01/22/2002 - Minutes (2) PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2002
The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in a Work Session on Tuesday, January
22, 2002, at 5:30 p.m. in Room 326, City Council Office, City County Building, 451
South State Street.
In Attendance: Council Members Carlton Christensen, Van Turner, Eric Jergensen, Nancy
Saxton, Jill Remington Love, Dave Buhler, and Dale Lambert.
Also in Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Mayor Ross C.
"Rocky" Anderson; Roger Cutler, City Attorney; Diana Karrenberg, Community Affairs
Manager; Gordon Hoskins, Controller; Rocky Fluhart, Chief Executive Officer; Jim
Considine, Labor Relations Specialist; Brenda Hancock, Human Resource Director; Steve
Fawcett, Deputy Director of Management Services; Russell Weeks, Council Policy Analyst;
Janice Jardine, Council Planning and Policy Analyst; Gary Mumford, Council Deputy
Director/Senior Legislative Auditor; Chief of Police Rick Dinse; Joel Paterson, Special
Projects Planner; Stephen Goldsmith, Planning Director; Michael Sears, Council Budget
and Policy Analyst; John Sittner, Director of Olympic Planning; Elizabeth Giraud,
Historic Preservation Planner; Rick Graham, Public Services Director; David Dobbins,
Acting Director of Community and Economic Development; Scott Nixon,
PriceWaterhouseCoopers; Scott Ballard, PriceWaterhouseCoopers; and Beverly Jones,
Deputy City Recorder.
Councilmember Buhler presided at and conducted the meeting.
The meeting was called to order at 5:37 p.m.
AGENDA ITEMS
#1. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION
ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS.
Cindy Gust-Jenson said Item A-8, the public safety command briefing, was
tentative.
She said staff could explain Olympic Planning information and the Council could make
motions on Thursday. Councilmember Christensen said the Council could recess the
Regular Council meeting and a discussion could be held during the work session. He
said action could be taken if issues were resolved. Ms. Gust-Jenson said the security
briefing could contain other information which the Council might want to know from a
budget point of view. All Council Members were in favor of recessing the Regular
Council meeting and holding a discussion on the Olympics before making a decision.
See File M 02-5 for Council announcements.
#2. INTERVIEW SANDRA HATCH PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF AN APPOINTMENT TO THE CITY AND
COUNTY BUILDING CONSERVANCY COMMITTEE.
Ms. Hatch said she had practiced architecture on her own for approximately 15 years.
She said she worked mostly in historic preservation and restoration. She said she did
remodeling in historic districts. She said she had served on the Historic Landmarks
Commission for seven years.
#3. RECEIVE AN UPDATE REGARDING ISSUES AT THE 2002 LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
No update was given.
#4. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS' AUDIT OF THE CITY'S FINANCIAL
02 - 1
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, JANUARY 22 , 2002
STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2001 AND THE AUDITOR'S LETTER REGARDING INTERNAL
CONTROLS. View Attachment
Gary Mumford, Gordon Hoskins, Scott Nixon, and Scott Ballard briefed the Council
from the attached handout.
Councilmember Christensen asked if there were enough resources in the 2002-2003
budget to complete the Governmental Accounting Standards Bond (GASB) No. 34 statement.
Mr. Hoskins said there were enough. He said they contracted with people to review
last year' s statement and had implemented the statement again. He said the Housing
Authority and the Library were struggling for compliance.
Councilmember Lambert asked about the new financial reporting model GASB No. 34.
Mr. Nixon said the largest change was that the City's infrastructure assets needed to
be capitalized on and depreciated. He said in the past infrastructure assets were not
required to be capitalized. He said they had gone back several years and picked up
acquired assets. He said then they had to estimate what the depreciation should have
been between the time they were originally purchased and the end of the year. Mr.
Hoskins said internal service funds had to be allocated back to primary functions.
Councilmember Turner asked about monitoring cash balances to avoid additional
borrowing by Public Utilities. Mr. Nixon said Public Utilities had storm water, water
and sewer cash balances. He said cash inflows and outflows were different for each.
He said for one month at the end of the year, Public Utilities had not monitored cash
balances. He said one fund became negative and they had to borrow from the City's
internal borrowing system and pay interest.
