The URL can be used to link to this page

11/21/2006 - Minutes (2) PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21 , 2006 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in a Work Session on Tuesday, November 21, 2006, 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 Soren Simonsen. Also in Attendance : Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; John Spencer, Real Property Manager; Dan Mule' , City Treasurer; Rusty Vetter, Senior City Attorney; Gordon Hoskins, Chief Financial Officer; Steve Fawcett, Management Services Deputy Director; Linda Hamilton, Salt Lake County Public Services Director; Rick Graham, Salt Lake City Public Services Director; Greg Davis, Finance Director; Sylvia Richards, Council Research and Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Edward Butterfield, Mayors' Small Business/Economic Development Manager; Police Chief Chris Burbank; Janet Wolf, Youth City Division Program Director; John Naser, Engineering Deputy Director; Russell Weeks, Council Policy Analyst; Edwin Rutan, City Attorney; Jennifer Bruno, Council Policy Analyst; Cindy Rockwood, Council Staff Assistant; D. J. Baxter, Mayor' s Senior Advisor; Doug Wheelwright, Planning Deputy Director; Joel Paterson, Planning Program Supervisor; Tim Harpst, Transportation Director; Sherrie Collins, Housing and Neighborhood Development Special Project Grants Monitoring Specialist; Gary Mumford, Deputy Director/Senior Legislative Auditor; Russell Pack, Acting Executive Director of Airports; LuAnn Clark, Housing and Neighborhood Development Director; Stuart Palmer, Solid Waste Fiscal Manager; Phil Bernal, Interim Solid Waste Management Division Director, Salt Lake County Public Works Department; Steve Meyer, Greg Thorup and Ralph Jackson, Utah Transit Authority; Kelly Murdock, City' s Financial Advisor; Joe Reidling, Vice President of Local Pages; Alden Breinholt, Facilities Manager; and Beverly Jones, Deputy City Recorder. Councilmember Buhler presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5 : 40 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1 . 5 : 40 : 50 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE PROPOSED BUDGET FOR THE SALT LAKE VALLEY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2007 . View Attachments Rick Graham, Stuart Palmer, Linda Hamilton, Phil Bernal and Sylvia Richards briefed the Council from the attached handouts . #2 . 6 : 03 : 03 PM RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING REGARDING: (A) A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING A PUBLIC BENEFIT STUDY IN COMPLIANCE WITH UTAH CODE 10-8-2 AUTHORIZING THE APPROPRIATION OF FUNDS CONCERNING AN 06 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21, 2006 AMENDED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE EXTENSION OF A TRAX LINE TO THE INTERMODAL HUB AND (B) AN ORDINANCE APPROVING THE AMENDED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN THE AMENDED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT RELATING TO THE UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY (UTA) TRAX EXTENSION TO THE INTERMODAL HUB. View Attachments D.J. Baxter, Greg Thorup, Dan Mule' , Ralph Jackson and Steve Meyer briefed the Council from the attached handouts . Councilmember Buhler said this item would be moved forward. #3 . 6 : 14 : 27 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BONDS FOR LOCAL PAGES LEASING COMPANY, LLC. (TEFRA) View Attachments Dan Mule' , Gary Mumford, Ed Butterfield, Kelly Murdock, Gordon Hoskins, Joe Reidling and Sylvia Richards briefed the Council from the attached handouts . #4 . 6 : 35 : 12 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 2 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2006-2007 . View Attachments Sylvia Richards, Gordon Hoskins, Steve Fawcett, Tim Harpst, Rick Graham, John Spencer, Alden Breinholt, Police Chief Chris Burbank, D.J. Baxter, Jennifer Bruno and Joel Paterson briefed the Council from the attached handouts . Council Members were in favor of Item A-1, Airport CIP ($9, 492, 000) ; A-2, downtown parking token subsidy ($15, 000) ; Item A-3, Garfield School facility maintenance ($126, 800) ; Item A-4, Worker Compensation actuarial services ($12, 100) ; A-5, energy reduction at the City and County Building ($164, 980) and Item A-6, energy reduction at Plaza 349 ($259, 079) . Council Members were in favor of Item A-7, Building Plans Examiner — Fire ($13, 000) ; Item A-8, Public Safety Building garage demolition ($260, 000) and Item A-9, police investigative overtime ($78, 000) . Council Members wanted clarification on Items A-10, Bond Proceeds — Westside Railroad re-alignment and public way improvements (Grant Tower) ($5, 720, 000) and A-11, Salt Lake County contribution - Westside railroad re-alignment and public way improvements (Grant Tower) ($3, 500, 000) . Councilmember Buhler said these items would be brought back on December 5, 2006 . Council Members were in favor of Item A-12, Foothill Drive transit study ($70, 000) . Council Members were in favor of Items B-1 through B-5, grants requiring existing staff resources; Items D-1 through D-12, 06 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21 , 2006 housekeeping; Items E-1 through E-8, grants requiring no new staff resources and Items F-1 through F-2, donations . Councilmember Saxton briefed the Council on Item I-1, funding for D-4 historic surveys ($212, 000) . Councilmember Jergensen asked for clarification on the 500 contributing structures . He said he wanted to explore Community Development Block Grant funding for the area. Councilmember Buhler said he wanted to know why the area was not included in 1991 . Councilmember Love said she met with the Mayor and representatives from Tracy Aviary. She said during the last budget opening, the Aviary lost accreditation. She said the Aviary had an opportunity to get reaccredited in two years but to do that they had to beat some construction cycles . She said they could be under construction this summer on several facilities . #5. 6 : 19 : 55 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING FROM THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING HONORARY STREET NAME CHANGE POLICY MODIFICATIONS AND A BRIEFING ON A REQUEST BY MICHAEL CLARA, JUNIOR CRUZ AND BOY SCOUT TROOP 987 FOR AN HONORARY NAME CHANGE OF 300 SOUTH BETWEEN REDWOOD ROAD AND I-15 TO "ADAM GALVEZ STREET. " (PETITION NO. 400-06-33) View Attachments Jennifer Bruno, Joel Paterson and Doug Wheelwright briefed the Council from the attached handouts . Councilmember Buhler said he felt the Council should approve the honorary street name change . He said he also wanted to consider the Japantown name change when it was ready. He said then no more honorary street name changes should be considered until a new policy was in place. Council Members did not want to hold a public hearing on the street name change. 6. 8 : 05 : 43 PM THE COUNCIL WILL CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR THE PURPOSE OF STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE, OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY WHEN PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE PUBLIC BODY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANNOTATED § § 52-4-204 , 52-4-205 (1) (d) AND ATTORNEY-CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANNOTATED § 78-24-8 . Councilmember Jergensen moved and Councilmember Turner seconded to enter into Executive Session, which motion carried, all members voted aye except Councilmember Simonson who was absent for the vote. 7 . REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND 8 : 00 : 44 PM ANNOUNCEMENTS . 06 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 21 , 2006 No report was held. See File M 06-5 for announcements . The meeting adjourned at 8 : 05 p.m. Council Chair Chief Deputy City Recorder This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes for the City Council Work Session held November 21, 2006 . bj 06 - 4 204 Communication to 0140000 the City Council SAL I J AK, ,,V Department of Community Development Office of the Director To: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administr-r Officer From: Louis Zunguze, Community Development Dir:ctor A Date: November 13, 2006 ' AN CC: Cheri Coffey, Deputy Planning Director Doug Wheelwright, Deputy Planning Director Joel Paterson, Planning Program Supervisor Everett Joyce, Senior Planner& Master Plan Manager Re: Salt Lake City Lakeshore Community Master Plan (Northwest Quadrant)—Status Report Staff Contact: Everett L. Joyce, 535-7930, Senior Planner, Planning Division The following is an update on the Lakeshore Community Master Plan (Northwest Quadrant) development project. I. THE LAKESHORE COMMUNITY(NORTHWEST QUADRANT) MASTER PLAN - CONSULTANT Consultant Selected The Salt Lake City selection committee has selected a team of consultants to assist the City in the development of the Lakeshore Community Master Plan. The team selected for the Master Plan project consists of several consulting firms that will work together to comprehensively develop of the Master Plan. The lead team is EDAW, Inc., from Ft. Collins, Colorado. The secondary team is MGB+A of Salt Lake City. These two teams will direct the overall management and tasks of the consulting services necessary to develop the Lakeshore Community Master Plan. The team also includes three specialty-consulting firms, all of which are from Salt Lake City. These firms are responsible for the transportation (Fehr& Peers), environmental (SWCA), and economic development(Bonneville Research) elements of the Master Plan. •Page 1 of 3 Consulting Services Contract On September 22, 2006, the contract between Salt Lake City Corporation and EDAW, Inc., for the Master Plan consulting services was recorded with the City Recorder. The scope of work and planning process identified in the contract anticipates completion and adoption of the Master Plan by March of 2008. II. MASTER PLAN CITIZEN COMMITTEES There are two citizen advisory committees established for the development process of the Lakeshore Community Master Plan. These committees are the Technical Resource Committee and the Master Plan Advisory Committee. Technical Resource Committee The Technical Resource is comprised of 30 members, including property owners, special interest groups, County and State organizations, and City Department representatives(see Attachment A). The purpose of the Committee is to contribute local knowledge, resources, and professional perspective on issues identified during the development of the Master Plan to the Advisory Committee. The Committee met on August 22, September 12, September 26, and October 10, 2006. The Technical Resource Committee's next scheduled meeting is November 30, 2006. Master Plan Advisory Committee The role of the Master Plan Advisory Committee is to establish a broad base of community involvement and advocacy for the Master Plan process. The Advisory Committee will offer formal comments on policy decisions proposed by the Technical Resource Committee, consultant(s), and Planning staff, as well as provide advocacy for those decisions to the Planning Commission, Mayor, and City Council. The Committee will provide input and identify options for the City's consideration in the development of vision, goals, and policies for the Master Plan. The Master Plan Advisory Committee's membership represents a variety of City-wide interests. The Planning Commission endorsed committee members from a selection pool established by the City Council and Mayor's Office. The committee consists of 16 members (see Attachment B)and will meet at the end of November with consultants and City staff. III. PHASES OF THE MASTER PLAN PROCESS The development of the Plan will consist of the following four phases: Assessment, Visioning, Plan Development, and Plan Adoption. The four phases of the Master Plan process are depicted in Attachment C. • Page 2 of 3 IV. PHASES I AND II: ASSESSMENT AND VISIONING The Assessment phase of the Master Plan process includes the development of a baseline-planning summary with identification of opportunities and constraints within the study area. Assessment will include a series of stakeholder interviews with key property owners, business owners, and special interest groups. Stakeholders will identify issues, opportunities, constraints, and components of vision and goals for the Master Plan study area. The Visioning phase will involve a key public workshop focused on Visioning and Goal setting as well as Guiding Principles for the Master Plan. The workshop will include a presentation on the project to educate the public on the importance of tools utilized for sustainable development and case study examples of successes and failures in managing growth. Part of the workshop will be vision preference exercises to determine support for different development patterns. The public visioning workshop is tentatively scheduled for the end of January 2007. Attachment D provides a detailed schedule for the assessment and visioning phases of the Plan. V. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A— Technical Advisory Committee Members Attachment B— Master Plan Advisory Committee Members Attachment C— Master Plan Development Phases Attachment D—Assessment and Visioning Phases—Three-month meeting schedule •Page 3 of 3 Attachment A Lakeshore Community Master Plan Technical Resource Committee Lakeshore Community Master Plan— Technical Resource Committee Brad Stewart Kathleen Anderson SLC Public Utilities Department U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Allen McCandless Wayne Martinson SLC Airport Authority Audubon-Utah Wetlands Coordinator Kevin Young Don White SLC Transportation Division Zions Securities Max Peterson Ray Whitchurch SLC Engineering Division Bothwell Swaner Conslutant-IBI Group Scott Weiler Christine Pedroncelli SLC Engineering Division Bothwell Swaner-property owner John Cardona Russell Fox SLC Police Department Kennecott Development Company Lon Halterman Jim Schulte SLC Police Department Kennecott Development Company Brad Larson Ann Neville SLC Fire Department Inland Sea Shorebird Reserve Alison McFarlane Richard West SLC Economic Development Southshore Wetlands Mgt, Inc Janice Jardine Brian Carrington SLC City Council Property Reserve Inc Janet Roberts Sammie Dickson Salt Lake City School District Salt Lake City Mosquito Abatement Steve Woods Greg Gruber Salt Lake City School District SLC Business Advisory Board Carol Wong Jason Green Salt Lake County Planning Envision Utah Tom Roach Nancy Keate Salt Lake County Planning Utah DNR Division of Wildlife Resources John Thomas John McDonald Utah Department of Transportation Representative—Riverbend Holdings,LLC Edie Trimmer Utah State Parks and Recreation Attachment B Lakeshore Community Master Plan Advisory Committee Lakeshore Community Master Plan —Advisory Committee Roger Borgenicht Assist Inc Carlton Christensen City Council Mark Clemens Utah Chapter Sierra Club Babs DeLay SLC Planning Commission Robert Farrington Chamber of Commerce/Downtown Alliance Ken Fultz Westpointe Community Council Arla Funk Former Planning Commissioner Karen Hale Utah State Senate Betsy Herrmann U.S. Fish&Wildlife Service Cliff Higbee Salt Lake City School District Pam Kramer Utah DNR Division of Wildlife Resources John Ray Utah Water Fowl Association Jennifer Seelig Utah State Representative Van Turner City Council Marion Willey Utah Nonprofit Housing Corp Mary Woodhead SLC Planning Commission Attachment C Lakeshore Community Master Plan Master Plan Development Phases Lakeshore Community Master Plan Master Plan Development Phases PHASE 1: PHASE 2: PHASE 3: PHASE 4: ASSESSMENT VISIONING PLAN DEVELOPMENT PLAN ADOPTION t. I. , Project Kickoff Public Participation Technical D F Plan Reports Evaluation of"What-lf" R 1 Inventory& A N Analysis Erwkonment Scenarios F A Information Gathering/fats Lend Use T L Review,Inventory,& Vision Workshop Evaluate Exiling Conditions&Services Transportation Update Existing Land use. P P [lease PublicL Senile" W Map r Resources Info `� �• Demographic&Economic A A Forecasts Economic Review Alpert constraints Dewtloptnent N N Vision Hominy, 'what-lf" Stakeholder Interviews 1 Statement Remotion,& Olberl lernerts Workshop &Goals Opportunities Public Public 8 Constraints Hearing Hearing Public involvement ` Stakeholder Interviews,Focus Groups,Staff Presentations to Community Groups,Public Meetings,Pubic Hearings, Media Outreach(TV,press releases,phone calls,correspondeec e) Attachment D Lakeshore Community Master Plan Assessment and Visioning Phases Meeting Schedule LAKESHORE COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN LAKESHORE COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN ;. 3 MONTH MEETING SCHEDULE Phases I - Assessment Phase II - Visioning SEC I AKE5HORE COMMUNITY Pt AN MEETING GROUP OBJECTIVES August 22th Technical Resource Initial TRC meeting,Introductions,Committee Organization, Committee(TRC) Distribute Background Information and Project Objectives Technical Resource Identify additional resource materials and information September 12th Committee(TRC) Identify issues or concerns that should be addressed in the Lakeshore Community Master Plan process September 26th Technical Resource Salt Lake County staff will present and answer questions about Committee(TRC) the West Bench Master Plan Planning Division PDMT and EDAW Team kick-off meeting,overview of Phase I October 9th Management Team and II tasks and products,final schedule and public involvement (PDMT) plan. Airport Authority staff will present and answer questions about Technical Resource the Airport Master Plan. Discussed stakeholder meetings on October 10th Committee(TRC) Nov 28-29 and next TRC meeting on November 30th with the consultants. Requested TRC members provide contact information for individuals for stakeholder interviews. Stakeholder interviews with key property owners,business November 28th& 29th Stakeholder owners,developers,and special interest groups. Stakeholders (2 days) Interviews will identify issues, opportunities,constraints,and components of vision and goals. Planning Division November 30th Management Team Review preliminary inventory findings and data gaps. Discuss (10:00- 12:00pm) (PDMT) preliminary vision and goal statements Introduction of EDAW Team and TRC.Discuss issues list and opportunities and constraints(the"Givens"). Review November 30th Technical Resource preliminary inventory findings and data gaps. Homework— (12:00-2:00pm) Committee(TRC) existing vision and goals framework. Review stakeholder summary. Introduction of EDAW Team and MPAC.Discuss issues list and Master Plan opportunities and constraints(the "Givens").Review November 30th Advisory preliminary inventory findings and data gaps. Homework— (2:00-4:00pm) Committee existing vision and goals framework. Review stakeholder (MPAC) summary. EDAW I AECOM LAKESHORE COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN I ° EDAW I AECOM LAKESHORE COMMUNITY MASTER PLAN MEETING GROUP OBJECTIVES Finalize Public Workshop#1 (Vision Workshop)preparations. January 9th Planning Division (10:00-12:00 pm) Management Team Review draft baseline planning summary,draft opportunities and constraints map and preliminary guiding principles. January 9th Technical Resource Prepare for Public Meeting#1 (Vision Workshop). Review draft (12:00-2:00 pm) Committee(TRC) baseline planning summary,opportunities and constraints map, and stakeholder summary. Master Plan Prepare for Public Meeting#1 (Vision Workshop). Review draft January 9th Advisory (2:00—4:00 pm) Committee baseline planning summary,opportunities and constraints map, (MPAC) and stakeholder summary. January30thPublic Workshop Review and provide input on: • Stakeholder Findings m #1: Visioning (6:00—9:00 pm) Workshop • Vision and Goals/Guiding Principles • Opportunities and Constraints Master Plan Field Visit(TBD) Advisory MPAC will be invited to join the EDAW Team and PDMT on-site 3 Hours Committee to review resource issues,opportunities and ongoing data (MPAC) collection. EDAW I AECOM SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT BUDGET ANALYSIS - CALENDAR YEAR 2007 DATE: November 17, 2006 BUDGET FOR: Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility - Proposed 2007 Calendar Year Budget STAFF REPORT BY: Sylvia Richards, Research and Policy Analyst cc: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rick Graham, Steve Fawcett, Kevin Bergstrom, Greg Davis, Philip Bernal and Stuart Palmer The Solid Waste Management Council has forwarded the proposed 2007 calendar year Solid Waste Management Facility budget for the City Council's review. A representative of the Solid Waste Management Facility will be present at the November 21st briefing to respond to inquiries from the City Council. SALT LAKE VALLEY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY PROPOSED BUDGET Amended Proposed Percent 2006 2007 Difference Change Revenue&other sources Landfill Fees $12,720,000 $10,884,000 (1,836,000) (14.4%) Compost Sales 400,000 350 000 (50,000) (12.5%) Salvage Sales 220,000 350,000 130,000 59.1% Interfund Charges 100,000 100,000 -0- -0- Interest 640,000 2,950,000 2,310,000 361.0% Other Sources 257,000 257,400 400 .16% Total revenue&other sources $14,337,000 $14,891,400 554,400 3.9% Expenditures and uses Salaries,Wages and Benefits $3,480,667 $ 3,425,398 $ (55,269) (1.6%) Operating and Maintenance Supply 321,500 226,500 (95,000) (29.5%) Charges and Services 8,263,345 5,537,345 (2,726,000) (33.0%) Total Operating Expenses 12,065,512 9,189,243 (2,876,269) (23.8%) Capital Outlay 1,412,200 3,074,200 1,662,000 117.7% Appropriation to Fund Balance 859,288 2,627,957 1,768,669 205.8% Total Expenses $14,337,000 14,891,400 554,400 3.9% The Salt Lake City Council may wish to hold a public hearing and consider adopting this budget on December 12, 2006. In order to provide adequate advertising for the public hearing, the set date will be listed under Consent items on the November 21st City Council agenda. The Salt Lake County Council will also hold a public hearing and consider adopting this budget on December 5, 2006. The Administration's paperwork outlines the proposed changes to the Solid Waste Management Facility's budget. Calendar year 2007 revenues are estimated at $12,263,443; expenditures are estimated at $12,263,443. Excess revenues over expenditures of $2,627,957 are proposed to accumulate in the fund balance to be used for future capital costs and for COLA (cost of living) adjustments. The landfill uses a calendar year budget, and when the budget is prepared in August, there is no way of knowing what, if any, the county's COLA adjustment will be. POTENTIAL MATTERS AT ISSUE: The most significant changes to the budget as compared to the amended 2006 budget are as follows: 1. Landfill tipping revenues are projected to decrease by $1,836,000 or (14.4%) based on a projected net loss of approximately 40,000 tons of waste. Allied Waste opened their transfer station in April of 2006. Since April, Allied Waste has taken 40% of their waste to their transfer station rather than to the City/County Landfill. Other City/County landfill users have taken their waste to the Ace/Metro transfer station which opened in 2005. In an attempt to regain some of the tonnage, the SLVSWMF is proposing to reduce the charge per ton for all commercial loads at the City/County transfer station by 22.5% or $6.95 per ton. 2. As approved during the 2006 budget, sixteen FTE's were laid off, and then six of those employees were rehired and added to the budget with the assumption that they would be needed as a result of the changes taking place in the landfill industry. Four of the six FTE's were rehired for a three month period. The other two employees were rehired with no time limitation. The 2007 budget proposes that the four FTE's hired for three months be eliminated from the budget. 3. Interest income is projected to increase by $2.3 million or 361 percent. Increasing interest rates account for a portion of this increase. The 2006 budget was based on the assumption that approximately 50% of cash reserves of$40 million dollars would be distributed last year, but this did not take place. Thus the base level of cash reserves on which interest is calculated is much higher for 2007 as compared to what was budgeted for 2006. 4. Total operating expenses are proposed to decrease by approximately $2.8 million mostly as a result of a reduction in contract hauling fees. Currently, Allied Waste hauls waste from the City/County transfer station to Allied's landfill in Tooele County at $23.85 per ton. 5. Capital expenditures are anticipated to increase by approximately $1.6 million. The capital expenditures include the scheduled replacement of the following equipment: Scraper $580,000; D9T dozer $782,000; transport truck $108,000; 2 walking floor trailers $130,000; 2 rolloff trucks $230,000; water wagon $286,000; loader $175,000, 4 rolloff containers $25,000. In addition, $758,200 will be used in association with the leachate pond construction and replacement pumps. The leachate pond collects and moves water coming off the landfill. As part of the landfill master plan, the leachate pond is being moved to property adjacent to the landfill. These are one-time costs. 6. The budget includes an additional $244,000 for fleet fuel, while the fleet maintenance budget reflects a decrease of$105,000. An additional $56,000 is needed for the maintenance of facilities, grounds, office equipment and software. 7. Landfill excavation costs are expected to decrease by $135,000 due to a decrease in tonnage coming to the Landfill. 8. Materials and supplies are projected to decrease by $95,000 largely due to tonnage decrease. The projected decrease in tonnage equates to a decrease in cover material closure costs by $70,000. Small tools expenses are expected to decrease by $28,500, while the cost of pesticides is expected to increase by $9,000. CURRENT MARKET CONDITIONS AND BACKGROUND: The Salt Lake City/County Solid Waste Management Facility is jointly owned and operated by Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County. The Solid Waste Management Facility's operation is based on an Interlocal agreement entered into by Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County in 1978 and updated in 2000. The Interlocal agreement establishes a Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council. The Management Council appoints the Director of the Solid Waste Management Facility, who supervises and manages the day-to-day activities of the Facility. Information on the facility and its programs has been provided by the Administration. The Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council worked with the Facility's Interim Director to develop a proposed 2007 calendar year operating and capital improvement budget for the Facility. The Landfill Council reviewed and approved the proposed budget on September 8, 2006. According to the agreement both the City Council and the County Council must approve a budget for the landfill. As mentioned earlier in this report, the changing circumstances in the waste market will dramatically influence the City/County Landfill waste revenue. The arrangement with Allied Waste to haul waste by rail to its landfill site in East Carbon County was ended. Allied now hauls the transfer station waste by truck to its Tooele County landfill at the same rate it charged to haul by rail to Carbon County. Some time after the first of the year, SLVSWMF anticipates entering into an agreement with a private waste hauler to haul waste from the City/County transfer station to the City/County Landfill. As mentioned in last Thursday night's landfill briefing, the current life of the landfill is estimated to be 49 years. 3 Nov 1 $ ?00 6 SAL' \ aJC3TYGORR ° .- IOI RICHARD GRAHAM ® - - +a. ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES MAYOR COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL TO: Rocky Fluhart, Date: October 26, 2006 Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Rick Graham Public Services Depa ent SUBJECT: Salt Lake Valley Landfill Calendar Year 2007 Budget STAFF CONTACT: Greg Davis 535-6397 Stuart Palmer 562-6424 Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Facility DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt the proposed budget. BUDGET IMPACT: User fees collected and managed by Salt Lake County. DISCUSSION: The FY 2007 budget reflects changes to the ongoing Landfill operations. The proposed budget was reviewed and approved by the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council on September 8, 2006. The Salt Lake County Council has scheduled its public hearing and formal adoption of the proposed budget on December 05, 2006. Schedules are attached. PUBLIC PROCESS: Conducted by Salt Lake County. See above. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 148, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7775 FAX: 801-535-7789 WWW.SLCGOV.COM �~ Rccvcco vnvcn SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2006 (Adopting the Solid Waste Management Facility budget, which has been prepared and submitted by the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council for calendar year 2007, subject to specific policy directives) AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY BUDGET, AS PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY THE SALT LAKE VALLEY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT COUNCIL, FOR CALENDAR YEAR 2007, SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC POLICY DIRECTIVES. PREAMBLE On November 14, 2000, Salt Lake City (the "City") and Salt Lake County (the "County") entered into an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement (the "Agreement"), pursuant to Title 11, Chapter 13 of the Utah Code Annotated, regarding the joint management and operation of a Solid Waste Management Facility. The Agreement established the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council and provided it with authority and responsibility relating to the operation and management of the Solid Waste Management Facility. Pursuant to the Agreement, all actions by the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council constitute recommendations to the City and the County and the City and the County have the power to review, ratify, modify, or veto any action of the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council. The Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council has prepared the attached Solid Waste Management Facility budget for calendar year 2007 and has submitted said attached budget to the City Council for its approval. The City Council has authority relating to budgets and appropriation of funds and, therefore, must approve, on behalf of the City, the Solid Waste Management Facility budget. The attached Solid Waste Management Facility budget has been available for public inspection in the Office of the City Recorder for at least l 0 days. The City Council fixed the time and place for a public hearing to be held on December 12, 2006 to consider the adoption of the attached Solid Waste Management Facility budget and ordered notice thereof be published at least seven days prior to the hearing. Notice of said public hearing was duly published as required herein. A public hearing to consider adoption of said Solid Waste Management Facility budget was held on December 12, 2006, in accordance with said notice, at which hearing all interested persons were heard for and against the estimates of revenue and expenditures in the Solid Waste Management Facility budget. The City Council wants to adopt the attached Solid Waste Management Facility budget for calendar year 2007, submitted by the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council, subject to specific policy directives. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Ordinance is to adopt the attached Solid Waste Management Facility budget, prepared and submitted by the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council, for calendar year 2007, subject to the attached policy directives. SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF BUDGET. The attached Solid Waste Management Facility budget, prepared and submitted by the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council, for calendar year 2007, is hereby adopted subject to the attached policy directives, and subject to similar approval by the County. SECTION 3. RESERVE THE RIGHT TO AMEND. The City reserves she right to amend the attached Solid Waste Management Facility budget at any time, consistent with the Agreement. SECTION 4. PUBLIC INSPECTION. Copies of the attached Solid Waste Management Facility budget shall be available for public inspection during regular business hours in the Office of the City Recorder. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect on its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this 12th day of December, 2006. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorneys Office Date 10 -2— " CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER sy7 � �� Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR 3 ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2006. Published: 1:\Ordinance 06\Adopting the Solid Waste Mgmt Facility Budget-Oct 26,2006.doc 4 Initiative Name: SLVSWMF - 2007 Initiative Number:„ (Blank) Initiative Type: (Type of Initiative) Initiative Discussion: Each year the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility (SLVSWMF), which is jointly owned by Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City, submits its budget to Salt Lake City for its approval. Salt Lake City last provided its approval of the SLVSWMF budget in December 2005 for calendar year 2006. SLVSWMF has submitted its 2007 budget to Salt Lake County for approval. SLVSWMF is also seeking the approval of the 2007 budget from Salt Lake City. After Salt Lake City approved the 2006 SLVSWMF budget, 6 of the 16 FTEs who were laid-off as part of the approved 2006 SLVSWMF budget were added back to the budget by Salt Lake County. The rationale was that additional FTEs would be needed while the major changes which were occurring at the landfill and in the waste disposal industry as a whole leveled out. Four of these FTEs were added back for a "three-month window." The remaining two were added back without time limitations. As part of the 2007 SLVSWMF budget, the four "three-month window" FTEs are being • .eliminated. The post Salt Lake City approval FTEs, described above, along with the traditional types of midyear adjustments seen each year have been combined with the approved budget to form the 2006 amended SLVSWMF budget. Revenue is proposed to match expense with a contribution being made to fund balance. Year-to- .year both revenue and expense will decrease by $1,214,269 after a contribution to fund balance of $2,627,957. The contribution to fund balance in calendar year 2007 is budgeted to be $1,768,669 more than the amended calendar year budget for 2006. The major changes to revenue and expense follow. All comparisons are made to the amended 2006 budget. Landfill tipping fees are budgeted to decrease by $1,836,000, driven by a net loss of approximately 40,000 tons of waste. Two factors are influncing this net loss. During the first three months of 2006, some of Allied Waste's Inc. customers continued to use the SLVSWMF. Once the Allied Transfer Station opened in April 2006, most of the remaining customers no longer came to the SLVSWMF. This pattern is expected to continue. To try and offset the tonnage loss to Allied, the SLVSWMF is proposing to reduce the price charged on commerical loads at the Transfer Station by 22.5% or $6.95/ton. Interest income is projected to increase by $2,310,000. Increasing interest rates account for a portion of this increase. However, the budget for 2006 was based on an assumption that approximately 52.5% of the cash reserves of $40M would be distributed. This distribution did not occur. Hence the base level of cash reserves on which interest is being calculated is much higher for 2007 than it was for 2006. Expense at the SLVSWMF is proposed to decrease by $1,214,269. A major component of this decrease is a reduction of $2,890,500 in contract hauling fees. Waste from the Transfer Station is currently hauled by Allied Waste to its landfill in Tooele County. The cost for this service is $23.85 per ton. In a very short time that contract will be terminated and the Landfill will use Western Disposal to haul Transfer Station waste to the City/County Landfill site at a lower cost per ton. The proposed budget also includes an additional $244,000 for fleet fuel, a decrease of $105,000 in fleet maintenance and an additional $56,000 for the maintenance of facilities, grounds, office equipment and software. Landfill excavation costs are also budgeted to decrease by $135,000 because of decreased tonnage coming to the landfill. Utility costs are also budgeted to increase by $38,000. Materials and supplies are projected to decrease by $95,000. The largest component of this decrease is associated with landfill closure costs. Driven by the decrease in tonnage describe above, closure costs are projected to be $70,000 less in 2007 than was budgeted in 2006. The budget for small tools is projected to decrease by $28,500. An offsetting increase will be the cost of pesticides which is expected to increase to by $9,000. Capital expense is projected to increase by $1,662,000. All items on the list fall under scheduled replacement except for the $758,200 in cost associated with the leachate pond construction and the pumps for the leachate pond. It is recommended that the Council approve the SLVSWMF budget. F SLVSWMF-2007 Initiative Name (Blank) _ 2006-07 Initiative Number —_ J Fiscal Year r Public Services Department _ (Type of Initiative) Department Type of Initiative Greg Davis _ 535-6397 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Imr actBvFund: 1st Year •2nd:Year • 2007 20. 08 General Fund Total $0 $0 Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 Enterprise Fund Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility Interest 2,950,000 2,950,000 Landfill Fees 10,884,000 10,884,000 Compost Sales 350,000 350,000 Salvage Sales I 350,000 350,000 Interfund Charges 100,000 100,000 Other Sources 257,400 257,400 Fund Balance...