.
Councilmember Simonsen said the Council needed to hold a policy discussion regarding the process to mail ballots to residents based on active/inactive voter lists. He asked what would be done with opinion question results. Councilmember LaMalfa said he would schedule a follow-up briefing to review the process and discuss potential direction for future proposals.
Straw Polls from attachment:
•Question No. 1: Should there be an investigation on the process of receiving arguments for or against. All Council Members were in favor except Councilmember Love who abstained and Councilmember Simonsen who was opposed.
•Question No. 2: Should the City pay return postage on opinion questions. All Council Members were opposed except Council Members Penfold and Luke who were in favor.
•Question No. 3: Should provisional voting be allowed (or something similar). All Council Members were in favor except Councilmember Love who was opposed.
•Question No. 4: Should a deadline be administratively established for mailing duplicate and “not received ballots”. All Council Members were in favor except Council Members Penfold and Garrott who were opposed.
•Question No. 5: Should voter signatures on the return envelope be verified. All Council Members were opposed except Councilmember LaMalfa who was in favor.
•Question No. 6: Should comments be complied regarding the process separately. All Council Members were opposed.
•Question No. 7: Should the Council defer to the County’s rule on how many attempts should be made to deliver a ballot. All Council Members were in favor.
•Question No. 8: Should the Council defer to the County’s rule on whether the outer envelope mailed to each registered voter should be marked “Return Service Requested” or Address Service Requested”. All Council Members were in favor.
•Question No. 9: Should ballots be sent only to active voters or to all registered voters. All Council Members were in favor of following the County’s process except Councilmember Simonsen who was opposed.
The Council did not make a decision on Question No. 13 regarding who should pay for opinion question costs, but Councilmember Garrott said it was important for the Council to discuss that issue. He said there were remaining questions about voter information that could be discussed at a future meeting.
Council Members Love and Christensen said the Council needed to establish guidelines/policies regarding what types of issues should be considered as opinion questions. Councilmember Simonsen said he felt there was prior consensus and wanted the Council to work on changing State legislation to allow opinion questions to be placed on general election ballots.
#6. 8:35:49 PM REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. View Attachments The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business.
See file M 13-5 for announcements.
#7. REPORT OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.
No discussion.
#8. (TENTATIVE) CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE § 52-4-204, FOR ANY ALLOWED PURPOSE.
Item not held.
The meeting adjourned at 8:39 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 October 8, 2013.
sc