Mr. Nixon said if the City had an adoption or change in an accounting principal,
that needed to be disclosed. He said the City was required to adopt GASB No. 33 which
was how they accounted for financial reporting of non exchanged transactions. He said
the largest impact was at the airport where passenger facility charges used to be a
contributed capital item and went straight to equity. He said now everything had to
be recognized as revenue. He said Public Utilities had to recognize donated sewer and
water lines as revenue. He said property taxes had to be recognized as of the date of
the official lien. He said those taxes used to be recognized 60 days after the end
of the year.
#5. RECEIVE A BRIEFING FROM THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING THE OLYMPICS.
John Sittner and Rocky Fluhart briefed the Council.
Mr. Sittner said money to provide security at the perimeter of the mag and bags
had not been budgeted for. He said the City's portion would be approximately $200, 000.
He said the total manpower cost was $457, 000. He said SLOC and Utah Olympic Public
Safety Command (UOPSC) would pay $258,000.
Councilmember Saxton asked about security on Washington Square. Mr. Sittner
said $50,000 was originally planned for security. He said that amount provided security
for the inside and outside of the City and County Building. He said in addition to
that there was now festival security to protect people at the festival on Main Street
and Washington Square. He said that amount was now $55,000, up from $46,000.
Councilmember Saxton asked why UOPSC had not recognized the increase in cost.
Mr. Fluhart said the SLOC/UOPSC proposal was put together overnight and was sent to
Washington. He said funding had not come to the City the way it had been requested.
He said the proposal suggested that National Guard troops provide security. He said
02 - 2
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 2002
that would have freed up officers which would then be able to provide security on the
block.
Councilmember Christensen asked about the festival contingency. Mr. Sittner
said it had not been used. He said that contingency was part of the United Concerts
budget. He said the entire festival portion incorporated all United Concerts
obligations and things the City was doing for the whole downtown festival.
Councilmember Christensen said he was not comfortable going into the games with
no contingency. He asked if actual costs and committed costs were being considered.
He asked if there were other anticipated costs which were not included. Mr. Sittner
said everything he had been able to identify was reflected on the spreadsheet. He
said he was asking for $100,000 to replenish the contingency so there was cushion going
into the games.
Councilmember Lambert asked if the City had received any Federal money. Mr.
Sittner said the $45 million coming to UPOSC would be used by the State, the City, and
SLOC. Mr. Fluhart said most of that money was for Federal personnel during the
Olympics.
Councilmember Love asked for clarification on the amount of money SLOC was asking
for. Mr. Sittner said the total was $310, 000. He said that would provide $200,000
for security, $100,000 for contingency and $10, 000 excess expenditure for public
services.
Cindy Gust-Jenson said that amount included $91, 000 for restoration of the grass
around the City and County Building. She said it did not include $70, 000 for the
receptions. Councilmember Jergensen said he understood that amount would be funded by
private contributions. Ms. Gust-Jenson said the complete amount would not be funded
by donations. Mr. Fluhart said they currently had $32,000 committed for the receptions.
Councilmember Saxton asked if there would be other monies besides vending permits
which the City would realize from the Olympics. Mr. Sittner said the most significant
source of revenue would be the occupancy tax which included the hotels and sales tax.
He said they were making sure the occupancy tax was correctly assessed. He said he
felt there would be more revenue than originally anticipated. He said vendors in the
downtown festival were paying a percentage of their sales for the benefit of selling
within the festival. He said the City could see approximately $100,000 of revenue
from the sale of the map and the poster of the map.
Councilmember Buhler asked Mr. Fluhart if he had any objection if this issue was
held over until Thursday, January 24, 2002. Mr. Fluhart said they had no objection.
All Council Members were in favor of tabling the issue until Thursday, January 24,
2002.
#6. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING A TEMPORARY PARKING LOT LOCATED AT 404 WEST 400 SOUTH.
Joel Paterson and Stephen Goldsmith briefed the Council.
Councilmember Christensen asked if they were getting complaints from neighboring
businesses. Mr. Paterson said they had not received any complaints.
#7. HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING THE COUNCIL'S LABOR POLICY AND A PROPOSED LABOR PROTOCOL
AGREEMENT WITH THE ADMINISTRATION. View Attachment
Gary Mumford, Jim Considine, Brenda Hancock, and Rocky Fluhart briefed the Council
02 - 3
PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH
TUESDAY, JANUARY 22 , 2002
from the attached handout.