(Favorable)/Unfavorable (2,627,957) (2,318,253) Total $12,263,443 $12,573,147 Other Fund Total 0 $0 Staffing Impact :° Existing Number of FTE's 56.751 58.75 Change In Number of FTE's: (1) Approved by SL County after SL City had approved 2006 budget 6.00 (2) Proposed 2007 RIF (4.00) Total 58.75 58.75 ---- -- --------------- Description Personnel approved from 01 Jan 06 to 31 Mar 06 (1) 4.00 A/P-Payroll (1) 1.00 Temp Employee (1) 1.00 6.00 Personnel approved from 01 Jan 06 to 31 1Mar06 (2) (4.00) 1 I I _ Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount Expenditure: 1st Year 2nd Year 2007.' 2008 Personal Services 3,425,398 I 3,596,668 Operating and Maintenance Supplies 226,500 226,500 Charges and Services 5,537,345 5,675,779 Capital Outlay 3,074,200 3,074,200 Total 12,263,443 12,573,147 Additional Accounting Details: (1) SLVSWMF budgets on a calendar year. (2) This is a co-approval budget opening for the SLVSWMF. Accounting for this facility is handled by Salt Lake County. Therefore,cost centers and object codes are not applicable. Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? (Yes or No) Is there a potential for grant to continue? (Yes or No) If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? (Yes or No) Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? (Yes or No) Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? (Yes or No) Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? (Yes or NO) • M 0,N 000, 00. 0. , ccILI In LO N TO Cl O 0 G 0 0 0 0 C' 0 0 Cl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00000000000,rr ' ry LO.-1 0 0 O C., O ID N C IV d CO C d d Cl C Cl 0 0 C, C.,CD C) CrCG 00 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0(O '0 0,N N 0 0 Cr 0 P (O N C Ol , M O, rr .-1 N. r'l V)O O O Vt O C M O G O O W ,O O O O (O O Vl N O N O O G C% Ci O O O O N V - f0 o'1'IN 0 I0 0 0 LO p 'I N 0, N Ill O •O 0. 0 I',N TO re O,of O Ln O 10 V O O Ill(CD CO N 110 W (r, V d O (v CO O C.IO It,✓. .+ V ,1 P , 1 I/1 M IO EI ID (0 P .-. LO N N N N 0,0 P P 0,"V.r'1 ' N (0 N ro a, co O rr M IL) 0-N -I ID O 0,CO V 0 (O'-r n rV r 0 01 ^ P d " W '0 N '� .+ N to N -+ "I 0, N .-, IN N N F- f1 N rI I- N IV y N 0 ,co co dl ID to 0 0.N 'D ID U V I'-cr,1,OI Cl) CO N U 13 Q 0 c 00 N CO lD 1L NJ N. LL N 00 J- N L. N CC 01 0 0 0 0 0 0 a) 0 0 do Q a 01 u n n L j 11-1 UI to O O N N N V) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 .0 N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 C O O O O N N N O N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O• u O 0 0 O N N N P P O N CO 0 0(O Lc,Ul INC O 0 0 'a '0 .0 N M CO CO O .M CO CO N N ID Q., f0 ra C P P , V) I a N N (D O G U U O ti v O M 0 O 0 0 O LO 0 U) O O O 0 0 0 0 0 O O O O 0 0 0 0 0 In 0) 0 CD O O ,11 M O M cr LP 0 0 0 0 CO/0 0 0 O_O ID 0 V) NO 0 10 01 4 O O C 0 0 0) U 10 0 M co 0 V1 P 0 0 UI CO(0 rV CO CO V"V1 .-1 l0 CD I. V, N N M a„,V) 01•- M M ID N 01 0 'Q V 0)"V)(0 "N N PI Co N M 0) N N .-I .-1 rn i 0) M N rU N-� �• 'a n V) Ol (0 V) L O) N. GO Ni •J N Ul ra In U r U _ '0 0 0 o c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 Cl N O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C' O (n 0 0 0 O O 0 V O V n O O O n O O O rd Cl. a, 0 o 0 O O -a.-1 O.-I N to M O)(D O ry 0 O to 1n U) 0) a or,N `� N ^. U- O fn 1- Va.,M N M U f 0 0 0 0 O O (O P V, VI 10 N In V VI CO 0 O 0 0 0 0 - N t\ P CO P .-'ID N V IO Cl) 0 0 0 0 0 0 O y CO M Ol M.-�l0 0)f'1 N M N O•O O t0 d' 0 V fV N Loon-0 NC) 10 In 9 0) 0 N Ni In c0 La C LL in V N CO m CO �. M M P ~M P ' IN v CO C J N N--i 1 .-♦CD kO M ro i. O 0 0 O O C O 0 0 CO 0 T. O O o 0 0 I-- � 0 0 o !� O 1- - P V NI In LL t0 C d rn 10 (D re M U In V .� N co I-I N N 01 'C C O W TJ - Y N C 4IT L O O O C C v 0 CO F O N_J U 11 m 0 3T to cr N 1/' Ql gi -0t O rO J C v al N a, N f+l N � O C J N 'a O VI L C F- ov- V O. at J IT 10 L 01 n N .0 lD m M CO .D . 0 u c u L .Q Cr o 0 0 c Et C o n E o, Q co ON = D ] a) E C N L E !n - O. u. c E V o al E °s.z, = o E U o u + 'II t ,to c-, CO ."C--- c o Cl, C) . o .J.o Cl ti w o0 Cl 0 C u c ly U 6 E , 01 E N U . ] ,.; O, N - o W o m _ o '-^ o U .o m U V `- _ o o v co m e o, v, w .. �� Nr. U N N O) m V N [ co i, UI N E .' E E W V a, 0 C"VI ID C V V.a ° c, v in ,a D D I_ n (- U> 0 a N - U a o 3 � E G G G L E c v 4 L 1 v°1i v Ll a > w o o �. 'LI C �' „� •' c v r. CJ 0 w '01 L L E °1 E .o a .-o m- _D I( o n c , c a, o U E o, - c c,u'-I .. c o Y V- t w fO a. )- a1 N N ,, i O N - ,r. N I`W N - 6 C.N G O p n 0 n E C N E D H E W )( N 0 w D Q L) V) 0.o. rn �] `v a, m aI c,v a s n c T E o,0 .0 n o z n E v o -] c v t m v E i.ul t c > t H o y o `° ] o,v 4 ° > c J= ] c v ° n n n o o s � v c E Q a 2 t. LL c v c J O (D 10,0 I Ae. m v' E toum c ,0D0 .>. voa E ,DC E c ' D.c -oCUUt , m ° + Cro �L1� � m o E a; O 0i. o,V- L c Um 0 0 o U, LT D d a� 0 ry 0 o a Q O 0 V, o n E o 'u= E v _ a' ,a a' vt `�° L (n U a U v °' 2 0 N ID 1!. ID tD - I>1 V, C l�, J - U .Y O u O V r.; J G O O C C V V ''� v� C G O 0 O E E E C C c v a, V, > , ] v D F- - - - v 0 > > N O v 0 '- ] C > O >} ^.�. 0 0 0 , 0 E ra (a O a, N N La N 'U'C 'Y O W L' V. T - C - 0 0 0 O L L L as L D _ 0 I F- F , c 1.. U G L ^ C. U U CL V) J J U 1L L Ce {- . 0 w n .= U v, 0 0 C i U L ) • • to O O O N ID N 0 M M ✓ Q In ni to N N N ry .y N O N M A\O O t0 O M V At V COO O 0,1 O V N N tD V 0 to N lc, CA W N (D UD tD O N N N v M N 1 N lJ LL 7 N Z C c • t z U 1.5 ID O O L U ¢ 2 y Z ,T w • c D o Z 8c w c N O c 0 N � h c ¢ 0 7 O V c !O a, NO c V1 �-W O W m c N.m V�i c f1 vNi O n 7 'Op ? crn WU oc VU 0 } W ` = v x w of vi t" v' • w VN m u. NY r, a m w a tt MEMORANDUM DATE: November 16, 2006 TO: City Council Members FROM: Russell Weeks RE: Proposed Amendments to TRAX Extension Interlocal Agreement CC: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Steve Fawcett, Ed Rutan, DJ Baxter, Dan Mule,Valda Tarbet, Gordon Hoskins, Gary Mumford, E. Russell Vetter,John Naser, Jennifer Bruno, Sylvia Richards This memorandum pertains to proposed amendments to an interlocal agreement between Salt Lake City and the Utah Transit Authority relating to a project to extend the Trax line from the Delta Center Station at 400 West South Temple to the Intermodal Hub at 300 South 600 West. An ordinance amending the agreement is scheduled for an update briefing during the City Council work session November 21 and formal action at the Council's regularly scheduled meeting. The City Council held a public hearing November 14 on the proposed amendments and the project's potential public benefit. The public hearing was in conformance with Utah Code Section 10-8-2. UPDATED INFORMATION After the November 14 public hearing in conformance with Utah Code Section 10-8-2 the Council delayed consideration of: • A resolution to accept a study on the public benefit of the proposed amendments and authorize the appropriation of funds for the amended interlocal agreement. • An ordinance approving an amended interlocal agreement between Salt Lake City and the Utah Transit Authority relating to the Trax line extension. That leaves the following motions for the City Council to consider: ACTION ON PUBLIC BENEFIT RESOLUTION • I move that the City Council adopt the resolution accepting the study performed in compliance with Utah Code Section 10-8-2 and authorizing the appropriation of funds concerning an amended interlocal agreement relating to the Trax extension and other matters. • I move that the City Council consider the next item on the agenda. 1 AMENDED INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT • I move that the City Council adopt the ordinance relating to the amendment to the Interlocal Agreement for the Trax extension project extending light rail service from the Delta Center Station to the Salt Lake City Intermodal Hub. • I move that the City Council consider the next item on the agenda. • I move that the City Council adopt the ordinance relating to the amendment to the Interlocal Agreement for the Trax extension project extending light rail service from the Delta Center Station to the Salt Lake City Intermodal Hub with the following amendments: (Council Members may wish to propose amendments). OUTSTANDING ISSUES It appears that the resolution and the ordinance would commit the City to funding portions of the project. The Administration estimates that the City's share of increased costs for the Intermodal Hub extension project is $3.41 million. Of that, $600,000 would be allocated to help build a future light rail station at 525 West 200 South. However, the $600,000 would be ineligible for bond revenue if the City chose to bond for the project. (It should be noted that the interlocal agreement calls for the City to place the$600,000 into the Intermodal Hub Enterprise fund.) The Administration has identified three potential funding sources for the City's share of the increased expenses: • Add to a sales tax revenue bond that would pay for a new City fleet facility, straightening the railroad line at Grant Tower, and controlling erosion on the 900 South and Folsom Street rail corridors. • Issue a motor fuel excise tax bond • Pay cash from fund balance Of the three, the first and third potential funding sources appear to have generated the most interest. There is some indication from Administration financial officials that they prefer adding to the sales tax bond. There would be some economies of scale achieved by adding to the sales tax bond. A rough estimated amount for the projects is $21.6 million for the new fleet facility; $5.7 million for straightening railroad track at Grant Tower; and $300,000 for controlling erosion on the 900 South and Folsom Street rail corridors.That amount equals about$27.6 million. Adding the roughly$2.81 million would bring the total amount of the bond to about$30.41 million. Again, the City also would have to allocate $600,000 from another revenue source to the Intermodal Huh Enterprise fund for the station at 525 West 200 South. Since the November 14 Council meeting the Administration has indicated that the general fund has about$5 million more in fund balance than the 10 percent level of general fund revenues that the City likes to keep in fund balance. It should be noted that other potential expenditures the City Council has recently discussed could lower the $5 million figure. The Administration has indicated that City funds for the project might not be necessary to spend until summer 2007. Council Members may want to clarify with the Administration about when the City's share of funds must he available for the project. 2 INFORMATION FROM PREVIOUS MEMORANDA The proposed amendments to the interlocal agreement mainly involve increasing the amount of money each party to the agreement will contribute to the project. When the City Council originally authorized Mayor Ross C. Anderson in April to sign the agreement the estimated project cost was $32 million.However,bids to build the extension came in significantly higher than the original estimate. The lowest bid for the project was $46.5 million. City and UTA officials then met and pared $4.8 million from the bid so the estimated project cost now is $41.7 million. Salt Lake City originally agreed to fund 26.4 percent of the project. If the City Council adopts the proposed amendments,the City's share would be $11.01 million. Under the original agreement the City's share was $8.45 million. KEY POINTS • Adopting the proposed amendments would acknowledge that project construction costs to extend the Trax line from the Delta Center to the Intermodal Hub have risen from an estimated $32 million to an estimated $41.7 million. • The lowest bid for the project was $46.5 million. The City and UTA pared about$4.8 million from the bid through cutting or delaying aspects of the project including: 1. Planned improvements such as curb and gutter, sidewalk, trees and lighting on the east side of 600 West Street. 2. Reduction by half in planned set-aside funds to help mitigate business impacts during construction from$250,000 to $125,000. 3. Change to ballasted track on 600 West Street instead of imbedding the track in concrete. 4. Elimination of UTA's third tail track at the end of the light-rail line. 5. Deferral to a later date of public way improvements on the south side of 200 South Street between 600 West and 700 West streets. • Salt Lake City's total share of construction costs would rise from$8.45 million to $11.01 million—a $2.56 million increase. • In April when the City Council authorized signing the original agreement, the Council and the Administration acknowledged that funds already in hand for the City's share of the project were $850,000 short of the project estimate. The City acknowledged that it would have to allocate $850,000 for the project by July 2007. The $850,000 plus the $2.56 million projected increase equals $3.41 million—the total amount of funds that have not been allocated for the project. • The Administration has proposed three funding options for the City Council's consideration: • Add to a sales tax revenue bond that would pay for a new City fleet facility, straightening the railroad line at Grant Tower, and controlling erosion on the 900 South and Folsom Street rail corridors. • Issue a motor fuel excise tax bond • Pay cash from fund balance 3 • According to the Administration transmittal,the $600,000 designated in the original interlocal agreement as the City's share to build a second Trax station at 525 West 200 South is not eligible for municipal bonds. That means about$2.81 million would be eligible for bonding, and $600,000 would have to come from other sources. • There is some indication that among the Administration financial managers that adding to the sales tax revenue bond might be preferable to the other two options to retain a strong fund balance. ISSUES/QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION • Before making a decision on financing methods, the City Council may wish to know how much fund balance above 10 percent of general fund revenues is available unencumbered. • The Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency has committed $2.4 million to the Trax extension project. Does the Agency have other funds available for the project? • Is $125,000, instead of$250,000, enough money to help mitigate business impacts during construction of the extension? • The original agreement's requirement that the City appropriate $600,000 to the Intermodal Hub enterprise fund to pay the City's share of building a Trax station at 525 West 200 South remains in place. The agreement requires that UTA build the station in 2010 or when the combined average weekday passenger boardings at the 400 West and Delta Center Trax stations reach 4,650 boardings. Is there any sentiment among the City Council to work with UTA to build the station sooner than the requirements? BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION As indicated above, the City Council in April authorized Mayor Ross C. Anderson to sign an interlocal agreement between Salt Lake City and the Utah Transit Authority. The agreement outlined financial and other responsibilities of each party for the construction of a light-rail extension between UTA's Delta Center Trax station at 400 West South Temple and the Inteinuodal Hub at 600 West 200 South. Under the agreement Salt Lake City agreed to pay 26.4 percent of project construction costs. Total construction costs were estimated at $32 million. Salt Lake City's share was $8.45 million. Of the $8.45 million, Salt Lake City had $7.6 million in available revenue to pay for its share. The sum included $2.4 million in Redevelopment Agency funds; $2 million in Utah Transit Authority funds; and$3.2 million in reimbursements from the Federal Transit Administration for the City's expenses in securing land and building the Intermodal Flub. That left about $850,000 the City would have to appropriate from a revenue source by July 2007. After the City Council's action the Transit Authority issued a request for proposals to build the extension. The bids the UTA received were significantly higher than the $32 million estimate. The low bid for the project was $46.5 million. UTA and City officials then met with the 4 low bidder and cut$4.8 million from the project, leaving a construction budget of$41.7 million— roughly$9.71 million above the original $32 million budget. Items cut from the construction budget: • Planned improvements such as curb and gutter, sidewalk, trees and lighting on the east side of 600 West Street. • Reduction by half in planned set-aside funds to help mitigate business impacts during construction from$250,000 to $125,000. • Change to ballasted track on 600 West Street instead of imbedding the track in concrete. • Elimination of UTA's third tail track at the end of the light-rail line. • Deferral to a later date of public way improvements on the south side of 200 South Street between 600 West and 700 West streets. Pursuant to the original agreement,the parties agreed that each would bear the same percentage (26.4 percent) of costs that they had agreed to in the original document.That meant that Salt Lake City's share of the $9.71 million in increased costs was $2.56 million.UTA also would pay $2.56 million, and the Federal Transit Administration would pay $4.58 million. (It should be noted that UTA will advance $4.58 million to the project and seek reimbursement from the Federal Transit Administration.) Again, Salt Lake City's share of the increased estimated cost is $2.56 million.Under the original agreement, City officials also understood that another $850,000 still was needed by July 2007 to meet the City's financial obligations under the original agreement. That means the City's total unfunded obligation under the proposed amendments to the interlocal agreement would be $3.41 million. The Administration has proposed three options to meet the obligation: • Add to the sales tax revenue bond that will be issued for building a new City fleet facility, straightening railroad track at Grant Tower, and controlling erosion on 900 South and Folsom Street rail corridors. • Issue a motor fuel excise tax bond. • Make a cash payment from fund balance. There is some indication from Administration financial officials that the preferable option would be to add to the sales tax bond.There would be some economies of scale achieved by adding to the sales tax bond. A rough estimated amount for the projects is $21.6 million for the new fleet facility; $5.7 million for straightening railroad track at Grant Tower; and$300,000 for controlling erosion on the 900 South and Folsom Street rail corridors. Again, it should be noted that City officials represented to the Legislature in the last session that the City would issue up to $37 million in sales tax revenue bonds this year. The motor fuel excise tax bond nominally pledges Class C road funds as the revenue source to pay back bonds over a 10-year period.The Administration transmittal notes that bond payments would come from the General Fund's Capital Improvement Fund—not necessarily actual Class C road funds. However, the transmittal says, if the City issues "a bond with Class C funds as security, (it) must maintain adequate Class C revenue to cover debt service." The Council may wish to seek clarification of whether that means Class C revenue must be encumbered to cover debt service. The third option involves taking cash from the General Fund's fund balance to pay the entire $3.41 million.The unknown in that case is how much unencumbered money is available in fund balance above the 10 percent of general fund revenue that makes up fund balance.The City Council appears to be in general agreement that the 10 percent limit at least should be maintained to keep the City's AAA bond rating. The issue is whether there is revenue available above the 10 percent limit for the project. It should be noted that City financial officials say they are concerned about pressure on the fund balance. If the amount in fund balance remains uncertain at the time the City Council votes on the proposed amendments to the interlocal agreement, the Council could approve the amendments but delay a decision on how much, if any, of the costs the Council might want to cover with bonding. Another issue involves the actual amount of bonding necessary. The Administration transmittal notes that even if the City Council pursues bonding, $600,000 of the project probably is not eligible for bonding. Under the original agreement, the City set aside $600,000 in the City's Intermodal Hub budget to pay its share of building a light-rail station in 2010. It should be noted that the agreement also requires that funds for public art at the station also would be placed in the Intel modal Hub budget. Given that, it appears that at least $600,000 from a source other than bonds must be allocated for the project. It also means that $2.81 million would be eligible for issuing bonds. One question the City Council may have is whether the Redevelopment Agency, which already has appropriated $2.4 million for the project, might be another revenue source to reduce the amount of the bond, or whether bonding might be more economical long-tei in than having the RDA share the expense. 6 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF MEMORANDUM DATE: November 17,2006 SUBJECT: INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT REVENUE BOND LOCAL PAGES LEASING COMPANY,LLC AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: District 1 STAFF REPORT BY: Gary Mumford ADMINISTRATIVE DEPT. Mayor's Office,Economic Development AND CONTACT PERSON: Ed Butterfield NOTICE REQUIREMENTS: Newspaper advertisement 14 days prior to the Public Hearing CC: Sam Guevara,Alison McFarland,Ed Butterfield,Steve Fawcett,Dan Mule Local Pages Inc. is financing a new printing operation in an existing building in the International Center at 4910 W Amelia Earhart Drive. Local Pages is asking Salt Lake City to be the conduit issuer of industrial revenue bonds to finance the acquisition of the$2 million in printing equipment. This type of debt will result in significant interest savings to Local Pages. The company distributes phone books to various communities in several states. Local Pages currently contracts out its printing but plans to commence its own printing and binding operation in Salt Lake City. A separate company has been established to lease the building and operate the printing and binding portion of the business. The subsidiary that will repay the debt is Local Pages Leasing Company, LLC. Local Pages Inc. is also guaranteeing the debt. The credit worthiness of Local Pages is not an issue because GE Capital Public Finance, Inc. has offered to purchase the debt. The City has received a "sophisticated investor" letter from GE Capital Public Finance confirming that it understands the risks associated with this type of investment and under no circumstance will non-payment or a default constitute or impose upon the City any financial obligation or liability. In addition to 89 employees who currently work for Local Pages in its Salt Lake City office, the printing operation will bring 12 new jobs to Salt Lake City in 2007 and up to 18 more within five years. Local Pages employees in Salt Lake City currently earn an average annual salary of$29,000. Unrelated to the printing operation, Local Pages projects that with planned expansion of new books to be published in Utah and several other states, the company will add 240 more jobs in the Salt Lake City office by the end of 2010. The Local Pages, Inc. was established in 1997 in Kearns. The company first produced phone books for smaller community areas,but has expanded into larger communities. According to information provided to the City, the print in the phone books produced by Local Pages is twice as large as other phone books. Some features included are menus for restaurants and color advertising. Local Pages uses boy and girl scouts units to deliver the books, which helps scout groups financially. In the future, the company may produce a phone book for the Salt Lake City metropolitan area. The IRS has set a "volume cap" for each state ($150 million per year for Utah) for entities issuing industrial development revenue bonds or private activity bonds. (Providers of health care or educational services are not subject to the volume cap.) The Utah Legislature has established priorities for allocating the volume cap with most going to the Utah Housing Finance Agency for fist-time single-family homeowners or to college student loan programs. Some of the volume cap is set aside for small manufacturing businesses. The Utah Private Activity Bond Authority authorized industrial revenue bonds for the Local Pages project subject to City Council approval and issuance. Local Pages requests that the Council set the date for a Tax Equality and Fiscal Responsibility Act (TEFRA) hearing to be held on December 12, 2006. Following the hearing, Local Pages requests that the Council consider adopting one or more resolutions authorizing and approving the issuance of industrial development revenue bonds. 2 C j f4 ROSS C."ROCKY"AY ANDERSON SALMI�r Q a� J co u -�Io`{`�i OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 1 1� lJ CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL TO: Sam Guevara, Chief of Staff Fr.° DATE: November 17, 2006 Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Alison McFarlane, Senior Advisor for Economic Development RE: Industrial Revenue Bond Application from Local Pages, LLC. STAFF CONTACTS: Edward Butterfield, Small Business/Economic Development Manager ACTION REQUIRED: That the City Council (1)hold a briefing on November 21 st, (2) schedule a TEFRA Hearing to be held on December 12th, and (3) adopt an Inducement Resolution on December 12th. DOCUMENT TYPE: Inducement Resolution BUDGET IMPACT: None DISCUSSION: Local Pages, LLC has applied for a$2,041,000 industrial revenue bond for the purchase of printing equipment including a new printing press, pre-press, and binding equipment. Local Pages, LLC produces phone books and has operated in Utah for over six years. Its headquarters and manufacturing plant are located at 4910 W. Amelia Earhart Dr. in Salt Lake City. The Company currently employees 89 people at the Salt Lake City location and generates annual revenues of$9 million (2005). Local Pages is also licensed to do business in Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Ohio, Oregon, Montana,Nevada,New Mexico, Texas, Washington and Wyoming. Local Pages LLC currently uses outside vendors for printing and binding of their phone books. The establishment of a printing facility, with the assistance of IRB funds, will result in cost savings of$3 million in the first year. The cost savings will permit Local Pages, LLC to expand into new markets, specifically in the Southeast and possibly a Salt Lake City Metro phone book. The Local Pages LLC will hire 12 employees this year to run and operate the printing equipment. As sales increase from the market expansion, the company will hire an additional 248 employees in Executive Management, Sales, Office/Clerical and other positions over the next five years. In ten years, the company is projected to have over 783 employees at their Salt Lake City location. Local Pages, LLC payroll will increase from $2.5 million to an estimated $12.7 million in 5 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 306,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 84111 TELEPHONE:801-535-7704 FAX 801-535-6331 wwwsIcgov.com years. The current taxable sales will increase from $2.2 million to an estimated $7.4 million within the same time period. Local Pages, LLC enhances their community impact in support of local charities by coordinating phone book delivery activities as a means of fundraising. As an example, the Boy and Girl Scouts Club in Tooele, Utah delivered 25,000 phone books for Local Pages, LLC and earned $3,500. Additionally, the Local Pages, LLC offers at least a 50% discount on advertising space to non-profits in their phone books. Local Pages LLC received its state allocation for IRB funding in July, 2006, and the City's Industrial Revenue Advisory Committee has reviewed its application and recommends a favorable action by the City Council. To move ahead with the bond issue, the City needs to: (1) have City Council adopt an Inducement Resolution; arrange for the publication of Notice of Bonds to be Issued; and schedule a TEFRA Hearing, (2)publish the Notice of TEFRA Hearing at least 14 days prior to the hearing, (3)publish the Notice of Bonds to be Issued, and (4) after the 14-day notice period for the TEFRA Hearing expires the City Council needs to hold the Hearing. Local Pages, LLC has paid a $1,000 non-refundable application fee and will submit an additional $14,000 at closing to reimburse the City for expenses entailed in issuing the bonds including City personnel time, and related expenses incurred in the evaluation process. Attachments: (1) IRB Application from Local Pages, LLC (2) Inducement Resolution Name of Transmittal Page 2 of 2 Salt Lake City Corporation INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND APPLICATION PART A: APPLICANT INFORMATION 1.Name of applicant: Local Pages Leasing Company, LLC ("LPLC") 2. Name of guarantor Local Pages, Inc. ("Local Pages") 3.Address of applicant: The Local Pages, Inc. is the main corporation and is set up as an "S" Corp. We have an "L.L.C." for each of the states we operate in. The address to which they are all registered is: 5150 West 4820 South, Kearns, Utah 84118 except for our most recently formed L.L.C.s (Georgia, New Mexico and Texas) whose address is 4910 W. Amelia Earhart Dr. Ste. 1, Salt Lake City, UT 84116. 3.Attachment A: Include a brief history of your company. Kelly Clark established The Local Pages, Inc. in 1997 In Kearns, Utah in approximately a 6,000 sq ft building with one goal in mind- build a phone book that benefits the community not stockholders. He wanted to develop a book that actually represented the community not something cookie cutter that would save a buck. The Local Pages produced their first phone book for the Elko Nevada area with only five employees. Identity and a multitude of struggles continued as this small group of individuals were told they couldn't do it and that their efforts were futile. However, during the first year of operations approximately$86,000 in sales was generated. Sales increased to $4,500,000 within 5 years. During this period of rapid growth, various in house departments were staffed and advanced computer support installed. These include fully staffed graphics, editing, telemarketing, collections and administrative departments. The Local Pages' drive and passion to bring something better to the market is what has spurred our growth in each market we enter. IRB Page 1 4. Name and address of all other major business officers and investors supporting this application: Name Title Email Phone Mailing Address Kelly President Kellyclark84020@hotmail.com 801.963.1702 Clark Joe Executive Vice Joe63@thelocalpages.net 801.963.1702 Ostmeier President Ext. 115 Cindy Director of chall(althelocalpages.net 801.963.1702 Hall Sales Ext. 119 Dawn Director of dsansing@thelocalpages.net 801.963.1702 Sansing Production Ext. 126 Gail Director of greidling@thelocalpages.net 801.96.1702 Reidling Delivery Ext. 133 Tom Director of tkeene@thelocalpages.net 801.963.1702 Keene Administration Ext. 116 Joe Vice President jreidling@thelocalpages.net 801.963.1702 Reidling Ext. 224 5. Name and address of bond counsel (bond counsel must be retained before application is considered complete for processing): Eric Johnson Smith/Hartvigsen 215 South State Street, Ste. 650 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Phone: 801.413.1600 Fax: 801-413-1620 eric@smithlawonline.com 6. Name and address of proposed underwriter or purchaser of bonds: David Jackman, Vice President—Business Development GE Capital Public Finance, Inc. 8400 Normandale Lake Blvd., Ste. 470,Minneapolis,MN 55437 Phone: (800) 689-0168 Mobile: (303) 888-5913 Fax: (720)488-9480 IRB Page 2 PART B: PROJECT INFORMATION 1. Name and description of the project (minimum of one page): Name: Application for Debt Issuance io Salt Lake City Corporation, Utah from Local Pages Leasing Company, LLC. Project name: "Local Pages Relocation Project 2006" Purpose and Description: Local Pages requests Salt Lake City Corporation (the "City") to act as a conduit issuer. Local Pages is financing a new printing operation in the International Business Park west of the Salt Lake airport. The printing operation will be housed in an existing building that will be equipped after purchase to print phone books. Local Pages is asking the City to be the conduit issuer for the acquisition of the printing equipment in the estimated amount of$2,000,000. Local Pages believes it qualifies for tax-exempt financing as a small manufacturer. The project is the financing of printing equipment, including a new printing press, pre-press and binding equipment. Joe Reilding, V.P. of the Local pages will represent Local Pages. The proposed terms of debt issuance are $2,030,000 (equipment cost plus up to $30k in issuance expense) to be repaid over 8 years at a fix interest rate of approximately 5.61%. The credit worthiness of Local Pages has already been accepted by GE Capital Public Finance, Inc., which has offered to purchase the debt on the above terms. As a conduit issuer, this offering will create no financial obligation or liability on the City. This form of financing is allowed under Section 144(a) of the federal tax code. The printing operation will bring 12 new jobs to Salt Lake City in 2007 and up to 18 more within five years for a total of 30 projected by 2010. This is in addition to the 89 employees who currently work for Local Pages in our Salt Lake City office. In addition to the printing operation and the current employee base, Local Pages projects that the planned expansion and new books to be published in Utah and several other states will add an estimated 240 more jobs in the Salt Lake City office by the end of 2010. The total projected number of employees by the end of 2010 in our Salt Lake City office and printing operation is 359. This is 270 more than today's 89 employees. These numbers do not include any outside sales representatives as none are based in the Salt Lake City offices. Currently, the outside sales employees constitute about 51% of the total number of employees of Local Pages. Current Salt Lake City Office 89 Printing Operation 2010 Projection 30 Projected Growth in SLC Office by 2010 240 Total SLC Office and Printing 2010 (Projected) 359 IRB Page 3 Local Pages has grown rapidly in recent years and hopes to establish strong ties to local government that will facilitate continued growth in the City. As a conduit issuer, the City will need to adopt a resolution declaring its intention to act as conduit issuer, hold a public hearing known as a TEFRA hearing, and adopt a resolution authorizing the loan and entering into an agreement with Local Pages whereby Local Pages will commit to repay the loan. The origin of the project started about a year ago when we could tell space would soon be an issue. Finding the right property to house a printing company has been an issue, till now. Currently, moving forward is what we would like to do, upon approval of financing. Researching every aspect of having proper ventilation, vendors of printing companies, pre-press etc. are some significant actions taken to get project to its current status. Because of current business relations with printing companies, we have kept this project confidential, minimizing the amount of public awareness as much as possible. Shareholders Joe Ostmeier, and Kelly Clark are individuals who have been significantly involved with every aspect of this project (including funding, promoting, developing etc.). Joe Ostmeier and Kelly Clark have decision-making authority or oversight responsibilities. They also have a financial interest in the Project greater than that of a member of the general public. The date and place of our incorporation or formation are as follows: The Local Pages Inc. - S.L.C., Utah, 1997; and The Local Pages Leasing Company S.L.C., Utah 2005 We are licensed to do business in: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Ohio, Oregon, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Texas, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. We also publish phone books and sell advertising in Canada for the Canadian firm, Directory Masters, Inc. The purpose for original incorporation was to produce phone books. 2. Address of project: 4910 West Amelia Earhart Drive Salt Lake City, UT 84116 3. Type of Industry: Manufacturing of phone books. 4. Rationale for seeking public support for Industrial Revenue Bond approval: The Local Pages seeks public support for this bond so that we might obtain the desired equipment at a significantly lower interest rate than what our bank has proposed. We believe the benefit to the City will be an increase in the number of good paying jobs with little risk to the community because of our financial position. • This will allow for us to save $3mm our first year in Printing costs. IRB Page 4 • Traditional taxable financing at pre-tax equivalent rate of tax-exempt rate would cost a total of$2,820,409 in loan payments over the 96 months versus only $2,527,919 under the proposed.tax-exempt loan, a savings of over$290,000. 5.Will the project have a•positive economic impact on the community? We project that within 5 years of having our own printing and binding facility, the combined operations of Local Pages will reach $67MM in total revenue per year (an increase of 586% from FYE 2006). The project will have a positive economic impact in that a good majority of resources including people, materials, equipment, and ongoing material needs are and will be purchased right here in Salt Lake City. Local Pages could reduce operating expenses by outsourcing jobs. However, we believe in supporting the local community as long as it's fiscally responsible. Moreover, we support businesses based in Salt Lake that will grow as we do. Therefore, approving this bond would do more than help just our business grow; it would be supporting other businesses that feed off of us. In addition, there are clusters of lower income areas within 10 minutes of the International Business Center that should benefit from increased employment opportunities, especially from an employer like Local Pages that has hired a very diverse group of people. In particular, this project should impact the community over by Amelia Earhart Drive, which has experienced a dramatic economic downturn in the last 3 years. Local Pages will bring sustained and substantial growth to this area and to Salt Lake City by adding jobs that pay on average $35,000 per year by 2010, and a product that is widely used by all economic levels. As previously discussed, we estimate that the combined office and printing operations, all in Salt Lake City, will create more than 270 new jobs in the next 5 years and more than $67 MM dollars in total company revenue (2010 projection). This in turn will mean more tax dollars for the City. In the last 5 years running Local Pages has been named to the top 100 of "Utah's fastest growing companies". Our business model coupled with doing ALL our work in house, while not sending any overseas, we believe makes a compelling argument for the City to support this request. For more specific financial detail on our projections, please refer to the proforma financials that are enclosed with this application and made a part hereof. The proforma financials are for total company operations and not for only Salt Lake City operations. 