Loading...
01/10/2002 - Minutes PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, JANUARY 10 , 2002 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in a Committee Room on Thursday, January 10, 2002 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 326, City Council Office, City County Building, 451 South State Street. In Attendance: Council Members C. Christensen, Van Turner, Eric Jergensen, Nancy Saxton, Jill Love and Dale Lambert. Absent: Councilmember Dave Buhler Also in Attendance: Mayor Ross C. "Rocky", Anderson; Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer; Jay Magure, Mayor' s Chief of Staff; Cindy Gust-Jenson, City Council Executive Director; Gary Mumford, Council Deputy Director/Senior Legislative Auditor; Michael Sears, Council Budget & Policy Analyst; Jan Aramaki, Council Constituent Liaison/Research & Policy Analyst; Steven Allred, Deputy City Attorney; Gary Mumford, Council Deputy Director/Senior Legislative Auditor; Rick Graham, Director of Public Services; Greg Davis, Public Services Finance Director; Steve Fawcett, Management Services Deputy Director; Max Peterson, City Engineer; Rick Johnston, Deputy City Engineer; John Naser, Senior Project Manager; Tim Campbell, Director of Airports; Joseph Moratalla, Airport Contract Payments; David Dobbins, Acting Director of Community and Economic Development (CED) ; Stephen Goldsmith, Planning Director; Tim Harpst, Transportation Director; LuAnn Clark, Deputy Director of Housing and Neighborhood Development (HAND) ; and Chris Meeker, Chief Deputy Recorder. Council Vice Chair Christensen presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:34 p.m. #1. CONSIDER ENTERING INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE, TO DISCUSS PENDING LITIGATION. An Executive Session was held. See File M 02-2 for confidential tape and Sworn Statement. #2. RECEIVE AN OLYMPIC BRIEFING REGARDING BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 4. View Attachment Steve Fawcett, Steven Allred, Tim Campbell, Joseph Moratalla, and Michael Sears briefed the Council from the attachment. Councilmember Love asked what the job duties would be for Issue No. 1, RDA Railroad Ordinance and Bills paralegal. Mr. Allred said the position would be full time research for railroad franchises and administrative law. He said the position could last longer than one year depending on the skill set of the individual and the need. Councilmember Saxton asked if this position was new or had been requested at budget opening. Mr. Sears said this was a new request. Councilmember Lambert said he was concerned with the salary. Mr. Allred said the dollar amount in the budget included equipment and other employee related costs. Councilmember Christensen asked for a financial breakdown of the position. Mr. Fawcett said the equipment cost was $4,000 and the salary plus benefits was $56,000. Mr. Fluhart said the position was intended to accomplish a specific task and the funding appropriation was through fiscal year 2002. Mr. Campbell said with regard to Issue No. 2, Airport Capital Projects, a portion of the issue was a reduction of the development program consulting costs. He said another portion was the acceleration of several capital programs due to federal grant funding availability. He said as funds became available projects were identified from the 5 year plan. A discussion was held regarding the Skywest portion of the development program. Mr. Campbell said this project was moving forward. He said because of changes, the airlines had redesigned the schematics and the project would be deferred 02 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, JANUARY 10 , 2002 for a year. Council Members did not have questions regarding Issues Nos. 3, 4, 5, and 6. Councilmember Saxton asked with regard to Issue No. 7, Fire Department: TESORO private Donation to the Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) . She asked if donations went directly to General Fund. Ms. Gust-Jenson said that was not City policy but donations came through City Council as a general fund appropriation. Council Members did not have questions regarding Issue Nos. 8, or 9. Councilmember Christensen ask Mr. Graham about Issue No. 10, Fleet Maintenance for the Refuse Fund. Mr. Graham said the sales vendor had bankrupted and the warranty was no longer good. Councilmember Lambert asked what the percentage of the requested increase for the refuse fund fleet maintenance was. Mr. Davis said he would get that number for the Council. Councilmember Christensen asked if the warranty was through the vendor or the manufacturer. Mr. Graham said he was not sure. Councilmember Saxton asked if an audit had been performed on the bidders. Mr. Graham said standard practice was a competitive bid but low bid was not required. He said this problem had caused them to make some changes on bids for the future. Councilmember Christensen asked about Item No. 11, 1.5 FTE for Public Service Support Staff. Mr. Graham said much more community work was needed due to the curbside recycling program. Councilmember Saxton asked why no additional funding was needed. Mr. Davis said the landfill dividend had covered the needs previously. Ms. Gust-Jensen said services had been provided by seasonal employees and contract employees with no benefits. She said the proposal was that the jobs had proved to be constant and should be changed to regular part time positions (RPT) . Mr. Davis said overhead cost for contract employees would be shifted to the RPT positions. Councilmember Christensen said Item No. 12, Rotary Playground at Liberty Park, had some additional costs. Mr. Graham said there would be savings by adding money to the project rather than stopping the project. He said a contingency fund had been used up and some funds had been raised. He said the funding was for finishing the project. No Council Members had questions on Issue Nos. 13, 14, and 15. Councilmember C. Christensen said he had reservations granting the loan for Issue No. 16, Utah Arts Festival Sponsorship. Councilmember Lambert asked if this was a loan or a grant. Mr. Fawcett said it was a grant. He said before the City could grant funding, a study had to show that the event would produce a value for value exchange. A discussion was held regarding the festival moving back to the downtown area and the grant. Mr. Fawcett said festival administration wanted to move downtown and needed infrastructure funding for the next two years. Councilmember Jergensen asked if this was an operational cost. Mr. Fawcett said that was correct. Councilmember Christensen asked that a written response from the Arts Festival administration be submitted to the Council regarding an interim move from the Fair Park and then a permanent move when a site was available. He asked them to explain if the grant would be needed if they stayed at the Fair Park. No Council Members had questions on Issue No. 17. Councilmember Christensen asked with regard to Issue No. 18, Physical Fitness of Cities Donations, if funds had been received. Mr. Fawcett said part of the funds were from a grant which could come after the fact. Ms. Gust-Jenson said processing of the grant was not completed but funds were available and in the account. Issue No. 19, 600 North and 1500 West - Backman Elementary School. Councilmember 02 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, JANUARY 10 , 2002 Christensen said there was an asphalt island in front of Backman School. He asked that the asphalt island be landscaped. Councilmember Turner said the island was currently used as a weekend swap meet area. He said the community would benefit from new landscaping. Councilmember Saxton said she was concerned that the issue had not gone to the Capital Improvement Project (CIP) board. Mr. Sears said if a local street was being reconstructed a CIP exception could be made. He said it made sense to do the trench cut and put in facilities rather than come in later and dig up the new road. He said this exception was built in to the process. Councilmember Jergensen asked that the landscaping be xeriscaped. He said the City should move projects toward xeriscaping. He asked for a comparison to a regular landscape. He said this would make a statement to the community. Councilmember Saxton asked if 700 North was being resurfaced. Mr. Johnston said the street was not currently being resurfaced. He said some street repairs had been done due to a water main break. Councilmember Christensen asked that this be done before the school opened. Mr. Sears said the Administration had asked that the reception planned for the February 18th be eliminated. He said this would be a cost savings of approximately $40, 000 to the Olympic Planning budget. He said in place of the reception, opening and closing receptions would be held before the Olympic opening and closing ceremonies. He said these receptions would be jointly hosted by City Council and the Mayor. He said the cost for both receptions was $110, 000 of which $40,000 could be reallocated. He said that left an additional cost of $70,000 for both receptions. Mr. Fluhart said the concept for the receptions was for the local community to have a place to mingle with international community. He said they would continue to raise funds. He said the Mayor had pledges. A discussion was held regarding concepts for distributing tickets to the community. Mr. Magure said they were trying not to target specific guests but have a general mix of community and international guests from country houses and sponsors. Ms. Gust- Jenson said there was a guest list for potential community invitees consisting of 6000. #3. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE UTAH DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OF THE RECONSTRUCTION OF SOUTH TEMPLE FROM MAIN STREET TO VIRGINIA STREET. View Attachment Max Peterson, Rick Johnston, John Naser and Michael Sears briefed the Council. Mr. Johnston said the project was a two-year project, finishing in the fall of 2003. He said during the project access to the street and properties would be open. He said they wanted to minimize traffic problems during the project. Councilmember Saxton thanked Engineering for the traffic study. She asked if the City was willing to pay for lighting. She asked for a breakdown of costs for lighting. Mr. Naser said the approximate cost was $500,000 which would be for restoration and installation. He said there were 140 poles. Mr. Johnston said lighting was part of the federal funding for the project. Mr. Johnston said funding went through the Wasatch Front Regional Council. Mr. Naser said the section between Main and State Street needed the least work. He explained the work schedule. Councilmember Turner asked if the City was responsible for cost overruns. Mr. Peterson said additional funding might be needed for overruns. #4. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING AN AMENDMENT RELATING TO CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIREMENT FOR OPERATION OF TAXICABS WITHIN THE CITY. View Attachment Jay Magure and Russell Weeks briefed the Council with the attached handout. Mr. Weeks 02 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, JANUARY 10 , 2002 said some minor changes needed to be made. He said on Page 2, Paragraph C, sub- paragraph 1 would change from "that is licensed" to "was licensed on January 2, 2002 by the City or by a company maintaining a place of business". He said the second proposed change was in sub-paragraph 2. He said the change would begin after the words limited to and read "taximeter, radio, and the vehicle and driver". Mr. Magure said the second proposed amendment was redundant and already listed in the code. A discussion was held regarding the need for temporary taxicabs during the Olympics. Councilmember Saxton asked if taxicab drivers who had paid for a license were being protected from other various temporary transportation vehicles. Mr. Magure said ground transportation and taxicab ordinances had been re-written with the intention of protecting licensed drivers. Ms. Gust-Jenson asked if the amended ordinance needed a public hearing or if the Council wanted a public hearing. Councilmember Christensen said since the issue had a limited life it should be moved forward. #5. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING FIDELITY BONDED INSURANCE FOR ELECTED CITY OFFICIALS. View Attachment Gary Mumford briefed the Council using the attached handout. Councilmember Jergensen said this was protection and liability for the City. Councilmember Lambert said there was a State indemnification statue. A discussion was held regarding this issue. #6. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING HORSE-DRAWN CARRIAGE AND ANIMAL CONTROL ORDINANCE CHANGES. View Attachment Laurie Dillon and Jan Aramaki briefed the Council with attached handout. Councilmember Saxton asked if Animal Services had the resources to carry out this obligation. Ms. Dillon said the new ordinance made it easier for Animal Control officers to enforce. She said they had worked closely with Animal Control and carriage owners. She said the new ordinance was more specific. A discussion was held with regard to civil liability potential. Ms. Dillon said there were civil and criminal processes. She said the civil process was handled through the Administrative Law Judge. Councilmember Lambert requested that the administration talk with dog associations regarding the verbiage vicious. Councilmember Jergensen said he was concerned with interpretation of what a dog bite was. He said the mauling issue was clear. He asked how often the condition of the horses was checked and if a journal was kept for each animal. Ms. Dillon said the horses were checked every six months and the owners did have a means of knowing what animal was working and how long it had worked. Councilmember Jergensen said he felt something needed to be done with regard to the health of the carriage animals. He said he questioned the need for carriages in the community. Councilmember Christensen suggested holding the portion of the dog ordinance dealing with biting and moving forward with the rest of the ordinances. He said a public hearing could be scheduled for February 5, 2002. #7. HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING THE OLYMPICS. View Attachment Michael Sears, Russ Weeks and Lehua Weaver briefed the Council with regard to receptions on opening and closing nights with a computer video screen. A discussion was held with regard to scheduling Council Members through the week of the Olympic games. Ms. Gust-Jenson said Council staff had developed a program showing dates and 02 - 4 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, JANUARY 10 , 2002 events, sorted by type of event and date. She said the program had a link between the date and spread sheet. Discussions were held regarding transportation access for the games, interest in having Council Members at City Hall on a rotating basis for a hospitality affair at City Hall and contingency funds to cover unexpected needs. Councilmember Christensen said he was concerned with unexpected and unplanned expenditures. Mr. Fluhart said planning in the last two weeks had been extensive but adjustments would need to be made through the events. He said after September 11, 2002 the security plan had changed. He said there could be some financial risk which he could not define at this point. Councilmember Christensen asked Council Members if they would consider using currently budgeted CIP contingency funds for Olympic capital items. He asked what the dollar amount should be. A discussion was held regarding these questions. All Council Members were in support of using CIP contingency funds. Councilmember Christensen asked Council staff to develop a detailed list of capital items which would be supported by the contingency fund. See file M 02-5 for announcements. The meeting adjourned at 9:15 p.m. cm 02 - 5 i? C DEG P. S`- ' r,) .E,CETY`9,1M0 ° e • II.OI OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Posted: January 8, 2002 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING DATE: January 10, 2002 TIME: 5:30 p.m. PLACE: City Council Conference Room City and County Building 451 South State Street, Room 326 Salt Lake City, Utah AGENDA ITEMS (Briefing time lengths are approximations only.) I. The Council will consider a motion to enter into an Executive Session,in keeping with Utah Code,to discuss pending litigation. II. The Council will receive a briefing regarding Budget Amendment No. 4. (Estimated time: 15 minutes) III. The Council will receive a briefing regarding an agreement with the Utah Depaitment of Transportation for the reconstruction of South Temple from Main Street to Virginia Street. (Estimated time: 5 minutes) IV. The Council will receive a briefing regarding an amendment relating to certificate of public convenience and necessity requirement for operation of taxicabs within the City. (Estimated time: 10 minutes) V. The Council will receive a briefing regarding Fidelity Bonded Insurance for elected City Officials. (Estimated time: 10 minutes) VI. The Council will receive a briefing regarding Horse-Drawn Carriage and Animal Control Ordinance changes. (Estimated time: 10 minutes) Access agendas at http://www.ci.slc.ut.us/council/agendas/default.htm. A sound system for the hearing impaired is available and headphones can be obtained for all public meetings upon four hours advance notice. Arrangements can be made for sign language interpreters;please allow 72 hours advance notice. TDD Number 535-6021. Assisted listening devices are available on Channel I. Large type and#2 Braille agendas are available upon 72 hours advance notice. After 5:00 p.m.,please enter the City and County Building through the east entrance. Accessible route is located on the east side of the building. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-5335-7600, FAX: 801-535-7651 !"1 Rrc.cco P«cA FY 2002 Initiatives in Budget Amendment - January FY 2002 FY 2003 Initiative Name Initiative Gen. Fund FTE Gen.Fund FTE Amount Impact Impact 1. RDA: Railroad Ordinances $60,000 $60,000 1.0 -0- and Bills 2. Airport Capital Projects (7,567,900) -0- -0- 3. Legal Services: Union $75,000 $75,000 -0- -0- Pacific Railroad Legal Counsel 4. Police Department: VAWA $21,854 0.5 -0- Grant 5. Police Department: State $50,000 1.0 -0- Department of Public Safety Olympic Planning Grant 6. Police Department: $58,000 1.0 -0- Attorney General Internet Crimes Task Force Grant 7. Fire Department: TESORO $10,000 -0- -0- Private Donation— Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) 8. County CDBG— $50,000 -0- -0- Neighborhood House Association Building Improvements 9. Housing Program Income $471,300 -0- -0- 10. Refuse -Fleet Maintenance $280,911 -0- -0- 11. Establish FTE's for Public $0 1.5 1.5 Services Support Staff 12. Rotary Playground at $190,000 -0- -0- Liberty Park 13. Existing LLEBG Funds $35,000 -0- -0- 14. New Park Playground $0 -0- -0- Priorities 15. Jordan River Parkway Trail $100,000 -0- -0- -State Grant 16. Utah Arts Festival- $42,700 $42,700 -0- -0- Sponsorship 17. Fire Department—R. $25,000 -0- -0- Harold Burton Foundation Grant 18. Physical Fitness of Cities - $40,000 -0- -0- Donations Salt Lake City Corporation Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet for Budget Development and Budget Amendment Non Departmental FY 01-02 Department For Fiscal Year Utah Arts Festival -Sponsorship BA#4 16 Initiative Name Initiative Number Steve Fawcett 535-6399 Prepared By Phone Number Fiscal Impact of Proposed Change Biennial Period Proposed A. Revenue Impacted by Fund and Source: 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 1. General Fund Fund Balance 42,700 42,700 Total $42,700 $42,700 $0 2. Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 $0 3. Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 $0 4. Other Fund Total $42,700 $42,700 $0 B. Expenditures Impacted by Fund and Source: 1. General Fund Sponsorship of Utha Arts Festival 42,700 42,700 Total $42,700 $42,700 $0 2. Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 $0 3. Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 $0 4. Other Fund Total $42,700 $42,700 $0 C.Expenditure Impact Detail 1. Salaries and Wages 2. Employee Benefits 3. Operating and Maintenance Supply 4. Charges and Services 42,700 42,700 5. Capital Outlay 6. Other(Specify) Total $42,700 $42,700 $0 Salt Lake City Corporation Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet for Budget Development and Budget Amendment E. Measured or measurable Impact on functions, structure and organization Sponsorship will assist Arts Festival in remaining downtown. The Festival generates $3.3 million in general economic benefit to the City. F. Issue Discussion: A complete justification will contain a discussion of each of the elements mentioned below; criteria, condition, effect, cause and recommendation. Criteria is a definition of what is expected or what can be expected. It provides a basis for comparison without which analysis cannot be effective. The criteria varies from issue to issue. In straightforward cases, it can be an ordinance or policy. In of Condition is a description of current practices. it is the information to which the criteria is compared. Effect is the difference, if any, between the condition and criteria. It is best described in terms of a dollar impact or a service level impact. If an effect cannot be identified, there is no finding. Cause is sometimes a difficult element to identify but is essential to a finding. It is simply identifying why the condition varies from the criteria. Sometimes the answer is as simple as a change in policy or budget but often goes deeper into management Recommendation is made in a way that addresses the cause. By doing so, it is most likely to result in improving the condition to be in line with the criteria. Issue Discussion: The Utah Arts Festival has been held in Salt Lake City for twenty four years. The Utah Arts Festival estimates that it generates over $3.3 million in general economic benefit to Salt Lake City. The Festival is moving in 2002 from the Utah State Fairpark, where it was held for one year, to the Galivan Center. Funding was requested from the RDA Board and was not approved. The impact to the Arts Festival for moving is over$1 million. They are requesting that the City General Fund sponsor a portion of this cost. The amount of the request all relates to infrastructure costs, such as power, sound, lighting, fencing, bleachers, toilets, etc. The City sponsorship would represent approximately 4.5% of the total cost of moving. Construction in downtown necessitated the move of the Arts Festival to the State Fair Park. Now that construction is slowing down, it is necessary to move the Festival back to the downtown area. It is believed that moving the festival out of the downtown area resulted in less attendance and fewer dollars generated. The Administration supports this request and further supports the continued assistance through FY2003, when the Festival moves to another location, either Washington Square of Library Square. Recent Utah Supreme Court decisions place restrictions on the City's ability to make contributions with taxpayers money. To meet the requirements of the Court, the City must show that it will receive at least an equal cash return on the contribution in the same fiscal year and those terms must be spelled out in a contract. The following analysis (see next page) determines the quid pro quo that the City will receive. This analysis is based on actual survey data conducted at a recent Arts Festival, actual sales data generated by the Arts Festival, and the actual tax rates charged on sales, etc. Salt Lake City Corporation • Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet for Budget Development and Budget Amendment The Administration recommends that the City Council appropriates $42,700 in support to the Utah Arts Festival. This support is based on the estimated direct economic impact to the City revenue base generated by this event. people who stay the transient room tax night Average Rate rate Quid Pro Quo 12,000 $80.00 1% $9,600 #of meals Average Rate sales tax rate Quid Pro Quo 150,500 $7.50 0.82% $9,256 #of other purchases Average spent sales tax rate Quid Pro Quo 23,000 $96.00 0.82% $18,105 Total $ spent at Art sales festival sales tax rate Quid Pro Quo $500,000 0.82% $4,100 Total $ spent at Food sales festival sales tax rate Quid Pro Quo $200,000 0.82% $1,640 Grand Total Estimate of Quid Pro Quo Amount $42,700 Salt Lake City Corporation Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet for Budget Development and Budget Amendment CED: Planning FY 01-02 Department For Fiscal Year Physical Fitness of Cities BA#4 18 Initiative Name Initiative Number Steven Goldsmith, Brent Wilde 535-6180 Prepared By Phone Number Fiscal Impact of Proposed Change Biennial Period Proposed A. Revenue Impacted by Fund and Source: 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 1. General Fund 0 0 Total $0 $0 $0 2. Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 $0 3. Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 $0 4. Other Fund Grants and Contributions for the Physical Fitness 40,000 of Cities Administration-Misc 72 Grant Fund $40,000 $0 $0 B. Expenditures Impacted by Fund and Source: 1. General Fund 0 0 Total $0 $0 $0 2. Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 $0 3. Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 $0 4. Other Fund Physical Fitness of Cities Administration 40,000 Total $40,000 $0 $0 C. Expenditure Impact Detail 1. Salaries and Wages 2. Employee Benefits 3. Operating and Maintenance Supply 4. Charges and Services 5. Capital Outlay 6. Other(Physical Fitness of Cities) 40,000 Total $40,000 $0 $0 Salt Lake City Corporation Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet for Budget Development and Budget Amendment E. Measured or measurable Impact on functions, structure and organization The Planning Division has published a brochure which is being used to solicit entries for the Physical Fitness of Cities exhibition, an exhibition showcasing state-of-the-art practices in city planning and building throughout the world. Utah Power has provided a $5000 grant to the City to offset the costs of the brochure. F. Issue Discussion: A complete justification will contain a discussion of each of the elements mentioned below; criteria, condition, effect, cause and recommendation. Criteria is a definition of what is expected or what can be expected. It provides a basis for comparison without which analysis cannot be effective. The criteria varies from issue to issue. In straightforward cases, it can be an ordinance or policy. in other cases, it may be an industry standard or comparable data from another city. Condition is a description of current practices. it is the information to which the criteria is compared. Effect is the difference, if any, between the condition and criteria. It is best described in terms of a dollar impact or a service level impact. If an effect cannot be identified, there is no finding. Cause is sometimes a difficult element to identify but is essential to a finding. It is simply identifying why the condition varies from the criteria. Sometimes the answer is as simple as a change in policy or budget but often goes deeper into management or personnel issues. Recommendation is made in a way that addresses the cause. By doing so, it is most likely to result in improving the condition to be in line with the criteria. Issue Discussion: The Physical Fitness of Cities is a cultural program being held in conjunction with the 2002 Olympic Winter Games and Paralympic Winter Games. The Exhibition will highlight many state-of-the-art practices in city building from throughout the world. Stephen Goldsmith, Salt Lake City Planning Director, is the project director for the Physical Fitness of Cities exhibition. The exhibition will feature projects that establish new standards of resourceful design, ethical practice and far-reaching vision, to create, transform and repair cities. This $40,000 in this amendment will appropriate the additional funds received, and will help to address various administrative needs required for the Physical Fitness of Cities program. Donations will be received from the following companies: HNTB Architects -$20,000 Envision Utah -$10,000 Kennecott Development Corp. -$5,000 Herman Miller-$5,000 Analyst Comments: Pledges have been made, but the funds have not yet been received. Whatever funds have been received by January 15, when the Council will approve the amendment, will be appropriated. ROCKY J. FLU HART SALT' 1 •, .t allyC O RPO °'� IION RO55 C. ANDERSON HIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER MAYOR COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL TO: Roger Thompson, Chairman Salt Lake City Council FROM: Rocky J. Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer DATE: December 5,2001 SUBJECT: Budget Amendment No. 4 Recommendation: We recommend that on December 11, 2001, the City Council set a date to hold a public hearing on January 15, 2001,to discuss Budget Amendment No. 4. Discussion and Background: The amendment packet will be transmitted to the City Council Office on January 1, 2002, for the briefing on January 8, 2002. Legislative Action: The attached ordinance to amend this budget has been approved by the City Attorney. cc: Dan Mule, City Treasurer 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 23B, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH B41 1 1 TELEPHONE: B01-535-6426 FAX: 001-535-6190 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2002 (Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2001 which adopted the Final Biennial Budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Years 2001-2002 and 2002-2003) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE NO. 32 OF 2001 WHICH APPROVED, RATIFIED AND FINALIZED THE BIENNIAL BUDGET OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, INCLUDING THE EMPLOYMENT STAFFING DOCUMENT, FOR THE FISCAL YEARS BEGINNING JULY 1, 2001 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2002 AND BEGINNING JULY 1, 2002 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2003. PREAMBLE On June 14, 2001, the Salt Lake City Council approved,ratified and finalized the biennial budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the employment staffing document, for the fiscal years beginning July 1, 2001 and ending June 30, 2002 and beginning July 1, 2002 and ending June 30, 2003, in accordance with the requirements of Section 118, Chapter 6, Title 10 of the Utah Code Annotated, and said biennial budget, including the employment staffing document, was approved by the Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah. The City's Policy and Budget Director, acting as the City's Budget Officer, prepared and filed with the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted biennial budget, including the amendments to the employment staffing document, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and inspection by the public. The City Council fixed a time and place for a public hearing to be held on January 15, 2002 to consider the attached proposed amendments to the biennial budget, including the employment staffing document, and ordered notice thereof be published as required by law. Notice of said public hearing to consider the amendments to said biennial budget, including the employment staffing document, was duly published and a public hearing to consider the attached amendments to said biennial budget, including the employment staffing document, was held on January 15, 2002, in accordance with said notice at which hearing all interested parties for and against the biennial budget amendment proposals were heard and all comments were duly considered by the City Council. All conditions precedent to amend said biennial budget, including the employment staffing document, have been accomplished. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the biennial budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 32 of 2001. SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The biennial budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document, attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance shall be, and the same hereby are adopted and incorporated into the biennial budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the employment staffing document, for the fiscal years beginning July 1, 2001 and ending June 30, 2002 and beginning July 1, 2002 and ending June 30, 2003, in accordance with the requirements of Section 128, Chapter 6, Title 10, of the Utah Code Annotated. 2 SECTION 3. Certification to Utah State Auditor. The City's Policy and Budget Director, acting as the City's Budget Officer, is authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said biennial budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document, with the Utah State Auditor. SECTION 4. Filing of copies of the biennial Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said biennial budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection. SECTION 5. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect on its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2002. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER 3 Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Data �f_2 _e9( (SEAL) Bill No. of 2002. Published: . G\OrdinaO 1\Amending budget I-15 doc 4 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL MOTION SHEET DATE: January 15, 2002 SUBJECT: Fiscal Years 2001-2002, 2002-2003 Budget Amendment #4 (MOTION SHEET) MOTION SHEET BY: Michael Sears, Budget and Policy Analyst OPTIONS AND MOTIONS: At the briefing on January 10, 2002, Council Members requested additional information or had questions or concerns with Initiatives 16, 18, 19, and 20. the following motions deal with Initiatives where Council members did not express concern. The briefing summary section lists those initiatives that Council Members had questions about or requested a separate motion. Please use the motions in that section for those initiatives. 1. ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance amending the fiscal year 2001-2002 and fiscal year 2002-2003 budget as proposed for Initiativ s 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 17. 2. ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance amending the fiscal year 2001-2002 and fiscal year 2002-2003 budget as proposed. 3. ["I move that the Council"] Not adopt an ordinance amending the fiscal y ar 2001-2002 and fiscal year 2002-2003 budget as proposed. SUMMARY OF BRIEFING The City Council held a briefing on January 10, 2002 to discuss the proposed amendments to the fiscal year 2001-2002 and fiscal year 2002-2003 budget. Council Members had questions about the following initiatives and requested that they have separate motions for their consideration: Issue #16: Utah Arts Festival Sponsorship ($42,700 — General Fund) The Utah Arts Festival is asking that Salt Lake City assist with the infrastructure costs relating to the new venue location of the Utah Arts Festival. The Utah Arts Festival moved from downtown to the State Fairpark to avoid construction concerns that were impacting attendance at the festival. The festival organizers will be responding to Council Member concerns before the meeting on January 15, 2002. The Council Members may wish to use one of the following motions: Page 1 ["I move that the Council") Ad pt an ordinanc am nding th fiscal y ar 2001-2002 budget and fiscal year 2002-2003 budg t for Initiativ #16 as pr pos d / Not Ad pt Initiativ #16. Issue #18: Physical Fitness of Cities - Donations ($40,000 -Misc. Grant Fund) The Administration clarified that City funds have not been used for the sponsorship and programming of the Physical Fitness of Cities. The Administration is requesting that the Council make a motion that will allow them to use the money that is donated or granted to the program. The following motion will allow the creation of a budget for the deposited funds. ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance amending the fiscal y ar 2001-2002 budget and fiscal year 2002-2003 budget for Initiativ #18 only in the amount that has been donated and deposited / Not Adopt Initiative #18. Issue #19: 600 N and 1500 W Island Landscaping and Curb Reconstruction ($63,000 - CIP Fund) The island in front of the Backman School at approximately 600 North and 1500 West is in need of new landscaping and curbing around the median. This island was installed in 1964. There is construction activity at the new school that is impacting the island. This request has been pulled from consideration until June of 2002 to allow more information to be gathered about the site and possible remedi s to th island. Initiative #20 - Hosted Olympic Receptions ($70,000 - General Fund) The Administration is requesting that an additional $70,000 be allocated from the General Fund to pay for the additional expenses associated with the hosting of receptions related to the opening and closing ceremonies for the Olympic Games. The Administration is actively seeking sponsors to cover the cost of these receptions. The City Council has also considered adding Olympic Contingency funds. The Olympic Planning Office used General Fund appropriations to install several infrastructure improvements to the City. If the Council wishes to appropriate Capital Improvement Program contingency funds to the Olympic Planning Office for the reimbursement of infrastructure expenses the following expenses can be used. $68,000 - Streets Division for Security Gates and Cameras $40,000 - Parks Division for Cameras $29,000 for Sewer Connection and other utilities $20,800 for 175 trees along Broadway that will be replanted throughout the City $75,000 for the Sport Court material at Washington Square $217,000 for the Kiosks throughout the City $10,000 Ski Chairs Installation $30,000 for the banner bracket system throughout the City (+ 3wks/6 employees labor costs to install) Page 2 There may be other costs incurred such as barricade and fencing material that can be used again, but definitive expenses have not been calculated. Some Council Members indicated that they would be supportive of increasing the Olympic Contingency by $100,000 or $200,000. Other Council Members indicated that they would be supportive of combining the request for the additional Olympic reception funds and reimbursement CIP funds to be no more then $200,000. Additionally, the Administration learned today that the City would not be reimbursed for security measures on Washington Square. The cost to provide security is estimated to be $150,000. The Council members may wish to allocate this additional Olympic expense from General Fund balance. The Council Members may wish to use the following motions to address Olympic related budget items: ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance amending the fiscal year 2001-2002 and fiscal year 2002-2003 budget for Initiative #20 in th amount of $70,000 to pay for City hosted receptions. (Source: CIP Fund Contingency) And ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance amending the fiscal y ar 2001-2002 and fiscal year 2002-2003 budget for Initiative #20 in th amount of $XXX,000 to provide for additional Olympic Conting ncy. (Source: CIP Fund Contingency) And ["I move that the Council"] Adopt an ordinance amending the fiscal y ar 2001-2002 and fiscal year 2002-2003 budget for Initiative #20 in th amount of$150,000 to pay for City Security Measures around Washington Square during the Olympics. (Source: General Fund Balance) Please note: Council staff has been watching the construction on Washington Square and anticipates that the Administration may return to the Council to ask for additional funds to repair Washington Square. The damage to the turf, sod and irrigation system may be higher than expected. The General Fund departments have not budgeted funds sufficient to repair the damage on Washington Square. Page 3 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: January 8, 2002 SUBJECT: Interlocal Agreement with the Utah Department of Transportation for the reconstruction of South Temple from Main Street to Virginia Street. STAFF REPORT BY: Michael Sears, Budget and Policy Analyst Document Budget-Related Facts Policy-Related Facts Miscellaneous Facts Type Resolution The proposed Interlocal This resolution The Interlocal Agreement Agreement with the Utah authorizes the Mayor specifies that the City will Department of to approve the pay for any costs incurred Transportation for the interlocal agreement during this project above reconstruction of South on behalf of the City. the estimated amount. Temple is for the reimbursement program between Salt Lake City and UDOT.The City's financial obligations have been budgeted for by the City Council. The City Council will hold a briefing on January 10, 2002 regarding the proposed resolution and consider taking action on January 15, 2002. The following are possible motions that the Council can make regarding this resolution. 1. ["I move that the Council"] Adopt a resolution authorizing the approval f an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Utah Department of Transportation. 2. ["I move that the Council"] Not adopt a resolution authorizing the approval of an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City Corporation and the Utah Department of Transportation. MATTERS AT ISSUE The Administration is recommending that the City Council adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor to approve an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement between Salt Lake City and the Utah Department of Transportation. The agreement is for the reconstruction of South Temple between Main Street and Virginia Street. The City has budgeted $869,849 for this project. The budgeted amount was appropriated in fiscal year 1999-2000. The City's amount is the local authority match that is required. The federal government has approved $10,500,000 for this project. Page 1 The Public Utilities Department has also allocated $1,300,000 to this project for the upgrade and replacement of utilities under South Temple. The Public Utilities portion of the project has been programmed into the overall street reconstruction schedule. This project has been reviewed by the City Council before, and several interlocal agreements are already in place concerning the design and construction of this project. This interlocal agreement is for the reimbursement program of this project. The design work for this project is nearing completion and the actual construction is scheduled to begin in spring of 2002 and be completed by the fall of 2003. Specific projects details are included in the transmittal from the Administration. cc: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rocky Fluhart,Jay Magure, Steve Fawcett,Gordon Hoskins,Roger Cutler,Rick Graham,Max Peterson,Rick Johnston Page 2 • these efforts, the following measures are recommended for inclusion in the construction contract specifications for the South Temple reconstruction project: • Maintain continuous access to abutting properties • Coordinate all driveway impacts with property owners • Utilize alternative 1 of the Korve report for construction sequencing to maintain one lane of traffic in each direction during utility phase and maintain one eastbound lane of traffic during the street paving phase • Begin at west end of project (Main Street) and work east • Provide continuous access across South Temple at the following intersections o State Street, 500 East, 700 East, 900 East, and Virginia Street • Encourage through traffic to use 100 South, 200 South and 400 South o Use detour signs to direct through traffic to alternate routes (see attached) o Improve signal progression on alternate routes • Perform other traffic signal modifications to include: o North and southbound left turn phasing has recently been installed on 700 East at 100 and 200 South o Split east/west phasing on South Temple between sections with one-way and two-way traffic flow o Modify signal timing • Coordinate with the three adjacent schools to provide construction updates and safe pedestrian access routes to each school • Prohibit construction employees from parking on South Temple or adjacent streets In addition to the above, other measures were developed following input received at the public hearing of August 27, 2001: • Provide low interest business impact loans to South Temple businesses impacted by construction, similar to the program offered on the light rail projects. This measure is being explored with CED. • Provide a South Temple website to provide continuous updates during construction of construction progress, traffic detours and related pertinent information • Explore the use of financial bonuses to the contractor for early completion as well as for meeting specific goals and standards set for maintaining abutting property owner and business access. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended the South Temple reconstruction project be approved for construction beginning in April, 2002 provided the above measures are instigated as part of the construction contract and administration of the construction project. It is further recommended that the interlocal agreement between the city and UDOT for construction of this project be approved by Council. SOUTH TEMPLE DISCUSSION PAPER BACKGROUND Engineering is in the final stages of design and bid document preparation for the South Temple reconstruction project(Main Street to Virginia Street). This$10.2 million project is an approved Federal Highway Administration STP project with 93.77%of funding to come from FHWA funds and the remaining 6.23%coming from previously budgeted city funds. In November,1998,Council approved an interlocal cooperative agreement between the Utah Department of Transportation and Salt Lake City for allocation of funding for this project,and a contract with RB&G Engineering for final design and preconstruction services. Construction of this project was scheduled for the construction years of 2000 and 2001,but was delayed for two years to allow for completion of the University Light Rail project during the 2000/2001 time frame. During the approval process for the above agreements,Council directed a traffic study be added to the consultant agreement to identify where traffic will flow and how traffic will be managed during the construction of this project. This study was completed by Korve Engineering,a traffic subconsultant to RB&G Engineering,and is attached to this paper. With the University LRT project moving towards its fall,2001 completion,and design nearing completion for South Temple,Engineering is proposing the scheduling of South Temple construction to occur from April,2002 to November,2003. This schedule will coincide with the proposed schedules of two other street construction projects in the general vicinity;University Medical Center LRT construction from the stadium to the University Medical Center,and Guardsman Way reconstruction from 500 South to Sunnyside Avenue. Concerns were raised in the community of the possible conflict these project schedules would have on each other. These concerns were addressed along with a project update of the above three projects at a community meeting held August 31, 2001. Community Council leaders,South Temple Advisory Committee members,Traffic Advisory Committee members,South Temple property owners and representatives from the University of Utah were invited to this meeting. Attached is a copy of the minutes to this meeting. ANALYSIS The South Temple Reconstruction Traffic Impact Analysis report completed by Korve Engineering involved a detailed analysis of the traffic impact imposed by the project. The report developed and studied numerous methods to minimize construction impacts on abutting properties and businesses and to reduce impacts to traffic flow in surrounding neighborhoods. In addition,RB Sc G Engineering has studied the constructability of this project in light of the traffic impact analysis in an effort to develop meaningful and realistic requirements for die construction contractor which will meet the goals of minimizing construction impacts while ensuring a quality construction product. Based on SAL' ' i ,,G-ITY ORP ;O ��r. I ROCKY J. FLUHART -., _ ��-. ,�.�.�Oi � � ROSS C. ANDERSON CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER MAYOR COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL /I—) TO: Rocky J. Fluhart, DATE: January 3, 2002 Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Jay Magure, Chief of Staff SUBJECT: Ordinance amendment relating to certificate of public convenience and necessity requirement for operation of taxicabs within the City. STAFF CONTACT: Jay Magure, 535-7732 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinance DISCUSSION: It is anticipated that there will be a need for additional taxicabs within the City during the months of February and March of 2002, due to the Winter Games. This ordinance would provide for the temporary suspension of the City's taxicab certificate of convenience and necessity requirements through March 31, 2002. The ordinance requires that taxicabs meet the City's vehicle, driver and insurance standards, and provides for termination by mayoral executive order in the event the anticipated need does not materialize and there is a financial hardship placed upon the existing companies. RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends adoption of the ordinance. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-6426 FAX: 801-535-6190 ®RECVCLEO PAPER SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2002 (Taxicab Certificate of Convenience and Necessity) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5.72.130, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, RELATING TO CERTIFICATE OF A PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY BEING REQUIRED FOR OPERATION OF A TAXICAB WITHIN THE CITY. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 5.72.130, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to a certificate of public convenience and necessity being required for operation of a taxicab within Salt Lake City be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.72.130 Required For Operation: A. No person shall operate or permit a taxicab owned or controlled by such person to be operated as a vehicle for hire upon the streets of Salt Lake City without first having obtained a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the City in accordance with Chapter 5.05 of this Title, or its successor. B. For the purpose of this Section, the teiui "operate for hire upon the streets of Salt Lake City" shall not include the transporting,by a taxicab properly licensed in a jurisdiction outside the corporate limits of the City, of a passenger or passengers for hire where a trip shall originate with the passenger or passengers being picked up outside of the corporate limits of the City and where the destination is either within or beyond the City corporate limits. The term "operate for hire upon the streets of Salt Lake City" means and shall include the soliciting or picking up of a passenger or passengers within the corporate limits of the City, whether the destination is within or outside of the corporate limits of the City. C. The foregoing notwithstanding, due to the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympics scheduled to be conducted within the City during the months of February and March of 2002 and the anticipated need for additional taxicabs within the City during said period, a taxicab may operate within the City without a certificate of public convenience and necessity, commencing on the effective date hereof and until March 31, 2002, provided the following conditions are met: 1. it is operated by a taxicab company that is licensed by the City or by a company maintaining a place of business without the boundaries of the Salt Lake City that has paid a like or similar license fee to some other taxing unit within the State, and provided such other taxing unit exempts from its license tax or fee, by reciprocal agreement, taxicab companies domiciled in Salt Lake City; 2. Its operation complies with and is subject to all ordinances of Salt Lake City applicable to taxicabs and taxicab drivers within the City, including, but not limited to, the vehicle and driver requirements set forth in Chapters 5.71 and 5.72 of this Code; and 3. It is operated by a company that maintains continuous vehicle insurance covering the operation of such vehicle within the City in accordance with the requirements of and at the minimum levels of coverage set forth in Section 5.05.120 of this Title or its successor or by the Utah Department of Transportation or by the United States Department of Transportation, 2 whichever levels are higher. Proof of insurance shall be required prior to such taxicab operating within the City, and may be verified upon the City's receipt of a negative comment form as provided by Chapter 5.71 or at the time of an on-street unscheduled ground transportation vehicle inspection. All taxicab companies shall send a copy of any notice of cancellation or reduction of such insurance coverage to the Salt Lake City department responsible for the enforcement of ground transportation and/or taxicab violations immediately upon such cancellation or reduction. D. In the event the mayor of Salt Lake City, or the mayor's designee, at any time prior to March 3 2002, finds that the need for additional taxicabs operating within the City as provided by Subsection C of this Section is significantly less than is presently anticipated and that the operation of additional taxicabs pursuant to Subsection C of this Section is causing a financial hardship upon the taxicab companies presently holding certificates of convenience and necessity from the City, the mayor may, by executive order, immediately terminate the operation of all taxicabs operating within the City pursuant to Subsection C of this Section. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of January 2002. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: 3 CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on . Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2002. Published: . G:\Ordinance 02\Amending Section 5 72.130-Taxicab Certificates of Convenience&Necessity 1-3-02 draft 4 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2002 (Taxicab Certificate of Convenience and Necessity) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 5.72.130,SALT LAKE CITY CODE, RELATING TO CERTIFICATE OF A PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY BEING REQUIRED FOR OPERATION OF A TAXICAB WITHIN THE CITY. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 5.72.130, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to a certificate of public convenience and necessity being required for operation of a taxicab within Salt Lake City be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.72.130 Required For Operation: A. No person shall operate or peiuiit a taxicab owned or controlled by such person to be operated as a vehicle for hire upon the streets of Salt Lake City without first having obtained a certificate of public convenience and necessity from the City in accordance with Chapter 5.05 of this Title, or its successor. B. For the purpose of this Section, the term "operate for hire upon the streets of Salt Lake City" shall not include the transporting, by a taxicab properly licensed in a jurisdiction outside the corporate limits of the City, of a passenger or passengers for hire where a trip shall originate with the passenger or passengers being picked up outside of the corporate limits of the City and where the destination is either within or beyond the City corporate limits. The term "operate for hire upon the streets of Salt Lake City" means and shall include the soliciting or picking up of a passenger or passengers within the corporate limits of the City, whether the destination is within or outside of the corporate limits of the City. C. The foregoing notwithstanding, due to the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympics scheduled to be conducted within the City during the months of February and March of 2002 and the anticipated need for additional taxicabs within the City during said period, a taxicab may operate within the City without a certificate of public convenience and necessity, commencing on the effective date hereof and until March 31, 2002, provided the following conditions are met: 1. It is operated by a taxicab company that is licensed by the City or by a company maintaining a place of business without the boundaries of the Salt Lake City that has paid a like or similar license fee to some other taxing unit within the State, and provided such other taxing unit exempts from its license tax or fee, by reciprocal agreement, taxicab companies domiciled in Salt Lake City; 2. Its operation complies with and is subject to all ordinances of Salt Lake City applicable to taxicabs and taxicab drivers within the City, including,but not limited to, the vehicle and driver requirements set forth in Chapters 5.71 and 5.72 of this Code; and 3. It is operated by a company that maintains continuous vehicle insurance covering the operation of such vehicle within the City in accordance with the requirements of and at the minimum levels of coverage set forth in Section 5.05.120 of this Title or its successor or by the Utah Department of Transportation or by the United States Department of Transportation, 2 whichever levels are higher. Proof of insurance shall be required prior to such taxicab operating within the City, and may be verified upon the City's receipt of a negative comment form as provided by Chapter 5.71 or at the time of an on-street unscheduled ground transportation vehicle inspection. All taxicab companies shall send a copy of any notice of cancellation or reduction of such insurance coverage to the Salt Lake City department responsible for the enforcement of ground transportation and/or taxicab violations immediately upon such cancellation or reduction. D. In the event the mayor of Salt Lake City, or the mayor's designee, at any time prior to March 31, 2002, finds that the need for additional taxicabs operating within the City as provided by Subsection C of this Section is significantly less than is presently anticipated and that the operation of additional taxicabs pursuant to Subsection C of this Section is causing a financial hardship upon the taxicab companies presently holding certificates of convenience and necessity from the City, the mayor may, by executive order, immediately terminate the operation of all taxicabs operating within the City pursuant to Subsection C of this Section. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of January 2002. CHAIRPERSON 3 ATTEST: CHI I-F DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2002. Published: APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake ity .Attorneys Office Date / 3 LI-e By G\Ordinance 02Wmending Section 5.72.130-Taxicab Certificates of Convenience&Necessity 1-3-02 clean 4 MEMORANDUM DATE: January 8,2002 TO: City Council Members FROM: Russell Weeks RE: Proposed Amendment to Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity for Taxicabs During Olympics and Paralympics CC: Rocky Fluhart,Jay Magure,Cindy Gust-Jenson,David Dobbins, Larry Spendlove This memorandum addresses a proposed amendment to Section 5.72.130 of the City Code relating to certificates of public convenience and necessity required to operate taxicabs within the City.The proposed amendment would suspend the requirement during the Olympics and Paralympics. OPTIONS 1. Adopt the proposed ordinance. 2. Do not adopt the proposed ordinance. MATTERS AT ISSUE/POTENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION If the proposed ordinance is adopted,would: • Taxicab drivers have to obtain a"valid taxicab driver's license issued by the Police Department"as required under City Code Section 5.72.220? • Taxicabs and taximeters be inspected before cabs are allowed to operate within the City as required under City Code 5.72.315? BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION The intent of the proposed ordinance is to augment the City's taxicab fleets during the Olympics and Paralympics.There has been some concern that there may be a shortage of taxicabs available during the Olympics and Paralympics to serve the public and visitors. Ordinarily,the City regulates taxicab service through issuing certificates of public convenience and necessity. Taxi service is considered a public necessity,and it has been City policy to make sure the service exists and is regulated through the issuance of the certificates.The certificates are divided among three companies—Yellow Cab,Ute Cab,and City Cab.Last year; a hearing officer determined that the maximum number of taxicabs to provide necessary service, to.Salt Lake City residents,was 268.Of that number, 33.are involved in a court case. Until the case is resolved the cab companies,are operating with 235 certificates of public convenience and t necessity. According to the Administration,the 235 certificates are perhaps half the number needed to provide service during the Winter Games. It should be noted that the proposed ordinance affects only the operation of taxicabs within the City.The proposed ordinance would not allow businesses that operate ground transportation vehicles such as shuttles,courtesy vehicles and limousines to act as taxicabs. As a practical matter,the proposed ordinance would appear to allow taxicab companies in Murray, South Salt Lake,and West Valley City,and other local companies that do not have certificates of public convenience and necessity to operate in Salt Lake City during the Winter Olympics and Paralympics. The proposed ordinance would allow taxicabs to operate within Salt Lake City without certificates of public convenience and necessity roughly between the start of the Olympics and March 31—if cab companies meet the following conditions: • A cab is operated by a company licensed by the City or by a company outside Salt Lake City that"has paid a like or similar license fee to some other taxing unit within the State." • Another taxing unit within the State exempts from its license and fees"by reciprocal agreement"Salt Lake City taxicab companies. • A taxicab"complies with and is subject to all ordinances of Salt Lake City"involving the operation of taxis and taxi drivers—including regulations such as cab drivers'appearance and conduct,and standards for taxicabs'appearance.It should be noted that meter rates are set in Article VI of City Code Chapter 5.72. • A taxicab also must be operated by a company that"maintains continuous vehicle insurance covering the operation of such vehicle with in the City in accordance with the requirements of and at the minimum levels of coverage"required by the City Code. One issue might be that the sections cited in the proposed ordinance include requirements that cab drivers obtain taxicab driver's license from the Salt Lake City Police- Department and that taxis be inspected before they are allowed to operate in the City. If a company from outside Salt Lake City has drivers licensed in another city to operate a taxicab, would its drivers also need a Salt Lake City taxi driver's license?Similarly, if a vehicle meets inspection requirements of another city, would it—and its meter—need to be inspected by Salt Lake City? A final clause of the proposed ordinance would allow the Mayor or his designee to "immediately terminate"by executive order allowing taxicabs to operate without certificates of public convenience and necessity if the demand for taxicabs is "significantly less"than anticipated and their operation "is causing a financial hardship on taxicab companies presently holding certificates of public convenience and necessity." According to the Administration,the three companies that hold certificates of public convenience and necessity support the proposed ordinance. 2 MEMORANDUM DATE: January 8, 2002 - TO: Council Members FROM: Gary Muntford RE: Joint Resolution Approving Penal Bonds for Elected Officials State law requires elected City Council Members and the Mayor to post penal bonds in the sum of not less than$10,000 each. Because of an oversight,the City has failed to comply with this requirement in the past,but now that theAttorney's Office is aware of the requirement,the Attorney's Office has arranged for the suiy bonds with the modest cost to be paid by the City. The Attorney's Office forwarded an explanation letter(attached)and applications for a commercial surety bond for each Council Member to complete and sign: Council staff has placed an application in each Council Meniber's signature box. Council•staiFs:understanding is that,if a Council Member fails to act in his/her fiduciary duty(for example favors one contractor,because the contractor is a personal friend resulting in harm to the City), the City can recover damages from the bond,and the surety company would seek to recover the cost from the Council Member. By signing the application,the Council Member 'i agreesto indemnify the surety.company and save it harmless from all loss and expense because of a'clEim'by the City against the bond. • The state law also.requires that the Mayor and Council approve their respective bonds. The Attorney's Office prepared a joint resolution memorializing that approval. If Council Members have questions regarding the bonds or the joint resolution, you may wish to ask the City Attorney during the Council Work Session. The joint resolution can be placed on the Council's next regular Council Meeting agenda. cc: Rocky Fluhart,Jay Magure,Roger Cutler DEC 2 I. 20u ROGER F. CUTLER SAW I'' 1 ^� 'a� �P©' ��. ' I 1 ��� ���� ����``���� ROSS C. ANDERSON CITY ATTORNEY LAW DEPARTMENT MAYOR December 19, 2001 • Mayor Ross C. Anderson Salt Lake City Council Rocky Fluhart(City Auditor) Re: Fidelity Bonded Insurance for elected and other City officials Dear Mayor, Council Members and Auditor: A short time ago the Council's Executive Director, Cindy Gust-Jenson, inquired concerning how the City was complying with statutory requirements concerning the bonding of elected and other officials of the City. Following a review, it was determined that the City had duly complied with all applicable laws regarding posting the appropriate bonds for the City Treasurer; however, others were not bonded in conformity with State and City law. State law requires that the Treasurer be bonded on a formula consistent with the Money Management Act and the amount of the bond is based on a percentage of the City budget. Our office undertook a review and determined that the Treasurer has consistently been bonded in full conformity with statutory requirements. State law further requires that the Mayor and City Council Members, prior to being sworn in office, post a penal bond in the sum of not less than $10,000. In addition, State law requires that the City Auditor be similarly bonded in a sum not less than $20,000. (See 10-3-819, 820, 821 Utah Code Ann. 1953.)1 As a supplement to the State requirements, City law requires bonding for many City officers, in addition to those required by State law. (See 2.42.020 City Code.) The amounts of these City bonds are to be determined by the Mayor. Collaterally, it should be noted that the City's Administrative Code provides that the City Auditor will be the director of the Department of Management Services for all purposes,within the meaning of the Uniform Fiscal Procedures Act of the State,as is the City's budget officer, unless otherwise designated in writing by the Mayor. (See 2.08.025B,E,City Code.) 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 505, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE:801-535-7788 FAX: 801-535-7540 /Q The City for some years has purchased a policy of insurance to provide coverage in the event that an employee did not faithfully perform his/her duties or absconds with City resources. Apparently, this insurance was viewed as covering the bonding requirement. However, certain City employees covered by the City Code were not included in that policy. Also, there is a significant legal difference between a"penal bond" and insurance. In reviewing the matter, it has been determined that a rider can be obtained, without additional premium. Therefore, to obtain immediate substantial compliance with Section 2.42.020 of City law, a rider has been obtained. Nonetheless, to bring the City into compliance with the State statutory requirements of penal bonds, it will be necessary to acquire new bonds. Thus, we have attached a Commercial Surety Application for bonding which needs to be completed and signed, as indicated. In addition, a resume will need to be annexed to this application. These bonds will provide the minimum statutory bonding requirements of $10,000 for the elected officials and$20,000 for the City Auditor. Please note, however, that the Council Member bonds will include only the incumbent Council Members (who will retain office following the inauguration in January) and the newly elected Council Members (who will take the oath of office on the first Monday in January). Please complete these forms and return them to the City's Risk Manager, Jeff Rowley. He will arrange to pay the modest fee required for the premium to require these bonds. He would also assume the responsibility to have them filed with the City Recorder, as required by law. (See, 2.42.030 City Code.) The law also requires that the Mayor and Council approve their respective bonds at the first meeting of the governing body in January, following municipal election. We have, therefore, prepared an appropriate joint resolution memorializing that approval as required by 10-3-822 Utah Code Ann., 1953. Please include the adoption of this Resolution on your agenda for January 7, 2002. Lastly, it appears that the bonding requirement for City personnel, other than those specified in State statute should be revisited. In light of the City's self- insurance program, the current purchase of an insurance policy to cover fidelity issues needs to be reconsidered, in light of the premium costs of approximately $9500 per annum. In addition, if that coverage is still desirable, a City policy evaluation should be made as to whether this risk coverage be satisfied with a penal bond or with the current practice of commercial insurance coverage. The Administration is presently considering the policy implications of this matter and will be making a recommendation to the Council by proposing an amended ordinance. 2 To avoid inadvertence concerning these matters, the City's Risk Manager will assume responsibility to monitor and make arrangements for the acquisition of all required bonds or insurance dealing with these requirements in the future. If there are any questions or assistance needed in completing the application or in completing the required resume, please contact Jeff Rowley, the City Risk Manager, located in the attorney's office. He will be pleased to provide any needed assistance. S' .cer y, F. ER • City Attorney RFC:ca cc: Jeff Rowley Cindy Gust-Jenson Rocky Fluhart i 3 JOINT RESOLUTION NO. OF 2002 (APPROVING PENAL BONDS) WHEREAS, Chapter 3 of Title 10 Utah Code Ann., 1953 requires that penal bonds in the sum of not less than $10,000 be obtained for the Mayor and City Council Members; and WHEREAS, Section 10-3-821 Utah Code Ann. 1953 requires that the Treasurer's bond be set by resolution or ordinance in an amount not less than established by the State Money Management Council, which sum for the City's Treasurer is $8,513,615 for fiscal year 2001/02; and WHEREAS, Section 10-3-822 Utah Code Ann., 1953 requires that the Mayor approve the amount of the bond set for Council Members and, reciprocally, the Council set the amount of bond for the Mayor on the first meeting in January following a municipal election; and WHEREAS, Chapter 42 of Title 2 of the City Code requires that an indemnity be given for various non-elected officials; and this obligation has been met by acquiring insurance coverage to guarantee the full and faithful performance of official duties by all said officials, which insurance is in the sum of$1,000,000 and is deemed adequate by the Mayor and City Council; and WHEREAS, Section 2.08.025 City Code provides that the City Auditor shall be the Director of the Department of Management Services or the Mayor's designee, who is presently Rocky Fluhart; NOW THEREFORE, be it jointly resolved by the Salt Lake City Council and Mayor as follows: 1. The penal bonds in the sum of$10,000 for each Council Member and the Mayor is hereby approved and accepted, in compliance with Section 10-3- 822 Utah Code Ann., 1953. 