Mr. Considine said they had collective bargaining agreements with four bargaining units
within the City represented by three different unions. He said firefighters and both
AFSCME units were up for negotiations.
Councilmember Christensen said the protocol agreement talked about looking at local
markets. Mr. Considine said they would continue that this year. Councilmember
Christensen said the economy had changed considerably since last year when the Citizen' s
Compensation Board made recommendations. He asked if the Compensation Board would be
reviewing last year's recommendations. Ms. Hancock said there would be a written
report and the Board was tentatively scheduled to brief the Council the end of February.
She said there had been slowing in the economy and that would be reflected in the
recommendations.
Councilmember Saxton asked how performance was looked at when considering raises. Ms.
Hancock said the City did not have a pay for performance system. She said people
received raises if their performance was satisfactory. She said one of the Mayor's
initiatives was that all City employees have a fair and consistent performance
appraisal. She said the system being considered was on-line and adapted to different
occupations. She said it would be a major policy switch for the City to change to pay
for performance.
Councilmember Jergensen asked how the City surveyed local employers with whom the City
competed. Mr. Fluhart said they looked at where employees were hired from in the past.
He said it was clear the City' s labor market was predominantly the Wasatch Front.
#8. RECEIVE A BRIEFING ON A PROPOSED AGREEMENT WITH THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMAND.
No briefing was held.
#9. CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO AN EXECUTIVE SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE,
TO DISCUSS THE DEPLOYMENT OF SECURITY PERSONNEL, DEVICES, OR SYSTEMS.
An Executive Session was held. See File M 02-2 for Sworn Statement and confidential
tape.
The meeting adjourned at 7:43 p.m.
bj
02 - 4
MEMORANDUM
DATE: January 18,2001
TO: Council Members
FROM: Gary Mumford
RE: Salt Lake City's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and
Letter to Council and Mayor from Auditors
CC: Rocky Fluhart,Jay Magure,Gordon Hoskins,Elwin Heihnann,Scott Nixon
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
The Department of Management Services recently issued the City's Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report for the year ended June 30,2001. The CPA firm PricewaterhouseCoopers
audited the financial report. A representative of the CPA firm and representatives from the
Department of Management Services will be present at the work session to answer any questions
that the Council may have regarding the annual financial report.
Management Letter
In performing the audit,the auditors reviewed the City's internal control structure in order to
determine auditing procedures. Although the audit was not designed to provide complete
assurance on the internal control structure,the auditors noted certain matters in a letter submitted
to the Council and Mayor. The recommendations contained in this letter are designed to help the
City make improvements and achieve operational efficiencies. City managers have included a
response to the recommendations.
The auditors'comments relate to the following items:
1. Impact fees—
• Develop system to manage activity relating to impact fees
2. Fidelity Bond
• Adjust City Treasurer's fidelity bond to 2%of budgeted revenues to meet State
requirements
3. New Financial Reporting Model
• GASB statement 34 effective for Salt Lake City's fiscal year ending June 30,2002
4. Cash Management
• Monitor cash balances to avoid additional borrowing at Public Utilities (Invested
cash exceeded available cash.)
• One instance of a cash receipt not deposited within the required three days
5. Budgetary Compliance
• One instance where the public notice of a hearing for a budget amendment was not
published
• One instance where expenditures exceeded appropriations(Emergency 911 Dispatch
Fund)
•
Salt Lake City Corporation
•
Management Letter
for the year ended June 30, 2001
a
a
S
✓
I
0
P?ICEWATERHOUsECcDPERS
110
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Beneficial Life Tower
36 South State Street Suite 1700
Salt Lake City UT 84111
Telephone (801)531 9666
Facsimile (801)363 7371
December 19, 2001
Members of the City Council
and the Honorable Mayor
Salt Lake City Corporation
451 South State Street
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear City Council and Mayor:
In planning and performing our audit of Salt Lake City Corporation ("the City") for the year
ended June 30, 2001, we considered its internal control in order to determine our auditing
procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and not to
provide assurance on internal control. However, we noted certain matters involving internal
control and its operation, and are submitting for your consideration related observations and
recommendations designed to help the City improve internal control and achieve operational
efficiencies. Our comments reflect our desire to be of continuing assistance to the City.