6.What social and physical benefits will be realized by the City? We pay our employees well for the job they do so they can enjoy a good standard of living. On average, our Salt Lake City employees currently earn $29,000 dollars, contributing valuable tax dollars into Salt Lake City. This average is projected to grow to more than$35,000 by 2010. IRB Page 5 All non-profit organizations are offered at least a 50% discount off the lowest price our sales people are allowed to offer prospective clients for advertising in our books. A few even get an ad for free. Some non-profit agencies in Utah that have benefited from discounts or free ads include: Utah Public Radio (Logan); Hospice for Utah (Logan); A Act of Love (St. George); Open Heart Adoptions (St. George); LDS Family Services (many areas including St. George); Dixie State College of Utah (St. George); Vernal Area Chamber of Commerce (Vernal); and Duchesne County Chamber of Commerce (Vernal). Local Pages also supports local charities by coordinating delivery activity as a means of fund raising. As an example, we just completed working with Boy and Girl Scouts clubs in Tooele, Utah who delivered 25,000 books and are being paid $3,500 for doing it. A job like this took them 3-4 weeks, doing it part-time, but earning a nice sum of money. 7. Does the project contribute to the development of underutilized property in the City? Over the last five years the previous owner of the building was Michelex Inc., who is exiting the market. In the sense that Local Pages is bringing a performing business into a location where another business is exiting, we believe we are contributing to the development of an underutilized property in the City. Further, typically the City should note that when successful companies (like ours) will move in to an area, different companies also start to pop up like restaurants, specialty stores, core business, etc. 8. Does the project generate synergies for the development of surrounding properties? In the same way that Local Pages contributes to the development of an underutilized property within the International Business Center, we also create synergy for the area. When a company like ours comes in to an area, it commonly results in other companies opening up shop nearby, thus generating additional commerce. The Local Pages feels the City should take an active interest in bringing in anchor tenants, like ours, to the International Center because this will invariably result in the other businesses making greater investments to enter or to stay as well. In addition, area businesses will benefit economically from the presence of our current 89 employees. 9. Does the project serve unmet needs of City residents? Our product has many benefits to the residents and businesses of Salt Lake City because our books have many features that are not in other phone books. For example, we put menus for restaurants in our phone books. We also put cell phone numbers in our books, and our print is twice as large as any other book. In addition, we will be offering full- color advertising at a significantly discounted rate compared to the utility books. While we do not currently have a Salt Lake City book, Local Pages does have preliminary plans to market and publish a Salt Lake City or Salt Lake Metro phone book. A projected publishing date for a Salt Lake book has not yet been determined. IRB Page 6 PART C: FINANCIAL INFORMATION 1. Attachment B: Include audited financials of the applicant for the last three years. Local Pages By,Laws oily require Reviewed Financial Statements and the financial institution that Local Pages is currently involved with also only requires Reviewed Financial Statements. 2. Attachment C: Include operating statements. Please refer to attached Pro-forma financial statements for additional operating analysis. 3.Amount of proposed Industrial Revenue Bond: $2,030,000 pursuant to attached Sources and Uses statement 4. Is an application for the State allocation required? Yes Allocation from the Utah Private Activity Bond Review Board has already been approved. Recently the Board approved an extension of our allocation to December 31, 2006. 5. Credit Enhancement. City regulations require that All publicly offered revenue bonds issued by the City on behalf of a Private Entity shall be credit enhanced by either a bond insurance policy issued by a `AAA'-rated municipal bond insurer, or by a direct-pay letter-of-credit from a financial institution with at least a 'AA' rating. Evidence of the availability of such bond insurance or letter-of-credit shall be provided to the City with the initial application. In the case where the proposed bonds are to be sold on a private placement basis to a sophisticated investor or group of sophisticated investors, the City's credit enhancement requirement will be waived once the City has received written confirmation from a sophisticated investor that it understands the risks associated with this type of investment and that under no circumstance will non-payment or a default on the bonds constitute or impose upon the City any financial obligation or liability. Bond insurance: N/A Direct-pay-letter-of-credit: N/A This bond will not be publicly offered. It is being sold as a direct purchase, private placement to an accredited institutional investor; GE Capital Public Finance, Inc., who has provided Local Pages a financing commitment that does not require any of the aforementioned enhancements.Please see GE commitment attached. Sophisticated Investor: GE Capital Public Finance, Inc. Commitment letter is attached. 6.Anticipated method and terms of bonding: Level amortization over 8 years IRB Page 7 7. What impact will the proposed expansion have on your company? The proposed expansion will have a number of positive impacts on our company as well. The major impacts include: • Financial Savings- our company should benefit from an immediate savings of 20%. Currently, we spend $3MM annually on printing and binding costs. We will be able to absorb that extra 20% and use it for expansion into new markets, specifically ones in the Southeast. • Control- Right now we have an "open" time with the printers we contract out to. What that means is that when a printer wins a bid, we are at the mercy of their schedule to print our books which could be anywhere from a month to four months. In looking at the scheduling of our books we anticipate having a two week production schedule for any of our books. • Quality- For the most part this is a non-issue. However, on occasion a production glitch may occur, and when it does, the cost of reproduction is huge. Sometimes parts of books might be missing or put in the wrong place. Correcting these problems can be expensive because our timelines are thrown off and complications arise. Our experience has show us where printing firms typically cut corners. With our quality control procedures in place, our new operations will help ensure a successful run every time. 8. Identify your sources and uses of funds: Please see attached Sources and Uses statement 9. How will the bond be repaid? Over 8 years from operating revenues. 10. Estimated annual tax revenue generated by project: Total Payroll Value (Salt Lake City Only): Total Current Payroll Estimated in 1 Yr. Estimated in 5 Yrs. $2,580,312 $3,394,523 $12,781,396 Property Valuations (Salt Lake City Only): Total Valuation Estimated in 1 Yr. Estimated in 5 Yrs. $3,000,000 $3,700,000 $8,200,000 IRB Page 8 Gross Taxable Sales (Salt Lake City Only): Current Taxable Sales Estimated in 1 Yr. Estimated in 5 Yrs. $0 $2,200,000 $7,400,000 Our printing operation will be the source of sales tax revenue to the city as the supplies used in the printing operations, including paper, will be sales taxable according to the Utah State Tax Commission. Since much of the printing will be for our books for other states where we will have to pay a use tax, we are hoping to avoid a double taxation issue. We are working with the Utah State Tax Commission to resolve this issue. 11. Description of all collateral required to finance the project: • We are looking at purchasing the below equipment: o 1 King Press 8 unit Printing Press $1,175,000 o 1 Mueller Martini Perfect Binder 21 Pocket $30,000 o 1 Fuji Pre-Press Equipment $134,000 o 1 Shanklin HS-3 w/ Shrink Wrap $143,000 o 1 Lantech Q300 Stretch Wrapper $10,200 o 1 Waste Recovery System $9,100 o 1 Polar 115 Paper Cutter $25,000 o 1 Muller Martini Conveyors $30,000 o 1 Wohlenberg TS Book Saw $36,000 o 1 Wurst Flat and Twist Belt $10,000 o Installation and other minor equipment costs $397,700 IRB Page 9 PART D: EMPLOYMENT INFORMATION 1. How many new jobs will be created, at what levels, and what percentage of the applicant's total payroll will they comprise? This project will benefit the public by creating more than 270 solid jobs in Salt Lake City over the next 5 years, which in turn, will mean more tax dollars for the City. The jobs will be in all areas of the company's Salt Lake City office and printing operations. Our Salt Lake City operation accounts for 60.6% of our total payroll costs. 2. Specify the classification and number of permanent jobs created in Salt Lake City: Currently Local Pages (Designated as TLP in the table below) has only one location and that is in Salt Lake City. The table below shows our present and projected employment levels for our Salt Lake City office and printing operation. Other Employees consist of Outside Sales People and employees that work outside of our Salt Lake City offices. Present Proposed 5 year 10 Year Projected Classification Employment Employment Projected Executives/Mgrs 8 8 26 60 Professionals 11 12 39 88 Craftsmen 2 14 32 50 (Skilled) Laborers 0 0 0 0 (Unskilled) Office/Clerical 36 40 136 300 Services/Sales 32 37 126 285 Other(Specify) 0 0 0 0 TOTAL SLC 89 111 359 783 Other Employees 90 112 362 790 TOTAL TLP 179 223 721 1,573 IRB Page 10 3. For each type of employment classification, specify the average annual wage: This table covers only our Salt Lake City operations. Classification Current Average Annual Wage Executives/Mgrs.* 49,100 Professionals 21,100 Craftsmen (Skilled) 25,500 Laborers (Unskilled) Office/Clerical 21,600 Services/Sales* 23,800 Other(Specify) * Does not include owner draws or our more highly paid outside sales representatives, all of whom work outside of our Salt Lake City offices. 4. Specify the classification and number of temporary jobs created: All jobs will be full-time IRB Page 11 PART E: SIGNATURE(S) Joe Reidling Joe Reidling By (Signature of Authorized Representative) (Please Print Name) By (Signature of Authorized Representative) (Please Print Name) Date IRB Page 12 Please enclose a$1,000 nonrefundable application fee and send application package to: Ed Butterfield Small Business/Economic Development Manager Mayor's Office Salt Lake City Corporation 451 South State Street, Room 306 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 If you have questions, call 801/535-6306. FEE SCHEDULE The applicant shall pay to the City, at the time of filing, an application fee that is nonrefundable even if the bonds are not issued. The application fee for a new issue is $1,000 and for a refunding issue is $500. This fee may be applied to the following fee schedule. The applicant shall also pay to the City, at the time of closing, an industrial revenue bond fee that shall be calculated as follows: $7,500 plus .15%of the principal face amount of the bonds for the first $5,000,000 .10% for the second $5,000,000 .075% for the third $5,000,000 .05% for the fourth $5,000,000 The minimum fee for any issue shall be $15,000 and the maximum fee shall be $25,000. In addition, the applicant shall pay to the City's Financial Advisor at closing $1.75 per $1,000 par amount of the bonds, with a minimum of $7,500 for financial advisory services associated with the issuance of the proposed bonds. IRB Page 13 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT BUDGET AMENDMENT #2 — FISCAL YEAR 2006-07 DATE: November 17, 2006 SUBJECT: Budget Amendment #2 STAFF REPORT BY: Sylvia Richards CC: Sam Guevara, DJ Baxter, Ed Rutan, Steve Fawcett, Gordon Hoskins, LuAnn Clark, Chief Querry, Chief Burbank, LeRoy Hooton, Louis Zunguze, Rick Graham, Russ Pack, Shannon Ashby, Sherrie Collins, Susi Kontgis, Kay Christensen, Gina Chamness The proposed budget amendment contains 39 adjustments. The Administration proposes the use of fund balance for eight initiatives for a total decrease in fund balance of$986,059. As the Council has discussed previously, it is always difficult to consider major projects outside of the annual budget process. These fund balance requests will not be analyzed against other one-time needs, future budget amendment requests or other priorities that the Council may wish to consider funding. Council staff asked the Administration for the approximate current fund balance in the general fund. According to the Administration, the estimated fund balance as of June 30, 2007, adjusting for fund balance requests from Budget Amendments 1 and 2, the fund balance is $23,408,000, or 12.77%, which is approximately $5 million above the 10%. Without the expenditures proposed in this budget amendment, the dollar amount available above 10% is approximately $6 million. A Council Member suggested an additional possible budget item, which would require appropriations of fund balance of$212,000 (see item I-1). The public hearing for this budget opening is tentatively planned for December 12, 2006. The Council requested that a current-year revenue forecast be included with each budget amendment. The attached revenue forecast projects that overall general fund revenue will exceed budget by $650,000 primarily because of favorable sales tax revenue. In an effort to make the review of the budget openings more expedient, the Administration has attempted to categorize budget opening items as follows: A. "New" - those items that are new issues. B. "Grant requiring existing staff resources" -- those grants that will require the City's existing staff to complete a specific project. (Employees involved with these projects may have less time to focus on other projects within the scope of their work.) Page 1 C. "Grant requiring additional staff resources" - those grants that provide additional staff positions and require a City match. These generally have policy implications because they may add a new service or create an expectation that the City will fund the position after the grant has expired. D. "Housekeeping" -- those items classified by the Administration as strictly accounting actions that do not have policy implications. E. "Grants requiring No New Staff Resources" - those grants that provide funding for costs that are not associated with positions. F. "Donation" -- those items that are donations that require Council appropriation to be used, are consistent with previous Council discussions, or do not have policy implications. G. "Cost Overruns" - those CIP items that have exceeded the appropriation. H. "Follow-up on Previously Approved Items" - those items that were approved in a previous budget amendment but require some additional adjustments. I. "Additions from the Council" - items added by Council staff for the Council's consideration. MATTERS AT ISSUE The Administration classified the following as: New Items: A-1: Airport CIP($9,492,000-Airport Enterprise Fund) source:Airport passenger facility charges The Department of Airports is requesting that three projects be added to its capital improvement program with funding to come from passenger facility charges: • $2,579,000 - Sterile Corridor Extension to increase the number of international gates from three to five. Gates D8 and D 10 will be added to the current international gates D2, D4, and D6. The sterile corridor will be extended so that arriving international passengers will proceed to the federal inspection services facility in the International Terminal. This expansion will meet the future growth of international flights as Delta comes out of bankruptcy and aggressively pursues more international flights. • $3,124,000 - Federal Inspection Services Facility Remodel to add a second bag carousel for arriving international passengers and to expand the number of inspector positions from four to eight. Current space is available in the International Terminal for this expansion. • $3,789,000 - Purchase six new passenger boarding bridges to replace old deteriorated bridges with new boarding bridges that will allow the airlines to be more flexible in the types of aircraft used at the airport including aircraft ranging from smaller regional jets to large wide-body aircraft. Once a new terminal facility is built, these boarding bridges will be repositioned to the new concourses. A-2: Downtown Parking Token Subsidy ($15,000 - General Fund) source: Fund Balance The Downtown Alliance has submitted a request asking Salt Lake City to assist with the Downtown Token program in the amount of$15,000. The City contributed $150,900 in 2003 and 2004 for this program and the Redevelopment Agency provided some start-up funds. Last year, the RDA provided another subsidy in the amount of$50,000. In order to get the usage from participating merchants and businesses, the Downtown Alliance has had to discount the sale of the tokens. Currently, the Alliance is requesting $15,000 to Page 2 , fund the program through the end of its fiscal year, July 2007. The Downtown Transportation Master Plan will be making recommendations on whether this program should be continued, modified or discontinued. A-3: Garfield School Facility Maintenance ($126,800 - General Fund) source: Fund Balance „ The Garfield School property, recently purchased by the City, is now in need of operational and maintenance expense funding. The rent from the two existing tenants is being deposited into the CIP Fund, and will be used for one-time improvements to the building. The Administration is requesting $112,700 from the general fund for ongoing operational costs including utilities,janitorial services for common areas, and snow removal services. Additionally, the Administration is requesting $14,100 of one-time funding to re-core door locks, and for repairs to the air conditioning units, ventilation fan, concrete steps, and the boiler. A-4: Worker Compensation Actuarial Services ($12,100 -Insurance &Risk Management Fund) source: Reserves in the Insurance &Risk Management Fund Each year the City is required to report an estimated liability for the total costs of worker's compensation as well as general liability. This estimated liability is to recognize that the City will incur future costs as a result of accidents or incidents that have already occurred. The Department of Management Services has contracted with a firm to provide the actuarially determined liabilities. The Department is requesting an appropriation in the Insurance & Risk Management Fund for these services. The Council may wish to ask why this expense wasn't anticipated during tie annual budget process. A-5: Energy Reduction City & County Building ($164,980 - CIP Fund) source: Fund Balance from the General Fund The Administration is recommending that the Council approve a request in the amount of $164,980 to assist with energy savings and the reduction of environmental impacts relating to the City & County Building, in keeping with the City's energy-saving initiative. This project will include converting the outside air system to VAV (variable air volume, which fluctuates the volume of air), providing evaporative cooling to the outside air system (similar to a swamp cooler), installing direct digital controls, and converting the hot water system to variable air volume. In their initial site visit report, Rocky Mountain Power outlined the potential savings of these energy-efficient improvements. If the project is funded, Rocky Mountain Power will then conduct an energy analysis for the City and County Building (at Rocky Mountain Power's cost). As a result of these changes, the Administration estimates a savings of nearly $22,000 in natural gas and electricity per year using today's energy prices. The Administration anticipates the City would recover the monies expended for this project in 6.5 years. Rocky Mountain Power will provide nearly $25,000 in energy conservation incentives payable 45 days after the project is completed, according to the Administration. The Council may wish to weigh whether this project should be included for review in the annual budget process, and whether CIP applications have been submitted to fund items A5 and A-6. A-6: Energy Reduction Plaza 349 ($259,079 - CIP Fund) source: Fund Balance from the General Fund In conjunction with the previous request (A-5), the Administration is requesting $259,079 for energy upgrades to Plaza 349 on 200 East. The project would include installing new rooftop air handling heating and cooling units with economizers and evaporative Page 3 condensers, and upgrading the direct digital building controls and parking terrace lighting. The Administration estimates a savings of$52,000 per year and anticipates that the monies expended for the project would be recovered in 5 years. Rocky Mountain Power will provide $78,663 in energy conservation incentives, payable 45 days after completion of the project, according to the Administration. The Administration has applied for and received a $15,000 grant from the Utah State Energy Program. The grant is payable upon the completion of the project. The Council may wish to weigh whether this project should be included for review in the annual budget process, and whether CIP applications have been submitted to fund items A 5 and A-6. A-7: Building Plans Examiner- Fire ($13,000 - General Fund) source: Fund Balance During the Fiscal Year 2006-07 budget process the Building Services and Licensing Division requested an additional FTE, a Building Plans Examiner/Fire Engineer, to assist with the implementation of the one-stop counter. The Council funded the position at $64,408, which was $16,712 less than requested after the Administration determined fire reviews could be conducted by a non-engineer. The Division advertised the position but was unable to attract qualified candidates at the funded level. The Council encouraged the Division to request the additional funding necessary to recruit at a competitive salary. Comparisons to similar jurisdictions indicate a $13,000 funding gap, which is the amount of the request. The Council expressed support for this funding previously, and may wish to ask about the hiring status. A-8: Public Safety Building Garage Demolition ($260,000 - CIP Fund) source: Fund Balance from the General Fund The multi-level parking structure next to the Public Safety Building is unusable due to safety and environmental concerns. The Administration proposes that the parking structure be demolished down to the existing floor slab, resurfaced and restriped. Costs are estimated as follows: Demolition: $170,000; permits, bonds and utility disconnection - $30,000; floor slab repair - $20,000; security fence installation on north and east sides - $10,000; contingency - $30,000. According to the Administration, there will be a gain of at least 15 to 20 parking spaces. Council staff understands that demolishing this structure will remove an existing weight/fitness room for police personnel, a fire department storage area, as well as a police department evidence storage area for recovered stolen bicycles. Regarding the fitness area, the Police Department is working with the Administration to allow police personnel to use vacation time to pay for a gym membership. The Fire Department will be finding another place to store cleaning supplies, medical supplies and personal protective equipment. This situation with the parking garage is apparently long-standing. The Council may wish to ask why this request is being made midyear as opposed to the annual budget process. The Council may also wish to ask whether theAdministration has considered applying for CIP funds for this project. Additionally, the Council may wish to ask whether the Administration has considered renting parking spaces in the vicinity of the public safety building A-9: Police Investigative Overtime ($78,000 - General Fund) source: Fund Balance Non-budgeted Police Department overtime costs related to the child abduction case earlier this summer were $31,500. In addition, the Police Department used $46,500 of unplanned special event overtime in support of President Bush's visit to Salt Lake City and related free Page 4 speech activities. The Administration requests funding from the General Fund fund balance. A-10: Bond Proceeds - Westside Railroad Re-alignment and Public Way Improvements (Grant Tower) ($5,720,000 - CIP Fund) The Adminstration requests a budget to recognize bond proceeds of$5,720,000 and authorize expenditures of this amount. Of this amount, $5,600,000 is for the project and $120,000 relates to the cost of issuing the bonds. Council staffs understanding is that the Redevelopment Agency will pay the debt service on $3,100,000 of this amount. In addition to these funds, Salt Lake County will provide $3,500,000 in sales tax collections for transportation projects that were authorized by the 2006 state legislature (see initiative A- 11). The requested budget does not include $4,000,000 that was previously appropriated by the City Council to fund the purchase of land which will ultimately be used in the realignment of the railroad tracks. A-11: Salt Lake County Contribution - Westside Railroad Re-alignment and Public Way Improvements (Grant Tower) ($3,500,000 - CIP Fund) source: Salt Lake County In the 2006 General Session, the Utah legislature authorized Salt Lake County to expend $3.5 million out of sales tax collections for transportation projects for the Grant Tower work. The Administration has been working with the County to secure the funds and expects to execute an Interlocal Agreement with the County to transfer the funds to Salt Lake City in one lump sum in January 2007. The Administration is requesting that the budget be created now in order to receive and start expending the funds as soon as they are received. Funds will be used for cash payments to Union Pacific and right-of-way acquisitions. A-12: Foothill Drive Transit Study($70,000- General Fund) source: Fund Balance The Northeast Salt Lake City Traffic and Transportation Committee was formed earlier this year to discuss transportation issues relating to this portion of the City. The Committee has discussed the need for a transit alternatives analysis to be performed to determine the best means of providing transit services along Foothill Drive given the increase in traffic volumes and congestion. The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT), the University of Utah, and the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) have all expressed willingness to contribute $50,000 each towards a transit corridor analysis, and the Wasatch Front Regional Council has agreed to manage the study and provide computer modeling services as their contribution. The Administration is requesting that the City contribute $70,000 towards the study. The Council may wish to ask the Administration for a projected timeline for the study. The Administration classified the following as: Grants Requiring Existing Staff Resources B-1: Grant- Department of Justice Meth Enforcement & Cleanup ($148,084 - Grants Fund) The Police Department applied for and received grant monies of$148,084 from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Program under a Bureau of Justice Assistance Congressional mandate for methamphetamine enforcement and clean-up. This grant requires no match. The funds will be used as follows: $ 60,500 Hire contract employee to develop and produce meth public awareness campaign, including public service announcements, video production, billboard announcements and display costs. $ 5,000 Police training (meth clean up) Page 5 } $ 10,000 Send presenter to the third Drug Endangered Children Conference to provide courses for clergy as well as parent and teen mentors regarding issues associated with teen substance abuse. $ 22,500 Program evaluation required by the grant (evaluates Police Department's efforts at meth eradication and enforcement) $ 50,084 Supplies including printing, brochures. mailings, education/training materials, local media news clips and production of student banners. $148,084 Total The Administration requests that the Council adopt the necessary resolution authorizing the Mayor to accept and sign the grant agreement and appropriate the necessary budget to facilitate the grant. The Police Department currently employs a meth coordinator position. The Council may wish to ask whether it is necessary to hire a contract employee for this campaign, and whether more resources could used for training and education if the salary costs were not incurred. B-2: Grant-Department of Justice COPS Meth ($197,466 - Grants Fund) The Police Department applied for and received grant monies of$197,446 from the U.S. Department of Justice, Office of COPS (Community Oriented Policing Services), under the methamphetamine grant program to increase the level of law enforcement equipment, training and cross training of joint agency responders to meth drug cases and community awareness. There is no required match for this grant. The funds will be used as follows: $ 38,813 Defray costs associated with Police Narcotic Squad overtime for their "Knock and Talk" program. $ 84,969 Equipment purchase, including personal protective suits for officers, software and manual/reference book needed for on-site processing of clandestine drug labs and surveillance equipment. $ 17,458 Travel and training (national training for meth enforcement). $ 56,206 Supplies, including training, educational and awareness campaign materials, a laptop computer, software and web design for a marketing tool to promote community awareness. $197,446 TOTAL B-3: Grant- Office of National Drug Control Rocky Mountain HIDTA ($167,030 - Grants Fund) The Police Department applied for and received grant monies of$167,030 from the Executive Office of the President, Office of National Drug Control. The grant will continue to partially fund three officers assigned to Metro Narcotics/Drug Enforcement, of which one officer is assigned to the Airport and is working with a drug detection dog. This is a continuation grant which caps benefits at 35% of base salary for the three officers, and the remaining funds will be requested during the Fiscal Year 2007-08 budget process in the Police Department's budget. There is no required match. A resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept this and any additional grants relating to the original grant. The Council may wish to ask whether the officer assigned to the Airport could be paid with Airport Enterprise funds rather than this grant, and whether doing so would free those resources for the use of the program. Further, the Council may Page 6 wish to clarify whether the Administration intends to requestgeneral fund monies for this project including the officer assigned to the Airport. B-4: Grant-- Utah Victims of Crime ($28,040 - Grants Fund) The Police Department applied for and received annual grant monies of$28,040 from the State of Utah, Office of Crime Victims Reparations, Victim of Crime Act (VOCA), for continuation of the Mobile Response Team program. Of this amount, $26,450 will be used for partial salaries and benefits of two part-time victim advocates who provide on-scene crisis counseling and resource services to victims of domestic violence. In addition, $1,590 will be used to pay registration fees for victim advocates and other police personnel to attend two VOCA conferences and trainings during the year. The required 20% match of$5,671 will be met within the Police Department's budget. A resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept this and any additional grants relating to the original grant. B-5: Grant- Utah Department of Health, Drug Free Community ($100,000- Grants Fund) The Mayor's Office applied for and received $100,000 of grant funding from the Department of Health and Human Services for continuation of the Mayor's Drug Free Communities program, which supports the Mayor's Coalition on Alcohol, Tobacco and other Drugs in the reduction and prevention of substance abuse. The funds will be used as follows: $56,780 Salary and benefits of the Coalition Coordinator who coordinates and supports the program implementation and activities. $ 5,352 Fund the grant monitor's time to monitor and oversee the grant. $ 3,309 Travel and training at mandatory conferences. $ 2,839 Printing brochures and pamphlets and other media packets. $ 1,000 Memberships and conference registration. $30,720 Contractual program evaluation, three $5,000 mini grants to local service providers for drug abuse prevention, IMS website costs, and consultant fees to assist in the annual strategic planning process. $100,000 Total The grant requires a $100,000 in-kind match which will be met with Mayor's Office staff and Coalition volunteer time, IMS Brown Bag Lunch taping, volunteer Brown Bag speakers, and mini-grant Subgrantees who will match the $5,000 mini-grants. A resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept this and any additional grants relating to the original grant. The Administration classified the following as: Grant requiring additional staff resources None. The Administration classified the following as: Housekeeping D-1: CDBG Adjustment in the CIP Fund($23,341 decrease - CIP Fund) Page 7 During the CDBG budget process last spring, the Council awarded $1,759,023 of CDBG funds in the CIP Fund. However because of an oversight, the amount that was formally adopted in June was in excess of this amount by $23,341. The Administration is requesting that the Council decrease the budget for CDBG in the CIP Fund by this amount. D-2: Donation Fund Contributions and interest ($41,168 - Donation Special Revenue Fund) The City uses a donation fund to account for individual private and intergovernmental contributions held in trust by the City for contributions received for a specific purpose. For a few years, the Council made and annual appropriation of$400,000 so that donations could be expended without approaching the Council for a specific appropriation. During fiscal year 2006, the Council reduced the budget to $50,000 so that the Council would be informed of significant donations. In fiscal year 2007, the Council again appropriated $50,000 for the use of donated funds. This appropriation was placed in a "budget only cost center" within the special revenue funds. As contributions are received appropriations are moved from the "budget only cost center" to the project to match the actual amount of available cash. The Finance Director reports that $41,168 has been moved from the budget only cost center to reflect donations received and interest earned between July 1, 2006 and October 15, 2006. The Finance Director is requesting that the appropriation be increased by this amount to bring the budget for future donations and interest back to the $50,000 amount. Donations were received for the following programs: Be Safe Be Seen $14,000 Parks Maintenance 5,755 Crisis Intervention Team 4,470 Memorial House Maintenance 1,753 YouthCity Programs 252 Sorensen Technology 30 Interest earned on all projects 14,908 The Council may wish to ask the Finance Director for additional detail onsome of these projects. D-3: Grants Carryover($142,786 - Grants Operating Fund) On June 30, 2006, unexpended budgets in special revenue funds lapsed in accordance with State law. In Budget Amendment #1, the Administration provided a list of the carryover amounts and the appropriated these carryovers. Due to an oversight, the Administration left off some YouthCity grants to be carried over from the U.S. Department of Education: U.S. Department of Education Grant $38,518 Ottinger Hall - U.S. Dept of Education 22,770 Fairmont- U.S. Dept of Education 31,005 Liberty - U.S. Dept of Education 8,204 YouthCity Administration - U.S. Dept of Education 27,189 Central City Program Income 15,100 The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward or "carryover" the balances for these funds. D-4: Water Utility Fund Carryover, Filter Replacement, and Watershed Purchase ($4,061,055 - Water Fund) Page 8 On June 30, 2006, unexpended appropriations lapsed in accordance with State law. The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward, or "carryover" the appropriations for existing construction projects in progress of$1,589,095 (primarily for the City Creek Treatment Plant) and for outstanding purchase orders for equipment of $271,960. The fiscal year ends on June 30th of each year, which falls in the middle of a normal summer construction period. Equipment is similar, having been ordered and encumbered in one fiscal year but received in the next fiscal year. The Administration labeled this initiative as housekeeping because the Council traditionally approves carryover budgets for capital projects and equipment orders. However, this budget request also includes two new items: Big Cottonwood Treatment Plant filter media (water filter) $800,000 -The filters at the Big Cottonwood Treatment Plant are 20 years old. They were originally expected to last 15 years. The Department was hoping that the replacement could be deferred until fiscal year 2009-10, but testing has shown that the media should be replaced