2. The City Auditor's bond for Rocky Fluhart in the sum of$20,000, as required by State law, is jointly approved. 3. The Treasurer's bond for the Salt Lake City Treasurer in the sum of $8,513,615 is hereby approved in conformity with Section 10-3-821 Utah Code Ann., 1953, that sum being the amount established by the State Money Management Council and consistent with the Money Management Act of the State of Utah. 4. The requirement for the Recorder's bond and indemnity be satisfied by filing a copy of the insurance policy or commitment of coverage with the City Treasurer, as required by Chapter 42 of Title 2 of the City Code. ADOPTED by the Mayor and City Council as a joint resolution this day of January, 2002. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON MAYOR ATTEST: Chief Deputy City Recorder G:\RESOLUTNoint resolution re penal bond.doc 2 ROCKY J. FLU HART sAgll # ei fi a0IR-G RP�1 RA�'I:0Ni ' ��m —mac ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES MAYOR P OOLIIICCY AND BUDGET DIVISION C� l To: Rocky Fluhart Chief Administrative Officer From: Laurie Dillon o _c. pQ 535-7766 Subject: Horse-Drawn Carriage and Animal Control Ordinance Changes Date: November 14, 2001 CC: Jan Aramaki, Steve Fawcett, Scott Fisher, Mary Johnston, Ken Miles, Jennifer Seelig, Larry Spendlove Several changes were proposed in March of this year to update Title 5 and Title 8 of the Salt Lake City Code relating to horse-drawn carriages. The Mayor and the City Council agreed with the changes, but requested that additional regulations regarding extreme temperatures and the care of the horses be included as well. The attached ordinance changes include more specific requirements for temperature limitations, carriage operator appearance, stable conditions, working hours for horses, watering and blanketing of the horses. These changes were discussed with the carriage company owners on August 30, 2001, and they are in agreement with them. The new regulations would require that the carriages not operate when the temperature and ambient humidity are above 150 degrees F and when the temperature adjusted for wind chill is below 10 degrees F below zero. The upper temperature range was developed by the Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS). In Utah, this limit would rarely be reached because of the low relative humidity. However, in other areas of the country, this is a critical issue, since this limit is reached at 98 degrees F and 85%relative humidity. A chart that indicates the heat index is attached for review. The lower temperature limit was developed by reviewing ordinances from other areas of the country as well as guidelines from the HSUS and the American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (ASPCA). These organizations suggest a lower temperature limit of 30 degrees F and 18 degrees F,respectively, regardless of wind chill factor. The review committee concluded that these lower limitations were more restrictive than was needed for the Salt Lake City environment. The second attached chart shows the relationship between temperature and wind speed in producing equivalent temperature. In looking at the wind chill chart, a temperature of 15 degrees F and wind speed of 15 mph results in an equivalent temperature of-11 degrees F. The lower temperature is not as great a concern as the higher temperature for two reasons. The first is that the horses are less able to deal with high temperatures and high humidity because in those circumstances they can't sweat enough to cool themselves. These kinds of weather conditions led to the 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 145, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH B41 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535.5399 FAX: 801-535-6663 -a.RECYcco r,,PER 0 death of three carriage horses in New York City in 1988. The second reason is that in cold conditions the horses would either be working and generating heat, or they would be covered with a blanket if they are standing. One further point is that the carriage business tends to be self-regulating for cold conditions—passengers decrease as the winter temperatures decrease. Acceptable stable conditions are specified in much more detail than the ordinance had previously. The proposed requirements for carriage drivers' manner and appearance are similar to what is required in Salt Lake City's taxi cab ordinance. Changes regarding the notice of violation (civil violation) and violations regarding animal care and vicious animals are proposed. The animal care violations were included as civil violations previously, but the Administration is proposing that they be treated as criminal. Regarding vicious animals, more specific definitions are provided for what a vicious animal is, and when euthanasia or forfeiture may be allowed. One additional fee requested by Salt Lake County Animal Services is included with these revisions. Fees are proposed for the disposal of dead animals ($25.00 for pets and $100 for livestock). Animal Services has provided this service at no charge in the past, but currently pays $0.33 per pound for disposal. This fee would offset that charge. Animal Services also provides a list of alternatives acceptable to the City-County Health Department for pet owners who do not want to pay for the service, and a list of commercial service providers for livestock. As noted previously, representatives from the carriage companies, Salt Lake County Animal Services, and City employees in the Mayor's Office, Attorney's Office, Management Services Department, Police Department, Business Licensing Division, and Transportation Division developed and agreed upon the proposed changes. These changes will not affect the budget, but are needed to update the ordinance to include current and preferred practices. The specific changes and the reasons for making them are listed below, following the order in which they appear in the proposed ordinances. 5.37.008 Animal Services or Office of Animal Services—This change allows the wording "Animal Services" or"Office of Animal Services"in the ordinances to refer to either a department of the City or a contracted agency that provides animal control services for the City. 5.37.080 Fees —Annual Operation—This change was made previously when business regulatory fees were revised. 5.37.105 and 5.37.110 License—These sections require that carriage operators be at least 21 years of age, and notes the change from the requirement for a chauffeur's license to a motor vehicle operator's license because chauffeur's licenses are no longer available. Another change in this section updates "animal control officer" to "Animal Services officer". I 5.37.115 and 5.37.120—These sections update"animal control division"to"Office of Animal Services". 5.37.125 Periodic inspections—This section updates"animal control division"to "Office of Animal Services"and takes away the requirement for rear view mirrors for the carriages. Both the carriage owners and the police believe it is better for the carriage operators to turn around and look behind them,rather than relying on rear view mirrors. 5.37.150 Number of passengers—This change allows no more than two children under five years of age(rather than three years)to sit on the laps of adult passengers. Five years of age has been the conventional cut off rather than three years,and the change does not make a significant difference in the total weight or the amount of room available in the carriage. 5.37.155 Passengers Restricted to Passenger Area—This clarifies that no customer is allowed to ride on the seat with the driver. 5.37.160 Manner and Appearance—This section was added to provide standards for operators'appearance. As noted previously,these requirements are the same as those required for taxi drivers in Salt Lake City. 5.37.170 Routes—The only change in this section makes the number of carriages authorized(nineteen vs.eighteen)equal to the number associated with the carriage companies listed later in the section. 5.37.185 Revocation or Suspension—The change in this section requires Animal Services to report three or more violations by a driver or licensee within a 12-month period to the City's business licensing unit for review. It also provides the definition for a serious violation as injury to a human being or an animal,or property damage of$100 or more. 8.04.280 Biting or Potentially Rabid Animals—This proposed change allows an animal to be deemed as vicious on its first bite or attack,depending on the nature of the bite or attack,rather than requiring more than one instance. It also allows for either civil or criminal prosecution,and lists the potential considerations for euthanasia or forfeiture. 8.04.370 Animal Nuisances Designated—The definition for a nuisance is increased from being found at large three times within a 12 month period to four times. 8.04.410 Dogs Attacking Persons and Animals—The proposed addition to this section specifies conditions for euthanasia or forfeiture of a dog. 8.04.500 Violation—Penalty—The change indicates that the violations listed in Section 8.04.510 are civil violations rather than criminal. 0 8.04.510B. Issuance of Citations—Notice of Violations—The proposed changes to this section clarify when a notice of violation(a civil charge) rather than a criminal violation will be issued. The relevant sections for each violation have been added as a reference, and fees have been clarified. Animal care violations have been taken out of the civil process, as these kinds of violations are seen as instances that should be handled criminally. 8.04 Appendix A—Two fees are proposed to be added under Section C. Service and Violation Fees for Pets. The first is a$25 fee for disposal. This fee would recoup the cost incurred by Animal Services. The second addition is simply to clarify that there is a transportation charge of$25 for pets as well as for livestock. Previously the transportation charge was listed only under the livestock fees (section D) at$20, and this is proposed to increase to $25. A disposal fee of$100 for livestock has been added to section D. Fees for violations involving animal attacks and/or bites, and fierce, vicious or dangerous animals have been deleted because these serious offenses will be charged as criminal violations. The schedule also notes that the fourth offense in a 36 month period will be a criminal matter. 8.05.030 Offending Vicious Dogs --The proposed addition to this section specifies conditions for euthanasia or forfeiture of a dog, and makes it consistent with section 8.04.410. 8.16.005 Definitions —Definitions for"carriage,""carriage horse," and"work"have been added. 8.16.015 and 8.16.025 Identification Number and Certificate required—These changes authorize the Office of Animal Services to inspect the certification of horses and maintain the identification infolination,rather than requiring the City to do it. 8.16.035 Criteria for determining health—The immunizations have been updated to reflect vaccinations and procedures recommended by local veterinarians, the carriage company owners, and Animal Services and confirmed by the State Veterinary Services Office. The Coggins Test is typically done only on horses entering the State, but the City has required that it be done at least once even on horses that have only been in Utah. Requiring this test annually, as had been the case, is not necessary. 8.16.045, 8.16.055, and 8.16.060—The changes in these sections update "animal control officer"to "Animal Services officer" and"animal control division" or"city"to "Office of Animal Services". 8.16.065 Physical Condition for Work—This change clarifies that horses' hoofs shall be shod and trimmed at least every 4 to 6 weeks. 8.16.067 Other Regulations Governing Carriage Horses—This section has been added. It addresses not leaving a horse unattended, work hours, rest periods, watering, temperature restrictions, and when a blanket is required. Most of these regulations were 1 recommended by HSUS and the ASPCA. The exception is allowing the horses to work at lower temperatures. 8.16.070 Stables and Stalls—The addition of this section clarifies the requirements for stables and stalls,and allows for inspection by Animal Services every 6 months. A copy of the proposed changes is attached. Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. .1.1V U1.11111.V11 V11CL11 rage 1 or 1 Heat Index Chart (Temperature & Relative Humidity) RH Temperature(°F) (%) 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 1105 90 119 123 128 132 137 141 146 152 157 163 168 174 180 186 193 199 85 115 119 123 127 132 136 141 145 150 155 161 166 172 178 184 190 80 112 115 119 123 127 131 135 140 144 149 154 159 164 169 175 180 75 109 112 115 119 122 126 130 134 138 143 147 152 156 161 166 171 70 106 109 112 115 118 122 125 129 133 137 141 145 149 154 158 163 65 103 106 108 111 114 117 121 124 127 131 135 139 143 147 151 155 60 100 103 105 108 111 114 116 120 123 126 129 133 136 140 144 148 55 98 100 103 105 107 110 113 115 118 121 124 127 131 134 137 141 50 96 1. 98 100 102 104 107 109 112 114 117 119 122 125 128 131 135 45 94 96 98 100 102 104 106 108 110 113 115 118 120 123 126 129 40 92 94 96 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 111 113 116 118 121 123 35 91 92 94 95 97 98 100 102 104 106 107 109 112 114 116 118 30 89 90 92 93 95 96 98 99 101 102 104 106 108 110 112 114 http://205.156.54.206/er/buf/tprh.htm 10/1/01 rage 1 01 1 i . • furnished by National Weather Service Gray Maine Equivalent Temperature(OF) '--:_., Calm 35 30 25 '20 15 I0 5 x 1� a �i ,..,....,,,,,A.-.A -- CD 41 W 5 32 ; ,C71 22 16 11 6 `" .: r� �..,--;:',it'-;"'a Y'x ..'`--z�v n 10 22-..16 10 VE3YCOL,x n `a. 1,1 r ri L�r 4-x'k 4r.: r „`E_ 9 a eaa� 15 16 9 2 � }- '`" XZ �-g!kli _n 'a �. 20 I2 d '-"-1 17,., x&. «� ie 'fig- L6� ...k; yr '-, 'lip. e25 8 '�` '' * �r L.�"'' E ,r : 7K'� s -C#. ' k'" �1i F-�1 d 30 6-. R ., 4 t "i 3:rF s�`i '' ' j-,,,.„ mill. fl '.;5. H 40 �. �X j 45 x� �a sty 3. hip t i a, a r �,+, i j WINE CHILL CHAR3' the Wind Chill-which estimates the effects of cold temperatures and various wind speed values on the human body. updated 5/01 by ES http://205.156.54.206/er/gyx/wndchi l.htm 10/1/0l SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2001 (Animal Services and Horse-Drawn Carriages) AN ORDINANCE ENACTING SECTION 5.37.008, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO THE DEFINITION OF ANIMAL SERVICES; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.080, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO HORSE-DRAWN CARRIAGE FEES; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.105, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO LICENSE REQUIREMENTS FOR OPERATORS OF HORSE-DRAWN CARRIAGES; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.110, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO DISPLAY OF LICENSE; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.115, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO CARRIAGE INSPECTION PRIOR TO LICENSING; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.120, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO ISSUANCE OF STICKER FOR SATISFACTORY INSPECTION; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.125, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO PERIODIC INSPECTIONS; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.150, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO NUMBER OF PASSENGERS IN HORSE-DRAWN CARRIAGES; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.155, SALT LAKE CITY CODE,PERTAINING TO PASSENGERS RESTRICTED TO PASSENGER AREA; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.160, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO APPEARANCE; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.170, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO ROUTES FOR HORSE-DRAWN CARRIAGES; AMENDING SECTION 5.37.185, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO REVOCATION OR SUSPENSION; AMENDING SECTION 8.04.120 , SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO NUMBERS OF CATS AND RABBITS PER RESIDENCE; AMENDING SECTION 8.04.280H, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO VICIOUS ANIMALS; AMENDING SECTION 8.04.370, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO ANIMAL NUISANCES AND PENALTIES; AMENDING SECTION 8.04.410, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO DOGS ATTACKING PERSONS AND ANIMALS; AMENDING SECTION 8.04.500, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO VIOLATION —PENALTY; AMENDING SECTION 8.04.510, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO ISSUANCE OF CITATIONS —NOTICE OF VIOLATIONS; AMENDING APPENDIX A TO CHAPTER 8.04, SALT LAKE CITY CODE,REGARDING SALT LAKE CITY ANIMAL SERVICES PERMITS AND FEES; AMENDING SECTION 8.05.030, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO OFFENDING VICIOUS DOGS; ENACTING Section 8.16.005, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO DEFINITIONS; AMENDING SECTION 8.16.015, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO IDENTIFICATION; AMENDING SECTION 8.16.025, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO HORSE CERTIFICATION; AMENDING SECTION 8.16.035, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO CRITERIA FOR DETERMINING HEALTH OF A HORSE; AMENDING SECTION 8.16.045, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO POLICE OR ANIMAL SERVICES ORDERS; AMENDING SECTION 8.16.055, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO ACCIDENTS INVOLVING HORSE-DRAWN CARRIAGES; AMENDING SECTION 8.16.060, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO HORSE EXAMINATION BY THE OFFICE OF ANIMAL SERVICES; AMENDING SECTION 8.16.065, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO PHYSICAL CONDITION FOR WORK; ENACTING SECTION 8.16.067, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO OTHER REGULATIONS GOVERNING CARRIAGE HORSES; AND AMENDING SECTION 8.16.070, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PERTAINING TO STABLES AND STALLS. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 2 SECTION 1. That Section 5.37.008, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to the definition of animal services be, and the same hereby is, enacted to read as follows: 5.37.008 Animal Services or Office of Animal Services "Animal Services" or"Office of Animal Services"means that division or office of the City or that person or entity with which the City has contracted to perfoilii animal control and inspection services on behalf of the City. SECTION 2. That Section 5.37.080, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to horse-drawn carriage fees be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.37.080 Fees—Annual Operation No certificate shall be issued or continued in operation unless the holder thereof has paid an annual business regulatory fee as set forth in Section 5.04.070, or its successor section of for each horse-drawn carriage authorized under a certificate of public convenience and necessity. SECTION 3. That Section 5.37.105, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to license requirements for operators of horse-drawn carriages be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.37.105 License Required for Operators It is unlawful for any person to operate or for a holder to permit any person to operate a carriage for hire or a training cart upon the streets of the city without such operator(1) being at least twenty-one years of age and (2) having first obtained and having then in force a current Utah motor vehicle operator's chauffeur's license valid in the state of Utah. SECTION 4. That Section 5.37.110, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to display of license be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 3 5.37.110 License—Display Every driver operating a carriage under this chapter shall keep his or her current, valid, Utah motor vehicle operator's chau ffeur`s license on his or her person while such driver is operating a carriage, and shall exhibit the license upon demand of any police officer, Aanimal Services control officer, license inspector, or any authorized agent of the license office of the city. SECTION 5. That Section 5.37.115, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to carriage inspection prior to licensing be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.37.115 Carriage Inspection Prior to Licensing Prior to the use and operation of any carriage under the provisions of this chapter, the carriage shall be thoroughly examined and inspected by the Office of Aanimal Services control division and found to comply with the specifications of Section 5.37.125 of this chapter, or its successor. SECTION 6. That Section 5.37.120, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to issuance of sticker for satisfactory inspection be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.37.120 Satisfactory Inspection—Sticker Issued When the Office of Aanimal Services control division finds that a carriage has met the specifications established by Section 5.37.125 or its successor, the license Oeffice of Animal Services shall issue a sticker to that effect. SECTION 7. That Section 5.37.125, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to periodic inspections be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 4 5.37.125 Periodic Inspections A. Specifications. Every carriage operating under this chapter shall be inspected by the Office of Aanimal Services control divisio at least once each year in order to make certain each carriage is being maintained in a safe and efficient operating condition in accordance with the following inspection requirements: 1. Each carriage shall be equipped with rear view mirrors, two electrified white lights visible for one thousand feet to the front of the carriage, and two electrified red lights visible for one thousand feet to the rear of the carriage. All lights shall be operational from one- half hour after sunset to one-half hour before sunrise and during times of lessened visibility. Electrified directional signals are required at all times; 2. Each carriage shall be equipped with hydraulic or factory equipped mechanical brakes appropriate for the design of the particular carriage; 3. Each carriage shall be equipped with a slow moving vehicle emblem(red triangle) attached to the rear of the carriage; 4. Each carriage shall permanently and prominently display the name and telephone number of the carriage business operating it on the rear portion of such carriage; 5. Each carriage shall be equipped with a device to catch horse manure falling to the pavement; 6. Each carriage shall be maintained in a clean and sanitary condition. B. Training Cart. This article shall be fully applicable to training carts, as described in Section 5.37.085B, or its successor, with the exception of subsection A2 of this section regarding brakes. In addition, all training carts shall be clearly marked, on the rear portion of such cart,with the words: "CAUTION: HORSE IN TRAINING." 5 SECTION 8. That Section 5.37.150, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to number of passengers in horse-drawn carriages be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.37.150 Number of Passengers No driver shall permit more than six adult passengers, ages five years of age or older to ride in the carriage at one time,plus no more than two children under five three years of age, if seated on the laps of adult passengers, unless the carriage was designed to carry fewer, in which event the carriage shall not carry more passengers than it was designed to carry. With regard to a training cart, no more than two passengers shall be permitted, neither of which shall be a customer for hire. SECTION 9. That Section 5.37.155, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to passengers restricted to passenger area be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.37.155 Passengers Restricted to Passenger Area No driver shall permit a customerpassenger to ride on any part of the carriage while in motion, unless the passenger is seated inside the carriage. No customer shall be allowed to ride while sitting on the same seat as the carriage driver at any time while the carriage is in motion. SECTION 10. That Section 5.37.160, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to appearance be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.37.160 Manner and Appearance Drivers shall be neatly dressed and courteous in manner and shall adhere to the following standards of appearance, in order to meet the interests of Salt Lake City in such transportation:_ A. Wear enclosed shoes or boots. B. Maintain their hair, and beards or mustaches, if any in a clean and groomed condition. 6 C. Maintain their clothes in a clean and repaired condition. D. Be free from offensive odor. E. Not at any time expose the following body regions: the stomach, back, shoulders, chest, hips, buttocks, abdomen, genitals, or thighs higher than four inches (4") above the knee. F. Not wear as outer garments any clothing manufactured and commonly worn as underwear. G. Not wear T-shirts as outer garments unless as a part of a company uniform. It Wear shirttails and shirt hems tucked into pants, and shall use a belt or suspenders when pants are designed for their use. I. Not wear sweatpants or sweatshirts designed for athletic use. J. At all times bear an identification of the company with which they are associated on their shirts,whether as a shirt logo, name tag, photo identification badge, or otherwise, as shall be approved by the City. K. Any driver who desires that an exception be made to any requirement under this Section on any grounds may notify the City Law Department of the same in writing and request a review of the same by such mayoral hearing examiners as the Mayor deems appropriate to consider such matters with the assistance of the City Law Department. Such exception shall be granted if such driver can demonstrate that the requirement from which an exception is requested is unduly restrictive of any religious, political or personal right of the driver, as provided under the United States or Utah constitutions or laws, or Salt Lake City ordinances. SECTION 11. That Section 5.37.170, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to routes for horse- drawn carriages be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 7 5.37.170 Routes A. 1. The licensees and drivers shall operate horse-drawn carriages only upon certain streets within specified routes and/or quadrants and according to restrictions authorized by the city's horse-drawn carriage committee. In determining said routes, restrictions, and/or quadrants, the horse-drawn carriage committee shall seek to ensure safe and efficient movement of transportation within the city, and shall take into consideration the location of the streets therein, the expected traffic flow upon such streets, the history of traffic accidents upon such streets, the width of such streets, and any natural or man-made physical features of such streets which may be pertinent to the safe and efficient movement of transportation thereon. 2. With regard to the determination as to which holders may operate carriages and as to the number of carriages to be operated by such holders along a particular route or within a particular quadrant within the city, the city horse-drawn carriage committee shall, no later than February 15, 1990, develop a process for allocating in an equitable manner such routes and/or quadrants among holders. Said process shall not unreasonably withhold entry into the market from holders which have not previously operated along a particular route or within a particular quadrant. Said allocation shall be made on an annual basis, no earlier than February 15th of each calendar year. 3. As of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter, subject to amendment by the city horse-drawn carriage committee as provided in this section, there shall be established a quadrant for the operation of horse-drawn carriages which shall be bounded by the following streets: North Temple, 200 East, 400 South, and 200 West. The maximum number of carriages, which shall be allowed to operate within said quadrant, unless amended by the city horse-drawn carriage committee, shall be nineteen eighteen. Subject to reallocation by the city 8 horse-drawn carriage committee as provided in this section, the three carriage companies in operation as of the effective date of the ordinance codified in this chapter shall be allowed to operate the following number of carriages within the aforementioned quadrant: Carriage Horse Livery Ltd. 10 carriages Carriage for Hire 5 carriages The Carriage Connection 4 carriages B. * * C. * * * SECTION 12. That Section 5.37.185, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to revocation or suspension be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 5.37.185 Revocation or Suspension If any person to whom a license has been issued pursuant to this Chapter commits a violation of this Chapter, such license may be revoked or suspended according to the procedure provided for revocation or suspension of a business license issued by the City. Upon a serious violation, or upon any third violation of this Chapter by either a driver or a licensee within any 12-month period, a referral shall be made by Animal Services to the City's business licensing office for possible suspension or revocation of a business license issued by the City. A"serious violation"means a violation resulting in injury to human being or animal or property damage of $100,00 or more. SECTION 13. That Section 8.04.120 , Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to numbers of cats and rabbits per residence be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.04.120 Cats and Rabbits Number per Residence A. No person or persons at any one residence within the City shall at any one time own or keep more than two (2) cats and two (2) rabbits at any such residence. 9 B. No person or persons at any one residence within the City shall at any one time own car keen il- Te than_two f2l abbitsat any such residence: SECTION 14. That Section 8.04.280H, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to vicious animals be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.04.280 Biting Or Potentially Rabid Animals-Quarantine/Confinement Or Other Disposition: H. Vicious Animals: If any animal bites or attacks a person or animal onetwo(1)(2) or more times or more in a twelve (12) month period, such animal may be immediately impounded by the Office of Animal Services without court order and held at owner expense pending civil or criminal court action. Any such animal maystiall be deemed a vicious animal, and the Director of Animal Services may seek a court order in a civil or criminal court action, or, as provided in Section 8.04.220 of this Chapter, or its successor, for forfeiture or euthanizationdestruction of the animal. Parties owning such animals shall, if possible, be notified immediately of the animal's location by the Animal Services Office. SECTION 15. That Section 8.04.370, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to animal nuisances and penalties be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.04.370 Animal Nuisances Designated—Penalty A. Any owner or person having charge, care, custody or control of an animal or animals causing a nuisance as defined below shall be in violation of this Title and subject to the penalties provided herein. B. The following shall be deemed a nuisance: Any animal which: 1. Causes damages to the property of anyone other than its owner; 10 2. Is a "vicious animal," as defined in this Chapter, and kept contrary to Section 8.04.420 of this Chapter, or its successor; 3. Causes unreasonable fouling of the air by odors; 4. Causes unsanitary conditions in enclosures or surroundings; 5. Defecates on any public sidewalk,park or building, or on any private property without the consent of the owner of such private property, unless the person owning, having a proprietary interest in, harboring or having care, charge, control, custody or possession of such animal shall remove any such defecation to a proper trash receptacle, and shall carry the appropriate instrument(s) for the removal and disposal of such waste; 6. Barks, whines or howls, or makes other disturbing noises in an excessive, continuous or untimely fashion; 7. Molests passersby or chases passing vehicles; 8. Attacks people or other domestic animals whether or not such attack results in actual physical harm to the person or animal to whom or at which the attack is directed; 9. Is found at large fourthree(43) or more times within any twelve (12) month period; 10. Is offensive or dangerous to the public health, safety or welfare by virtue of the number and/or type of animal kept or harbored; or 11. Otherwise acts so as to constitute a nuisance or public nuisance under the provisions of title 76, chapter 10,Utah Code Annotated, 1953, or its successor. SECTION 16. That Section 8.04.410, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to dogs attacking persons and animals be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 11 8.04.410 Dogs Attacking Persons And Animals: A. Attacking Dogs: It is unlawful for the owner or person having charge, care, custody or control of any dog to allow such dog to attack, chase or worry any person, any domestic animal having a commercial value, or any species of hoofed protected wildlife, or to attack domestic fowl. "Worry", as used in this Section, means to harass by tearing, biting or shaking with the teeth. B. Owner Liability: The owner in violation of subsection A of this Section shall be strictly liable for violation of this Section. In addition to being subject to prosecution under subsection A of this Section, the owner of such dog shall also be liable in damages to any person injured or to the owner of any animal(s) injured or destroyed thereby. A court order may be sought,by civil or criminal court action, for forfeiture or euthanization of such dog. C. Defenses: The following shall be considered in mitigating the penalties or damages or in dismissing the charge: 1. That the dog was properly confined on the premises; 2. That the dog was deliberately or maliciously provoked. D. Dogs May Be Killed: Any person may kill a dog while it is committing any of the acts specified in subsection A of this Section, or while such dog is being pursued thereafter. SECTION 17. That Section 8.04.500, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to violation— penalty be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.04.500 Violation—Penalty Any person violating the provisions of this Title, either by failing to do those acts required herein or by doing any act prohibited herein, shall be guilty of a Class B misdemeanors unless otherwise provided in Section 8.04.510. Each day any such violation wider this chapter is 12 committed or permitted to continue shall constitute a separate offense and shall be punishable as such.Nothing herein shall be construed to proscribe any act specifically authorized under State statute. SECTION 18. That Section 8.04.510, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to issuance of citations—notice of violations be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.04.510 Issuance of Citations—Notice of Violations A. A peace officer and/or animal services officer is authorized to issue a citation to any person upon a charge of violating any provisions of this Title. The form of the citation, and proceedings to be handled upon the basis of the citation, shall conform to the provisions of the Utah Code of Criminal