This letter is intended solely for the information and use of management, and others within the
r organization and is not intended to be and should not be used by anyone other than these
specified parties.
Very truly yours,
i
MANAGEMENT LETTER COMMENTS
✓
A. IMPACT FEES
The City began collecting impact fees during the year ended June 30, 2001. State law
requires the City to spend or encumber those fees within six years of collection. We
O recommend that the City develop a system to manage activity related to impact fees to ensure
compliance with State requirements.
Management Response:
The City currently has a system that identifies the payee as the fees are collected. The cost
center and object code combination used to record the receipt of these fees identifies the
geographical region and type of impact for which the fee is collected. The Accounting
Division on a monthly basis transfers the fees collected during the prior month to specific
cost centers in the Capital Projects Fund. These cost centers also identify the kind of fee
collected and the geographic area. With this information, the City will be in a position to
identify specific individuals or entities that are due refunds if the fees are not spent or
encumbered within six years of collection.
B. FIDELITY BOND
P
The State of Utah requires the City treasurer to maintain a fidelity bond of at least 2% of
gross budgeted revenues of the previous fiscal year. This minimum requirement was not met
for a portion of the year ended June 30, 2001. We recommend that the City develop
procedures to adjust the amount of the fidelity bond whenever the budget or a budget
amendment is passed.
Management Response:
The Accounting Division will work the the City's risk manager to develop a periodic review
of the changing requirements of the fidelity bond.
C. NEW FINANCIAL REPORTING MODEL
The City will be required to adopt the provisions of Statement No. 34 of the Governmental
Accounting Standards Board ("GASB"), "Basic Financial Statements and Management's
Discussion and Analysis for State and Local Governments" effective for the year ended June
30, 2002. This will represent the most significant change to occur in the history of
governmental financial reporting. Major changes will include:
1) Management's Discussion and Analysis
2) Government-wide Financial Statements
3) Fund Financial Statements
•
4) Accounting for Infrastructure/Depreciation
5) New Notes to Financial Statements
6) Additional Required Supplemental Information
The City's Department of Management Services is aware of this new reporting requirement
and has taken significant steps toward implementing this new standard.
We recommend that the City continue to pursue educational and practical knowledge
regarding the implementation of this standard, including discussions with other entities as
appropriate. Additionally, the Department of Management Services should work closely
with the City Council to ensure adequate funding and personnel are available to accomplish a
smooth transition and implementation.
Management Response:
The City's accounting staff is currently acquiring additional printed guidance published by
the Governmental Finance Officers Association (GFOA) and the American Institute of
Certified Public Accountants (AICPA). We expect that implementing the provisions of the
new standard will be very arduous and time consuming and that there will be added resource
requirements on a continuing basis after the initial implementation.
The standard will not only require the City to continue reporting similarly to how it has in the
past, but also to go through a complex process to convert the information to what GASB calls
the Government-wide financial statements.
The standard includes a requirement that the City capitalize and depreciate all infrastructure
in the public right of way, which will be a particularly difficult task to accomplish. Initially,
0 the standard requires the City infrastructure activity (additions and depreciation) for up to 20
years. It will also require more resources to keep up with new infrastructure activity on an
on-going basis.
The fixed asset system has been modified to accommodate dual responsibility or allocation of
fixed assets. Property Management is continuing to test the modified system. Ongoing
•
communication is occurring between the Accounting Division and various divisions of Public
Services to inventory and value various systems and subsystems of infrastructure. Methods
to eliminate internal service funds in the government wide statements have been identified
for the internal service fund activities. The Accounting Division has completed a rough
conversion of the fiscal 2000 financial data and will complete a more refined conversion of
IP
fiscal 2001 data to the new reporting model.
We hope the City Council will be sensitive to our resource needs to implement, and then
continuously maintain the capacity to comply with, this new accounting and reporting
D standard.
0
•
SALT LAKE CITY PUBLIC UTILITIES MANAGEMENT LETTER COMMENTS
•
A. CASH MANAGEMENT
During fieldwork we noted that the Salt Lake City Public Utilities (the "Utilities") had over
• invested cash at year-end, resulting in the need to borrow from the City's pooled cash. The
Utilities have traditionally performed monitoring controls over the cash management function
by reviewing the cash and investment balances on a monthly basis. At year-end, this
monitoring function did not occur, resulting in too much cash being invested and increased
borrowing from the City's pooled cash.