sooner to guarantee high quality water. The Department of Public Utilities is requesting that the Council appropriate reserve funds within the Water Fund for this project. Watershed purchase $1,400,000 -The Department of Public Utilities has the opportunity to purchase a prime parcel of watershed property in Big Cottonwood Canyon. The Department of Public Utilities has been working to acquire this parcel for several years and is very pleased with this outcome. The Water Fund has sufficient reserves for this purchase. D-5: Sewer Utility Fund Carryover($2,325,337- Sewer Fund) On June 30, 2006, unexpended appropriations lapsed in accordance with State law. The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward, or "carryover" the appropriations for existing construction projects in progress of$2,146,000 (primarily for the sewer treatment plant) and for outstanding purchase orders for equipment of$179,337. D-6: Stormwater Fund Carryover($1,607,000- Stormwater Fund) On June 30, 2006, unexpended appropriations lapsed in accordance with State law. The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward, or "carryover" the appropriations for existing construction projects in progress of$1,607,000 primarily for the 900 South storm drain project. D-7: Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Facility Engineering Support ($1,600,000 - CIP Fund) Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City are co-owners of the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Landfill and Transfer Station. By agreement, Salt Lake City provides engineering and construction management on a reimbursement basis for capital projects. The City Council will receive a separate briefing on the budget for the Landfill including proposed capital projects. The City's Engineering Division is requesting an appropriation of$1,600,000 for engineering support including consultants. Actual amounts spent will be reimbursed by the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Facility. D-8: CIP Fund Recapture ($110,010 decrease - CIP Fund) Each year the City Council "recaptures" remaining appropriations from completed capital improvement projects (CIP). Five CIP projects are ready to be closed out. The Administration is proposing that these funds be transferred to the CIP cost overrun Page 9 account. The cost overrun account is also a holding account. This account is reviewed in connection with the annual budget to determine whether there are any excess funds that can be appropriated for CIP projects. D-9: CIP Fund CDBG Recapture ($110,122 - CIP Fund) Each year the City Council "recaptures" remaining appropriation's from completed or closed CDBG projects in the CIP Fund. This request reduces the remaining budgets of five completed CDBG CIP funded projects totaling $110,122 and increases the budget of the same year's CDBG cost overrun account which will be reprogrammed during the next CDBG process. D-10: HOME, CDBG and Revolving Loan Fund Program Income ($2,409,081 - Grants Fund) a. The City uses loan repayments from an old Urban Development Action Grant loan (City Center Project) for its Small Business Revolving Loan Program. The final payment has been received of$1,446,467. The Administration is requesting that the Council appropriate this final payment to the Small Business Revolving Loan Fund. b. Interest and principle of$695,000 has been received from housing rehabilitation loans and from first time home buyers loans. HUD Federal Guidelines require program income to be reallocated to programs that have the same eligible activity. The Administration is requesting that these funds revolve back into these programs and be available for future loans. c. Interest and principle payments totaling $267,614 have been received relating to HOME grant funding. The Administration proposes that this amount be placed in a holding account for next year's allocation. D-11: Copy Center Closeout($11,340 - Transfer to General Fund) The old Copy Center Fund (internal service fund) account has $11,340 of remaining cash after the disposition of all of the supplies and assets. This request will transfer that remaining cash to the General Fund. D-12: Lowe's Property Purchase ($8,105 - Surplus Land Account) In Budget Amendment #1, the Council approved funding for the transfer of property from Lowe's on 1300 South 300 West for a turn lane and driveway approach into a small business to the south of Lowe's. The amount listed in the budget amendment was $40,000. The total amount the City owes to Lowe's is $48,105. The City originally sold property to Lowes at $15 per square foot and has negotiated to buy a portion back at the same cost per square foot. Funds are available in the Surplus Land Account. The Council previously expressed support for this transaction. The Administration classified the following as: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1: Grant- State Homeland Security ($321,080 - Grant Fund) Each year the City's Emergency Management Services applies for and receives a grant from the State of Utah Homeland Security for the purchase of equipment necessary to prepare in Page 10 the event of a terrorist or weapons of mass destruction attack. There is no match required. The funds will be used as follows: $195,173 Purchase of automated dialing and notification system (alert/notification system similar to reverse 911), and pandemic supplies $ 65,407 Purchase of 120 Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Neurological, Environi'iental (CBRNE) Ensembles (protective masks), 1 Mack air distribution (allows high speed refilling of air packs), automated dialing and notification system, and 12 water purification systems for fire services. $ 47,000 Purchase of 115 CBRNE Ensembles and 2 water purification systems for law enforcement. $ 13,500 Purchase of EOC Communications system (radios), and 2 water purification systems for Emergency Management. $321,080 Total The Administration recommends that the Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate the grant. A resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept this and any additional grants relating to the original grant. E-2: Grant- Utah Department of Health Medical Services ($104,337- Grant Fund) Each year the Fire Department applies for and receives grant funds from the Utah Department of Health, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services for the purchase of medical equipment and supplies as well as training or schooling. $98,569 will be used to purchase medical equipment, $4,500 will be used for training and $1,268 will be used to purchase a bariatric transport flat (similar to portable ambulance cots). A $1,500 match is required for the training portion of the grant, and a $1,268 match is required for the bariatric transport flat which will be met within the Fire Department's budget. The Administration recommends that the Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate the grant. A resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept this and any additional grants relating to the original grant. E-3: Grant- Utah Department of Public Services Medical Response ($104,337- Grant Fund) Each year the Fire Department applies for and receives this grant from the State of Utah Department of Public Services under the Homeland Security Metropolitan Medical Response (MMRS) grant program. The grant is awarded to jurisdictions across the County for the purpose of planning and implementing a medical response mechanism in the event of a mass casualty or weapons of mass destruction terrorist attack. The Fire Department will purchase equipment and provide a training/drill exercise for jurisdictions valley-wide, provide minimal amounts of funding to local hospitals for their participation in this exercise, and pay for the two contract personnel who provide pharmaceutical oversight and clerical duties. There is no required match. The Administration recommends that the Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate the grant. A resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept this and any additional grants relating to the original grant. Page 11 E-4: Grant- Utah Department of Public Safety Emergency Services Citizen Corps Council ($6,000 - Grant Fund) Each year, the City's Emergency Management Services receives this grant from the State of Utah Department of Public Safety, Division of Emergency Services and Homeland Security to organize, develop and implement a citywide strategic plan and to organize and implement the Citizen Corps Council. The funds will be used to defray costs associated with training and educating the Citizen Corps Council in community preparedness and family safety measures, and other costs associated with marketing and advertising special events that promote the Citizen Corps Council. There is no required match for this grant. The Administration recommends that the Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate the grant. A resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept this and any additional grants relating to the original grant. The Council may wish to request further information regarding this program and request a briefing on the citywide strategic plan wlen it is developed. E-5: Grant- Salt Lake City Arts Council- Global Artways ($2,000 - Grant Fund) YouthCity Global Artways received a $2,000 grant from the Salt Lake City Arts Council to engage youth, teachers and families in dance, theater, opera and visual arts. The grant does not require a match. The Administration requests that the Council adopt the necessary resolution authorizing the Mayor to accept and sign the grant agreement and appropriate the necessary budget to facilitate the grant. E-6: Grant- Utah Department of Community Culture -Arts Education ($6,160 - Grant Fund) YouthCity Global Artways received a $6,160 grant from the Utah Department of Community Culture to contract with three artists for puppetry workshops for elementary students and for productions involving high school students. No match is required. E-7: Grant-Kennedy Center Performing Arts - Global Artways ($7,500 - Grant Fund) YouthCity Global Artways received a $7,500 grant from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts for the Imagination Celebration, which is an on-going art workshop program that includes exhibits and public art-making activities. Global Artways receives this grant on an annual basis. This grant requires a dollar-for-dollar cash match, which will be met from within Global Artways' general fund budget for personnel expenses. The Administration recommends that the Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate the grant. A resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept this and any additional grants relating to the original grant. E-8: Grant- Sustainable Business Education ($10,000 - Grant Fund) The Mayor's Office applied for and received a grant from the E.P.A. to assist with costs associated with the Mayor's Environmentally and Economically Sustainable (e2) Business Program. The purpose of this program is to educate small business owners on best management practices that lead to pollution prevention and resource conservation. Of these funds, $9,549 will be used for printing services and display advertisements and $451 will be used for mailings of meeting announcements and outreach brochures. A match of $3,600 will be met with a portion of the City's Environmental Advisor's salary. The Mayor received a similar grant last year. Page 12 The Administration classified the following as: Donations F-1: Daniels Fund YouthCity After School Program($50,000 -Donation Fund) The Public Services YouthCity Program received a $50,000 donation from the Daniels Fund, which offers grants to communities providing services for education, youth development, aging, alcohol and substance abuse, amateur sports, disabilities and homeless/disadvantaged. Grant monies will be used as follows: $13,000 Salary and benefits of the part-time employee assistant coordinator for the Central City YouthCity site $ 5,000 Cost of living allowances paid to youth participants of the YouthCity Employment program (stipend for participation in employment program) $32,000 Part time teacher positions for all YouthCity sites. The Administration recommends that the Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this donation. F-2: Arts Works for Kids -Imagination Celebration ($30,000 - Donation Fund) The Salt Lake City Foundation has received a private donation of$30,000 from the Art Works for Kids Foundation. Global Artways will use the donation to fund costs associated with three events, including The Kennedy Center Imagination Celebration orl-tour production of Willy Wonka, the Children's Opera Showcase, and the Imagination Celebration Art Workshops. The Administration recommends that the Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this donation. The Administration classified the following as: Cost Overruns None The Administration classified the following as: Follow-up on Previously Approved Items None. Additional Items that the Council May Wish to Consider including in the amendment: I-1 Council Member Saxton's Request for_funding for D-4 Historic Surveys j$212,000) (source: Fund Balance) As noted in Budget Amendment Number One, Council Member Nancy Saxton expressed interest in the potential expansion of District Four historic districts, and asked the Planning Division for a cost estimate for a number of surveys. A meeting was held on October 19th with representatives from the State of Utah Division of State History, Administration staff and community members in the East Central, Douglas Page 13 and Central City Community/Neighborhood Councils to discuss in detail the potential expansion of historic districts in District Four and further refine the parameters of the project. Community members committed to provide more detailed information to assist the Administration in providing cost estimates for the Council's consideration. The Planning staff has indicated that the assistance provided by the community will be used in the studies. The Planning Division has submitted the estimated costs for the surveys necessary to study the potential expansion of District Four historic districts. (See attached memo from the Planning Division.) Council Member Saxton is asking for the Council's support in her request for $212,000 of fund balance to fund the requested surveys. As support for this request, Council Member Saxton cites the Historic Landmark and Planning Commissions'recommendations in 1991 to include five additional blocks to the University Historic District. Page 14 SAL' ' r A\ Inir CORPORATIOI ROCKY J. FLUHART =E � -m�„�„�i „�. . ROSS C. ANDERSON CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER MAYOR COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL TO: Dave Buhler, Chair Salt Lake City Council Chief Administrative Officer FROM: Rocky J. Fluhart, d DATE: November 6, 2006 SUBJECT: Budget Amendment No. 2 Recommendation: We recommend that on November 21, 2006, the City Council set a date to hold a public hearing on December 12, 2006 to discuss Budget Amendment No. 2. Discussion and Background: The attached amendment packet is transmitted to the City Council Office for the briefing on November 14, 2006. Legislative Action: The attached ordinance to amend this budget has been approved by the City Attorney. cc: Dan Mule, City Treasurer Shannon Ashby 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-6426 FAX: 801-535-61 90 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2006 (Amending the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2006-2007) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE NO. 32 OF 2006 WHICH ADOPTED THE FINAL BUDGET OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH, AND ORDINANCE NO. 57 OF 2006 WHICH RATIFIED AND RE-ADOPTED THE FINAL BUDGET THE FISCAL YEAR BEGINNING JULY 1, 2006 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2007. PREAMBLE On June 15, 2006, the Salt Lake City Council adopted the final budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the employment staffing document, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2007, in accordance with the requirements of Section 118, Chapter 6, Title 10 of the Utah Code Annotated, and said budget, including the employment staffing document, was approved by the Mayor of Salt Lake City, Utah. On August 8, 2006, the City Council ratified and re-adopted the final budget. 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 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. All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing document, have been accomplished. r � Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized by Salt Lake City Ordinance No.32 of 2006 and Ordinance No. 57 of 2006. SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The 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 budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the employment staffing document, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2007, in accordance with the requirements of Section 128, Chapter 6, Title 10, of the Utah Code Annotated. 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 budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document, with the Utah State Auditor. SECTION 4. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said 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. 2 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2006. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved Vetoed MAYOR ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorneys Office (SEAL) Bill No. of 2006. Published: 1:Ordinance O6'BudgetBudget Amendment#2 2006-2007.doc 3 FY 2007Initiatives in Budget Amendment #2 —December FY 2007 FY 2007 Gen. Fund Initiative Name Initiative Gen. Fund FTE Fund Amount Impact Balance Impact Section A New Items 1. Airport CIP $9,492,000.00 2. Downtown Parking $15,000.00 $15,000.00 $15,000.00 Token Subsidy 3. Garfield School Facility $126,000.00 $126,000.00 $126,000.00 Maintenance 4. Risk Fund Workers $12,100.00 Comp Actuarial 5. Energy Reduction C&C $164,980.00 $164,980.00 $164,980.00 Building 6. Energy Reduction Plaza $259,079.00 $259,079.00 $259,079.00 349 7. Building Plans Examiner $13,000.00 $13,000.00 $13,000.00 —Fire 8. Public Safety Garage $260,000.00 $260,000.00 $260,000.00 Mitigation 9. Police Investigative $78,000.00 $78,000.00 $78,000.00 Overtime 10. Sales Tax Bond Proceeds $5,720,000.00 — Grant Tower 11. Grant Tower—Salt Lake $3,500,000.00 County Contribution Section B Grants For Existing Staff Resources 1. Dept of Justice Meth $148,084.00 Enforcement & Cleanup Grant 2. Dept of Justice COPS $197,466.00 Meth Grant 3. Office of National Drug $167,030.00 Control Rocky Mtn HIDTA Grant 4. State of Ut VOCA Grant $28,039.78 5. State Dept of Health $100,000.00 Drug Free Comm Grant Section C Grants For New Staff Resources Section D Housekeeping 1. CIP CDBG Cost Overrun $-23,341.00 Adjustment 2. Donation Fund Contrib. $41,168.00 & Interest r , FY 2007 Initiatives in Budget Amendment #2 —December FY 2007 FY 2007 Initiative Gen.Fund Gen. Fund Initiative Name FTE Fund Balance Amount Impact Impact 3. Special Revenue $142,786.45 Carryover 4. Water Utility Fund $4,061.055.00 Carryover 5. Sewer Utility Fund $2,325,337.00 Carryover 6. Storm Water Fund $1,607,000.00 Carryover 7. SL Valley Solid Waste $1,600,000.00 Facility 8. CIP Fund Recapture $-110,010.47 9. CIP Fund CDBG $110,121.55 Recapture 10. HOME, CDBG and $2,409,081.00 UDAG Program Income 11. Copy Center Closeout $11,340.30 $11,340.30 12. Lowes Property Purchase $8,105.00 & Improvements Section E Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources 1. State Homeland Security $321,080.00 Grant 2. State Dept of Health $104,337.00 Medical Sery Grant 3. State Dept of Public Sery $232,330.00 MMRS Grant 4. State Dept of Public $6,000.00 Safety Emerg Sery Citizen Corps Council 5. SLC Arts Council— $2,000.00 Global Artways Grant 6. State Dept of Comm $6,160.00 Culture—Arts Education 7. Global Artways— $7,500.00 Kennedy Center Performing Arts Grant 8. EPA— Sustainable $10,000.00 Business Ed. Grant Section F Donations 1. Daniels Fund Youth City $50,000.00 After School Program 2. Imagination Celebration $30,000.00 —Arts Works for Kids 7 r Z FY 2007 Initiatives in Budget Amendment #2 —December FY 2007 FY 2007 Initiative Gen. Fund Gen. Fund Initiative Name Amount Impact FTE Fund Balance Impact 3 f Initiative Name: Airport CIP Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-1 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: The Department of Airports FY 2006/2007 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget of $ 99,151,000 provides for the projects planned to be impemented in this fiscal year. Airlines serving the Airport have expanded their international service and expressed the need for facility improvements that will meet the growing demand for international travel. To meet this request from the airline tenants, the following projects were identified to be added to the FY 2006/2007 CIP budget of the Airport: 1. FIS Facility Remodel - Phase I $3,124,000 This project will increase the processing capacity of the Federal Inspection Services (FIS) facility from 400 passengers per hour to 800 passengers per hour. This project will add a second bag carousel, four new INS positions, and various elements to meet this increased capacity. 2. Sterile Corridor Extension $2,579,000 This project will extend the corridor where international passengers arrive, from the Customs hall to Gate D10 in concourse D. This will increase the number of gates for international use from three to five, therefore, allowing the Airport to accommodate additional international arrivals. 3. New Passenger Boarding Bridges $ 3,789,000 The purchase of these six new passenger boarding bridges will allow the Airport to replace fixed pedestal type bridges with apron drive bridges. These new bridges will allow the airlines to be more flexible in the types of aircraft used at the airport. In addition, with this project, wide-body-aircraft used for international destinations will be accommodated with these bridges. r .. 1 L I Airport CIP I I Initiative Name I BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-1 2006-07 1 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Airport Airports New Item Department Type of Initiative Jay Bingham 575-2916/575-2918 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue'Impact By Fund: 1st Year '2nd Year , ;•FY 2006-07 . FY 2007 08 General Fund I I I Total 1 $01 1 $0 __ Internal Service Fund I I Total, 1 $01 $01 ',Enterprise Fund I I '54 CIP Fund (Fund Balance) $ 9,492,000.00 II I Total $ 9,492,000.00 $0 ,Other Fund Total $0 I $01 Staffing•Impact. - _ 1New Number of FTE's I 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's I 0 I 0 Total _ 0 0 _ Description N/A 1 I 1 1 Y y Accounting`Detail Grant.#and CFDA#If Applicable Revenue: j Cost Center Number ! Object Code Number Amount I � � -- 1 - I I Expenditure Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 54-03836 2772-10 $ 5,703,000.00 54-03835 2760-91 $ 3,789,000.00 !, $ 9,492,000.00 I i i ' I Additional Accounting Details - Grant;Information 'Grant funds employee positions? N/A is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will - Ibe eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A — _— — 'Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are 'eliminated? I N/A 'Does grant duplicate services provided by private or 'Non-profit sector? N/A Initiative Name: Downtown Parking Token Subsidy Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-2 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: The Downtown Alliance has submitted the accompanying request for $15,000 as a subsidy to allow the continuance of the Downtown Token Program through the end of their current fiscal year, July 2007. The Downtown Alliance created the Downtown Token program four years ago to help provide a better experience for customers, businesses, and organizations trying to access Downtown by transit or car. At its inception, the program received a City subsidy of $150000 for the first three years to help it get established. It was intended the program would be self-sustaining after that. Since then, the experience has been that the Downtown Alliance had to discount the sale of the tokens to participating merchants and businesses to achieve a critical mass of use. As a result, the program has not been able to be self- sustaining. Council approved.a subsidy last fiscal year, year four of the program. The Alliance is currently using unredeemed tokens to fund the program, but will need $15,000 to be able to sustain it through this fiscal year. The Downtown Alliance is not of the view that by the end of this fiscal year the Downtown Transportation Master Plan will have provided sufficient analysis of this program (token) and other parking issues to provide a recommendation as to whether the program should be continued as is, modified or discontinued. The Alliance's request letter contains a report on the program for each of the past four months. The Alliance states they provide $50,000'annually in marketing and promotional support of the program. r , Downtown Alliance Parking Token Subsidy Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-2 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year CD Transportation New Item Department j Type of Initiative Tim Harpst 535-6630 Employee Name Telephone Contact !General Fund ( Fund Balance) Imp $ (15,000.00) Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 ;FY 2007-08 General Fund I I • Total $0 $0 Internal Service Fund 1 ! Total f $01 $0! Enterprise Fund Total $01 $0! ;Other Fund Total 01 $0! Staffing Impact: !New Number of FTE's 01 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 0 !Total ----- ! 0 0---- Description r � Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: Revenue: j Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount r— Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 103-11700 2399 $ 15,000.00 H I Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A llf grant is funding a position is it expected the position will Ibe eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? ( N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? N/A f y Token Report As of August 2006 Tokens Distributed to Retailers Balance Forward 113003 Purchases through Downtown Alliance 0 Additional Purchases through Zions Bank 4150 Total 117153 Tokens Distributed at Events Balance Forward Distributed to Events 3175 0 3175 Redemption by Parking/Transportation Operators 120328 Balance Forward Tokens Redeemed 79155 Tokens Redeemed August 2006 3745 82900 Token Redeemed to Date 82900 In Circulation 37428 Resulting Profit Added to Future Marketing Balance Forward Marketing Pot $ 7,195.83 Resulting Profit to add $ 6.93 Marketing dollars recycled since beginning = $ 7,202.76 Estimated Tokens in Circulation 37428 Largest Users for August 2006 $ # John Boros Law $100.00 200 Mikado $50.00 200 Cheers to You $50.00 200 Pool Hall Junkies $50.00 200 Squatters $50.00 200 Money Mart $50.00 200 Himalyan Kitchen $50.00 200 Womens Business Center $50.00 200 Third&Main $50.00 200 DA Davidson $25.00 50 Cedars of Lebanon $50.00 200 Juniors Tavern $50.00 200 Souvenir Shop $25.00 100 ATG Wireless $25.00 100 Ken Sanders Rare Books $50.00 200 Parsons,Behle&Latimer $50.00 100 Mid City Salon $25.00 100 Sam Weller Zions Bookstore $50.00 200 Judge Café $50.00 200 Pawn Brokers $50.00 200 Oxford Shop $50.00 200 Rust Rare Coin $50.00 200 W Communications $50.00 100 Bastille $50.00 200 $1,150.00 4150 Estimated Balance of Redemption Account Should be $ 37,428.00 Current Balance Zions Token Account $ 35,380.29 Includes this years subsidy Difference $ (2,047.71) Subsidy this Month $ 3,000.00 Subsidy this fiscal year $ 4,741.50 Subsidy since beginning program $68,191.00 Token Report As of July 2006 Tokens Distributed to Retailers Balance Forward 110581 Purchases through Downtown Alliance 0 Additional Purchases through Zions Bank 2422 Total 113003 Tokens Distributed at Events Balance Forward Distributed to Events 3175 0 3175 Redemption by Parking/Transportation Operators 116178 Balance Forward Tokens Redeemed 77594 Tokens Redeemed July 2006 1561 79155 Token Redeemed to Date 79155 In Circulation 37023 Resulting Profit Added to Future Marketing Balance Forward Marketing Pot $ 7,171.47 Resulting Profit to add $ 24.36 Marketing dollars recycled since beginning= $ 7,195.83 Estimated Tokens in Circulation 37023 Largest Users for July 2006 $ # John Boros Law $100.00 200 Downtown Alliance $68.00 272 Cheers to You $50.00 200 Pool Hall Junkies $50.00 200 Squatters $50.00 200 Money Mart $50.00 200 Himalyan Kitchen $50.00 200 Café Molise $50.00 200 St Marks Cathedral $50.00 200 Slayton Lewis $50.00 100 UTA Ride Share $25.00 100 Juniors Tavern $25.00 100 Souvenir Shop $25.00 100 ATG Wireless $25.00 100 ? $12.50 50 $680.50 2422 Estimated Balance of Redemption Account Should be $ 37,023.00 Current Balance Zions Token Account $ 37,336.86 Includes this years subsidy Difference $ 313.86 Subsidy this Month $ 1,741.50 Subsidy this fiscal year $ 1,741.50 Subsidy 05-06 FY $43,971.25 Subsidy since beginning program $63,449.50 r , Token Report As of June 2006 Tokens Distributed to Retailers Balance Forward 106581 Purchases through Downtown Alliance 0 Additional Purchases through Zions Bank 4000 Total 110581 Tokens Distributed at Events Balance Forward Distributed to Events 3175 0 3175 Redemption by Parking/Transportation Operators 113756 Balance Forward Tokens Redeemed 71189 Tokens Redeemed June 2006 6405 77594 Token Redeemed to Date 77594 In Circulation 36162 Resulting Profit Added to Future Marketing Balance Forward Marketing Pot $ 7,139.62 Resulting Profit to add $ 31.85 Marketing dollars recycled since beginning= $ 7,171.47 Estimated Tokens in Circulation 36162 Largest Users for June 2006 $ # Cheers to You $100.00 400 Night Flight $100.00 400 Pool Hall Junkies $75.00 300 Bastille $75.00 300 Juniors Tavern $75.00 300 Squatters $50.00 200 Saans Photography $50.00 200 Everwood $50.00 50 Utah Book and Magazine $50.00 200 Especially for You $50.00 200 Womens Business Center $50.00 200 Mikado $50.00 200 Mid City Salon $37.50 150 Downtown Alliance $37.50 150 ATG Wireless $25.00 100 Souvenir Shop $25.00 100 Scandanavia Shop $25.00 100 W Communications $25.00 100 Baba Afgan $25.00 100 Nostalgia $25.00 100 UPS Store $25.00 100 $1,025.00 3950 Estimated Balance of Redemption Account Should be $ 36,162.00 Current Balance Zions Token Account $ 38,218.00 Includes this years subsidy Difference $ 2,056.00 Subsidy this Month $ 2,925.00 Subsidy this fiscal year $43,971.25 Subsidy since beginning program $61,708.00 r 1 Token Report As of May 2006 Tokens Distributed to Retailers Balance Forward 104031 Purchases through Downtown Alliance 0 Additional Purchases through Zions Bank 2550 Total 106581 Tokens Distributed at Events Balance Forward Distributed to Events 3175 0 3175 Redemption by Parking/Transportation Operators 109756 Balance Forward Tokens Redeemed 68971 Tokens Redeemed May 2006 2218 71189 Token Redeemed to Date 71189 In Circulation 38567 Resulting Profit Added to Future Marketing Balance Forward Marketing Pot $ 7,044.84 Resulting Profit to add $ 94.78 Marketing dollars recycled since beginning = $ 7,139.62 Estimated Tokens in Circulation 38567 Largest Users for May 2006 $ # Cheers to You $150.00 400 Squatters $50.00 200 Pool Hall Junkies $50.00 200 Himalyan Kitchen $50.00 200 Money Mart $50.00 200 Janet Hillis Pilates Studio $50.00 200 Juniors Tavern $50.00 200 Judge Cafe $50.00 200 Rust Rare Coin $50.00 200 ATG Wireless $25.00 100 Souvenir Shop $25.00 100 Mid City Salon $25.00 100 Johnnys on 2nd $25.00 100 Jeffrey Burke Productions $25.00 50 $25.00 100 $700.00 2550 Estimated Balance of Redemption Account Should be $ 38,567.00 Current Balance Zions Token Account $ 42,358.45 Includes this years subsidy Difference $ 3,791.45 Subsidy this Month $ 1,850.00 Subsidy this fiscal year $41,046.25 Subsidy since beginning program $ 58,783.00 Initiative Name: Garfield School Facility - Maintenance Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-3 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: The Garfield School property was recently purchased by the City. Initial adopted budgets for fiscal year 2006-07 did not reflect ownership and therefore a budget amendment is needed for operational maintenance expenses that will be incurred by Facilities and Parks. The rent received from two existing tenants is;being deposited to'the CIP Fund. The Police and Fire departments are expected to use the facility to some extent. Although this facility may be razed, security should be established and alarm systems may be needed in the near future, possibly using a card system. Operational / maintenance expense projections have been provided by the Public Services Facilities and Parks divisions, based on knowledge and information on the facility at this point. Because the CIP Fund will receive the rent, it will be able to cover certain one-time capital items that have been identified at this point. Garfield School Facility- Maintenance Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-3 2006-07 Initiative Number L_ _ - Fiscal Year Public Services Department New Item Department i Type of Initiative I _ Greg Davis' 535-6397 Prepared By Telephone Contact 1 General Fund ( Fund Balance) Imp; $ (126,000.00) Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07.. FY 2007-08 General Fund Total $01 $01 Internal Service Fund II � I Total $01 1 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $01 ! $01 (Other Fund Total 1 01 1 $01 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 01 0 Total 01 I 0 Description 1 1 BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#A-3 Garfield School Maintenancel0/26/20061:29 PM i I I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: Revenue: . Cost Center Number j Object Code Number Amount I I I I, I I I Expenditure Cost Center Number ! Object Code Number � Amount 07-00931 2590 $ 112,700.00 07-00931 j 2590 j $ 14,100.00 $ 126,800.00 I I I See separate sheet for expense detail I I i Additional Accounting Details: L- I I -- Grant.information: Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A ! I Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are _ eliminated? ---- _- ------- - --_----NIA Does grant duplicate services provided by private or TNon-profit sector? j N/A ' I BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#A-3 Garfield School Maintenance10/26/20061.29 PM Garfield School Estimate of operating expenses and certain one-time items General Fund CIP 07-00931 83-07097 All Funds Ongoing operational expenses annually Electrical $ 9,000 $ - $ 9,000 Natural Gas 37,300 - 37,300 Water/Sewer 18,000 - 18,000 General maintenance 32,900 - 32,900 Janitorial for common area 12,500 - 12,500 Snow removal - contracted 3,000 - 3,000 Ongoing operational costs annually 112,700 - 112,700 One-time Recore outside door locks 900 - 900 Restore front A/C Units to operational status 1,600 - 1,600 Restore north ventilation fan to Ops 2,500 - 2,500 Repair south concrete steps into facility(safety) 3,100 - 3,100 Restore boiler to full operational status 6,000 - 6,000 Add port cooling units for Police and Fire areas - 5,800 5,800 Add Security System - 6,000 6,000 Renovation of irrigation system - 23,900 23,900 Total one-time 14,100 35,700 49,800 Total for FY06-07 $ 126,800 $ 35,700 $ 162,500 ADDITIONAL NOTES Renovation of irrigation system to include-backflow, controller, stainless steel enclosure, valves, • heads, and system compatible with Maxicom. Not included: -encapsulation of lead based paint for any part of the facility - boiler and ventilation unit major repairs or change out -cooling units for the Gym (only addressing restoration of the ventilation fan serving gym) - major remodel work or modification to the facility janitorial other than common area Initiative Name: Risk Fund Workers Comp Actuarial Study Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-4 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: The city is required to report an estimated liability for the total costs of worker's compensation as well as general and auto liability. These liabilities must be reported using generally accepted actuarial methods. This number is an estimation of the total costs of all,accidents or incidences that have occurred as of a given date regardless of when in the future actual payments are made. Management services has recently contracted with a firm to provide those actuarially determined 'numbers. Their bid was $12100.00. It is recommended that the Council appropriate the funds for this study Risk Fund Workers Comp Actuarial Study -11 Initiative Name BA#1 FY2007 Initiative #A-4 2006-07 Initiative Number _ Fiscal Year Management Services New Item Department Type of Initiative Elwin Heilmann _ 535-6424 _ Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: • 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 200.7-08 - General Fund Total 01 0 'Internal Service Fund '87 Risk Fund (Fund Bal) $ 12,100.00 Total $ 12,100.00 I i 01 Enterprise Fund Total I 01 i 0 Other Fund Total $ - I i 0 � i ( Staffing Impact: _ New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 0 Total 01 0 Description . , | � / # Accounting Detail K�rant#and 1CFDA ��e'. � | Cost CentmrNunnber C�bient �mda �unnber Amount | | ------ --� _ | / -� ��-- ------- --- T l J�� | | | Cost Canter Number Object Code Number | Amount | � _ 187-87001 2324 12.100.00 | Additional | | / | { ! | --- ` -�� ``��`^.�' i \ | ! --G��°* : Grant funds employee positions? N/A -� Is there o potential for grant to continue? N/A --- �If grant is a position i� i expected the poeitionvviU -�---- -- '------- -� � | � bem|irninatudat the end of the Qrant?