Procedure, including, but not necessarily limited to, sections 77-7-18 through 77-7-22, Utah Code Annotated, 1953, as amended, or their successors. B. Where violations of the following requirements of this Ordinance are committed, and provided they arc not charged in conjunction with another criminal offense and do not constitute a fourth or succeeding violation within a 36 month period, an animal services officer or authorized agent shall issue a notice of violation to such violatorany person in lieu of a citation; violations regarding: 1) commercial permits [Section 8.04.130], 2) commercial permit display j.ection 8.04.1601inspections and reports, 23) licensing, [Section 8.04.070], 34) license tag re uirements -Section 8.04.080], 5) rabies vaccinations,[Section 8.04.240], 6)rabies tag requirements -8.04.250 47) harboring stray animals, ,[Section 8.04.110], 58) animals running at large, [Section 8.04.390],69) animal nuisances,[Section 8.04.370, except for Subsections B.2, B.8, B.9, and B.10],f10) more than two dogs(2) animals at a residence up to a maximum of five dogs [Section 8.04.070], 11)more than two cats at a residence up to a maximum of five cats [Section 8.04.120], 12) more than two rabbits at a residence up to a maximum of five rabbits 13 • 'Section 8.04.120j,8) animal trespass, 913) staking dogs improperly, "Section 8.04.4001, 1014) confining female dogs in heat, [Section 8.04.3801, 11) animal care and maintenance, 12) animals in vehicles, 1415) giving animals as sales premiums, "Section 8.04.440BJ,4416) the sale/premium of baby rabbits and fowl,'Section 8.04.440A], or 1517) the sale of pet turtles [Section 8.04.440C1. The notice of violation mays state, with reference to the pertinent sections of this Title, the violation which must be remedied by the person charged and mayslah: set forth a compliance date by which the violator must comply with the remedial requirements. The notice of violation shall also--include a list of the fees as applit able to this violation as the amount of an administrative and proce viol ee-sh-all-be-the-sant t-set forth in Appendix A of this Chapter for minimum citation penalties. This fee amount may be reducedwaived for first offenses,provided the pet owner satisfactorily completes a class on responsible pet ownership, which is approved by the Office of Animal Services. Compliance with all remedial requirements referred to in the notice of violation by the compliance date shown thereon shall result in a $25.00 reduction in the penalty. Refusaland/or nonpayment of the administrative and processing fee, or failure to comply with anythe remedial requirements referred to in the notice of violation by the deadline set as the compliance dater_may result in the imposition of the full penalty and any additional administrative fees which may be applicableissuance of a citation to the person charged. SECTION 19. That Appendix A to Chapter 8.04, Salt Lake City Code, regarding Salt Lake City Animal Services Permits and Fees be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: APPENDIX A SALT LAKE CITY ANIMAL SERVICES PERMITS AND FEES 14 A. Permit Fees Commercial operations up to 30 animals $ 75.00 Commercial operations over 30 animals $150.00 Riding stables $ 40.00 Business selling only tropical or freshwater fish $ 50.00 Pet rescue permit $ 25.00 If issued at shelter's request $ 0.00 Late fee (in addition to regular fee) $ 25.00 15 B. Pet License Fees One Year Two Year Three Year Lifetime Unsterlized $25.00 $45.00 $60.00 N/A Sterilized $5.00 $9.00 $12.00 N/A Senior Citizen (Age 60 and Older): Unsterilized $20.00 $36.00 $48.00 N/A Sterlized $15.00 Transfer fee: $3.00 Replacement tag: $3.00 C. Service and Violation Fees for Pets Board fees per day for pets $ 8.00 Adoption fee (includes microchip and adoption packet) $25.00 Rabies deposit $25.00 Pet disposal fee $25.00 Pet pickup and transportation fee S25.00 Sterilization deposit: Dog $50.00 Cat $25.00 Rabies deposit S25.00 Pet disposal fee $25.00 i-e; d-t uspot on ee 0 Notice of violation fee (per violation) 25.00 Where indicated, fees for second, third, and subsequent violations are for those occurring within a 364-2-month period. Subse- First Second Third quent Offense Offense Offense Offenses Impound Fees $25.00 $50.00 $100.00 Criminal Minimum citation penalties: Subse- First Second Third quent Offense Offense Offense Offenses Licensing, permits, tags, rabies vaccination, at large, number of annuals_staking, $25.00 $50.00 $100.00 Criminal 16 female dogs in heat. animals as sales prenliu ns„sal ,Q[baby ra l2its _o la and pet turtles Animal nuisance $50.00 $100.00 $200.00 criminal Animal-.attacks--and ----- 20 0 Fierce, dangerous or vicious animals 300.00 D. Service Fees For Livestock: Impound fees: Large livestock $ 60.00 Small livestock $ 30.00 Board fees per day: Large livestock $ 10.00 Small livestock $ 8.00 Transportation fees $ 25.00 Livestock disposal fee _ $__100.00 Purchase price for unclaimed livestock is based on costs incurred by Animal Services during impound and recommendations made by the State Brand Inspector. SECTION 20. That Section 8.05.030, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to offending vicious dogs be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.05.030 Offending Vicious Dogs A. It shall be a Class B misdemeanor offense of strict liability for the owner or keeper of a vicious dog if the owner's or keeper's vicious dog shall, when unprovoked, kill or wound, or assist in killing or wounding any sheep, lamb, cattle, dog, cat,horse, hog, swine, fowl or other animal, or shall, when unprovoked, attack, assault, bite or otherwise injure any human being or assist in attacking, assaulting, biting or otherwise injuring any human being while out of or within the enclosure of the owner or keeper of such vicious dog, or while otherwise, on or off the 17 property of the owner or keeper, whether or not such vicious dog was on a leash and securely muzzled or whether the vicious dog escaped without fault of the owner or keeper. B. The owner or keeper of such dog shall also be strictly liable to the person aggrieved, as aforesaid, for all damage sustained. It is rebuttably presumed as a matter of law that the owning,keeping or harboring of a vicious dog in violation of this Chapter is a nuisance. It shall not be necessary, in order to sustain any such action, to prove that the owner or keeper of such vicious dog knew that such vicious dog possessed the propensity to cause such damage or that the vicious dog had a vicious nature. Upon such attack or assault, the Office of Animal Services or Police Department is hereby empowered to impound the vicious dog. C. Any judge presiding over a criminal prosecution of art owner or keeper of a vicious do.g_under this Section may make euthanasia of such dog a condition of probation of the owner or keeper convicted of violating this Section. SECTION 21. That Section 8.16.005, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to definitions be, and the same hereby is, enacted to read as follows: 8.16.005. Definitions In addition to the definitions included at Section 8.04.010, the following definitions shall apply to Chapter_ A. "Carriage horse" means any horse used to draw a carriacre in a carriao-e business. B. "Works"with reference to a horse means that the horse is out of the stable and presented as being available for pulling; carriages:,is iia harness: or is pullinga carriage. SECTION 22. That Section 8.16.015, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to identification number be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.16.015 Identification Number 18 Each horse used to pull a carriage in the City shall be identified by a brand or mark in accordance with chapter 4-24, Utah Code Annotated, or its successor, which brand or mark uniquely identifies the horse thus marked. The identification brand or mark and description of each of said horses, including age, breed, sex, color and other identifying markings, shall be filed by the carriage horse business with Animal Servicestile r;4y l ee� office. SECTION 23. That Section 8.16.025, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to horse certification be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.16.025 Certificate Required No person shall cause or attempt to cause a horse to pull a carriage, unless the horse has been certified pursuant to this section. The certification of the horse may be made subject to a condition, or otherwise limited by the veterinarian. The certificate shall be kept and be available for inspection by the Office of Animal Services city at the stable where the certified horse is kept, and a copy of the certificate shall be mailed to the Office of Animal Services cry within five days from its date. SECTION 24. That Section 8.16.035, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to criteria for determining health of a horse be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.16.035 Criteria for Determining Health For purposes of this chapter, a horse shall be deemed to be in good health only if the horse: A. Strength. Has, in the opinion of the veterinarian, flesh, muscle tone, and weight sufficient to perform the work for which the horse is used, including the pulling of carriages; B. Immunizations Against Anemia. Has been immunized for the following against equine infectious anemia, and such vaccination will be effective at all times during the next six 19 months: Eastern Equine Encephalitis, Western Equine Encephalitis, Tetanus, Rhino-Flu, and de- worming; C. Coggins Test. The horse has been given a coggins test with negative results on at least one certificate during its life and since the last time the horse entered the State of Utah per year; the certificate verifying said test or tests shall be filed with Animal Services before such horse is used in any carriage business. D. In General. Is, in the opinion of the veterinarian, in general good health and in all respects physically fit to perform the work for which the horse is used, including the pulling of carriages. SECTION 25. That Section 8.16.045, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to police or animal services orders be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.16.045 Police or Aanimal Services Central Orders A city police officer, a health department officer or an Aanimal Services control officer may order that a horse not be used to pull a carriage in the city and that the horse be returned to its stable, if the officer has cause to believe that the horse is suffering from any injury, ailment, or other condition significantly affecting its ability to pull a carriage safely. The order shall be effective only for so long as the officer specifies or until a hearing can be held regarding disqualification, or for three working days, whichever is shorter. SECTION 26. That Section 8.16.055, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to accidents involving horse-drawn carriages be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.16.055 Accidents In addition to any other requirements of law regarding reporting of vehicle accidents, the operator of a horse-drawn carriage shall report to the Office of Aanimal Services control division 20 any accident involving such carriage, and no such horse or carriage shall again be operated until such have been inspected by an Aanimal Services control officer and a determination has been made by such officer that no removal order is necessary as provided by Section 8.16.050 of this chapter, or its successor. SECTION 27. That Section 8.16.060, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to horse examination by the office of animal services be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.16.060 Examination by the Office of Animal Services City The Office of Animal Services city and its officials may at any reasonable time,examine any horse owned by a carriage business or used by a carriage business to pull a carriage, or may have such a horse examined by a veterinarian. The costs of such examination shall initially be borne by the Office of Animal Services eity. Such orders shall be in writing and may be given to the driver of a carriage to which the horse is hitched, or to a carriage business owning or having possession of the horse. If such examination determines that such horse is suffering from any injury, ailment or other condition significantly affecting its ability to pull a carriage in the city, the costs for such examination shall be reimbursed to the Office of Animal Services eity by the certificate holder owning or operating such horse. SECTION 28. That Section 8.16.065, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to physical condition for work be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.16.065 Physical Condition for Work No person shall cause a horse to draw or to be harnessed to a carriage if: 21 A. Certifiable: The person attending to the horse knows, or reasonably should know that the horse, if then examined by a veterinarian, would probably not then be eligible for certification, or would be subject to cancellation or revocation of certification; B. Acute Ailment: The horse has an open sore or wound, or is lame or appears to have any other injury, sickness, or ailment, unless the person attending to the horse has in his possession a written statement signed by a veterinarian and stating that the horse is fit for pulling a carriage notwithstanding the injury, sickness, or ailment; C. Hoofs: The hoofs of the horse are not properly shod and trimmed, utilizing rubber coated heel pads or open steel barium tip shoes to aid in the prevention of slipping. Horses shall be shod and trimmed at least every four(4) to six (6) weeks, or more frequently if necessary by an experienced, competent farrier_at least every four(4) to six (6)weeks, or more frequently if necessary; D. Coat: The horse is not well groomed and/or has fungus, dandruff, or a poor or dirty coat. SECTION 29. That Section 8.16.067, Salt Lake City Code,pertaining to other regulations governing carriage horses be, and the same hereby is, enacted to read as follows: 8.16.067 Other Regulations Governing Carriage Horses A. A carriage horse shall not be left untethered or unattended except when confined in a stable or other enclosure. B. No carriage horse shall be at work for more than 9 total hours in any continuous 24- hour period. There shall be a rest period of at least 15 minutes at the end of each two-hour work period. During such rest periods, the person in charge of such horse shall make fresh drinking 22 water available to the horse. The horse shall not be allowed to drink in large quantities unless it is first rested. C. No carriage horse shall be worked more than live consecutive days without being provided a rest period of at least one day before the resumption of work. D. No carriage horse shall be at work (1.) whenever the ambient temperature, with the wind chill factor, drops below 10°F below zero, or(2)whenever the combination of the ambient temperature and the relative humidity exceeds 150°F. For purposes of this subdivision, temperatures shall be those measured in the downtown area of the City and broadcast by the local radio stations or as measured and announced by the National Weather Service. An operator of a carriage drawn by a horse already at work at the time the temperature reaches the above- described conditions shall return the passengers, if any, to the point of loading and shall rest the horse in sheltered conditions. Thereafter, such horse may be worked only when the temperature once again reaches acceptable limits under this ordinance. Every horse at work shall have a blanket provided by its operator when standing idle at its staging point, the horse has been working and is visibly sweating, and the ambient temperature is less than 20°F. SECTION 30. That Section 8.16.070, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to stables and stalls be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 8.16.070 Stables and Stalls All stables used by a carriage business and the keeping of horses therein shall be subject to the provisions of Chapter 8.08 of this Title, or its successor, as well as any and all other applicable laws and ordinances, including the following:.- A. Ventilation and fresh air shall be provided, but horses shall not be unnecessarily exposed to drafts during cold weather. 23 B. Ceilings shall be at least ten feet high from bedding flooring. C. Stalls shall be constructed and maintained: 1. in good repair to protect the animals from injury and to contain them; 2. so as to enable the animals to remain dry and clean; 3. to provide sufficient space as to enable each horse to turn about freely and to easily stand, sit or lie in a comfortable,normal position; 4. so that the horses contained therein have easy access to water and to mineralized salt at all times, and to food as needed. Such food and water shall be kept free of contamination. D. Floors shall be level and free from holes or openings, and shall provide proper drainage. No horse shall be stabled on a concrete floor without bedding that is: I. highly absorbent and comfortable in all stalls and stables in which horses are kept, 2. deep enough to provide warmth to the animal and so as not to show wetness under the pressure of the animal, 3. not of a type that will harm or in any way be a discomfort to the animal. E. Each stall shall be attended to daily, ensuring clean and dry bedding, and all interior areas of a stable and all exterior areas surrounding a stable shall be kept clean, properly drained and free from nuisances including, but not limited to, odors and accumulation of refuse or excrement. Manure accumulations shall be removed from.the premises weekly to prevent rodent and vermin activity. F. Each stall shall house one horse only. 24 G. Feed shall be kept in storage areas, constructed to permit extermination treatment in order.