•
We recommend that the Utilities continue to monitor cash and investment balances on a
monthly basis assuring that if the designated reviewer is unable to perform the review that
someone else familiar with the balances is designated to do so.
Management's Response:
We have implemented procedures to ensure that cash and investment balances are reviewed
on a monthly basis.
•
•
•
•
•
•
r
r
r
SCHEDULE OF STATE COMPLIANCE FINDINGS
for the period ended June 30, 2001
I
I
I
I
r
r
I
r
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
Schedule of State Compliance Findings
for the year ended June 30, 2001
A. Cash Management General Compliance. The City and its various entities and agencies
are required to deposit all public funds within three days of receipt. During the year
ended June 30, 2001, we noted one instance of non-compliance by Property Management.
B. Cash Management General Compliance. The City is required to maintain a fidelity
•
bond for 2% of gross budgeted revenue. During the year ended June 30, 2001, the City
carried a bond for $8,070,000, and the minimum amount required was approximately
$9,870,000.
C. Budgetary Compliance. The City is required to publish a notice to the public that a
hearing will be held for any amendments to the budget. During the year ended June 30,
2001, we noted one instance of non-compliance.
D. Budgetary Compliance. The City is required to limit expenditures or encumbrances to
the total appropriation for each separate activity in the Special Revenue Fund. During the
year ended June 30, 2001, expenditures of the Emergency 911 Dispatch Fund exceeded
the related appropriation by $1,517.
•
•
I
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
DATE: . January 18,2002
SUBJECT: CITY COUNCIL LABOR POLICY AND LABOR BARGAINING
PROTOCOL
STAFF REPORT BY: Gary Mumford
Document Type Budget-Related Facts Policy-Related Facts Miscellaneous Facts
Discussion of No budget impact Discussion is to confirm The intent of these documents is
• policy and protocol or revise an existing to help facilitate an orderly and
agreement Council policy and a meaningful interaction between
protocol agreement the two branches of
with the Mayor. government with regard to
collective bargaining.
Each year,prior to the beginning of the budget process,the City Council considers adopting a
City Council Labor Policy. In addition,the City Council develops and adopts a Labor
Bargaining Protocol Agreement with the Mayor to ensure that the mutual needs of the City
Council and the Administration are met during the labor bargaining process.
OPTIONS:
The Council may wish to discuss whether the attached Council labor relations'policy and
agreement accurately reflect the Councils current policy direction. The Council may wish to
modify,add or delete policy items or agreement provisions and confirm whether the
Administration has any proposed modifications to the protocol agreement.
ANALYSIS AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS:
This year's bargaining process will include negotiations with the International Association of
Firefighters,Local 1645(Fire Union)and the American Federation of State,County and
Municipal Employees(AFSCME Union). The International Union of Police Associations,Local
75 (Police Union)signed a three-year contract last year;therefore,negotiation with this union is
not necessary at this time.
The City Council's Labor Policy is a document that the Council may wish to adopt to indicate to
the Administration, the unions,and the public the Council's philosophical and policy directions
with regard to labor relations. The Policy contains guidelines that will assist the Administration
in preparing a labor package that meets the Council's goals and priorities and is,as a result,
likely to be supported by the City Council. The attached draft policy document contains the
following provisions:
• Salary surveys and market analysis should be based on local employers with whom the City
competes for qualified personnel.
Page 1
• In years that salary surveys are not conducted,salary adjustments should be based on the
Consumer Price Index.
• General compensation adjustments should be based on recommendations of the Citizens
Compensation Advisory Committee.
• Contracts with bargaining units should be multi-year and staggered.
• The City should provide a cafeteria benefit plan to allow employees a variety of choice
within a fixed level of subsidy.
• The commuter vehicle fee is a non negotiable item.
• Total costing of full compensation including benefits and any compensation portions that
are absorbed within departmental budgets should be disclosed to ensure that a true total
compensation cost is considered during the City's negotiation process.
Each year the City Council has worked with the Administration to develop a Labor Bargaining
Protocol Agreement with the Administration to help ensure that the mutual needs of the City
Council and the Administration are met during the labor bargaining process.
• Prior to negotiations,the Mayor confers with the Council(closed session):
a The Mayor briefs the Council on revenue projections and expected labor issues.
❑ The Council may provide the Mayor with compensation issues the Council desires to be
considered in the negotiating process.
a The Council provides the Mayor with a tentative commitment of what the Council will
be willing to fund for employee compensation and benefits.
• The Mayor will undertake negotiations and seek to reach an agreement within the tentative
financial commitments given by the Council by May 20th.
• The Mayor will periodically keep the Council apprised of the status of the negotiations
(closed sessions). The Council may modify the Council's tentative funding commitment.
• Once agreement with a union is reached within the Council's tentative commitment,the
Mayor will forward a proposed agreement to the Council for ratification.
• In the event agreement with a bargaining unit is not reached by May 20th,the Council
reserves the right to set compensation and employee benefits by ordinance.
Note: In the past, there were a few isolated attempts during the negotiation process by
representatives of bargaining units to lobby Council Members.According to Council Policy,
Council Members should refrain from discussing negotiation issues with union representatives
during the negotiation process. This allows each branch of City government to preserve and
respect their separate functions during the bargaining process.
cc: Rocky Fluhart,Jay Magure,Brenda Hancock,Jim Considine
•
Page 2
Effective Date: February 5, 2002 February-2072001
Subject: CITY COUNCIL POLICIES ON LABOR RELATIONS
Distribution: Council Members and Staff;Mayor,Mayor's Chief of Staff;Management
Services Director,Human Resources Director,City Attorney,Labor Relations Director,
Union Presidents, Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee Chair
Re-Evaluation Date: January 1,2003 2002 I
Chair,City Council
I. POLICY
It is the intent of the City Council to document specific policies related to labor relations which the City Council
supports.It is also the intent of the City Council to review these policies each year in January.
II PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this policy is to provide a forum for the City Council to express its position on specific terms and
conditions of employment which are listed in Section IV.
III. DEFINITIONS
Certified Employee Organization: A bargaining unit established under the Collective Bargaining Resolution
Section 7 that is authorized to represent employees in the negotiations process.
Executive Session: Closed door meeting of the City Council,without the right of the public to be present,
pursuant to the Open Meetings Act.
Memorandum of Understanding: The jointly prepared,written agreement of the representatives of the City and
the certified employee organization which constitutes a mutual recommendation jointly submitted to the Mayor by
May 20th of each year. The memorandum of understanding(MOU)is not binding upon the parties until: a
majority of the members of the certified employee organization,in attendance at the ratification meeting, has
ratified it by a majority vote;the City Council has approved it by a majority vote,enacted the necessary ordinances
or other changes required to implement it by general legislation,and appropriated the necessary funds required to
implement the full provisions of the MOU.
Negotiation: The performance of duly authorized management representatives of the Administration and the duly
authorized representatives of a certified employee organization of their mutual obligation to meet at reasonable
times and confer in good faith(within a reasonable length of time in order to freely exchange information,
opinions,and proposals on matters properly the subject of bargaining)with respect to wages, hours and other terms
and conditions of employment. This includes the mutual obligation to execute a written document incorporating
any agreement reached.
Nonunion,non represented employees: Groups of employees not represented by a certified organization such as
the employees in the"300""600""800",and"900"professional/paraprofessional series,and executive level
employees.
Terms and conditions of employment: Wages, salaries,working conditions,hours or benefits,except as
specifically modified.
IV. CITY COUNCIL LABOR RELATIONS POLICIES
(A) Indicators of financial condition
The City Council supports the preparation of various indicators of financial condition to determine trends in
both environmental factors outside of the City(i.e.cost-of-living index)and in financial factors internal to the
City(i.e.revenues,expenditures,debt structure,etc.). The City Council further encourages the preparation of
these indicators on an annual basis with presentation and discussion focused on them during the
Mayor/Council Winter budget retreat or discussion.
(B) Staggered Contracts
The City Council supports the adoption of staggered contracts/agreements so that all contracts/agreements are
not negotiated during the same fiscal year.
(C) Multi-Year Contracts
The City Council supports the adoption of multi-year contracts/agreements so that they may remain in effect
for more than one fiscal year.
(D) Total Costing of Fringe Benefits
The City Council supports the total costing of all fringe benefits to ensure that a true total compensation cost
is considered during the City's negotiation process. The City Council supports the preparation of a written
description of all fringe benefits along with cost information for each City employee so that they will know
exactly how much their total compensation package is worth.
(E) Cafeteria of Benefits Plan
The City Council supports the continuation of a cafeteria style of benefits plan which,within a fixed level of
subsidy by the City,allows employees a variety of choices to meet their individual needs. The City Council
supports a plan which offers expense reimbursement for dependent care and other tax savings programs as
provided under the Internal Revenue Service Code Section 125 as well as conventional benefit options in lieu
of health care coverage(with restrictions to ensure that sufficient levels of protection are ensured.) The City
Council supports a plan which allows employees to enrich benefits or maintain certain levels of benefits by
assuming resultant costs themselves which might exceed funding levels available through the City.
(F) Commuter Vehicles and Commuter Vehicle Fees
The City Council intends that all issues relating to commuter vehicles and commuter vehicle fees are non-
negotiable items during the labor negotiation process. These issues are the exclusive prerogative of formal
Administrative and Legislative processes outside of any labor negotiation process.
(G) Compensation Based on Recommendations of the Citizens' Compensation Advisory Committee and on
the Consumer Price Index
The City Council intends to review compensation recommendations made by the Citizen's Compensation
Advisory Committee(CCAC)and would like the Administration to provide information detailing the area(s)
wherein the Administration may be recommending a different approach than that recommended by the
CCAC. When the Administration's approach is not consistent with CCAC recommendation,the City
Council would like a letter from the CCAC chair detailing the CCAC's opinion and position.Further,the
City Council supports the philosophy that salary adjustments should be based on the Consumer Price Index in
years that salary surveys are not conducted.
(II) Salary Surveys and Market Analysis should be Consistent
The City Council intends that for compensation practice comparisons the City will survey those local
employers with whom the City competes for qualified personnel.
(G) Total costing of the full compensation package presented for the fiscal year,including those portions
that aren't budgeted,but rather,will be absorbed within departmental budgets
The City Council would like a written briefing outlining the total amount included for compensation
adjustments each year,including the amount that departments may be-asked to absorb.
LABOR BARGAINING PROTOCOL
AGREEMENT
THIS PROTOCOL AGREEMENT is entered into the day and year first written below by and between the
Executive Branch(hereinafter"Mayor")and the Legislative Branch(hereinafter"Council")of the City government;
and
WITNESSETH
WHEREAS,that the City's labor negotiation policy has been memorialized in a Resolution passed by the
City Council as Resolution No.41 of 1984 and,may,hereafter,be adopted as a City ordinance,which writings
delineate,among other relevant matters,bargaining processes,impasse resolution mechanisms and the functions and
duties of the Executive and Legislative branches of government with regard to collective bargaining;and
WHEREAS,each branch of City government desires to preserve and respect their separate functions,but
each desires cooperative interaction during the bargaining process to minimize misunderstandings and delays which
may prejudice rather than foster desired labor harmony;and,
WHEREAS,the Council and Mayor desire the labor bargaining process to be fair and deliberative;yet,it
must be conducted in a timely manner that comports with orderly budget development;and
WHEREAS,in mutual respect for their separate but equal roles in City governance,they desire to
memorialize a protocol to facilitate their orderly and meaningful interaction in this volatile area of labor bargaining;
NOW,THEREFORE,the Mayor and City Council mutually agree to the following procedural protocol:
1. Winter Consultation. The Mayor and Council will meet in a strategy session as a closed meeting
under the Utah Open Meetings Act,and a Council budget briefing before February 28 of each year. Among the
matters presented and discussed will be the following:
(a) The Mayor or the Mayor's designee will brief the Council on revenue projections for the coming fiscal year
and the projected budgetary impact of employee compensation;
(b) The Mayor or the Mayor's designee will present the expected labor issues for the coming bargaining year and
anticipated compensation demands by City employees. The Mayor or designee will discuss Executive Branch
negotiating objectives;
(c) The Council may provide the Mayor a summary of labor and compensation issues the Council desires to be
considered in the negotiating process and those it wishes to be included in the employee compensation package. In
addition,the Council will provide the Mayor a copy of the City Council Policy on Labor Relations which is updated
each year;and
(d) The Council will provide the Mayor a tentative commitment concerning what the Council would be willing
to fund for employee compensation and benefit program for the coming City fiscal year.
2. Negotiations with Joint Understandings. The Mayor will undertake negotiations with the Certified
Bargaining Units,consistent with City law,and seek to reach an agreement within the tentative financial
commitments given by the Council by May 20th;provided, however,that if no such funding commitments or
objectives are given by the Council,the Mayor will still negotiate,in order to reach an agreement with the Certified
Bargaining Units. In these negotiations,the Mayor will give due consideration to each of the stated Council
negotiating objectives. However,the parties mutually acknowledge their separate roles and responsibilities under the
City's optional form of government and that neither is legally bound by these understandings or positions.
3. Complete Negotiations by May 20; Cost Disclosure
(a) May 20 Deadline. The Mayor will use her/his best efforts to complete all negotiations with the Certified
Bargaining Units on or before May 20th of that year and forward agreements to the Council for ratification,
consistent with City law.
(b) Disclosure,if Labor Proposal Exceeds Council Tentative Approval. If the proposed Agreement negotiated
by the Mayor exceeds the tentative Council funding approvals,the Mayor shall include with the aggregate
transmittal,a letter:(1)providing an estimate of the aggregate cost of the agreement;(2)identifying the deviations
from any tentative understanding of the Council;and(3)specifying the cost of each such deviation(including
disclosure of non-cash benefits such as vacation,leaves of absences and the like,and pension,insurance,overtime,
compensatory time,and matters requiring cash payments separate from employee salaries).
(c) Disclosure,if Labor Proposal is Within Council Tentative Approvals. If the compensation package
negotiated is at or under the funding level tentatively approved by the Council,the Mayor shall state the estimated
total cost of the compensation package and include disclosure of all non-cash benefits such as vacation,leaves of
absences,etc.
4. Periodic Council Briefing During Negotiations;Modification of Council Positions.
(a) Mayor Duty to Inform Council. As negotiations proceed towards agreement or impasse,the Mayor shall
periodically keep the Council apprised of the status of the negotiations and areas of likely impasse.
(b) Council Duty to Notify Mayor of Policy Change. The Council will notify the Mayor, in writing, as soon as
practicable of any change in its earlier position on labor issues.
(c) Duty to Meet and Confer. Should said modifications to the Council's tentative funding commitment(or in
the package previously presented by the Mayor)occur,the parties shall meet as soon as practicable and seek to
arrive at a mutually acceptable negotiating position for the City. Either party to this protocol may calendar and call
a meeting for this purpose,upon reasonable notice and at mutually convenient times.
(d) Written documentation for briefings. The Administration agrees to provide written briefing documentation
to the City Council and its designated staff members before each labor briefing session. It is mutually understood
and agreed that the records provided to the Council during negotiations are"protected"under Section
63-2-304(22)of the Government Records Access Management Act(GRAMA)and Section 2.64.070 of the Salt
Lake City Code. Since the records are"protected,"they shall not be disclosed unless otherwise required by law.
The records may be shared internally among the Council Members and staff on a need-to-know basis,provided
that they maintain the"protected"classification and are not given to others,including City employees or their
representatives. As provided in Section 51-4-5 of the Open and Public Meetings Act,Council meetings scheduled
to discuss the records shall be closed. This provision applies only to periodic written briefings to the City Council
during negotiations. It is understood that the final Memorandum of Understanding and records discussed in(e)
below may be disclosed.
(e) Briefing on total compensation package at the end of negotiations. The administration will provide a full
written briefing that outlines the total compensation package, including those portions that the administration
intends to be absorbed within the departmental budgets at the end of the negotiation process.
2
5. Council Initiated Compensation Ordinances. In the event agreements with the certified bargaining
units of the City are not completed and presented to the Council by May 20th or any later impasse date prescribed by
City law,the Council reserves the right to set compensation and employee benefits by ordinance. The City Attorney
will prepare the necessary legislation to implement a compensation package,as directed by the Council;this employee
compensation package will become effective on the first day of the applicable fiscal year.
6. Termination. Either party to this protocol may terminate it upon 30 days prior written notice.
DATED this day of 20022001.
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
By
CHAIRPERSON _
MAYOR
ATTEST
CITY RECORDER
3