|| / N/A _ iWi|| grant program be complete in grantfunding time frame? NIA } Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are 7-eliminated? N/A | � Dons 0rmrd duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? | N/A Initiative Name: Energy Reduction at City & County Building Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-5 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: Funding this project provides energy savings and reduces environmental impacts and is in line with the City's environmental initiative. Converting the Makeup Air System to VAV (variable air volume) Enable Economizer, providing evaporative cooling to the Makeup Air System, installing DDC (direct digital controls) and converting the hot water system to variable volume in the City and County Building will have thermal comfort, financial, and environmental benefits. This project is in line with the City's energy-saving initiative. Rocky Mountain Power provided an 'Initial Site Visit Report' outlining possible energy savings, which prompted further study. The initial incremental cost of the project to the City is projected to be $164,980. Energy savings are estimated to be 200,960 KWh/yr of electricity and 1,172 decatherms/yr of natural gas, totaling $21,779 per year at today's energy prices. The payback would be 6.5 years. As well as energy savings, Rocky Mountain Power will provide $24,491 in Energy Conservation Incentives payable 45 days after completion of the project. This project has been submitted for a Utah State Energy Program (SEP) grant for up to $1.5,000. The State plans on awarding the'grants in January 2007, payable upon completion of the project, if the project is selected by the State. I I Energy Reduction at City& County Building Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-5 2006-07 Initiative Number J Fiscal Year Public Services Department New Item _ Department I Type of Initiative Jim Cleland and Alden Breinholt 535-6397 Greg Davis Prepared By A Telephone Contact (General Fund ( Fund Balance) Imp $ (164,980.00) Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year grid Year FY 2006-07 FY2007-.08 General Fund Total $01 $0 Internal Service Fund I I Total I $01 $0I Enterprise Fund • Total I $0 I $0 Other Fund 83 CIP Find Transfer from $ 164,980.00 0 General Fund $ - Total $ 164,980.00 I 0 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's Existing Number of FTE's 0 0 !Total 1 0 0� Description NO CHANGES IN STAFFING I I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: — Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 83 - New Cost Center 1974-01 $ 164,980.00 i Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 83 - New Cost Center I 2399 $ 164,980.00 09- New Cost Center 2910-01 j $ 164,980.00 Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? Li N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? N/A Initiative Name: Energy Reduction At Plaza 349 Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-6 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: Funding this project provides energy savings and reduces environmental impacts and is in line with the City's environmental initiative. Installing new Rooftop AHU's with economizers and evaporative condensers, upgrading the DDC building controls and upgrading the parking terrace lighting will have thermal comfort, financial, and environmental benefits. This project is in line with the City's energy saving initiative. Rocky Mountain Power conducted an Initial Site Visit Report outlining possible energy savings, prompting further study. The initial incremental cost of the project to the City is $259,079. The payback for this project in energy savings is 677,170 KWh/yr of electricity and 1,249 decatherms / year of natural gas totalling $52,105 per year for 5 years at today's energy price rates. As well as energy savings, Rocky Mountain Power will provide $78,633 in Energy Conservation Incentives, payable 45 days after completion of the project. This project has been submitted for a Utah State Energy Program (SEP) grant for up to $15,000. The State plans on awarding the grants in January 2007 and would be payable upon completion of the project, if the project is selected by the State. Energy Reduction at Plaza 349 I Initiative Name I BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#A-6 I 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Public Services Department New Item _ L Department I L Type of Initiative Jim Cleland and Alden Breinholt 535-6397 Greg Davis Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Imp. $ (259,079.00) Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund 0 Total $01 $0 Internal Service Fund Total $01 I $01 Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 Other Fund 83 CIP Fund Transfer from $ 259,079.00 0 General Fund $ - _ Total $ 259,079.00 I I01 I Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 0 Total 01 I 0 Description � I I i Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 183- New Cost Center 1974-01 $ 259,079.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 83- New Cost Center 2399 $ 259,079.00 09- New Cost Center 2910-01 $ 259,079.00 I i Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue'? N/A �If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A !Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are leliminated? j N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? N/A Initiative Name: Building Plans Examiner - Fire Initiative Number: BA#4 FY2006 Initiative #A-7 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: In FY06-07, the Building Services& Licensing Division requested an additional FTE for a Building Plans Examiner: Fire Engineer to implement the One-Stop-Shop. The FTE was approved as part of the FY06-07 budget but funded at $64,408 ($16,712 less than requested) after a determination was made that fire reviews can be legally conducted by a non-engineer. The Building Services & Licensing Division has advertised the position but is unable to attract qualified candidates at the funded level. Subsequently, the City Council directed the Division to request the additional funding needed to enable recruitment at a competitive salary. Comparisons with similar jurisdictions identify a funding gap of $13,000, which is the amount being requested in this budget amendment. It is recommended that the City Council appropriate the necessary budget to facilitate hiring the previously approved FTE. li I Building Plans Examiner- Fire Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-7 2006-07 Initiative Number 1 j Fiscal Year r— Community Development New Item Department Type of Initiative r Orion Goff 1 535-6681 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Imp $ (13,000.00)I1 Revenue'Impact Ry fund 1st Year 2nd Year . . . , - _ . FY 2006 Q7 • `•... FY 200124p01 ,. ;• General Fund � I Total $0 Internal Service Fund Total $0! $0! Enterprise Fund I 'I Total) I $0I $01 Other Fund Total 0I $0 Staffing ampactc `, New Number of FTE's 0 I 0 --rtExisting Number of FTE's 0�- --- -----_-- -�-- _- ,Total - --------- � -� 0 0 Description i I --------- - ---- 1 I 1 1 1 1 Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: Revenue; Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount I � I I , � 1 I I � Expenditure: Cost Center Number I Object Code Number Amount _ 106-00015 2100 $ 13,000.00 I 1 I I 1 � Additional Accounting Details 1 Grant information Grant funds employee positions? N/A Its there a potential for grant to continue? N/A 7If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A -Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are I eliminated? N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? N/A Initiative Name: Public Safety Garage Mitigation Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-8 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: Access to the parking structure next to the Public Safety Building has been restricted due to safety and environmental concerns. It is Proposed to demolish above ground structure down to existing floor slab. Resurface (as needed) and re stripe existing floor. Includes: Demolition - $ 170,000! Permits, Bonds, Utility Disconnect - $ 30,000, Repair floor slab $ 20,000, Install security fence on north and east exposures (away from existing PSB Parking - $ 10,000, Contigency $ 30,000 for a total of $ 260,000. Public Safety Building Garage Mitqation Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#A-8 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Police Department New Item Department r Type of Initiative Jerry Burton _ 799-3824 Prepared By Telephone Contact 'General Fund ( Fund Balance) Imp; $ (260,000.00) Revenue'Impact By Fund: : 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07, FY 2007-08. General Fund I 0 0 Total $01 1 $0 Internal Service Fund I Totall $01 1 $0 Enterprise Fund _ Total I $01 $0 Other Fund I I Total $0 $0 II Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 I 0 Existing Number of FTE's _ I 0 Total 0 I 0 Description I I . I I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: ; NA Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 83 - New Cost Center 1974-01 $ 260,000.00 I � I Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number I Amount 83 - New Cost Center 2700 $ 260,000.00 09-00700 2910-01 ( $ 260,000.00 I I Additional Accounting..Details: 1 Grant Information:, Grant funds employee positions? NA _ Is there a potential for grant to continue? 1 NA - if grant is funding a position is it expected the position will 'be eliminated at the end of the grant j NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? - NA _ Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? I NA 'Does grant duplicate services provided by private or 'Non-profit sector? -_ NA Initiative Name: Police Investigative/Support Overtime Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-9 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: The Police department expended non budgeted overtime for investigative expenses related to the Destiny Norton case $ 31,500. In addition, unplanned special event overtime was expended to support the visit of President Bush and related free speech activities $ 46,500 for a total of$ 78,000. Request supplemental budget from fund balance. Investigative/Support Police Overtime Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-9 2006-07 Initiative Number [ Fiscal Year Police Department New Item - � Department � � � Type of Initiative Jerry Burton _ 799-3824 Prepared By Telephone Contact I I [General Fund ( Fund Balance) ' Imp. $ (78,000.00) Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st'Year • -2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY,2007-OI3 General Fund j 0 Total $0i $0 Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 ,Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 lOther Fund Total $ - $0 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0 (Existing Number of FTE's j 0 [Total 0 0 Description Police Officer overtime ---- -- -- -------------------- --- ---- ----- Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: NA Revenue: Cost Center Number j Object Code Number Amount Expenditure' Cost Center Number j Object Code Number I Amount 02- Police Department 2133 $ 78,000.00 II _ Additional Accounting Details: i - - I _ Grant Information: . Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A jlf grant is funding a position is it expected the position will _- Jbe eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or i Non-profit sector? j N/A Initiative Name: Sales Tax Bond Proceeds - Grant Tower Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-10 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: This amendment is to appropriate the revenue and expenditure budgets necessary for the upcoming series of sales tax bonds to be issued for the purpose of funding Grant Tower related construction expenses. The budget of $5,720,000 being requested does not include the $4,000,000 portion previously appropriated by the 'City Council to fund the purchase of land which will ultimately be used in the realignment of the Grant Tower area railroad tracks. --+ i— SalesTax Bond Proceeds - Grant Tower Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative _ 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year i Mqmt Sery!Treasurer's New`Item Department i Type of Initiative Randy Hillier/ Dan Mule 535-6641 /`535-6411 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY.2006-07 FY 2007-08. • General Fund • _ Total I $01 1 $0 Internal Service Fund � I Total $01 $01 (Enterprise Fund Total 1 $01 I $0 Other Fund 83 CIP Bond Proceeds $ 5,720,000.00 Total $ 5,720,000.00I $0 Staffing'Impact: 1New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 0 Total 0 I 0 Description Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 83-06079 1980 5,720,000.00 IThIII Expenditure ' ' • Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount -[83-06079 I2700 5,720,000.00 —1 7 _ Additional Accounting Details Grant Information: 1Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are 'eliminated? N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? 1 1 N/A $5,720,000 Salt Lake City, Utah Sales Tax Revenue Bonds, Series 2006 (Grant Tower Project) Total Issue Sources And Uses Dated 11/01/2006 I Delivered 11/01/2006 Issue City Portion RDA Portion Summary Sources Of Funds Par Amount of Bonds $2,555,000.00 $3,165,000.00 $5,720,000.00 Total Sources $2,555,000.00 $3,165,000.00 $5,720,000.00 Uses Of Funds Total Underwriter's Discount (0.500%) 12,775.00 15,825.00 28,600.00 Costs of Issuance 33,058.67 40,951.33 74,010.00 Gross Bond Insurance Premium 5,677.65 7,032.56 12,710.21 Deposit to Project Construction Fund 2,500,000.00 3,100,000.00 5,600,000.00 Rounding Amount 3,488.68 1,191.11 4,679.79 Total Uses $2,555,000.00 $3,165,000.00 $5,720,000.00 • • FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES ONLY File I SALESTAXREVENUE.SF I SLC Sales Tax$5.6 proj R 1 10/26/2006 1 3:41 PM Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC Public Finance Initiative Name: Grant Tower - Salt lake County Contribution Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-11 Initiative Type: New Item Initiative Discussion: In the 2006 General Session, the Utah legislature authorized Salt Lake County to expend $3.5 million out of sales taxes collections for transportation projects on the Grant Tower work. We have been working with the County to secure these funds, and expect to execute an Interlocal Agreement with the County soon. The County will budget for the funds in its 2006- 07 budget, and will transfer the funds to Salt Lake City in one lump sum in January 2007. We would like to create a budget allowing Salt Lake City to receive these funds and immediately begin spending them on the Grant Tower Project. The funds will be used for cash payments to Union Pacific and some right-of-way acquisitions. Grant Tower-.Salt Lake County Contribution Initiative Name I BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #A-11 2006-07 JInitiative Number Fiscal Year Mayor's Office New Item Department I Type of Initiative L D.J.Baxter 535-7704 Prepared By 1 Telephone Contact I I _ 'General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund Total $0 I $0 Internal Service Fund Total $01 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $01 $01 Other Fund 83 CIP County Funds $ 3,500,000.00 Total I $ 3,500,000.00 I $0 Staffing Impact New Number of FTE's _ 0 0 ,Existing Number of FTE's 0 0 Total 01 1 0 Description 1 1 1 1 Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 83-New Cost Center 1398 $ 3,500,000.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 83-New Cost Center 2700 Ts 3,500,000.001 —1 Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: - Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A ,If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will I be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A 'Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A 1Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are -'eliminated? N/A 1Does grant duplicate services provided by private or IN on-profit sector? N/A Initiative Name: Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Meth Enforcement & Cleanup Grant Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #B-1 Initiative Type: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Police Department applied for and received $148,084 from the US Department of Justice, Office of Justice Program under a BJA Congressional mandate for Methamphetamine Enforcement & Cleanup. These funds were awarded to provide necessary resources to address Utah's methamphetamine problems. $60,500 of these funds will be used to hire contractual components for the development and production of a methamphetamine public awareness campaign which includes public service announcements, video production, billboard production and display costs, $5,000 for police training, $10,000 for a presenter at the third Drug Endangered Children Conference to provide courses that address issues associated with teen substance abuse for clergy, parent and teen mentors, $22,500 for program evaluation and $50,08.4`which will be used for supplies that includes printing, brochures, mailings, education/training materials, local media news clips and the production of student banners. There is no required match. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary Resolution authorizing the Mayor to accept and sign the grant agreement and to appropriate the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs'-Meth Enforcement & Cleanup Grant Initiative Name I BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#B-1 2006-07 Initiative Number L J Fiscal Year Grants for Existing Police Department Staff Resources Department , Type of Initiative Krista Dunn/Sherrie Collins 799-3265/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact 'General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 __ General Fund Total $0 I $0 Internal Service Fund Total $0 I $0 Enterprise Fund Total I $01 $0 Other Fund _172- Grant Funds $ 148,084.00 Total $ 148,084.00 I $0 _ Staffing Impact:New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 I Total 01 0 Description Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: 16.580 Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 72- New Cost Center 1360 $ 148,084.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 172- New Cost Center 2590 $ 148,084.00 Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? No Is there a potential for grant to continue? Possible If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? No Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? No Initiative Name: Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, (COPS) Meth Grant Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #B-2 Initiative Type: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Police Department applied for and received $197,446 from the US Department of Justice, Office of COPS, under the Methamphetamine Grant Program to increase the level of law enforcement equipment, training and cross training of joint agency responders to methamphetamine drug cases, and community awareness. These funds will be used to defray $38,813 of costs associated with Police Narcotic Squad OT for their "Knock and Talk" program; $84,969 will be used to purchase equipment including personal protective suits for Officers, software and field guide needed for on-site process of clandestine drug labs, and surveillance equipment; $17,458 will be used for travel and training; and $56,206 will be used to purchase supplies including training, educational and awareness campaign materials, a laptop computer, software and web design. There is no required match. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary Resolution authorizing the Mayor to accept and sign the grant agreement and to appropriate the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. . ... ... _ . .... ...... ......... .. . ...... .. .. ..... _.. . .. Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Service (COPS) Meth Grant Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#B-2 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Grants for Existing Police Department Staff Resources Department J Type of Initiative Krista Dunn/Sherrie Collins 799-3265/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact _Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund Total I $0 $0 Internal Service Fund Total $01 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $01 I $0 Other Fund 72- Grant Funds $ 197,466.00 _ Total $ 197,466.00I I $0 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0I I 0 Existing Number of FTE's n 0 Total 01 0 Description Office OT - $37. x 1049 hrs 38,813 i I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: 16.710 Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number I Amount 72- new Cost Center 1360 $ 197,446.00 � I Expenditure:' Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 72- new Cost Center 2133 $ 38,813.00 72- new Cost Center 2590 $ 158,633.00 1 $ 197,446.00 Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? No Is there a potential for grant to continue? Possible If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will lbe eliminated at the end of the grant? NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes ;Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? No T Does grant duplicate services provided by private or ;Non-profit sector? No Initiative Name: Executive Office of the President, Office of National Drug Control - Rocky Mountain HIDTA Grant Initiative Number: BA# FY 2007 Initiative #B-3 Initiative Type: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Police Department applied for received $167,030 from the Executive Office of the President, Office of National Drug Control. The grant will continue to partially fund 3 Officers assigned to the Metro Narcotics/Drug Enforcement, of which 1 Officer is assigned to the Airport working with a drug detection dog. Although the grant caps benefits at 35% of base salary, the remaining funds needed will be requested as part of the FY 08 budget process. Future grant plans include reduced federal participation for Calendar year 2008 and no funding provided for Calendar FY 09. There is no required match. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. A Resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept the grant and any additional grants or agreements that stem from the original grant. Executive Office of the President, Office of National Drug Control- Rocky Mountain HIDTA Grant Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #B-3 _ 2006-07 JInitiative Number L_— Fiscal Year Grants for Existing Police Department Staff Resources Department Type of Initiative Krista Dunn/Sherrie Collins _ 799-3265/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 IGeneral Fund Total $0 $0 ,Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $01 $01 Other Fund _ 72- Grant Funds $ 167,030.00 Total $ 167,030.001 $0 Staffing Impact: 1New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 3 0 Total 3 0 Description Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#'If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number � Amount 72- New Cost Center 1304 $ 167,030.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 72- New Cost Center 2131-01 $ 123,726.00 72- New Cost Center 2191-21 $ 43,304.00 $ 167,030.00 Additional Accounting Details: Establish one cost center for total budget Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? Yes Is there a potential for grant to continue? Yes If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant?' _ No The department would request the GF to fund the positions Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? No Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? No 1 Initiative Name: State of Utah, Office of Crime Victims Reparations - VOCA Grant Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #B-4 Initiative Type: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Police Department applied for and received $28,039.78 from the State of Utah, Office of Crime Victims Reparations, Victim of Crime Act (VOCA), for continuation of the Mobile Response Team''program. These' funds will be used or partial salaries and benefits of two (2) part time victim •advocates who provide on scene crisis counseling and resource services to victims of domestic violence. The PD receives this grant on an annual basis. Of these funds, $26,449.76 is allocated for 9 months of salary and benefits of two victim advocate positions. Due to personnel' changes reducing the number from 3 to 2 victim advocate positions being paid from the previous years grant, the State awarded a 3 month grant`extension which will cover the salary and'benefits for these two positions during the 1st quarter. The remaining $1,590 will be used to pay registration fees for victim advocates and other police personnel'to attend two VOCA conferences and training during the year. A 20% or$5,670.80 match is required which will be met through the payment of salary and benefits of an additional •victim advocate position and is budgeted for within the Police Departments general fund budget. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. A Resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept the grant and any additional grants or agreements that stem from the original grant. I State of Utah, Office of Crime Victim Reparations - VOCA Grant Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#B-4 I 2006-07 Initiative Number j Fiscal Year Grants for Existing Police Department Staff Resources Department Type of Initiative Krista Dunn/Sherrie Collins 799-3265/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund Total $01 I $01 Internal Service Fund Total) I $01 $0 Enterprise Fund Total I $0 I $0 Other Fund 72-State Grant Funds $ 28,039.78 Total $ 28,039.78 I $0 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 01 I 0 Description Victim Advocates Salaries PTE 24,570.18 2 x 733 hrs @ 16.76 pr hr Benefits - Med & FICA 1,879.60 2 x 939.80 26,449.78 ^ | � � _Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: 06-VOCA-38 Revenue: — Cost Center Number 0�e� Codo0umt�r Amount �� 72' New Cost C�anter 1370 � 28.U3078 | -_ -_�--_- _-- Expenditure: Cost Center Number | Object Code Number | Amount 72' New Cost Center 2181 24.570]8 |72' New Cost Center 2191'10 1.879.60 172' New Cost Center | 2525 i � 1.590.00 | $ 28.030.78 _ -� | | ' | / | / | Additional Accounting Details: / \ _ Grant Information: ---- -]Grant funds employee positions? es ---- |s there o potential for grant to continue? Yes _ |f grant is funding aposition is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? Yes lWi U grant program be complete in grantfunding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? No |- !Does 0rantdup|ioatoservices provided bprivateor _ |Non-profit sector? | ______ No Initiative Name: Dept of Health and Human Sery Drug Free Communities Grant Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #B-5 Initiative Type: Grant For Existing Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Mayor's Office applied for and received $100,000 of grant funding from the Department of Health and Human Services for continuation of the Mayor's Drug Free Communities program. This program supports the Mayor's Coalition on Alcohol, Tobacco and Other Drugs in the reduction and prevention of substance abuse in Salt Lake City. This is year 4 of this funding. Of these funds, $56,780 will be used for the salary and benefits of the Coalition Coordinator, who coordinates and supports the coalition strategy in program implementation and activities that include training, data collection, dissemination of findings, and liaising between the Coalition, the Mayor's Office and the community, and $5,352 will fund the Grant Monitors time for the fiscal monitoring and oversight of the grant. In addition, $3,309 will be used for travel and training at mandatory conferences; $2,839 will be used for printing of brochures pamphlets and other media packets; $1000 will be used for other costs such as memberships and conference registration; and $30,720 will be used for other contractual components to include continuation of program evaluation, three $5,000 mini grants to local service providers to further drug abuse prevention, Salt Lake IMS for Website domain; and a consultant to assist in the facilitation of the annual strategic planning process. The grant requires a $100,000 in-kind match which will be met with the Mayor's Office staff and Coalition volunteer time, IMS Brown Bag Lunch taping, volunteer Brown Bag speakers and mini-grant Subgrantee's who will match the $5,000 mini-grants. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. A Resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept the grant and any additional grants or agreements that stem from the original grant. Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: 93-243 Revenue: Cost Center Number Object C o de Number Amount 72- New Cost Center 1370 $ 100,000.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 1 72- New Cost Center 2111-01 $ 62,132.00 72- New Cost Center 2590 $ 37,868.00 $ 100,000.00 Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? Yes Is there a potential for grant to continue? 1 Yes If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? Yes Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? — Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are jeliminated? No Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? No - Dept of Health and Human Sery Drug Free Communities Grant Initiative Name I BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#B-5 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Grants For Existing Mayor's Office Staff Resources 1 Department Type of Initiative Abby Vianes/Sherrie Collins 799-7936/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund Total 1 $0 $01 ,Internal Service Fund Total $01 $01 Enterprise Fund Total I $01 $0' Other Fund 72- State Grant $ 100,000.00 Total $ 100,000.00 I I $01 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0I _Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 0I 0 Description Grant Coordinator Salary $ 40,353.00 Grant Coordinator Benefits $ 16,427.00 Grant Monitoring $ 5,352.00 $ 62,132.00 Initiative Name: US Department of Justice - Anti-Human Trafficking Task Force Initiative Number: BA# FY 2007 Initiative #C-1 Initiative Type: Grants for New Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Salt Lake City Prosecutor's Office applied for received $450,000, over a three year period, from the US Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance. These funds will be used to defray costs associated in the creation of a Task Force to provide services to victims of human trafficking. Salt Lake City will serve as the lead agency working in conjunction with the US Attorney's Office for the District of Utah, the Utah Health and Human Rights Project, the Salt Lake County District Attorney, the Salt Lake City Police Department and other local service agencies. In the last 18 months, law enforcement and community agencies have identified approximately 500 victims of human trafficking. The Task Force will increase the identification, intervention, and protection of victims in, the Salt Lake area by developing service protocols through training of law enforcement and prosecutorial agencies, create a community outreach and awareness campaign and collaborate with victim service providers. Of these funds, $356,416 will be used over a 3 year period to pay 100%0 of the salary and benefits of the Project Coordinator and 50% of an Assistant City Prosecutor, $7,524 will pay for the grant monitoring services, and $6,000 will be used for officer over-time. in addition, $23,500 will be used for travel to attend required grant conferences and bring national presenters to Utah, $15,310 will be used to produce brochures and media news clips, and $41,250 will be used to contract for video production, translation services, Latin outreach campaign and billboards. The grant requires a $150,000 match which will be met with 5% of the City Prosecutor's time and 50% of an Assistant City Prosecutors time who will be assigned as the community prosecutor for human trafficking cases. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary Resolution authorizing the Mayor to accept and sign the grant agreement and to appropriate the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. US Department of Justice -Anti- Human Trafficking Task Force Initiative Name r BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#C-1 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Grants for New Staff Salt Lake City Prosecutor's Officer Resources Department Type of Initiative Sim Gill/Krista Dunn/Sherrie 535-7990/799-3265/535 Collins 6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact 1 Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund Totall I $01 $01 Internal Service Fund Total $01 $01 Enterprise Fund Total $01 $0 Other Fund 72- Grant Funds $ 450,000.00 Total $ 450,000.00 I I $0 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 2 0 Existing Number of FTE's 1 0 Total 31 1 0 Description Salary Project Coordinator New Position - 165,262.00 3 year period Assistant City Prosecutor 50% - 3 $92,424 year period Project Monitor 5% of time - 3 7,524.00 year period _ Law Enforcement Overtime 6,000.00 cg�7 cn ner hr 7 vaar Qc,rinri Total 271,210.00 Benefits Project Coordinator New Position - 56,370.00 3 year period Assistant City Prosecutor 50% - 3 42,360.00 year period Totall $98,7301 I I I I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: 16.320 Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 172- New Cost Center 1 1370 450,000.00 Expenditure: , • Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 72- New Cost Center 2111-01 369,940.00 j 172- New Cost Center 2590 80,060.00 450,000.00 Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? Yes Is there a potential for grant to continue? Possible If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? Yes Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? No Does grant duplicate services provided by private or 1Non-profit sector? No Initiative Name: CIP CDBG Cost Overrun Adjustment Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #D-1 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: During the CIP CDBG Process, the Council recommended CIP CDBG projects totaling $1,759,n23 however, the amount formally adopted;in July listed the total CIP CDBG budget as $1,782,364. This resulted in an overage of $23,341 in budget allocated. All CDBG funds were appropriated during the process. This request decreases the CDBG CIP Cost Overrun budget by$23,341, balancing the CDBG fund. It is recommended that the City Council`adopt the necessary budget adjustment to the.CDBG Program. CIP CDBG Cost Overrun Adiustment Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #D-1 2006-07 Initiative Number 1 Fiscal Year Community Development- HAND Housekeeping Department Type of Initiative L LuAnn Clark/Sherrie Collins 535-6136/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund � I Total $01 $0 Internal Service Fund If I Total $01 $0 Enterprise Fund I Total $0 $0 Other Fund _- I - _ Total 0 $0I _Staffing Impact: (New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 0.00 0 1Description --_-- —__-- - 1 1 I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: NA Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount Expenditure: Cost Center Number 1 I Object Code Number Amount 83-07099 2700 (23,341.00) I I Additional Accounting Details: I Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? NA Is there a potential for grant to continue? NA If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? NA ;Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? I NA Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? NA Initiative Name: Donation Fund Contributions & Interest Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #D-2 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: Since',July 1, 2006 Salt Lake City has received additional donations for existing activities and donations for new activities Also the existing activities have earned interest income on cash balances during Fiscal 2007 This requested action will increase the budget in the master donation cost center back to its original amount of $50,000 It is recommended that the Council approve the budgets for this Donation Special Revenue Fund. Note that the Unity Center (Glendale Community Center) is not included in this request. 1 i Donation Fund Contributions & Interest Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#D-2 2006-07 Initiative Number r 1 Fiscal Year I Management Services Housekeeping Department _ 1 Type of Initiative Elwin Hellmann 535-6424 Prepared By _ Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By fund: ' lst'Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007 08; 1General Fund j 1 1 I Total 0 1 $0 Internal Service Fund Total 1 01 1 $0 Enterprise Fund Total 01 1 $01 1OtherFund j 177 Fund Donations $ 41,168.00 Total 1 $ 41,168.001 $0 Staffing Impact: 1New Number of FTE's 01 01 Existing Number of FTE's O1 01 Total 01 1 0 Description 1 1— 1 1 1 1 . !``^ ��K�mt�� '� .'/`� ' K�ma�t#��_' --'#� -- Revenue: Cost Center NumberObject Code Number | Amount |77'77001 / 1830 14.908.00 1 1895 _ � 26,2OO.00 41.108.00 Cost Center Number Object Code Number | Amount | �!��- 77'770O1 for all interest income | 2590 14`908.00 77'7711A donation for existing |Sorensen Technology | 2590 _ | $ 30D0 . | .77-0U875 donation for existing ,Youth City Programs / i 2590 $ 252.80 _ !77'7715Odonation for existing | yWannnha| HnuseMaintenanoe 2590 | 1.753.00 77'77108 donation for existing Parks Maintenance 2590 � $ 5'755.00 --77-7T15S for new Crisis |Intervention Team (Po|ice) 2590 | $ 4.470.00 77'77181fornewaotivitvBoSofe BeSeon 2500 $ 14.000.80 | | | | � 41'108.00 -=-�-'--' ~'o |n all the expense items listed above, the word existing n�oano the donadonfund e�stedat June 30, 2O0O. - 'The word new means the fund vv8screated and UOnaUOnswere received sometime between July 1. 200O and October 15. 200S beant_ Unfommation:``/�� `� Grant funds employee positions? N/A | _ _ there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a cted the ill — position�� be tedatthmendofthe8rant7 N/A Will rant program be complete in grantfundhng time frame? N/A grant impact the community once the grant funds are edhninatmd? | NIA --�-'- |Doos grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-proftsector? _ N/A __^ Donation Interest 77-00785 Public Services Recycling 65.75 77-10000 Cycle Salt Lake 30.25 77-77103 Access Salt Lake City 257.35 Master Trust 77-77113 Development Agreement Hughs 735.74 77-77115 Sorenson Center arts Program 136.27 77-77121 Gallivan Rainy Day 4,597.96 77-77122 SLC Classics 236.73 77-77123 SLC Foundation 0.12 77-77124 SLC Fire training Center 1,820.18 77-77125 Eccles Donation 7.18 77-77126 SLC Tornado pins 172.12 77-77131 Junior Golf 62.14 77-77132 SLC Tree Replacement 1,468.22 77-77136 Police equipment endowment 198.07 77-77137 Fire equipment endowment 968.03 77-77139 Police reward fund 68.82 77-77140 Cannon Farms Indemnification 24.60 77-77142 Park Plaque 117.84 77-77146 Gilgal Gardens 96.23 77-77147 Sugarhouse- 13thE crossing 32.36 77-77148 Spotlight of Excellence 46.53 77-77151 Equipment maintenance donation 41.21 77-77152 Environmental donations 296.66 77-77154 Service Dog Donations 32.63 77-77155 Safe Neighbors Project 129.94 77-77156 Cannon Farms Strip indemnification 47.17 77-77157 SLC Library Paver Replacement 2,189.18 77-77119 Sorenson Technology Center 30.00 124.07 77-00875 Youth City Programs. 252.00 295.52 77-77150 Memorial House Maintenance 1,753.31 159.37 77-77108 Parks maintenance donations 5,754.50 424.00 77-77130 Imagination Celebration 25.41 77-77159 CIT Scholarship 4,470.00 0.00 77-77161 Be safe Be seen 14,000.00 0.00 26,259.81 14,907.65 41,167.46 Rounded 26,260.00 14,908.00 41,168.00 Initiative Name: Special Revenue Carryover Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #D-3 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: The list that the City Council was provided was inadvertently missing these six cost centers for the Special Revenue carryover budget that was approved by Council in October, 2006 It is recommended that the Council approve the carryover budgets for these special revenue funds Special Revenue Carryover Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#D-3 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Management Services " Housekeeping Department Type of Initiative Elwin Hellmann 535-6424 Prepared By P Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund 1 Total 0 $0 Internal Service Fund Total 01 $01 Enterprise Fund Total 1 01 $0 Other Fund 72 Grants Operating Fund $ 142,786.45 — i Total $ 142,786.451 ( $0' Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 0 Total 01 I 0 Description Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number 1 - Amount 72-66001 Edgar Grant I 1305 $ 38,517.75 72-66002 Ottinger Hall - Edgar _ 1305 $ 22,769.65 j72-66003 Fairmont- Edgar 1305 _ $ 31,005.29 72-66004 Libey- Edgar _ 1305 $ 8,204.32 72-66005 Youth City Admin. - 1 I Edgar 1305 $ _ 27,188.99 72-66006 Central City Program 1 ,Income 1305 $ 15,100.45 $ 142,786.45 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 172-66001 Edgar Grant 2590 $ 38,517.75 72-66002 Ottinger Hall - Edgar 2590 $ 22,769.65 j 72-66003 Fairmont- Edgar 2590 $ 31,005.29 72-66004 Liberty - Edgar 2590 $ 8,204.32 172-66005 Youth City Admin. - jEdgar 2590 $ 27,188.99 72-66006 Central City Program Income 2590 $ 15,100.45 1 $ 142,786.45 Additional Description: Grant Information: 'Grant funds employee positions? _ N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? - N/A IIf grant is funding a position is it expected the position will Ibe eliminated at the end of the grant?j N/A twill grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A —1 — Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are _ I 'eliminated? T N/A _ ,Does grant duplicate services provided by private or r Non-profit sector? — _ __ N/A . t Initiative Name: Water Utility Fund Carryover Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #D-4 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: The Water Utility is asking to amend the 2006-07 budget for carryover projects which have been completed in the current year for which a budget is not currenity available. Also, additional funding is being requested to replace the Big Cottonwood Treatment Plant filter media. The filters were originally budgeted to be replaced in the 2009-10 budget year; however it has been determined that the media should be replaced this :budget year. Additonal funding is also needed to purchase watershed property in the Big Cottonwood Canyon area around Donut Falls in the amount of $1,400,000 which will be funded from the watershed purchase fund., Watershed purchases $ 1, 00,000 Carry over waterlines 1,5879,095 Carry over Equipment 271;960 BCWTP media replacement 800,000 Total $4,081,055 Water Utility Fund Carryover Initiative Name T BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#D-4 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Water Housekeeping Department Type of Initiative Jim Lewis 483-6773 Prepared By _ Telephone Contact I _ I _ (General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 (General Fund Total $01 $01 Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 Other Fund Total 01 $0 1 1 1 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 01 -- 0 Existing Number of FTE's - 0 0 Total 0 0 Description - --- -- -- ---- Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 51-51101 Fund Balance $4,061,055.00 T Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number I Amount 51-03301 2771-01 $ 1,400,000.00 51-00901 2720-30 $ 800,000.00 51-01301 2730-08 $ 1,589,095.00 51-02301 2750-30 $ 271,960.00 Total $ 4,061,055.00 Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Not Grant related Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? N/A r , Initiative Name: Sewer Utility Fund Carryover Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #D-5 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: The Sewer Utilitiy is requesting' that the budget be amended to fund projects which were budgeted in the prior year, but not expened until this current year. This will allow the continuation of the utilities capital improvement program. Carry over Sewer lines $ 2,146,000 Carry over Equipment 179,337 Total $2,325,337 1 1 Sewer Utility Fund Carryover 1 Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#D-5 ' 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Public Utilities Housekeeping 1 Department Type of Initiative Jim Lewis 483-6773 Prepared By Telephone Contact I �1General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact (Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 General Fund Total j $01 $0 Internal Service Fund — Total $01 $0 Enterprise Fund 1 Total I $01 $0 Other Fund Total 0 $0 1 1 Staffing Impact: (New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 0 Total 0 0 Description _ _ I Accounting Detail Grant*and CFDA# If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number j Amount 52-52201 Fund Balance $ 2,325,337.00 -- ------- ----- _ Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount '52-11201 2720-30 $ 620,000.00 52-10101 2760-90 $ 21,500.00 152-10801 2760-90 $ 57,837.00 52-12201 2760-90 $ 100,000.00 1 52-10401 2730-04 $ 1,526,000.00 ;Total $ 2,325,337.00 Additional Accounting Details: I _ Grant Information: Not Grant related 1 Grant funds employee positions? _ N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue'? - _ _ N/A - If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame'? N/A (Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? ---- --- j--- j N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or _ Non-profit sector? — N/A - Initiative Name: Storm Water Fund Carryover Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #D-6 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: The Storm Water Utilitiy is requesting that the budget be amended to fund projects which were budgeted in the prior year, but not expened until this current year. This will allow the continuation of the utilities capital improvement program. Carry over storm water lines $1607,000 Storm Water Fund Carryover Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #D-6 2006-07 Initiative Number L_ _ Fiscal Year L _ Public Utilities Housekeeping Department _ T Type of Initiative Jim Lewis 483-6773 Prepared By Telephone Contact ----- ----- -- IGeneral Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year — FY 2005-06 FY 2006-07 ;General Fund � I Total $0 $0 ;Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 Other Fund 1 Total 0 $0 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's ] 0 0 _,iExisting Number of FTE's 0 0 Total 0 0 Description Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 53-53301 Fund Balance $ 1,607,000.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 53-10201 2730-18 $ 1,607,000.00 Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? N/A Initiative Name: Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #D-7 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: The Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility has received approval for capital projects and landfill permitting, leachate, and water quality monitoring at the landfill. In accordance with an Agreement between the City and County, Salt Lake City provides engineering support for facilitation of improvement projects at the landfill by designing and constructing the required facilities. The City pays consultants, contractors, etc., and then is reimbursed by Salt Lake County. Engineering is requesting that a budget in the amount of $1,600,000 be approved, and authorization be given for the City's Engineer's office to establish budgets within the $1,600,000 as necessary to accomplish the required projects budgeted by Salt Lake County. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate the project. Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility 1 Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#D-7 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Community Development- HAND Housekeeping Department Type of Initiative L LuAnn Clark/Sherrie Collins 535-6136/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund Total 1 $01 1 $01 Internal Service Fund Total $01 1 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $01 I $0 Other Fund 83- County Funds $ 1,600,000.00 Total $ 1,600,000.00 I I $0 II Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 0.00 I 0 Description S Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: NA Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 83- New Cost Center 1890 1 $ 1,600,000.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 183- New Cost Center 2700 1,600,000.00 Additional Accounting Details: Object Code Number Amount Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame'? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? N/A _4 Initiative Name: CIP Funds - Recapture Completed Projects Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #D-8 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: This request decreases the remaining budgets and/or cash of five (5) completed and closed general fund CIP projects totaling $17487.60, and increases the budget and/or cash of the 06 CIP cost over-run account in the same amount. This also adjusts one (1) cost center containing a negative cash and budget of $40.00 and decreases the remaining budget on one (1) cost center. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget adjustment to facilitate this adjustment to the CIP. CIP Funds Recapture Completed Projects Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #D-8 2006-07 Initiative Number f Fiscal Year L_ Community Development- HAND Housekeeping Department _ Type of Initiative LuAnn Clark/Sherrie Collins 535-6136/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact_ i I Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07s FY 2007-08 , General Fund Total $01 $0 Internal Service Fund Total $01 I $01 Enterprise Fund Total I $0 $011 Other Fund Total 0 I $0 Staffing Impacts New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 0.001 0 Description I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: NA Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 1 Expenditure: I Cost Center Number I I Object Code Number I Amount Budget& Cash 83-01016 Jordan River Trail 2700 $ (1,073.75) 83-04025 Jordan River Trail Lighting 2700 1 $ (15,258.22) 83-03009 Donner Trail 2700 $ 40.00 83-04070 Liberty Park Tennis 2700 $ (769.13) 83-06025 Jordan River Trail Lighting 2700 1 $ (416.50) 83-99008 East Liberty Park SID 2700 ' $ (10.00), 83-06099 CIP Cost Over-run 1 2700 $ 17,487.60 1 1 Budget Only 73-04045 Rose Park Lighting $ (127,498.07) Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A f Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? I N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? I I I I N/A Initiative Name: CIP Fund - CDBG - Recapture Completed Projects Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #D-9 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: This request decreases the remaining budgets and/or cash of five (5) completed, closed, CDBG CIP funded projects totaling $110,121.55 and increases the budget and/or cash of the same years CDBG cost over-run account to be reprogrammed during the next CDBG process. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget adjustments to the CDBG Program. CIP Fund - CDBG - Recapture Completed Projects _ Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #D-9 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Community Development- HAND Housekeeping Department r _ Type of Initiative LuAnn Clark/Sherrie Collins 535-6136/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact - I Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07, FY 2007-08 General Fund Total $01 $01 Internal Service Fund Total I $01 $01 Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 Other Fund Total 01 . 1 $0 � ) 1 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 0.001 0 Description 1 _ _'`- . Detail Grant#and `- - _'''- #'Uf'Applicable:`- �_ �--- NA Revenue: _ CostCanbarNumber Object Code Number Amount � ----��--- � - ---- / l �' --- --- -1-�� -- ^ . . . ! __. Esp6md�mmm: Cost Center Number Object Cod* Nurnber Amount � 83-96065 Inner Block Street Li hti _ 2700 _ (25,416.80) �83'9hDSUCDBG Cost Over-run � _ 2700 _ �� 25.418.80 !83'08OO6GtreotLiQht\ngCDAna�s 2700 /8( ,177�50) -T -- -- - � 3'88U08CD8<� (�ostDveprun � � 2700 i | � 66.177.50 |83'0800O Street Lighting CDAreas _ 2700 $ (80l0O`T-'-- |83'800Q8CDB<� {�ost [)var'run | 2700 -- -�- |�---- - -- 0O( .OU----- |83'04061 Modesto Park | 2700 _ / $ (15.041.03} � | /83'040Q8CDBGCostOveprun 27UO $ __ 15'041.031�8 3-05O57 Sidewalk Replacement 2700 � (2'88622� T83'05O08C�BG {�netOve�run 2700 - 2,886.22- -- / -- i | - ----- | | | / | / | | | |Additional Accounting KS�mm : | - - ---- -- -- | -- - --- -- �- � ' `'�� ' �` ---------- -----' ��- -- - -�---- - -- | - funds employee positions? N/A v= there a potential for grant tocontinue? N/A -- |f grant isfunding a position ieit expected the position will be eliminated mt the end of the grant/ � _ N/A - lWill grant program be complete nQrantfunding .imnefnanmo? - N/A ---�- - � � � � !Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are |m|irninatad? � �� - �- --- i --- duplicateDoes grant nvi provided bv private or on'prof|teeotor7 ____ |_ __ NIA _�� _ Initiative Name: HOME, CDBG and UDAG Program Income Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #D-10 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: These Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funded programs, HOME, CDBG, and the City Center UDAG have received program income in the amount $2,409,081. from re_ payment of loans. This action establishes a'budget for those funds and allows the program income to be reallocated back into the individual program for continued programming. It is a HUD federal guideline that Program Income be reallocated to programs that have the same eligible activity. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget adjustments to facilitate expenditure of these funds. I I HOME, CDBG and UDAG Program Income Initiative Name 1 BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#D-10 2006-07 JInitiative Number 1 Fiscal Year Community Development-HAND I Housekeeping Department I Type of Initiative r LuAnn Clark/Sherrie Collins 535-6136/535-6150 Prepared By F 1 Telephone Contact 1 Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 I General Fund I Total $0 1 $0 j Internal Service Fund II I I I Total I $0 I $01 Enterprise Fund 1 I Total I $01 I $0 Other Fund I 72 Fund - Program Income $ 2,409,081.00 Total $ 2,409,081.00 I $0 I I 1 Staffing Impact New Number of FTE's 0 I 0 jExisting Number of FTE's I 0 I Total 0.00 0 _Description 1- - - - I j I I I I I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: NA Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 72-00720 City Center Payoff 1305 $ 1,446,467.00 I78-78325 HOME 1305 1 $ 267,614.00 78-32010 CDBG 1305 $ 695,000.00 F_ _ $ 2,409,081.00 1 1 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number j Amount 72-15607 Revolving Loan Fund 2590 $ 1,446,467.00 78-78325 HOME 2950 , $ 267,614.00 78-32010 CDBG 2950 $ 695,000.00 I $ 2,409,081.00 1 1 1 Additional Accounting Details: Please move cash of principle and interest from fund class 72 fund 00720 1 to 72 15607 Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? N/A If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A 1Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? N/A Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? N/A !Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? i N/A 1 Initiative Name: Copy Center Closeout Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #D-11 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: The Copy Center Funds has $11,340 remaining cash in the fund after the disposition of all of the supplies and assets. This budget opening will transfer that remaining cash to the General Fund. I I_ Copy Center Closeout Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#D-11 2006-07 JInitiative Number �_ j Fiscal Year l__ Mqmt Sery Finance . Housekeeping Department Type of Initiative r Gordon Hoskins 535-6394 Prepared By - J Telephone Contact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07° FY.2007-08 1General Fund I i Transfer from Copy Center $ 11,340.30 Total) $ 11,340.30 I $01 Internal Service Fund I � , Total! $0 $01 Enterprise Fund Total $01 $O! Other Fund I - Total $0 I $011 Staffina'Impacf: New Number of FTE's 0i Oj Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total _ 0.001 01 Description - • Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable:`:` NA Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount ,340.30 1 01-00021 '— 1974-67 1 -- ------ -- Expenditure Cost Center Number - Object Code Number Amount 67 00676 ! 2910-08 $ _ 11,340.30 — - --- I I _ Additional Accounting°.Details I I I � Grant Information, Grant funds employee positions? N/A Is there a potential for grant to continue? —_-- ; N/A if grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? N/A [Willrant program grant P gram be complete in grant funding time frame? —_ NIA 1Will grant impact the community once the 1 grantfunds are eliminated? ! N/A Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? N/A Initiative Name: Lowes Property Purchase and Granato's Property Improvements Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #D-12 Initiative Type: Housekeeping Initiative Discussion: In budget amendment number 1, Community Development requested $40,000 in budget to buy back property owned by,Lowes for construction of a right hand turn lane on 300 West and 1300 South. The actual purchase price of the property was $36,105. At the time the budget request was submitted the Hand Division of Commiunty Development was not aware that the total projected included $12,000 for three driveway approaches into Lowes and Granato's. This brought the total project cost to $48,105. This request will increase the budget by $8,105 for a total budget of $48,105. These additional funds will be appropriated from the surplus land account. Lowes has submitted 'a billing to the City and will be paid the total amount of $48,105 as soon as the total budget has been approved., It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary adjustment to facilitate payment to Lowes. -r- Lowes Property Purchase and Granato's Property Improvements Initiative Name BA#2FY2007 Initiative#D-12 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Community Development-HAND Housekeeping Department Type of Initiative LuAnn Clark/Sherrie Collins 535-6136/535-6150 Prepared By 1 Telephone Contact General Fund Fund Balance Impact Revenue Impact By Fund' 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007.08 General Fund Total $01 $0� Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $0; $0 Other Fund Total $0 $0 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's _ 0 _ 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 -Total 0.00 0 Description I i Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: NA Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 83-81100 Fund Balance $ 8,105.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number I Object Code Number i Amount 83-07007 2700 $ 8,105.00 Additional Accounting Details: Object Code Number Amount Create budget to facilitate cash expenditure Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? NA Is there a potential for grant to continue? NA If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? NA Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? NA Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? NA Initiative Name: State of Utah, Homeland Security Grant Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #E-1 Initiative Type: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Emergency Management Services Division receives this annual grant from the State of Utah, Homeland Security. It is awarded to jurisdictions to purchase equipment necessary to prepare in the event of a terrorist or weapons of mass destruction attack. The $321,080 grant award will be allocated to purchase euipment as follows. Public Safety Communications - $195, 173 to purchase an automated dialing & notification system and pandemic supplies. Fire Services $65,407 to purchase 120 - CBRNE Ensembles, 1 - MACK Air distribution, an automated dialing and notification system, and 12 - water purification systems. Law Enforcement $47,000 to purchase 115 - CBRNE Ensembles and 2 - water purification systems. Emergency Management $13,500 for an EOC Communications system and 2 - water purifictions systems. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. A Resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept the grant and any additional grants or agreements that stem from the original grant. L State of Utah, Home Land Security Grant Initiative Name I BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#E-1 1 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year L_ Grants Requiring No Management Services New Staff Resources Department Type of Initiative Mike Stever/Sherrie Collins 535-6030/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact I (General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund Total $01 $0 Internal Service Fund Total $0 $01 Enterprise Fund Total $01 $01 Other Fund _ 1 72- State Grant $ 321,080.00 Total 1 $ 321,080.00 1 I $0 1 Staffing Impact: (New Number of FTE's 0 0 'Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 0 0 Description ! I I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: Revenue: Cost Center Number ! Object Code Number Amount 72- New Cost Center 1370 321,080.00 - I - I Expenditure:Cost Center Number Object Code Number _ Amount 72- New Cost Center 2590 $ 321,080.00 1 Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: !Grant funds employee positions? No Is there a potential for grant to continue? Yes If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant?' NA _?- - Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? - - Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? No Does grant duplicate services provided by private or ;Non-profit sector? No Initiative Name: Utah Dept of Health, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services Grant Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #E-2 Initiative Type: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Fire Department applied for and received $104,337 from the Utah Department of Health, Bureau of Emergency Medical Services. Of this amount $98,569 will be used to purchase medical equipment, $4,500 will be used for training and $1`,268 will be use to purchase a bariatric transport flat. These funds are awarded annually to purchase medical equipment and supplies which could include an apparatus, pharmaceuticals, health and safety supplies, ie gloves, masks, safety glasses, et., and defibrillators; and for paramedic on-going training and/or schooling for new recruits. There is a 25% or $1,500 match for the training portion of the grant and a 50% or$1,268 match for a bariatric transport flat which will be met within the Fire Departments general fund budget. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. A Resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept the grant and any additional grants or agreements that stem from the original grant. Utah Dept of Health,Bureau of Emergency Medical Services Grant Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#E-2 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year r Grants Requiring No Fire Department New Staff Resources Department I Type of Initiative �_ John Vuyk/Sherrie Collins — -- 7.99-4210/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact r _jGeneral Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund Total $0 $01 Internal Service Fund Total $0 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 Other Fund 72- State Grant $ 104,337.00 Total $ 104,337.00 $0 Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 2-1 _ 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 jTotal 0 0 I Description Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: G0621526 Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount - 172- New Cost Center _ 1370 $ 104,337.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number I Object Code Number Amount 72- New Cost Center 2590 $ 104,337.00 I � Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? No Is there a potential for grant to continue? _ Yes If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will I be eliminated at the end of the grant? NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes 1Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? No Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? No Initiative Name: State of Utah, Dept of Public Services MMRS Grant Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #E-3 Initiative Type: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Fire Department applied for and received $232,330 from the State of Utah, Department of Public Services, under the Homeland Security Metropolitan Medical Response (MMRS) grant program. This grant is awarded on an annual basis to jurisdictions across the County to plan and implement a medical response mechanism in the event of a mass casualty or a weapons of mass destruction terrorist attack. The Fire Department will use these funds to purchase equipment and provide a training/drill exercise for jurisdictions valley wide, provide a minimal amount of funds to local hospitals for their participation in the training/drill exercise and to pay for the two contract personnel who provide pharmaceutical oversight and clerical duties. There is no required match. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. A Resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept the grant and any additional grants or agreements that stem from the original grant. State of Utah, Dept of Public Safety MMRS Grant Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #E-3 2006-07 1 Initiative Number j 1 Fiscal Year Grants Requiring No Fire Department New Staff Resources Department Type of Initiative John Vuyk/Sherrie Collins 799-4210/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund Total $01 $0 Internal Service Fund Total I $01 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $0 $01 Other Fund 72- State Grant $ 232,330.00 Total $ 232,330.00I $0 _ 1 1 I 1 — Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 01 I 0 Description I I i I I I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: 97.067 Revenue: -II Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount ,72- New Cost Center 1370 1 $ 232,330.00 1 -1 1 TT -I Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 172- New Cost Center 2590 $ 232,330.00 Additional - Additional Accounting Details: ---1 Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? No _1 I Is there a potential for grant to continue? Yes ;If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant?1 NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes ;Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are ;eliminated? I No ,Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? No i 1 Initiative Name: Ut Dept of Publi Safety, Emerg Sery Citizen Corps Council Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #E-4 Initiative Type: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Emergency Management Services Division receives this annual grant from the Utah Department of Public Safety, Division of Emergency Services and Homeland Security to organize, develop and implement a city wide strategic plan and to organize and implement the Citizen Corps Council. These $6,000 of grant funds will be used to defray costs associated with training and educating the Citizen Corps Council in community preparedness and family safety measures and other costs associated with marketing and advertising special events that promote the Citizen Corps Council. The Corps is comprised of various community,leaders, local service providers, volunteers, city employees and neighborhood groups. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. A Resolution was previously passed authorizing'the Mayor to sign and accept the grant and any additional grants or agreements that stem from the original grant. Ut Dept of Public Safety Emerq Sery Citizen Corps Council Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#E-4 2006-07 J Initiative Number Fiscal Year _ Grants Requiring No Management Services New Staff Resources Department � Type of Initiative Mike Stever/Sherrie Collins T 535-6030/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07_ FY 2007-08 General Fund Total $0 $0 Internal Service Fund Total $01 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $0 $0 (Other Fund 72- State Grant $ 6,000.00 Total $ 6,000.00 $0 Staffing Impact: 1 New Number of FTE's 0 0 _Existing Number of FTE's CT (Total 0 0 Description I Accounting Detail Grant# and CFDA#If Applicable: 97.067 Revenue: _ Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount -172- New Cost Center 1370 $ 6,000.00 Expenditure:. Cost Center Number Object Code Number I Amount 72- New Cost Center 2590 $ 6,000.00 i � I Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: Grant funds employee positions? No Is there a potential for grant to continue? Yes If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grantl NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? No Does grant duplicate services provided by private or INon-profit sector? No Initiative Name: SLC Arts Council - Global Artways Grant Initiative Number: BA#2FY 2007 Initiative #E-5 Initiative Type: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: Global Artways through The Salt Lake City Foundation received a $2,000 grant from the Salt Lake City Arts Council for their Kennedy Center Imagination Celebration (KCIC) program. The KCIC at Salt Lake City is an arts education program' that engages young people, teachers and families in dance, theater, opera'and visual arts. Global Artways will use the funds to defray costs associated with this fiscal years KCIC programming. This years programming includes the Children's Opera Showcase', KCIC on Tour, the Puppetry Festival, the Polynesian Arts Festival and 21st Century Play Festival. The grant requires no match It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary Resolution authorizing the Mayor to accept and sign the grant agreement and to appropriate the''necessary to facilitate this grant. SLC Arts Council -Global Artways Grant ; Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#E-5 2006-07 __J Initiative Number Fiscal Year Grants Requiring No New Public Services Staff Resources 1 Department Type of Initiative Janet Wolf/Sherrie Collins 535-7712/535-6150 Prepared By 1 1 Telephone Contact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 • General Fund -- Total' $01 $0 Internal Service Fund Total) I $01 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $01 $0 Other Fund 77- SLC Foundation $ 2,000.00 ; 77- KCIC $ 2,000.00 Total $ 4,000.00 $0 I Staffing Impact: INew Number of FTE's 01 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 )Total I 01 I 0 Description Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: NA Revenue Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 77-77123 1895 - ---- - ---------- -- — $ 2,000.00 -- !-- ! -- 77-77130 1895 2,000.00 I I -- --------------------- Expenditure Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 77-77123 2590 $ 2,000.00 77-77130 2590 $ 2,000.00 Additional Accounting Details - _ Grant Information. Grant funds employee positions? No Is there a potential for grant to continue? I Possible If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant?1_ NA ;Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are I eliminated? j Yes (Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? 1 T No • Initiative Name: St of Ut - Dept of Comm Culture - Arts Education Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #E-6 Initiative Type: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: Global Artways under the Salt Lake City Foundation applied for and received a $6,160 grant from the State of Utah, Department of Community Culture under the Arts Education Project. Global will use these funds to contract with 3 artists to facilitate Global Artways programming events during this fiscal year. Those events include Puppetry Workshops for 40 elementary students, 20 teens and 15-20 caregivers and their children, and two high school play productions of Hawkboy in which 100 high school students will participate, and The Breeze at Dawn in which an additional 100 high school students will participate. There is no required match. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. St of Ut- Dept of Comm Culture -Arts Education Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #E-6 2006-07 Initiative Number i i'------ --- ----- --- I � Fiscal Year Grants Requiring No New Public Services Staff Resources Department Type of Initiative Janet Wolf/Sherrie Collins 535-7712/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact Revenue Impact BVFund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07.• FY,,2007 08 General Fund Total) j $0 $0 )Internal Service Fund Total i $0 $0 iEnterprise Fund Total $0 $0 ;Other Fund '77- State Grant $ 6,160.00 Total $ 6,160.00 $0 Staffing Impact: , New Number of FTE's 0 _ 0 ----- -------- Existing Number of FTE's 1 0 Total _ 0 0 Description _ I 1 I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#.If Applicable: ` NA Revenue• Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount — 77-00875 136. 0 j $ 6,160.00 I - - 1 I i Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 77-00875 2590 $ 6,160.00 Additional Accounting Details: _ Grant Information iGrant funds employee positions? No Is there a potential for grant to continue? Possible If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are (eliminated? Yes ;Does grant duplicate services provided by private or ,Non-profit sector? No Initiative Name: Global Artways - The Kennedy Center for Performing Arts Grant Initiative Number: BA#2FY 2007 Initiative #E-7 Initiative Type: Grants Requring No New Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: Global Artways applied for and received a $7,500 grant from the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts Education Department for their Kennedy Center Imagination Celebration (KCIC) program. Global Artways receives this grant on an annual basis. The KCIC at Salt Lake City is an arts education program that engages young people, teachers and families in exploring and celebrating the creative process. The KCIC brings world-class artists, performances and events into schools and communities, to create powerful experiences for all participants. Global Artways will use the funds to contract with KCIC to host Willy Wonka, a KCIC on tour production. This production will provide 2,200 elementary and middle school students with an education-based exposure to professional theater that is supplemented through a professional development workshop that offers arts-integrated instruction methods to approximately 35 classroom teachers. The grant requires 100% or $7,500 match which will be met within Global Artways'general fund budget for personnel expenses. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. A Resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept the grant and any additional grants or agreements that stem from the original grant. I I 1 Global Artways -The Kennedy Center for Performing Arts Grant Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#E-7 2006-07 Initiative Number Fiscal Year Grants Requiring No New Public Services Staff Resources Department r Type of Initiative Janet Wolf/Sherrie Collins 1 535-7712/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact Revenue Impact By'Fu'nd: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007-08 General Fund I � Total I $01 $0 Internal Service Fund � I Total $01 $0 Enterprise Fund � � I Total $01 $0 Other Fund 172- Fed Grant $ 7,500.00 Total $ 7,500.00I $0 Staffinci Impact: . 'New Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 0 I 0 Description I I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA#If Applicable: 84-351.e _Revenue: , Cost Center Number Object Code Number j Amount I ! I 72- New Cost Center 1360 $ 7,500.00 T- Expenditure. Cost Center Number Object Code Number j Amount -- 172- New Cost Center 2590 j $ 7,500.00 Additional Accounting Details: I I I ---- ------------- -- i I i ! Grant Information. —�— Grant funds employee positions? No Is there a potential for grant to continue? Possible I i Ilf grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant?1 NA Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes — — — I i Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? - ---- ----- 1 Yes — � — — 1Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? No Initiative Name: US Environmental Protection Agency - Sustainable Business Education Grant Initiative Number: BA#2 FY 2007 Initiative #E-8 Initiative Type: Grant Requiring No New Staff Resources Initiative Discussion: The Mayor's Office applied for and received $10,000 of grant funding from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for continuation of the Mayor's Environmentally and Economically Sustainable (e2) Business program. This purpose of this program is to educate local small business owners on best management practices that lead to pollution prevention and resource conservation. To do this, an educational campaign will be launched to contact and recruit business, facilitate outreach meetings and conduct on-site visits to businesses who are interested in participating. Of these funds, $451 will be used for mailings of meeting announcements and outreach brochures and $9,549 will be used for printing services and display advertisements in the Catalyst, ReDirect Guide and Salt Lake City Weekly. The grant requires a $3,600 in-kind match which will be met with the Environmental Advisor to the Mayor's staff time. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this grant. A Resolution was previously passed authorizing the Mayor to sign and accept the grant and any additional grants or agreements that stem from the original grant. I I US Environmental Protection Agency Sustainable Business Education Grant Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#E-8 2006-07 Initiative Number j Fiscal Year L Grants Requiring No Mayor's Office New Staff Resources Department Type of Initiative Abby Vianes/Sherrie Collins 799-7936/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact 1 Revenue Impact By Fund:• : 1st Year 2nd'Year FY 2006-07 .: FY 2007-08 General Fund Total $0 $0 Internal Service Fund Total $01 $01 Enterprise Fund Total $01 $0 Other Fund 72- Federal Grant $ 10,000.00 _ Total) $ 10,000.00 $0 Staffing Impact. - New Number of FTE's 0 0 ;Existing Number of FTE's 0 !Total ( 0 0 !Description Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: ' 66.951 —Revenue: Cost Center Number j Object Code Number I Amount 72- New Cost Center j 1360 - $ 10,000.00 Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number ; j Amount 72- New Cost Center 2590 $ 10,000.00 j II Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information:.' Grant funds employee positions? No 'Is there a potential for grant to continue? Possibly If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant?' Yes Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are1] eliminated? No _ Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? No j Initiative Name: Daniels Fund - Youth City After School & Employment Programs Initiative Number: BA#2FY 2007 Initiative #F-1 Initiative Type: Donation Initiative Discussion: The Daniels Fund awarded Salt Lake City a $50,000 grant for YouthCity After School & Employment Programs. The Daniels Fund is a private foundation which offers various grants to communities who provide services in the areas of education, youth development, aging, alcohol and substance abuse, amateur sports, disabilities and homeless/disadvantaged. Of the $50,000, $13,000 will pay for the salary and benefits of the PET assistant coordinator for the Central City YouthCity,site, $5,000 will be used for the cost of living allowances paid to youth participants of the YouthCity Employment program and $32,000 will be used for the PET teacher positions for all YouthCity sites. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this donation. Daniels Fund -Youth City After School & Employment Programs Initiative Name P BA#2 FY2007 Initiative#F-1 _ 2006-07 ....:...._. Initiative Number Fiscal Year Public Services Donations JDepartment Type of Initiative Janet Wolf/Sherrie Collins 535-77121535-6150 Prepared By j Telephone Contact Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006-07 FY 2007 D8 General Fund I - Total $01 I $0 !Internal Service Fund Total I $01 I $0 Enterprise Fund Total $0! I $0 jOther Fund 77-00875 $ 50,000.00 Total $ 50,000.00 I $0 _ Staffing Impact: New Number of FTE's 0 0 _ Existing Number of FTE's 0 Total 0 ( 0 Description I Accounting Detail Grant#and CFDA# If Applicable: NA Revenue:_ • • Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 77-00875 1895 50,000.00 Expenditure.. Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 77-00875 2590 50,000.00 Additional Accounting Details Grant Information: ' 'Grant funds employee positions? Yes Is there a potential for grant to continue? Possible If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? Yes II Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? 1 Yes I I Does grant duplicate services provided by private or Non-profit sector? I I No Initiative Name: Imagination Celebration - Art Works for Kids Initiative Number: BA#2 FY2007 Initiative #F-2 Initiative Type: Donation Initiative Discussion: Global Artways through the Salt Lake City Foundation applied for and received a $30,000 donation from the Art Works for Kids foundation. The donation received will be used to cover costs associated with three Global Artways events. Those events include The Kennedy Center Imagination Celebration on tour production of Willy Wonka, the Children's Opera Showcase, and the Imagination Celebration Art Workshops. It is recommended that the City Council adopt the necessary budget to facilitate this donation. i L — — Imagination Celebration Art Works For Kids Initiative Name BA#2 FY2007 initiative#F-2 2006-07 r Initiative Number I Fiscal Year Public Services Department Donation Department I I j Type of Initiative r Janet Wolf/Sherrie Collins 1 535-7712/535-6150 Prepared By Telephone Contact —'General Fund ( Fund Balance) Impact j Revenue Impact By Fund: 1st Year 2nd Year FY 2006 07,: FY 2007 08 General Fund Total; $01 $0 (Internal Service Fund I J Total $0 $0 Enterprise Fund Total $0! $0 Other Fund 77-77130 ! $ 30,000.00 . 77-77123 _ i $ 30,000.00 Total $ 60,000.00 $0 .Staffing lengact - INew Number of FTE's 0 0 Existing Number of FTE's j 0 0 _-- Total 01 0 Description Request FY07 Imagination Celebration Trust10/30/200611:27 AM • Accounting Detail Grant#and,CFDA# If Applicable: NA Revenue: Cost Center Number Object Code Number Amount 177-77130 1895 $ 30,000.00 77-77123 1895 $ 30,000.00 - - Expenditure: Cost Center Number Object Code Number j Amount 77-77130 2299 j $ 5,000.00 77-77130 2329 $ 25,000.00 177-77123 2590 $ 30,000.00 j $ 60,000.00 T Additional Accounting Details: Grant Information: ,Grant funds employee positions? No Is there a potential for grant to continue? j Possible If grant is funding a position is it expected the position will be eliminated at the end of the grant? No 1Will grant program be complete in grant funding time frame? Yes Will grant impact the community once the grant funds are eliminated? No Does grant duplicate services provided by private or 'Non-profit sector? No Request FY07 Imagination Celebration Trust10/30/200611:27 AM MEMORANDUM TO: SAM GUEVARA, CHIEF OF STAFF FROM: STEVE FAWCETT, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES DATE: 11/6/2006 RE: SEPTEMBER REVENUE FORECAST In compliance with Council Resolution#59, of 2003, I'm providing an FY2007 revenue update. This update is in conjunction with Budget Amendment#2. The Finance Division of the Department of Management Services analyzes revenue each month and provides written updates each month beginning with the September analysis. The September projection indicates that overall revenue should end the year approximately $650,000 better than budget. Categorically, the explanations are as follow: Year end projections for property tax shows slightly better than budget because Real Prior Property Taxes shows a positive trend. Actual revenue from sales and use tax is approximately 16% higher than the last three years average. The projection shows an increase in Municipal Energy Tax (MET) and Sales Tax. Additionally, MET revenue from non Questar sources is already at half of the total yearly budget at this time. Year end projections for franchise taxes show less than budget. This is related to revenue received by charging for conduit based on one dollar per linear foot. The City is in a dispute with several telecom companies about their presence in Salt Lake City. Year end projections indicate that permits and licenses are coming in on budget. This will actually grow as soon as the LDS Church starts taking permits out for the City Creek Center project. After the budget was adopted it was discovered the City's practice of allocating interest to non General Fund funds was incorrect and therefore was changed. This change will impact the year end forecast of Interest Income. Year end projections for fines and forfeitures indicate that this source of revenue will be slightly better than budget. Year end projections for parking meter revenue indicates that this source will come in slightly less than budget primarily due to over estimated increase that were expected from the hourly rate increase adopted last fiscal year. Year end projections for charges for services indicate that this source of revenue will be slightly less than budgeted. FY06/07 FY 06/07 FY 06/07 Variance Annual Revised Favorable Revenue Budget Forecast (Unfavorable) Total General Fund 183,340,557 184,470,622 656,689 Selected Discussion Items Total Property Taxes 63,775,206 63,865,914 90,708 Discussion: Year end projections for property tax shows slightly better than budget because Real Prior Property Taxes shows a positive trend. Total Sales and Use Tax 46,437,500 47,746,654 1,309,154 Discussion: Actual revenue from sales and use tax is approximately 16%higher than the last three years average. The projection shows increase an in Municipal Energy Tax(MET) and Sales Tax. Additionally, MET revenue from non Questar sources is already at half of the total yearly budget at this time. Total Franchise Tax 23,446,972 23,374,435 (72,537) Discussion: Year end projections for franchise taxes show less than budget. This is related to revenue received by charging for conduit based on one dollar per linear foot. The City is in a dispute with several telecom companies about their presence in Salt Lake City. License and Permits: 13,997,613 14,010,539 (274) Discussion: Year end projections indicate that permits and licenses are coming in on budget. This will actually grow as soon as the LDS Church starts taking permits out for the City Creek Center project. Interest income 4,393,000 3,934,091 (758,909) Discussion: After the budget was adopted it was discovered the City's practice of allocating interest to non General Fund funds was incorrect and therefore was changed. This change will impact the year end forecast of Interest Income. Total Fines&Forfeiture 8,962,400 9,005,298 43,298 Discussion: Year end projections for fines and forfeitures indicate that this source of revenue will be slightly better than budget. Parking Meters 1,486,600 1,448,053 (38,547) Discussion: Year end projections for parking meter revenue indicates that this source will come in slightly less than budget primarily due to over estimated increase that were expected from the hourly rate increase adopted last fiscal year. Charges and Services 2,966,735 2,959,645 (1,132) Discussion: Year end projections for charges for services indicate that this source of revenue will be slightly less than budget. Communication to the City Council %Al I I AKI (-STY Department of Community Development Office of the Director To: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administr i icer qt From: Louis Zunguze, Community Development Dire P Date: November 15, 2006 CC: Cheri Coffey, Deputy Planning Director Doug Wheelwright, Deputy Planning Director Joel Paterson, Planning Program Supervisor Chris Shoop, Research & Projects Analyst Re: Potential Expansion of East Central Historic Districts This memorandum includes a general cost estimate and suggested approach to the four issues raised relating to expanding or creating new local historic districts in the northern portion of the East Central Community (see attached map). The area includes the existing local University Historic District, as well as the Bryant and Bennion-Douglas (Salt Lake City East Side) National Historic Districts. The cost estimate is outlined below. A. Updating University, Bryant, and Bennion-Douglas historic reconnaissance and intensive level surveys In general, the cost estimate for reconnaissance level surveys is $10.00 per structure and $400.00 per structure for intensive level surveys (without preparing floor plans). The University Historic District This District was adopted as a local district in 1991. The intensive survey work for this area which was completed in 1980 was inadequate based on today's standards. According to the University National Register Nomination form, there are 586 structures in the area. Because of this deficiency, the area requires both levels of surveys (reconnaissance and intensive). The reconnaissance level survey would cost approximately $5,860 (586 x $10). Potentially there are approximately 515 contributing structures. Therefore, the intensive level survey would cost approximately $206,000 (515 x $400). Planning Staff recommends that both a • Page 1 of 3 reconnaissance level and intensive level survey be conducted for this area at the cost of$211,860. Design guidelines were completed for the University Historic District as part of the adopted Design Guidelines for Residential Historic Districts in Salt Lake City. The Bryant National Historic District In order to establish a local historic district for the Bryant area, an intensive level survey will need to be conducted. A reconnaissance level survey was completed in 1995. Staff does not consider an update of this survey necessary at this time. According to the National Register Nomination form, of the 653 structures in the District approximately 463 are contributing. Therefore, an intensive level survey for this area would cost approximately $185,200 (653 x $400). The Bennion-Douglas National Historic District In order to establish a local historic district for the Bennion-Douglas area, an intensive level survey will need to be conducted. A reconnaissance level survey was completed in 2000. Staff does not consider an update of this survey necessary at this time. There are approximately 1,074 contributing structures in this area. Therefore, an intensive level survey would cost approximately $429,600 (1,074 x $400). B. Updating existing design guidelines for the individual new local historic districts The cost to develop design guidelines for each new local district is approximately $20,000. Therefore, the cost for developing guidelines for the Bryant and Bennion- Douglas neighborhoods would be $40,000. C. Updating survey information for the area from South Temple to 400 South, from 700 East to 1000 East, and from 400 South to 500 South between 1000 and 1100 East These boundaries are within the Bryant Historic District. Updating the surveys for this area is discussed above (see item A). D. Extending existing local historic district boundaries or creating new local historic districts to include: 1. 5 blocks between South Temple and 500 South and from 1100 East to 1000 East (including both sides of 1000 East), 2. Both sides of 100 South, 200 South, and 300 South west to the west side of 900 East, and • Page 2 of 3 3. 500 South and both sides of 600 South from University Street to the west side of 900 East. The proposed Bryant District would contain the properties within the boundaries outlined in items D1 and D2; the Bennion-Douglas District would incorporate properties within the boundaries outlined in items D3. A review of the maps submitted indicates there are approximately 663 structures in these areas, with 375 structures in the boundaries outlined in items D1 and D2 and 288 structures in the boundaries outlined in item D3. For these areas, we would only need to undertake the intensive level survey at a cost of$265,200 (663 x $400). Overall, there are approximately 4,300 locally designated structures in the City's historic districts and landmark sites. An addition of 663 locally designated structures would constitute an increase of approximately 15% in structures that would be regulated by the historic preservation ordinance of Salt Lake City. When considering the potential expansion of the historic districts discussed above, it is important to note that Council should give corresponding consideration to the need for staff resources to oversee the additional activities resulting from the approval of these expansion. •Page 3 of 3 1-1 TT 1 I � it I � I I • . . . , , A VIIE_IN_U_ELSi •� .... s ue . S=O=U-T:'H T-E-M-PLL-E II I ' L . 5 ee Lt I` BLNO AVE I , :U AVENO E"y "t"" al J s il z B [RYA##NT ,71, CA ! 4. A 3os �1 ( Central Cit•y� W I _.. _ , 1._ ` � III il ♦' E x t-e n 'iro n/) co id OM* ,INDEN AV U r r = I I I I "" O I o r� �o a S , � a 1 ...r t L._0 wEno Ce ^'� ¶VTHORNEEI o 4 $ rr • ai —6 I Z cJ r_?_\ r r r r-- ' W ,.a U B-E=N N I O N A-I .3 1 , ' L " \ \J I i . ®® 7116 Su"- ;.:. w D_O-U G L A-SI W E�L ( Ceinit_r_a=1 -City co w ' I r L__ Eil g_ ,'Extension ) 1 � 0 8 1.... _r). _ i _______,N, co z U c S NNYSIDE PNE a _ CHASE AVE c 0 ad. in w o 11 GPI L M ER r1r1 �r i BE1, rNT Ar r,r---1 r_ P'`�1 R'K Proposed Expansion of a Local Historic District Historic Districts on City and National Registers Historic Districts on the National Register Only ® Expansion Area SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: November 14, 2006 SUBJECT: Honorary Street Name Change Policy Modifications and Petition No. 400-06-33 - A request by Michael Clara, Junior Cruz, and Boy Scout Troop 987 for a name change, on an honorary basis, for 300 South Street between Redwood Road and Interstate-15,to"Adam Galvez Street" STAFF REPORT BY: Jennifer Bruno, Policy Analyst AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: City-wide, and District 2 ADMINISTRATIVE DEPT: Community Development AND CONTACT PERSON: Marilynn Lewis, Principal Planner KEY ELEMENTS: A. There are two issues for Council consideration: 1. Petition 400-06-33-A request by Michael Clara,Junior Cruz,and Boy Scout Troop 987 for an honorary name change for 300 South Street between Redwood Road and Interstate-15,to"Adam Galvez Street" 2. Honorary Street Name Change Policy Modifications B. Council Action Options: 1. The Council may choose to deal with one or both issues,or may choose to defer a decision regarding Petition 400-06-33 until a formal policy for honorary street name changes has been discussed and adopted. 2. The Council may wish to move this petition and the petition regarding Japantown (see item E below)forward,since application information is complete,but ask that no further applications be accepted until a formal policy can be discussed and adopted. 3. The Council may wish to hold all petitions,and not accept any new petitions,until a formal policy can be discussed and adopted. C. Regarding petition 400-06-33,honorary naming of"Adam Galvez Street": 1. An ordinance has been submitted for Council consideration that would change the name of 300 South Street From Interstate-15 to Redwood Road,on an honorary basis, to"Adam Galvez Street." 2. This petition was submitted on October 2,2006 by Michael Clara,Junior Cruz,and Boy Scout Troop 987,with the intention of honoring fallen Marine Corporal Adam Galvez, a member of the Poplar Grove community. Corporal Galvez was killed in the Iraqi conflict earlier this year. 3. Over the years there have been a number of national figures have been recognized in Salt Lake City with honorary street namings: Martin Luther King,Jr. (600 South), Cesar Chavez (500 South), Rosa Parks (200 East),Karl Malone (100 South between 300 and 400 West). 4. The Administration's transmittal notes the following: a) Prior to submission of the Honorary Street Name Change application, the applicants solicited signatures from property owners on either side of the 1 section of 300 South Street. A total of 78 signatures were presented in the application. In the original application letter, the applicant states that though the application form does not explicitly say so, the Planning '"""S Division informed the applicant that signatures of residents along the subject section of 300 South must be presented with the application. For Council reference, see attached to this staff report, the Salt Lake City application for an Honorary Street Name Change,as well as the former official policy of Salt Lake City for Street Name Changes, since recinded (attached). b) On September 27,2006, the applicant made a presentation to the Poplar Grove Community Council. The Community Council voted unanimously to support the petition. The Chair of the Community Council prepared a letter of support(attached in the Administration's Transmittal) and it was included in the application. c) On October 23, 2006 Planning Staff held an open house. 5 people attended and no negative comments were received. d) Requests for comment were submitted to Engineering, Permits, Transportation, Public Utilities, Police,Zoning Enforcement, Public Services, and Fire, and no negative comments were received. e) Planning Commission action is not required. f) Honorary Street Name Changes have no effect on certified mailing addresses or business listings. g) The Administration's Recommendation-The Administration's transmittal notes that after discussing the apparent confusion regarding policies and procedures with the Mayor,the recommendation to the Council is to hold all considerations for Honorary Street Name Changes, including the current application,until a formal policy can be discussed and adopted. h) The West Salt Lake Master Plan (1995) does not specifically address the issue of honorary name changes. i) The vision statement of the Final Report of the Salt Lake City Futures Commission states that Salt Lake City"Embraces pluralism and encourages diversity in population,urban design, and cultural expression." D. Regarding Honorary Street Name Change Policy Modifications: 1. Attached is a memo from the Director of Community Development requesting that the City Council place a hold on all applications for Honorary Street Name Changes until the Planning Staff has had time to develop and discuss procedural changes and guidelines with the Council. 2. The Administration indicates that they anticipate completing recommendations for policy modifications for Council review and adoption by January 15, 2007. 3. The Council may wish to identify key policies that they would like included and/or clarified in the Administration's recommendations regarding Honorary Street Name Changes, such as: a) Notification process of affected parties and how their input will be considered; b) Guidelines on who may apply for an honorary street name change; c) Guidelines on who or what may be honored (if name changes should be limited to historical figures or events,and/or school mascots), and criteria used to determine the appropriateness of the request; 2 d) The current fee charged ($250)compared to the cost of staff resources needed to process these requests (initiate a study similar to business licensing to see if fees are covering costs). 4. The Council may want to use the process for the current petition (described above), as a starting point for discussion. 5. The Administration's memo indicates: a) Currently the materials required by the application are"inconsistent," b) Criteria are unclear for what categories of names are appropriate to be honored, c) Criteria are unclear as to how the applicant should demonstrate the support for the name change. E. There are currently three petitions for honorary street name changes that are in various stages of the City process: 1. Adam Galvez (currently the transmittal is in the Council Office- the Administration's recommendation in the transmittal is to hold action on this petition until a more concrete policy can be developed and adopted). 2. Japantown Street-honorary street name for 100 South between 200 West and West Temple. This petition has been submitted but has not been assigned to a planner for processing(see item F below). 3. Mt. Ararat-petition filed by a City resident for an honorary street name for 800 East between I-80 and 3300 South (much of this is outside of the City limits). Contact information on the application is incomplete,and further information is needed. This petition has also not been assigned to a planner for processing(see item F below). F. The Community Development Department would appreciate Council direction as to whether Planning should cease accepting Honorary Street Name Change applications until a formal policy can be adopted,or if they should continue accepting applications with the intention that they will not be processed until a formal policy can be adopted. OTHER CITY HONORARY STREET NAMING RESEARCH A. Council Staff did preliminary research on the Honorary Street Naming Ordinance currently in place in Chicago,which is known for its prevalence of honorary streets. Standards are minimal and general,and the Council(consisting of 50 Alderman)bases decisions largely on the recommendation of the Alderman representing the particular district where the honorary name is proposed. Since the ordinance's inception in 1984,Chicago now has approximately 1,300 honorary street names,honoring figures both alive and dead, as well as sports teams,significant City places,and radio stations. 1. In March 2006,a controversial honorary name was proposed for a former black panther leader. As a result,the Chair of the Transportation Committee (the Council Sub-Committee that recommends passage or denial to the full Council),proposed amendments to the ordinance including: a. requiring a full biography of the person proposed to be honored, b. a list of the organizations recommending passage, c. a summary of the relationship of the person to be honored with the street to be named, d. possibly limiting the number of honorary street names to two per district per year. 2. None of these proposed amendments were passed and the Transportation Committee is still studying the issue. 3. The Council is still considering and adopting honorary street names. 3 B. In June of 2005,The City of Milwaukee adopted standards mirroring Chicago's regarding honorary street name changes.1 1. Requirements include:, a) Application fee b) A written proposal of the street to be named c) A biography of the person or meaning of the proposed name d) A description of the rationale for naming the particular street e) Letters from supporting organizations f) The clerk shall then provide written notice to property owners along the street,of the public hearing (held by a sub-committee of the Council in this case),where the proposal will be discussed. g) The clerk will also provide a postcard survey to owners. If more than 50% do not want the honorary name, the proposal is automatically dropped. 2. The criteria that the Milwaukee Common Council must use to evaluate a proposal for an honorary street name include the following: a) The proposed name cannot duplicate any other official street name b) The proposed name cannot override a previous honorary designation c) When a street name has been given an honorary designation,no other proposals shall be considered for a period of 10 years d) Names that could be considered derogatory to a person,organization, religious,ethnic,or disabled persons,or names that could be considered obscene or blasphemous shall not be considered e) Names of individuals will only be considered if it is determined that it is in the public interest to honor the individual for historical or commemorative reasons,and that the individual portrays a positive image and is or was associated with or made a significant contribution to the public f) Names of individuals who have made significant contributions to the Milwaukee community shall be preferred over names of national figures g) The name of an individual may only be considered if the individual is deceased or has attained the age of 70 years 3. In the event that an honorary street name request is not approved, the applicant may not reapply for the same honorary street name for a period of one year,nor may the applicant apply for the use of a different honorary name for the same street segment. 4. In September of 2006, the Council voted to approve an honorary street name change for a man who was killed trying to stop a burglary at a neighbors home. Members of the Council voiced concerns that grieving relatives would result in a large number of requests for honorary namings.2 5. On September 26,2006 the Council voted to place a moratorium on the "...consideration of all street renaming or honorary street naming requests involving the names of crime victims until such time as the City has developed and adopted a policy on the use of crime victim names in official street renamings or honorary street namings."3 6. No formal policy has been presented to the Council as of yet. Milwaukee Code of Ordinances, section 113-3 2 Larry Sandler,"Street Name Will Honor Victim,Name Change Could Be the Last,"Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, lY September 7,2006. 3 City of Milwaukee Common Council, September 26, 2006, Legislative File Number 060656 4 OFFICE USE ONLY Petition No. Honorary Street Receipt No. Amount: Date Received: Name Change Reviewed By: r+.\I.'I 1 ^sI' c.11 1" Project Planner: Date: Name of Applicant: Phone: cio Address of Applicant: 4 E-mail Address of Applicant: Cell/Fax: Location of the subject street: 4 Please include with the application: Z 1. A letter to the Director of Community & Economic Development explaining which street you wish to have renamed, also describing the end points of the segment being proposed for an honorary street name change. e letter must also explain why you�j de- sire The the name change; i.e. the significance of the honorary name and its relation to or *14 compatibility with the street, adjacent streets or location, and/or historical character or theme of the community. ■ 2. The names and addresses of all abutting property owners along the segment of the street being renamed. 1111 3. A property ownership map (known as a Sidwell map) showing the location of the street E.* and highlighting the street where the honorary name change is proposed. 4. A letter of support from the Community Council(s) for the area(s) where the honorary name change is proposed. Cu) 5. Non-refundable filing fee of$250.00 due at time of application. WPlease Note: The applicant will be responsible for reimbursing the City for the actual cost of implementing the changes, including any costs of updating official documents which exceed the petition fee of $250 and purchase and installation of all applicable street signs. The applicant will be responsible for reimbursing the City for the replacement of missing or damaged street signs. ) 14 If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this petition, please contact a member of the Salt Lake City Planning staff(535-7757) prior to submitting the application. Elimilli County tax parcel("Sidwell") maps and names of File the complete application at: property owners are available at: Salt Lake County Recorder Salt Lake City Planning 2001 South State Street, Room N1600 451 South State Street, Room 406 Salt Lake City, UT 84190-1051 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Telephone: (801) 468-3391 Telephone: (801)535-7757 Dec 2005 Signature of Applicant Or authorized agent RECD MAR 2 9 1990 SALT LAKE CITY POLICY MANUAL Effective Date Number EXECUTIVE ORDER March 15, 1990 _ 6.03.500 Subject STREET NAME CHANGES Reference Rescinds Amends Distribution Re-evaluation Date ALL DEPARTMENTS March 15, 1992 Authority: PALME A. DEPAULIS, YO No.Pages Signature /ptit )(• f G 3 I . POLICY It is the policy of Salt Lake City Corporation to name and number the streets of Salt Lake City in a way that eliminates duplication and other confusion which would impact the provision of emergency services. It is further the policy of Salt Lake City Corporation to evaluate re- quests for street name changes systematically and objec- tively. II. PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVE The purpose of this Executive Order is to establish the guidelines and procedure by which requests for street name changes will be evaluated. The objective of this Order is to provide clear and concise direction to all those involved in the naming of City streets. III. DEFINITIONS 1. Street - Any street within the corporate boundaries of Salt Lake City. 2. Preference Request - Any request for a street name change requested as a matter of preference rather than those which are essential for eliminating dupli- cation and other confusion which would impact the provision of emergency services. 3. Street Name Change - Any redesignation of a street, including official and honorary changes. EXECUTIVE ORDER - STREET NAME CHANGES 6.03.500 PAGE 2 IV. PETITION INFORMATION A. Street name changes requested to clarify location to more efficiently provide services will be processed according to Executive Order Number 6.03.200. Non- preference requests must be submitted to the Office of the Director of Community and Economic Develop- ment. B. Street name changes requested as a matter of preference must be submitted to the Office of the Director of Community and Economic Development. A valid petition for a preference request street name change will include: 1. An explanation of how the requested street name will be compatible with adjacent streets and location, historical character or theme. 2. Written proof of notification of the utility companies, the Utah Department of Transporta- tion, the Salt Lake County Address Coordinator, and the U.S. Post Office of the petition. 3. A non-refundable application fee for processing the preference request of $250 payable upon submission of the request. V. CRITERIA Review of any preference request will include but not be limited to the following criteria: 1. Signatures of at least 75 percent of the abutting property owners and, when the property is not owner occupied, occupants. 2. The cost of the impact on public/private utilities, business and property owners for revisions to comput- er databases, billing systems, legal documents, stationery, and other elements of business opera- tions. 3. Simplicity for the E-911 emergency system. 4. Compatibility with adjacent streets: location and historical character or theme. 5. Ease of locating the street for people new to or unfamiliar with the area. EXECUTIVE ORDER - STREET NAME CHANGES 6.03.500 PAGE 3 VI. PROCESS AND RESPONSIBILITIES Responsibility Action Applicant Submit a complete petition (See Section IV, above) . Community & Economic 1. Accept application and fee. Development 2. Distribute application to the following departments: a. Building & Housing b. Engineering c. Fire d. Planning & Zoning e. Transportation f. Public Utilities Departments Review application based upon the criteria identified in Section V, above. Return recommendation to Department of Community & Economic Development within five working days. Community & Economic 1. Review recommendations. Development 2. Forward petition information and staff recommendation through the Mayor's Office, to the City Council in conformance with Executive Order Number 2.01.200. City Council 1. Schedule public hearing concerning petition. VII. ADDITIONAL COSTS Upon approval of any preference request for an honorary or official name change, the petitioner will be responsible for reimbursing the City for the actual cost of implement- ing the changes including any costs of updating official documents which exceed the petition fee of $250 and purchase and installation of all applicable street signs. In cases when the new street name signs are a target for rivalries or mementos, for example high school"mascot designations, the petitioner will be responsible for reimbursing the City for the replacement of missing or damaged street signs. ARa��., THY(��," V/ )� 11,0`��r NOVS0 7 2006 ANDERSON 4. LOUIS ZUNGUZE ..,., v r 1�11 DIRECTOR DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MAYOR BRENT B. WILDE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR TRANSMITTED DEPUTY DIRECTOR NOV 0 7 2006 CITY COUNCIL T' • NS ITTAL TO CITY COUNCIL i TO: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Offi'er D• • November 2, 2006 • FROM: Louis Zunguze, Community Development IP RE: Petition 400-06-33: Honorary Street Name Change by Michael Clara, Junior Cruz, and Boy Scout Troop 987 for 300 South Street between Redwood Road and Interstate 15 to be given an honorary name of"Adam Galvez Street" STAFF CONTACTS: Marilynn Lewis, Principal Planner, at 535-6409 or marilynn.lewis@slcgov.com RECOMMENDATION: That no action be taken until policy and procedures pertaining to honorary street name changes are approved by the Salt Lake City Council DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution BUDGET IMPACT: None. The cost of installing the new street signs and replacement of these signs will be at the expense of Michael Clara,Junior Cruz, and Boy Scout Troop 987. DISCUSSION: Issue Origin:Michael Clara, Junior Cruz, and Boy Scout Troop 987 submitted an application to Salt Lake City to honor a member of the Poplar Grove community, fallen Marine Corporal Adam Galvez by adding the honorary name of"Adam Galvez Street"to 300 South Street(between Redwood Road and Interstate 15). Corporal Galvez was killed in the Iraqi conflict earlier this year. Background: Over the years the Salt Lake City Council has approved various honorary street name changes. In recent years, national figures have been recognized: Martin Luther King, Jr. (600 South Street), Cesar Chavez(500 South Street), and Rosa Parks (200 East Street). These individuals were honored for their selflessness and leadership in civil rights issues. The Poplar Grove community wishes to honor one of the City's residents for his selflessness, leadership, and contribution to his country. Analysis: The honorary street name change proposal was sent out to the pertinent City Divisions and Departments for comment. Those Departments included Engineering, Permits, Transportation, Public Utilities, Police, Zoning Enforcement, Public Services, and Fire(see 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7105 FAX: B01-535.6005 WWW.SLCGOV.COM Attachment 5: Department Comments). No negative comments were received. Master Plan Consideration: The West Salt Lake Master Plan does not specifically address the issue of honorary street name changes. The vision statement of the Final Report of the Salt Lake City Futures Commission states that Salt Lake City"Embraces pluralism and encourages diversity in population, urban design, and cultural expression." PUBLIC PROCESS Prior to submission of the Honorary Street Name Change application,the applicants solicited signatures from property owners on either side of the subject section of the 300 South Street corridor. Junior Cruz, one of the applicants, made a presentation to the Poplar Grove Community Council on September 27, 2006. After the presentation and discussion, a motion of support received unanimous support from those attending. The Poplar Grove Community Council Chair prepared a letter of support for the applicant, which was submitted with the original application (see Attachment 8: Original Application Packet). On October 23, 2006, Staff held an Open House in the City County Building to obtain comments from the community and adjacent property owners. A total of 5 people attended the Open House. Staff did not receive any objections to the petition (see Attachment 7: Public Comments). Please note that as part of the transmittal process, a meeting was held between Planning Staff and the Mayor, after which the Mayor indicated that given the apparent confusion regarding policy and procedures governing the Honorary Street Name Change process, the Administration should recommend that the Council put a hold on all considerations for Honorary Street Name Change applications, including the current application to honor Adam Galvez. Planning Commission action is not required. Honorary street name changes have no effect on certified mailing addresses, business listings in any telephone directory, or on private business signs. RELEVANT ORDINANCE: Section 6.03.50 Salt Lake City Planning Division Policies and Procedures: Street Name Change Sections 10-8-32 of the Utah Code Titlel0, Chapter 8: Powers and Duties of All Cities Petition 400-06-33: Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change Page 2 of 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. CHRONOLOGY 2. PROPSED RESOLUTION 3. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 4. MAILING LABELS 5. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS 6. OPEN HOUSE NOTICE Original Notice and Postmark October 13, 2006 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS Open House October 23, 2006 8. ORIGINAL APPLICATION PACKET Petition 400-06-33 1. CHRONOLOGY 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change PROJECT CHRONOLOGY 10/09/06 The petition information was given to me by the Supervisor. I contacted the Poplar Grove Community Council Chair and Mr. Clara to let them know that I had the project, as well as provided information on the process and rough time frames. 10/10/06 Memo was sent to City departments and divisions to gather comments. Comments were due back to me by October 23, 2006. 10/11/06 Request sent to City Attorney for a draft resolution. Due date was October 23, 2006. 10/12/06 Draft resolution was received from City Attorney's office. 10/13/06 Open house notices were sent. 10/16/06 Notice was received by staff with verified postmark. 10/23/06 Open house was held on October 23, 2006. Staff collected comments from the community. 10/26/06 Transmittal packet was forwarded to Community Development on October 26, 2006. 2. RESOLUTION 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change RESOLUTION NO. OF 2006 (Changing the Name of 300 South, between Redwood Road and I-15, on an honorary basis to "Adam Galvez Street," Pursuant to Petition No. 400-06-33.) WHEREAS, Salt Lake City has received Petition No. 400-06-33 relating to the change of name of 300 South, on an honorary basis, between Redwood Road and I-15; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is good cause to change the name of said street on an honorary basis, without changing the official name or designation of said street. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. That the name of 300 South between Redwood Road and I-15 shall be and hereby is changed on an honorary basis to "Adam Galvez Street." 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2006. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER g ?ROVED AS TO FORM I�/ ty Att.r eys Office I:\RESOLUTCResolution Changing Street Name to Adam Galvez Street.doe r''� �,' / BY 1 • . :1111 l ' • . , _ . • . . , , . _ -,.• - , REDWOOD RD --- - . _ . _ NI 0 0 ... .,. .,'; .. . . 0-3 1-‘ .„...,,,, 1-q ..,2,. . , :.-, ,,,,,z, ; I—(.,4- „ _ L ' '''''.. :--1'' .c:.,.... , .... p .,.. . ,, ,, ...,__, . ._.., ,,, . ,..., .3, ,.... ,............._. .. - , , 4, . .. 4 ...,z1119, ..,. •i• ''i' CP f '• I '',:'A,;;.1- •- -- '' C -YENNE ST :, ----- -- - ' ..- . '1- 7.:A1',. --, ...1. ,--.- i ,0, 4. I,,,61,. ''‘-... y e - ...,' • °-- 4 ',. : '141'.:-... ••4t4..--- i — '4 • (-- - • ..k. -It' -, •-• 1 -.1 . • i,t7.. :7• gags,'--IP' - ' . ' '-', o,,6 4 I,.._.....',ip A i : r. ,‘'',.,..•j. t. i 7,.. 1 ' L E tit u-•pi 40a ,. - 1,-_,,-1'sktl,.' ‘, • • " --,:.P-• ino .., •010: ' ‘ 0 >• 4 .;'t ' -•; .„ .it-i-•71`'Sf, Y-1ffs..t :-11 - 1 , _. ' ' '' , •,•'' ' - 00,- : ' '- •-i,-- ' !;''. A ;,,e, ;,.,.. 1 ,.. 0, .. 14-tA-- - . 'It. sv. - Or • i, , "1".. ..,, ...,_ 0 ,,15,0 .1pi • t'0 1,- il- ..--4-IA," 'l'''' —'i'' or 1 -I. 4 ' '''';','.••:" 1 e ". ' ,.'_',!,. :. :., , •• '...tj',. 1 - IZ 4 • ••a. 1 —_ - _ _ ,- , t 4-;:1,"•,,•• '',:•iii • - "-'' :L: ." k-7`' ::•-• , 1 _,., . . ' `."''4` , '7;1'i 1'.':ii' „. ' . • ' 't• 1 . 1 j- ''' ....i-l'-.r 1 l•C",- , .`, :-..- . -.4'.• -4 .rj,:irliiiiii,V1.,: {7 : 4TO ,1!,: ..11. . -•74,4, 41• •••' , 7_ori 1"%e•-• 7 • 0".. •-k, -1 .. -••••_ . r-• ---, g.k..' ;..-A, -a--I-- ...* i • jv - :'••• -'- I . Ixr-, _,.1' . ,,,, 4. • 5,. . .,-. „, _ ,.• 1 p, -I,4. ..-,.... ! .._.4, . •-,. -f•-. •it. •.,,,,, * - I. ., .. • '-`.7:7- ,7 r 'i "--- - :- I-' "'' ":I , ir • -•,14',;' t':!-,..2 .,_ i••"111..1',`•,, -, . ,-•• , - ,• •: 1 • ..""„sl, '). ,, ''' l,,,_ 7, ' 7 , -,7- 7..7, , ,,1.', • : 7-.77-••'• '!„,,t.lek.— ,•'' •' „,f. 1' ' . '' '. ' • ^•. - '1; ' ' ,Li t' -,..r^1-7---, •-..,- -'‘'`''.'- 7 ....,:..: - li. f ; ' .:4':.!. ' 4- ii, ,V‘ - 1111•." .:- i ( o) cyl 4:. _ . . • K..,-,d , ,.... ,,, C3 0 0 0 7 0':' , i-`,.i 1-• till „. 4 I. . . ,1 :: ,.-.'1,-....,-.. A, p..:4 ; 1„0„ 1 ; il,•,,-. N ' Cl) ... ; ' *. ' ' ,, ..----`,:t- ci) Cl') m , .. 7 tt-i-:t,, c , ..,,,,. .- ... .- , '; i. , -1.1.. 1,... ... ,:- ...' i • :. ...', i i ' ler I •-i-,-,. -., .. '4 A ,• -, •,L . ::; ', •,• - . , • -:-. ,., -r-, . • ,, _ . . :..- -'••. --•''' i ''. , _ r .,. ,...- -,., , . .• . ,_.. m 4,, i. :..,.....,,.. . ..T. -- ,. ..-, .-, --•,-.1 --; ,, , ,,. ,.., t. .2• , - ''', ,,,r• it+ify .•',..;"ss' : I ,i.7.. ':1.:''''•.' - ".,-' 6"`: — " ' - I... ' ., • 0 •• ' . 1- .,-,,.4., , ,.41- .•, , ,'. , • : :, 1 . , , "-,'.1,.., .7." r:1", '' la'!••••-•-, ,,' '-' . , ll 11 , __ " '' rn . P ,,` 1 " . _ .-:... e . , ,,•,- ' II ‘lia 6 ' r 'V-1 ugn ., , .: 03 .. , • .-ir 0k-1 '''. ez '•4_ 4 --2 , -- 1. f' ,, U) •, -•J . _ _;. - ' i 'IR .-.,. s.:_,,,..' 1 ,•k, ,. 1,, , .13 II,.li j .,', 2,, c':-. 'i' 4 -:-$:''''' : L. ‘• P 9`ur)1'1'7 4--1, -40n- - ' ,-,. .7:- :4, -"1- fin.., 4. 1, "1111 •A , !.,„. •,-=----- 1.= 4. -. -,• .0.--_ 1-,-1--,- -,-. '-_-t‘''' '' '0 1 - , - •t" .,,, g ,`,. --:•.,, -...4 '''' I I' - • . . -t"••-." - n, k I-- til i. ,-:. . '11, •'' , ,, ti; , 4, ._ , , I,.,,,. , .,,,;!.. ,? . 1 . .„1„. , . 7. f , '7)•'"7,,:..i. ,,, .' iii 4' 'W 4 " ' I ' 4.- - 40 1 • • ' ' -,.-y,c...- -,.' '".`-....',1-1•4 ."..• ,`._',."'•-• *- ,,,`, , 1000 1 ''.1q.-+:42:, :- _- :: ,, ' - - • , .-.:...-41 Z 1000 W 44'- '1'•,.;;;,'21-:' ' ._.. , ,... 4 . .... ‘,...,,,. .. - __... ,,,,.; -,_ .,. 4 '-•f.-:: , i i — - . • , , - -, r..,' •1, ' -, . •. 1 . .•_,.•. )-A, .,..,- 11i-J «0*‘,...$ , t .1, ,_ Am,.-. , .-.., , ag., •, 4._ • •-•.01• . '-. ' 1 • j• ''.. ".1,,, ' ,, ' • n , . , Alm• _ ,, , - Ilith41 3 'L q. ii ' 1 , :,., . ::',,' •1, - i ' ,._ !___P• ,.1- .., .. -. 1. A. ,.-"' erlii • ''''.. 77 .... 7 7 A,t,It •,7 , - 7 ' • - ' ' ' .' ', 1.'"• '"-:', .:C."-:::,-.'r 47 ,. '. "' T- , . -,'4 •-- ir 4 - .r 1: , . ' • -1? 'n, ,;.0 _ n,ly.--. :.,;_., ,;1 , , C : •-• . ri --!-_..i'_1'2....1_C- • ‘:1 iL - , _ • ,,_ ., . _...s. vf04... ' - 11,, • ..:'`.,`'.1 ' J. ,-- -. ., , • • — —: — — 7 •. ', ,' ek'_'tr-f''''-',,i F#IL ' '1, ,2 . ''•!.''•''''-"". ' ',"11'4 .,: ' -•• . . Z'4,74 i•li - ;" --- 4 i "'• '4":7',it ,- z-,_ -4., ,i.i.,; 1..k.,. .....,-, .---„,,,, -- A • 'R '.. •%, 1-,0. ' ''4.:,N51''' j.:4... '•-.,.. „.44.-;_-_•',-.1.,.-• 5. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change MEMORANDUM 451 South State Street, Room 406 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Planning and Zoning Division (8011535-7757 Department of Community Development TO: Rick Graham,Public Services Brad Larson,Fire Craig Smith,Engineering Larry Butcher, Permits t' Brad Stewart,Public Utilities Barry Walsh,Transportation Craig Spangenberg,Zoning Enforcement v Kim Guess, Police-(CPTED) FROM: Marilynn Lewis, Planning Division DATE: October 10,2006 RE: Petition 400-06-33. Honorary Street Name Change for Adam Galvez 300 South Street(Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) The Salt Lake City Planning Division is currently reviewing a request from Mr. Michael Clara, Mr.Junior Cruz and Boy Scout Troop 987,requesting an honorary street name designation of 300 South Street,beginning at Redwood Road and ending at Interstate 15 to Adam Galvez Street. Certified street address will not be affected by an honorary street name. The honorary street name will be added to the 300 South Street signs at the expense of the applicant, similar to the honorary street sign of 600 South Street as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. Enclosed,please fmd an area map showing the location and a letter from the applicant for the proposed honorary name change.The Planning staff must make a finding relating to the adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including but not limited to roadways,parks and recreational facilities,police and fire protection, schools, storm-water drainage systems,water supplies,wastewater and refuse collection. Please let me know whether you find adequate services and/or facilities are provided, and whether the proposed conditional use for this property will have any impacts on existing services or the area. Please also provide us with any information you may have on the previous uses as they relate to your division or department. Councilman Turner and the community are anxious to move this project forward quickly. Therefore,I would appreciate receiving your written comments by Monday October 23,2006.If you have no issues I still need a response.You may of course email your comments to me. If you have any questions,email or call me at 535-6409. Thank you. 1 RAT RICHARD GRAHAM SI ' 41.121 a,Sty/ AhT1 "�"' 1PO I;OV( ROSE C. "ROCKY" ANDERSr PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES MAYOR MEMORANDUM TO: Marilynn Lewis Planning Division 2/(V FROM: Rick Graham, Director Public Services Department DATE: October 20, 2006 RE: Petition 400-06-33 I have reviewed the petition and do not see that any services provided by my department will be impacted by the conditional use as long as the certified street address will not be affected and will remain on the new signage. Rick Graham 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 14B, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH B41 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7775 FAX: 801-535-7789 WWW.SLCGOV.COM Page 1 of 1 Lewis, Marilynn From: Butcher, Larry Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 5:12 PM To: Lewis, Marilynn Subject: Petition 400-06-33 Honorary Street Name Change Categories: Program/Policy Merrylynn: I have no comments. Larry 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 1 From: Isbell, Randy Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:36 AM To: Lewis, Marilynn Cc: Spangenberg, Craig Subject: Street name change Categories: Program/Policy Marilynn, The proposal for the street name change, Pet. 400-06-33 will not have any impact on services provided by the Housing/Zoning enforcement staff. Thanks, Randy Isbell, Housing/Zoning Specialist Planning & Zoning Division Salt Lake City Corporation Ph. (801) 535-6042 Fx. (801) 535-6131 file://C:\Zoning files\400-06-33 Adam Galvez Street\City Comments\Zoning Enforcemen... 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 1 From: Garcia, Peggy Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 4:28 PM To: Lewis, Marilynn Subject: Petition 400-06-33 Honorary Street Name Change Categories: Program/Policy Marilyn, Salt Lake City Public Utilities has reviewed the above-mentioned claim and finds no conflicts with our utilities. If you need any further assistance please contact me. Thank you, Peggy file://C:\Zoning files\400-06-33 Adam Galvez Street\City Comments\Public Utilities.htm 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 2 From: Walsh, Barry Seat: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 2:34 PM To: Lewis,Marilynn Cc: Young, Kevin; Smith, Craig; Larson, Bradley Subject: RE: Honorary Street Name Change on 300 South Street Categories: Program/Policy October 10, 2006 Marilynn Lewis, Planning Re: Honorary Street Name change for 300 South to "Adam Galvez Street" Transportation Division review is for approval subject to city standard requirements, in that the cost for the proposed sign change be per the Applicant. See attached memo from Tim Harpst. Please reply if further response is needed. Sincerely, Barry Walsh. Cc Kevin Young, P.E. Craig Smith, Engineering Brad Larson, Fire File From: Harpst,Tim Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 2:00 PM To: Walsh, Barry Cc: Young, Kevin; Lewis, Marilynn Subject: RE: Honorary Street Name Change on 300 South Street Barry-FYI, Al has already done a cost estimate if this gets approved. The applicant would need to pay $1,058.32 for Al to replace all of the street name signs impacted. Timothy P. Harpst, P.E., PTOE Transportation Director Salt Lake City Transportation Division Phone: 801 535-6630 349 South 200 East, Suite 450 Fax: 801 535-6019 Salt Lake City, Utah 841 1 1 email: tim.harpst@ci_slc.ut,us file://C:\Zoning files\400-06-33 Adam Galvez Street\City Comments\Transportation .htm 10/17/2006 Page 2 of 2 From: Lewis, Marilynn Sent:Tuesday, October 10, 2006 9:34 AM To: Boskoff, Nancy; Clark, Luann; Dinse, Rick; Fluhart, Rocky; Graham, Rick; Harpst,Tim; Hooton, Leroy; McFarlane, Alison; Oka, Dave; Rutan, Ed; Pace, Lynn; Ikefuna, Alexander; Burbank, Chris; Querry, Chuck; Williams, Roy Cc: Wheelwright, Doug; Coffey, Cheri; LoPiccolo, Kevin Subject: Honorary Street Name Change on 300 South Street RE: Petition 400-06-33. Honorary Street Name Change for Adam Galvez 300 South Street(Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Dear Directors, The Salt Lake City Planning Division is currently reviewing a request from Mr. Michael Clara, Mr.Junior Cruz and Boy Scout Troop 987,requesting an honorary street name designation of 300 South Street, beginning at Redwood Road and ending at Interstate 15 to Adam Galvez Street. Certified street address will not be affected by an honorary street name. The honorary street name will be added to the 300 South Street signs at the expense of the applicant, similar to the honorary street sign of 600 South Street as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. The following City staff members will receive the above attachment and associated documentation for review via inter-office mail: Rick Graham,Public Services Brad Larson,Fire Craig Smith,Engineering Larry Butcher,Permits Brad Stewart,Public Utilities Barry Walsh, Transportation Craig Spangenberg,Zoning Enforcement Kim Guess, Police-(CPTED) If you would like to review the details of this proposal please let me know by Monday, October 16,2006,and I will forward information to you. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to email or phone me at 535- 6409. Thank you, Marilynn Lewis Planning Division 451 South State St., Room 406 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 (801) 535-6409 file://C:\Zoning files\400-06-33 Adam Galvez Street\City Comments\Transportation .htm 10/17/2006 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS Open House October 23, 2006 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change OPEN HOUSE ATTENDANCE ROLL Adam Galvez — Honorary Street Name Change 400-06-33 October 23, 2006 Please Print Clearly, Thank you PRINT NAME% I PRINT NAME ADDRESS 149 Li W GX) So ADDRESS ZIP CODE "(I 0 Lf ZIP CODE PRINT NAME l C`"`�1 C (ct f \ PRINT NAME ADDRESS ( � Li / (A), .3 0 ( _ ADDRESS ZIP CODE lb 4 L 0 ZIP CODE PRINT NAME Silk ee w r ge f l nda z PRINT NAME . .DDRESS I w 041 Fr C 0-ye 4t 3 ADDRESS ZIP CODE kW(} ZIP CODE PRINT NAME h\or C�ry L PRINT NAME ADDRESS Vo a 1 w Do APA S) ADDRESS ZIP CODE 31-{ OLI ZIP CODE PRINT NAME ..VA.„,,., C,, PRINT NAME ADDRESS 1 t�� , k\Do s -0k -ZZ ADDRESS ZIP CODE g<-kw\A LIP CODE PRINT NAME PRINT NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS "IP CODE ZIP CODE OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment (please print clearly, thank you): Name k c, �. e, C t et r c Address) I D L-( LA) . 3 0 ® S L_ct vT � y � oy (include zip code) Phone 9 0 1 -- S z- 1 -- E Z- 2 lGt w� �r. -a v o f o k- r\ck.%AA. C re c o‘n l me, r t- -�- v!_s0.4,1 f 4r\-a-J- S t c)1A.S ,) tl o U r I o„ lJ • s t2 , Ike U.04---H/t4 19 5 D v r Y1 a 1 O (fie 5 Q wo Vcke O'r o 0 r' S o c W L o Lo 6eL5 U..r W l 40 5 4.Lt,r \x a S 'CU( I ii\A42.ks U,�, crK 40 °ur � o r Ck�-1. , i s w (0 t- � r t P ov r c 0 vv`wA,v V vi " t W cv 1fit' l�C t� 15 2 0 r C —4f1,c2_,AR trok C OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment(please print clearly, thank you): Name 74hran ( - . Address) \. Con\ LA()O Z (include zip code) Phon((g501� C1OB- 1 l GC Vic) a coo \nck v c} \ , OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment (please print clearly, thank you): NamC- \-\e`0(Y'kPZ Address) \' ,\ 0, \`�: (include zip code) Phone V--7/6 ' OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment(please print clearly, thank you): Name 3 v,v,a Address) \jk1U 7/ ,,.` (include zip code) Phone ') aye i q OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment (please print clearly, thank you): M '[)2Name 11 1 0•d'}lvy1 l� Address) J O NN) ' 30030 LC, CST siN (include zip code) Q� Phone (0) 1:3 2. ( tpl o a /0 ft°1°6 ff-/74 d--f 50 '7,26 ih;f ray ' Adk L 040 '71 oy morrd# /die � Page 1 of 1 Lewis, Marilynn From: Eleanor Ulibarri [EleanorU@vmh.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 1:43 PM To: Lewis, Marilynn Hi Marlynn, I live on the street 300 south off 9th west that is being considered for a name change. I will be out of town during the meeting time but want to say I fully support the idea and I would feel honored to live on a street with the name of the fallen Marine Corporal Adam Galvez. Thanks Eleanor Ulibarri 10/17/2006 NOV I`\ '�' �\a Obit @,013 ).LI°JI.,©: " ROSS C. `R 1 �UOY DERSON LOUIS ZUNGUZE ..,w DIRECTOR DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MAYOR BRENT B. WILDE OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR TRANSMITTED DEPUTY DIRECTOR NOV 0 7 2006 CITY COUNCIL T ' • NS ITTAL TO CITY COUNCIL TO: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Offi►er D' ''• November 2, 2006 FROM: Louis Zunguze, Community Development 1' - RE: Petition 400-06-33: Honorary Street Name Change by Michael Clara, Junior Cruz, and Boy Scout Troop 987 for 300 South Street between Redwood Road and Interstate 15 to be given an honorary name of"Adam Galvez Street" STAFF CONTACTS: Marilynn Lewis, Principal Planner, at 535-6409 or marilynniewis@slcgov.com RECOMMENDATION: That no action be taken until policy and procedures pertaining to honorary street name changes are approved by the Salt Lake City Council DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution BUDGET IMPACT: None. The cost of installing the new street signs and replacement of these signs will be at the expense of Michael Clara,Junior Cruz, and Boy Scout Troop 987. DISCUSSION: Issue Origin:Michael Clara, Junior Cruz, and Boy Scout Troop 987 submitted an application to Salt Lake City to honor a member of the Poplar Grove community, fallen Marine Corporal Adam Galvez by adding the honorary name of"Adam Galvez Street"to 300 South Street(between Redwood Road and Interstate 15). Corporal Galvez was killed in the Iraqi conflict earlier this year. Background: Over the years the Salt Lake City Council has approved various honorary street name changes. In recent years, national figures have been recognized: Martin Luther King,Jr. (600 South Street), Cesar Chavez (500 South Street), and Rosa Parks (200 East Street). These individuals were honored for their selflessness and leadership in civil rights issues. The Poplar Grove community wishes to honor one of the City's residents for his selflessness, leadership, and contribution to his country. Analysis: The honorary street name change proposal was sent out to the pertinent City Divisions and Departments for comment. Those Departments included Engineering, Permits, Transportation, Public Utilities, Police, Zoning Enforcement, Public Services, and Fire(see 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: B01-535.7105 FAX: 801-535-6005 WWW.SLCSOV.COM Attachment 5: Department Comments). No negative comments were received. Master Plan Consideration: The West Salt Lake Master Plan does not specifically address the issue of honorary street name changes. The vision statement of the Final Report of the Salt Lake City Futures Commission states that Salt Lake City "Embraces pluralism and encourages diversity in population, urban design, and cultural expression." PUBLIC PROCESS Prior to submission of the Honorary Street Name Change application, the applicants solicited signatures from property owners on either side of the subject section of the 300 South Street corridor. Junior Cruz, one of the applicants, made a presentation to the Poplar Grove Community Council on September 27, 2006. After the presentation and discussion, a motion of support received unanimous support from those attending. The Poplar Grove Community Council Chair prepared a letter of support for the applicant, which was submitted with the original application (see Attachment 8: Original Application Packet). On October 23, 2006, Staff held an Open House in the City County Building to obtain comments from the community and adjacent property owners. A total of 5 people attended the Open House. Staff did not receive any objections to the petition (see Attachment 7: Public Comments). Please note that as part of the transmittal process, a meeting was held between Planning Staff and the Mayor, after which the Mayor indicated that given the apparent confusion regarding policy and procedures governing the Honorary Street Name Change process, the Administration should recommend that the Council put a hold on all considerations for Honorary Street Name Change applications, including the current application to honor Adam Galvez. Planning Commission action is not required. Honorary street name changes have no effect on certified mailing addresses, business listings in any telephone directory, or on private business signs. RELEVANT ORDINANCE: Section 6.03.50 Salt Lake City Planning Division Policies and Procedures: Street Name Change Sections 10-8-32 of the Utah Code Title 10, Chapter 8: Powers and Duties of All Cities Petition 400-06-33:Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change Page 2 of 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. CHRONOLOGY 2. PROPSED RESOLUTION 3. NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL HEARING 4. MAILING LABELS 5. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS 6. OPEN HOUSE NOTICE Original Notice and Postmark October 13, 2006 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS Open House October 23, 2006 8. ORIGINAL APPLICATION PACKET Petition 400-06-33 1. CHRONOLOGY 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change PROJECT CHRONOLOGY 10/09/06 The petition information was given to me by the Supervisor. I contacted the Poplar Grove Community Council Chair and Mr. Clara to let them know that I had the project, as well as provided information on the process and rough time frames. 10/10/06 Memo was sent to City departments and divisions to gather comments. Comments were due back to me by October 23, 2006. 10/11/06 Request sent to City Attorney for a draft resolution. Due date was October 23, 2006. 10/12/06 Draft resolution was received from City Attorney's office. 10/13/06 Open house notices were sent. 10/16/06 Notice was received by staff with verified postmark. 10/23/06 Open house was held on October 23, 2006. Staff collected comments from the community. 10/26/06 Transmittal packet was forwarded to Community Development on October 26, 2006. • 2. RESOLUTION 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change RESOLUTION NO. OF 2006 (Changing the Name of 300 South, between Redwood Road and I-15, on an honorary basis to "Adam Galvez Street," Pursuant to Petition No. 400-06-33.) WHEREAS, Salt Lake City has received Petition No. 400-06-33 relating to the change of name of 300 South, on an honorary basis, between Redwood Road and 1-15; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that there is good cause to change the name of said street on an honorary basis, without changing the official name or designation of said street. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. That the name of 300 South between Redwood Road and 1-15 shall be and hereby is changed on an honorary basis to "Adam Galvez Street." 2. Effective Date. This Resolution shall become effective on the date of its first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2006. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: 'APPROVED AS TO FORM CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER 1Y Attar eys Offic C\RESOLUTEResolution Changing Street Name to Adam Galvez Street doc i BY a hi lir I 1 , REDWOOD RD ,7 '''4,r , - Loll 1 !"; ' ,_ - ”11 A•:•• ' . _ CD I•r,,'F.-: i I i ,, ..,r '- • ,,!- :.; ,--„„' :‘, - ' . i ' il 4: I-1 ,, , ',- a -.E., 1.,,,,•, - Is . . -k_ , •ir,:.., : 4 ' r a i ' 4 • ' HEYENNEST , C . o1v",.-`";•-'-'--''.,.r t••„,,-. '' CC4Z . . - , , ' 4 /Y , Z1 :16f '7.*$1 f.kW 4604 : t 0s. ';`' •'4"c_ 4 :' '*".. r'itsi,•_ :, ...• ., ..,?.• "'- . .- •r••••••;.1.7.1 i,_ - abi , r -,. . .. - 11 ' , .,‘".,•-, ..4A,,,t, . ,41 .- • ,-..,•• i - • ir, , ,"*--,..,' A 1, "43•V I'1,. 0.0 . , 0.... '4d03 1 4 • ''W t I 3'4* '', E ,,, :, .1 :-,-: ,..,'1 7::r, 7-2. :•,-.:`•-. .11 I -••• - ` .t`.I..' I 4 =' - ' 1 i.:tt..,,, .• =4:::..::_ =.k.,.L -4 _ r_, : ,t. It f.'j Li) _ , _. , ._ A ' • , ,_'---- i t ,--1 I , .,1001662,it.f'1 - liit tilk''t 4, • ,L , ._ .., 1 _ . , ,, : . .f.f ,..r.,- ..„ .., 14,,,., 1. . ,,z, , ...„ ,,,,, , - ao., AVAJO ST : .-1- - ' - ' , .• ?J..;,_ .2.:...',... 1 :-. ! „-4,4 . ' ,x, :t':‘ K 4: ' f =:l i ...-.1'- '''.! '''',..t - • -. i ..i.„ #‘.-.- - ‘.- '•. ...'. ,,,, ' _. 7.- r• . ,--1- -'' . .• , .-. .-'tp-, .* ,.4%1 .- 1. , c) • 1, ,,,!.. : , tri , ' r k - 1 .e. . '...,,. ... 1.1 ,p r., t-- .. - , III el --_, ,_ ,, , ., :.-_. - EME- -7 it:z'' ,i. ' ' , 0 4.. t V ' .--1 -• it, ..'' .1. it Z 03 p, el ,F, 1 lz: :-t 1 i•„ ,_ _ ._ ...- , ,, • ., .., t ii. • IMF - CP ,.. , _ ..; . t ....t.. ii: 1 '.I L $4 ',. ''';r ' ' 1 .1. , . , -•-•-_ , '1,,,, — . .,., ., ,, i w, ,,,. 1 ., . cit i.--- , _, .., ‘,.„.. -,,,_, ,J,I, .,,,-.- .1-- , 4-_,.• -k„ ,....- -' 7' , , - ' ''', ' 1 -.0 ' i"1, . ..:, ' 14- 4' .- - , CI) if"'n- iv "'-' '' "• ' ' i ..'', ' ' -1- '''', k , , ,,:: . tt ' t 4 • • :av . . e I I a, ' Z . k.; ''•i .. -: , ' ' •'It A t - : 'I '-- ,, ,,f" "K, . -'-. IT; , , , $,,,,.. , . 4 ' ..i.— . "r c, , ,. .,,.. .,), ,.,..• ,,, J at'l k 4.,..i' — - '. '1 1• I 4 5 0 I .-''' •— -1 " 1 •ti,.k ' • , t. ,,` ' ' , I, ' ' 'w.f. •_•- F , , • I` -.• ' • li— I II .> - , Y'$ ' 9 - : ,, , f. AtiII- = , -""- " ;14 -z i i I v- - :.7.' - r'• - "- i""s' ' ''--4. "-- •""; . ' v , ":"' i ,. . — .10.- '. . r--..=',,Zit = r. ' '. • 0,±:-ZIA100.4)96" `'. ,::::::7 •,, , 0 —, ,' , --„ ' . -• ': - -, -:".3L 4,1'--: ", -- - - ' ' i . • , INTERSTATE 15 , 1 . 1 * • ',% 5. DEPARTMENT COMMENTS 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change -s. MEMORANDUM .y� 451 South State Street, Room 406 Salt Lake City,Utah 84111 Planning and Zoning Division (801) 535-7757 Department of Community Development TO: Rick Graham, Public Services Brad Larson,Fire Craig Smith,Engineering Larry Butcher,Permits v% Brad Stewart,Public Utilities Barry Walsh,Transportation Craig Spangenberg,Zoning Enforcement Kim Guess,Police-(CPTED) FROM: Marilynn Lewis,Planning Division DATE: October 10,2006 RE: Petition 400-06-33. Honorary Street Name Change for Adam Galvez 300 South Street(Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) The Salt Lake City Planning Division is currently reviewing a request from Mr.Michael Clara,Mr.Junior Cruz and Boy Scout Troop 987,requesting an honorary street name designation of 300 South Street,beginning at Redwood Road and ending at Interstate 15 to Adam Galvez Street. Certified street address will not be affected by an honorary street name. The honorary street name will be added to the 300 South Street signs at the expense of the applicant, similar to the honorary street sign of 600 South Street as Martin Luther King Jr.Boulevard. Enclosed,please find an area map showing the location and a letter from the applicant for the proposed honorary name change.The Planning staff must make a finding relating to the adequacy of public facilities and services intended to serve the subject property, including but not limited to roadways,parks and recreational facilities,police and fire protection, schools, storm-water drainage systems,water supplies,wastewater and refuse collection. Please let me know whether you find adequate services and/or facilities are provided,and whether the proposed conditional use for this property will have any impacts on existing services or the area. Please also provide us with any information you may have on the previous uses as they relate to your division or department. Councilman Turner and the community are anxious to move this project forward quickly. Therefore,I would appreciate receiving your written comments by Monday October 23,2006.If you have no issues I still need a response.You may of course email your comments to me. If you have any questions,email or call me at 535-6409. Thank you. 1 RICHARD GRAHAM , a�a�.i��.IO WI `�1��.,0 ; ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERS PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES MAYOR MEMORANDUM TO: Marilynn Lewis Planning Division 9/(V FROM: Rick Graham, Director Public Services Department DATE: October 20, 2006 RE: Petition 400-06-33 I have reviewed the petition and do not see that any services provided by my department will be impacted by the conditional use as long as the certified street address will not be affected and will remain on the new signage. Rick Graham 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 14B, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH B41 1 1 TELEPHONE: B01-535.7775 FAX: B01-535-77B9 WWW.SL000V.COM m Page 1 of 1 Lewis, Marilynn From: Butcher, Larry Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 5:12 PM To: Lewis, Marilynn Subject: Petition 400-06-33 Honorary Street Name Change Categories: Program/Policy Merrylynn: I have no comments. Larry 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 1 From: Isbell, Randy Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:36 AM To: Lewis, Marilynn Cc: Spangenberg, Craig Subject: Street name change Categories: Program/Policy Marilynn, The proposal for the street name change, Pet. 400-06-33 will not have any impact on services provided by the Housing/Zoning enforcement staff. Thanks, Randy Isbell, Housing/Zoning Specialist Planning & Zoning Division Salt Lake City Corporation Ph. (801) 535-6042 Fx. (801) 535-6131 file://C:\Zoning files\400-06-33 Adam Galvez Street\City Comments\Zoning Enforcemen... 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 1 From: Garcia, Peggy Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 4:28 PM To: Lewis, Marilynn Subject: Petition 400-06-33 Honorary Street Name Change Categories: Program/Policy Marilyn, Salt Lake City Public Utilities has reviewed the above-mentioned claim and finds no conflicts with our utilities. If you need any further assistance please contact me. Thank you, Peggy file://C:\Zoning files\400-06-33 Adam Galvez Street\City Comments\Public Utilities.htm 10/17/2006 Page 1 of 2 Fruit: Walsh, Barry Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 2:34 PM To: Lewis,Marilynn Cc: Young, Kevin; Smith, Craig; Larson, Bradley Subject: RE: Honorary Street Name Change on 300 South Street Categories: Program/Policy October 10, 2006 Marilynn Lewis, Planning Re: Honorary Street Name change for 300 South to "Adam Galvez Street" Transportation Division review is for approval subject to city standard requirements, in that the cost for the proposed sign change be per the Applicant. See attached memo from Tim Harpst. Please reply if further response is needed. Sincerely, Barry Walsh. Cc Kevin Young, P.E. Craig Smith, Engineering Brad Larson, Fire File From: Harpst,Tim Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 2:00 PM To: Walsh, Barry Cc:Young, Kevin; Lewis, Marilynn Subject: RE: Honorary Street Name Change on 300 South Street Barry -FYI, Al has already done a cost estimate if this gets approved. The applicant would need to pay $1,058.32 for Al to replace all of the street name signs impacted. Timothy P. Harpst, P.E., PTOE Transportation Director Salt Lake City Transportation Division Phone: 801 535-6630 349 South 200 East, Suite 450 Fax: 801 535-6019 Salt Lake City, Utah 841 1 1 email: tim.harpst@ci.slc.ut.us file://C:\Zoning files\400-06-33 Adam Galvez Street\City Comments\Transportation .htm 10/17/2006 Page 2 of 2 From: Lewis, Marilynn Sent: Tuesday, October 10, 2006 9:34 AM To: Boskoff, Nancy; Clark, Luann; Dinse, Rick; Fluhart, Rocky; Graham, Rick; Harpst,Tim; Hooton, Leroy; McFarlane, Alison; Oka, Dave; Rutan, Ed; Pace, Lynn; Ikefuna, Alexander; Burbank, Chris; Querry, Chuck; Williams, Roy Cc: Wheelwright, Doug; Coffey, Cheri; LoPiccolo, Kevin Subject: Honorary Street Name Change on 300 South Street RE: Petition 400-06-33. Honorary Street Name Change for Adam Galvez 300 South Street (Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Dear Directors, The Salt Lake City Planning Division is currently reviewing a request from Mr. Michael Clara, Mr.Junior Cruz and Boy Scout Troop 987, requesting an honorary street name designation of 300 South Street, beginning at Redwood Road and ending at Interstate 15 to Adam Galvez Street. Certified street address will not be affected by an honorary street name. The honorary street name will be added to the 300 South Street signs at the expense of the applicant, similar to the honorary street sign of 600 South Street as Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard. The following City staff members will receive the above attachment and associated documentation for review via inter-office mail: Rick Graham,Public Services Brad Larson,Fire Craig Smith,Engineering Larry Butcher,Permits Brad Stewart,Public Utilities Barry Walsh, Transportation Craig Spangenberg,Zoning Enforcement Kim Guess,Police-(CPTED) If you would like to review the details of this proposal please let me know by Monday,October 16,2006,and I will forward information to you. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to email or phone me at 535- 6409. Thank you, Marilynn Lewis Planning Division 451 South State St., Room 406 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 (801) 535-6409 file://C:\Zoning files\400-06-33 Adam Galvez Street\City Comments\Transportation .htm 10/17/2006 7. PUBLIC COMMENTS Open House October 23, 2006 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change OPEN HOUSE ATTENDANCE ROLL Adam Galvez — Honorary Street Name Change 400-06-33 October 23, 2006 Please Print Clearly, Thank you PRINT NAME If I IAA U y\ PRINT NAME ADDRESS IP9 L vX SCE ADDRESS ZIP CODE `"d ZIP CODE PRINT NAME C Lck{ t\ PRINT NAME ADDRESS / I`"/ LA), 3 C O _ ADDRESS ZIP CODE `t ( 0 y ZIP CODE PRINT NAME rilk eewk r Iionm i 1 a 2 PRINT NAME -DDRESS Q.,76 W UGC;F1.� ve 1:13 ADDRESS ZIP CODE kL//oz/ ZIP CODE PRINT NAME , h r C r v PRINT NAME ADDRESS VJ(oa 1 w DO -0 ApA 0) ADDRESS ZIP CODE ()L-{ 10(-) ZIP CODE PRINT NAME TA,„,,, ��„� PRINT NAME ADDRESS t , ,,,, ku0 s ot- 2 Z ADDRESS ZIP CODE g�W.)\-k ZIP CODE PRINT NAME PRINT NAME ADDRESS ADDRESS 71P CODE ZIP CODE OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment (please print clearly, thank you): Name PC(c, Lwe.,I Ctm-� Address) 1 D { y W . 3 O ® S . t UT 8HI01-1 (include zip code) Phone D - 5 2 t 3Z2 r o-r �-Le, S4 f\r-k.WAR.__ C a. re c 0\ t W rI `k S L51^S ov� rA�l o u LL1 mot- �( �� o��cx \o4 c c.�-2G{uk� koy\p r k � t 5 ( I`ve UP-f-� �ql�`>) �p II ll D v r n 4 a - W-e-s a r a wo; c o 4 fat'•11ucje V e�ZS O O V r' S o G 1Q: j W �..o e ve S L� MS 1.,c2S 4 0 S V 'Cu( l LkiLp 4 5 U 1 , crK A2.00 / 440 °ur �Ma I 4 f 5 W l�t �1 r eC t p _ f po r cow.W\.V v vd vJ a l -,f) ct -- ,,� fit' 15 I kC t�n� w t b--.e d °`� ±�r o v 5 "` �- ( - f L c r -o J r 1 y\.'e I Sln ,rot' `�e �� e �� 191� --�� C o vN\-0 OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment(please print clearly, thank you): Name 7ohc,.,n e‘ u Address) (,,C)\ ,,u ('C) � t - (include zip code) Phonik O\�j e\U B- l (DC, 4 OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment(please print clearly, thank you): Narna. C c \\e,( 1, QZ Address) \a\6 ` ' cA \-L:� \\.1C 7) (include zip code) Phone g6! 001-1 (.77/6 r ,Q Z ev_,A2 • OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment(please print clearly, thank you): Name 3 a e cu7. Address) Av Yo0 \ \ L\O . � (include zip code) Phone i) • OPEN HOUSE October 23, 2006 Conditional Use Planned Development 400-06-33 Adam Galvez Honorary Street Name Change (300 South Street— Between Redwood Road and Interstate 15) Please provide us with the following information, so that we may contact you for further comment(please print clearly, thank you): Name �� \ 40•:CYV\Ct Address) lO HLi 3o0o LC, (include zip code) Phone 2 l Co"t o A a /PI 6)d 5° relfwilya)( "7)6 5,,,j d „i4 a4/ Page 1 of 1 Lewis, Marilynn From: Eleanor Ulibarri [EleanorU@vmh.com] Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 1:43 PM To: Lewis, Marilynn Hi Marlynn, I live on the street 300 south off 9th west that is being considered for a name change. I will be out of town during the meeting time but want to say I fully support the idea and I would feel honored to live on a street with the name of the fallen Marine Corporal Adam Galvez. Thanks Eleanor Ulibarri 10/17/2006