•to be made rodent and insect proof. Feed storage areas shall allow no harborage and shall be kept vermin free. Storage of feed concentrates shall be kept in an area inaccessible to the horses. H. All stables and stalls shall be inspected by Animal Services prior to use in a horse- drawn carriage business, and every six (6) months thereafter, to verify compliance with this Section and all other applicable laws and ordinances. In addition to the regularly scheduled inspections as set forth in this Section, the City may perform other inspections of stables and stalls used in any horse-drawn carriage business within the corporate limits of Salt Lake City, in order to administer and enforce the standards herein,provided the authorized employees or agents of Animal Services schedule an appointment with the licensed owner of the business or provide written notice by mail or by posting at the stable premises for such inspection at least twenty four(24) hours in advance of such inspection. Said inspection shall be conducted during the hours in which the business's horses are working. Nothing herein shall prevent the City from issuing citations or taking other action authorized under the City's ordinances for violations that are in the plain view of City employees or agents. SECTION 31. This ordinance shall take effect immediately upon the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2001. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: 25 CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: ❑Approved ❑Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2001 Published: G:\OrdinaO l\Animal Services and Horse-drawn Carriage amendments 01-08-02 draft 26 MEMORANDUM DATE: January 8,2002 SUBJECT: Proposed amendments to ordinances relating to horse-drawn carriages REPORT BY: Jan Aramaki CC: Cindy Gust-Jenson,Rocky Fluhart,Roger Cutler,Jay Magure,Steve Fawcett, Laurie Dillon,Larry Spendlove,and John Moore Section 10-8-59 of the Utah State Code was adopted in 1953 and permits municipalities to establish rules to prohibit cruelty to animals. Salt Lake City contracts with Salt Lake County Animal Services for animal control issues,including the control,care,and treatment of horses. The Office of Animal Services requires the issuance of a regulatory permit that must receive approval by the Health Department. In addition,Animal Services responds to any complaints regarding treatment of the horses,inspects the carriages,and inspects the facilities where horses are kept to ensure that the animals are receiving proper care. Salt Lake City also has relevant ordinances. The Administration is proposing several changes to three ordinances pertaining to horse-drawn carriages-Chapter 5.37,Horse-Drawn Carriages;Chapter 8.04,Animal Control;and Chapter 8.16,Regulation of Horse-Drawn Carriage Businesses. On March 13,2001,proposed changes to relevant ordinances pertaining to horse-drawn carriages were scheduled for the Council's consideration. At that time,the Council agreed with the proposed changes but requested additional regulations. In addition,community members asked some questions and expressed concern regarding care of the horses. Neither County nor City ordinances have weather or temperature restrictions for working horses,nor are restrictions in place regarding the number of hours a horse can work in a 24-hour period. Therefore,to better understand some of the issues,the Council requested a briefing for March 22,2001. Council Members requested that the Administration include regulations regarding extreme temperatures,length of service that horses are on the street,and the care of the horses. As a result of the Council's requests,on August 30,2001 the Administration discussed with the carriage company owners the attached revisions to the proposed ordinance that includes more specific requirements for temperature limitations,carriage operator appearance,stable conditions,working hours for horses,watering and blanketing of the horses. The Administration states that the carriage company owners are in agreement with the proposed amendments. Members of the Administration worked with various entities to develop and agree upon the proposed changes,including carriage companies,Salt Lake County Animal Services,and City employees representing the Mayor's Office,Police Department,Business Licensing Division, Page 1 Transportation Division,Attorney's Office,and Management Services. The proposed revisions will not impact the budget,but are for the purpose of updating the current ordinance to include current and preferred practices. A list detailing all of the proposed amendments that Council was in agreement with on March 13,2001 is included with the Administration's paperwork. In response to the Council's requests and community members'expressed concerns from the March 22,2001 briefing,proposed additional revisions are as follows: • 5.37.150 Number of Passengers: Proposed ordinance changes the number of passengers from six adult passengers to no more than six passengers,ages five years of age or older. In addition,if children are seated in the laps of adult passengers,no more than two children under three years of age has been changed to under"five"years of age. • 5.37.155 Passengers Restricted to Passenger Area: A customer will not be allowed to ride while sitting on the same seat as the carriage driver at any time while the carriage is in motion. • 5.37.160 Manner and Appearance: Proposed requirements for carriage drivers'manner and appearance are similar to what is required in Salt Lake City's taxi cab ordinance. • 5.37.185 Revocation or Suspension: Requirement that Animal Services report three or more violations by a driver or licensee within a 12-month period to the City's business licensing office for review for possible suspension or revocation of a business license issued by the City. In addition,a serious violation is defined as"a violation resulting in injury to human being or animal or property damage of$100 or more." • 8.04.120 Cats and Rabbits Number per Residence: The proposed ordinance clarifies that a person or persons per residence is allowed to own two(2)cats and two(2) rabbits-- clarifying that only two of each species is allowed. • 8.04.208 Biting or Potentially Rabid Animals: According to the Administration's paperwork"this proposed change allows an animal to be deemed as vicious on its first bite or attack,depending on the nature of the bite or attack,rather than requiring more than one instance. It also allows for either civil or criminal prosecution,and lists the potential considerations for euthanasia and forfeiture." • 8.04.370 Animal Nuisances Designated Penalty: A revision was made changing that if an animal or animals causing a nuisance is found at large four times (instead of three times)within any 12-month period. • 8.04.410 Dogs Attacking Persons and Animals: An addition states that"a court order may be sought for forfeiture or euthanization of such dog." • 8.04.500 Violation-Penalty: A change was made to indicate that the violations listed in Section 8.04.510 are civil rather than criminal. This allows the City's Administrative Court to hear the issues. Page 2 • 8.04.510B Issuance of Citations-Notice of Violations: The Administration states that "the proposed changes to this section clarify when a notice of violation(a civil charge) rather than a criminal violation will be issued. The relevant sections for each violation have been added as a reference,and fees have been clarified. Animal Care violations have been taken out of the civil process,as these kinds of violations are seen as instances that should be handled criminally." • 8.05.030 Offending Vicious Dogs: An addition was made stating that"any judge presiding over a criminal prosecution of an owner or keeper of a vicious dog under this Section may make euthanasia of such dog a condition of probation of the owner or keeper convicted of violating this section." This is consistent with Section 8.04.410. • 8.16.005 Definitions: Definitions were added: "carriage horse means any horse used to draw a carriage in a carriage business; and work,with reference to a horse,means that the horse is out of the stable and presented as being available for pulling carriages;is in harness;or is pulling a carriage." • 8.16.015 Identification Number: Rather than requiring that the City inspects the certification of horses and maintain the identification number,authorization was changed to the Office of Animal Services. • 8.16.035—Criteria for Determining Health: The Administration states: "the immunizations have been updated to reflect vaccinations and procedures recommended by local veterinarians,the carriage company owners,and Animal Services and confirmed by the Sate Veterinary Services Office. The Coggins Test is typically done only on horses entering the State,but the City has required that it be done at least once even on horses that have only been in Utah." The proposed change eliminates the requirement that the Coggins Test be conducted on an annual basis. • 8.16.065 Physical Condition for Work: Proposed changes stating that horses shall be shod and trimmed at least every four(4)to six(6)weeks or more frequently if necessary by an experienced,competent farrier. • 8.16.067 Other Regulations Governing Carriage Horses: More specific proposed regulations were added regarding the care of a horse. A carriage horse is allowed to be left untethered or unattended only when it is confined in a stable or other enclosure; No carriage horse shall be at work for more than 9 hours in any continuous 24-hour period; A rest period is required at least 15 minutes at the end of each two hour work period; During rest periods,person in charge of such horse is required to make drinking water available to the horse;and the horse is not allowed to drink in large quantities unless it is first rested; No carriage horse shall be worked more than five consecutive days without being Page 3 provided a rest period for at least one day before the resumption of work; Regulations requiring that the carriages not operate when temperatures adjusted for humidity are above 150 degrees F and when the temperature adjusted for wind chill is below 10 degrees F below zero. The Administration's attached paperwork explains in detail how these temperature restrictions were derived. • 8.16.070 Stables and Stalls: More specific stable conditions are being proposed: Ventilation and fresh air shall be provided,but horses should not be unnecessarily exposed to drafts during cold weather; Ceilings are to be at least ten feet high from bedding flooring; Stalls shall be constructed and maintained to protect the animal from injury and to contain them;enable the animals to remain dry and clean;provide sufficient space to allow each horse to turn about freely and easily stand,sit or lie in a comfortable position; allow easy access to water and to mineralized salt at all times,and to food as needed; keep such food and water free of contaminations; Floors to be level and free from holes or openings,and shall provide proper drainage; No horse shall be stabled on a concrete floor without bedding that is highly absorbent and comfortable in the stalls where the horses are kept;deep enough to provide warmth to the animal so as not to show wetness under the pressure of the horse;not of a type that will harm or in any way provide discomfort; Each stall shall be attended to daily-clean and dry bedding;all interior areas of stable and exterior areas surrounding stable are to be kept clean;be properly drained and free from nuisances including but not limited to odors and accumulation of refuse or excrement. Manure accumulations are to be removed from the premises weekly preventing rodent and vermin activity; Each stall is to house one horse only; Feed is to be kept in storage areas. Feed storage areas are not to allow harborage and shall be kept vermin free. Storage of feed concentrates shall be kept in an area inaccessible to the horses; All stables and stalls shall be inspected by Animal Services prior to use in a horse-drawn carriage business. In addition to the regularly scheduled inspections,additional inspections are being proposed provided Animal Services has scheduled an appointment with the licensed owner of the business or has provided written notice at least 24 hours in advance of inspection. • Appendix A-Permits and Fees: Fees are proposed for the disposal of dead animals-- $25 for pets and$100 for livestock. In the past,Animal Services provided this service at no charge but currently pays$.33 per pound for disposal. The proposed fee would offset the charge. Animal Services provides a list of disposal alternatives acceptable to the City- Page 4 County Health Department for pet owners who do not want to pay for the service. Also a list of commercial service providers is available for the disposal of livestock in lieu of the $100 livestock disposal fee. Page 5 Weaver, Lehua From: Gust-Jenson, Cindy Sent: Wednesday, January 09, 2002 3:11 PM To: Sears, Michael; Buhler, Dave; Christensen, Carlton; Jergensen, Eric; Lambert, Dale; Love, Jill; Saxton, Nancy; Turner,Van Cc: Mumford, Gary; Weaver, Lehua; Weeks, Russell Subject: RE: addendum item to amendment#4 here is the background: The Administration wants to have receptions on opening and closing nights. These would be hosted by the Mayor and Council. Opening Night would be at the Jewish Community Center (former Fort Douglas Country Club). They have some funding available because they are canceling a reception that was going to be held on February 18. They don't have enough to have both receptions. They hope to get a sponsor, but there is no guarantee. If the Council makes the appropriation the Administration is authorized to spend the funds with or without a contributing sponsor. Given the time constraints it may be a good idea for the Council to consider this as though getting a sponsor is a remote possibility. If you would like to hold the receptions there is a significant risk of 100 percent City funding. (Not trying to be negative,just realistic...) Original Message From: Sears, Michael Sent: Wednesday,January 09,2002 2:41 PM To: Buhler,Dave; Christensen,Carlton;Jergensen, Eric; Lambert, Dale; Love,Jill; Saxton, Nancy; Turner,Van Cc: Gust-Jenson,Cindy; Mumford,Gary;Weaver,Lehua;Weeks,Russell Subject: FIN: addendum item to amendment#4 The following item needs to be added to the briefing information that you received for item number 2 on the agenda. A hard copy will be placed at your seat for the meeting. If you have any questions please call me at 535-6295. Original Message From: Fawcett,Steve Sent: Wednesday,January 09,2002 2:15 PM To: Sears, Michael Subject: addendum item to amendment#4 Michael: Attached is the item we have received permission to add. Thank You << File: BA#4lnitiative19-Hosted Olympic Events.xls >> Salt Lake City Corporation Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet for Budget Development and Budget Amendment Mayor's Office and Olympic Planning FY 01-02 Department For Fiscal Year Hosted Receptions/Opening and Closing Ceremony BA#4 19 Initiative Name Initiative Number Steve Fawcett 535-6399 Prepared By Phone Number Fiscal Impact of Proposed Change Biennial Period Proposed A. Revenue Impacted by Fund and Source: 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year FY 2001-02 FY 2002-03 FY 2003-04 1.General Fund Private Sponsorship 70,000 0 0 Total $70,000 - $0 $0 2. Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 $0 3. Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 $0 4. Other Fund $0 $0 $0 B. Expenditures Impacted by Fund and Source: 1. General Fund Olympic Planning 70,000 0 0 Total $70,000 $0 $0 2. Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 $0 3. Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 $0 4. Other Fund Total $0 $0 $0 C. Expenditure Impact Detail 1. Salaries and Wages 2. Employee Benefits 3. Operating and Maintenance Supply 4. Charges and Services 70,000 5. Capital Outlay 6. Other(Physical Fitness of Cities) Total $70,000 $0 $0 Salt Lake City Corporation • Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet for Budget Development and Budget Amendment E. Measured or measurable Impact on functions, structure and organization F. Issue Discussion: A complete justification will contain a discussion of each of the elements mentioned below; criteria, condition, effect, cause and recommendation. Criteria is a definition of what is expected or what can be expected. It provides a basis for comparison without which analysis cannot be effective. The criteria varies from issue to issue. In straightforward cases, it can be an ordinance or policy. In other cases, it may be an industry standard or comparable data from another city. Condition is a description of current practices. It is the information to which the criteria is compared. Effect is the difference, if any, between the condition and criteria. It is best described in terms of a dollar impact or a service level impact. If an effect cannot be identified, there is no finding. Cause is sometimes a difficult element to identify but is essential to a finding. It is simply identifying why the condition varies from the criteria. Sometimes the answer is as simple as a change in policy or budget but often goes deeper into management or personnel issues. Recommendation is made in a way that addresses the cause. By doing so, it is most likely to result in improving the condition to be in line with the criteria. Issue Discussion: The Mayor is planning to host two special events, one in conjunction with the opening ceremony and one in conjunction with the closing ceremony. The cost of the two hosted functions is expected to be$110,000. The Olympic Planning budget will be able to cover$40,000 of the total cost within its current budget as an event previously planned has been canceled. The balance is expected to come from private donations and sponsorships. Although there is a possibility that the sponsorships will not completely cover the cost, an appropriation for the full amount is needed to proceed with the preparations. The Administration requests that the City Council approve this request to allow members of our community to participate in the Olympics and to enhance our economic development efforts for relatively low cost. Analyst Comments: