The URL can be used to link to this page

11/09/2006 - Minutes (2) PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2006 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in a Work Session on Thursday, November 9, 2006, at 5 : 00 p.m. at the Patrick Moore Gallery, 511 West 200 South, Salt Lake City, Utah. 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; Rick Graham, Public Services Director; Russell Weeks, Council Policy Analyst; Valda Tarbet, Redevelopment Agency Acting Director; LuAnn Clark, Housing and Neighborhood Development Director; Timothy Harpst, Transportation Director; D. J. Baxter, Mayor' s Senior Advisor; Gwen Springmeyer, Community Affairs Analyst for Council Districts 3 and 4; Sylvia Richards, Council Research and Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Veronica Wilson, Council Staff/Liaison; Louis Zunguze, Community Development Administration Director; Boyd Ferguson, Senior City Attorney; Kelly Furstenau, Keith Christensen for Mayor; Loggins Merrill, East Central Community Council Vice-Chair; Esther Hunter, University Neighborhood Organization Chair; Richard Wirick, Oxford Shop; Esther Radinger, Oxford Shop; Delbert Rushton, Peoples Freeway Community Council; Tom Mutter, Central City Community Council; Laurel Young, Salt Lake City School Board; Christopher Viavant, Downtown Community Council; LuAnn Lakis, Downtown Community Council; Jan Bartlett, Anderson Commons; and Scott Crandall, Deputy City Recorder. A bus tour of Council District 4 was held at 5 : 00 p.m. (See attached itinerary/fact sheet) . View Attachments Councilmember Buhler presided at and conducted the Work Session meeting which was called to order at 7 : 03 p.m. OPENING CEREMONY: 7 : 03 : 54 PM Disabled American Veteran' s Honor Guard presented the Pledge of Allegiance . WORK SESSION: #1 . 7 : 06 : 40 PM COMMENTS FROM DISTRICT 4 RESIDENTS . The following spoke or submitted written comments : Cindy Cromer, Rashmi Gopinath, Kevin Kittredge, Esther Hunter, Richard Wirick and Jen Colby. Comments included downtown rising, demolitions, development rights, historic preservation, master plan violations, urban design elements, walkable communities, height variations, smoking ban, health benefits, community support for homeless shelter, neighborhood involvement/stability, positive outlook regarding downtown 06 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2006 construction, public transit, energy crisis, and LEED building standards . #2 . 7 : 18 : 34 PM RECEIVE A PRESENTATION FROM DR. TED LIOU RELATING TO HIS OBSERVATIONS ON DISASTER PREPARATION BASED UPON HIS WORK DURING THE HURRICANE KATRINA AFTERMATH. Dr. Liou briefed the Council with a power-point presentation. #3 . 7 : 48 : 56 PM HOLD A REFUGEE FACT-FINDING DISCUSSION WITH THE FOLLOWING REPRESENTATIVES : (A) JANE WILLIE, SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT INVOLVEMENT COORDINATOR; (B) MIRO MARINOVICH, INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE DIRECTOR; (C) SHU CHENG, ASIAN ASSOCIATION; (D) ROSEMARIE HUNTER, UNIVERSITY NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERS AND HARTLAND PROJECT DIRECTOR; (E) JOHN ERLACHER, MOUNTAIN VIEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PRINCIPAL; AND (F) LARRY BROXTON, CONSULTANT AND REFUGEE GRANT FACILITATOR. View Attachments Jane Willie, Miro Marinovich, Shu Cheng, Rosemarie Hunter, John Erlacher and Larry Broxton briefed the Council with the attached handouts . Councilmember Jergensen asked for information on cost projections and potential business community partnerships for individual schools . Councilmember Love said the City' s information channel needed to include contact information so the public could participate in the program. #4 . 8 : 34 : 27 PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING CHANGES TO THE SALT LAKE VALLEY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT FACILITY WASTE HAULING (LANDFILL) PROGRAM. View Attachments Rick Graham briefed the Council with the attached handout . #5 . 9 : 00 : 10 PM RECEIVE AN UPDATE REGARDING THE CITY CREEK CENTER DEVELOPMENT PERMITS . Tim Harpst and Louis Zunguze briefed the Council . Mr . Zunguze said the Council would be given updates as the project progressed. #6 . 7 : 06 : 10 PM RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING REGARDING A PROPOSED ORDINANCE THAT WOULD PROHIBIT SMOKING TOBACCO PRODUCTS IN CITY-OWNED PARKS, PUBLIC SQUARES, BALL DIAMONDS, GOLF COURSES, SOCCER FIELDS, RECREATIONAL AREAS, LIBRARY SQUARE, CITY-OWNED CEMETERIES, TRAILS AND NEAR MASS GATHERINGS . (UNFINISHED BUSINESS ITEM Fl) . View Attachments Item postponed to November 14, 2006 . 06 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2006 #7 . 9 : 13 : 51 PM REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS . See File M 06-5 for announcements . The meeting adjourned at 9 : 20 p.m. Council Chair Chief Deputy City Recorder This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held November 9, 2006 . sc 06 - 3 SALT r C. OR Q JL1 OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Salt Lake City Council AGENDA City Council Chambers Patrick Moore Gallery 511 West 200 South Salt Lake City,Utah Thursday,November 9,2006 7:00 p.m. 5:00—6:00 p.m., some Council Members may tour areas in District 4. (Itinerary Attached) A. OPENING CEREMONY: 1. Pledge of Allegiance—Disabled American Veteran's Honor Guard B. WORK SESSION: 7:00 p.m., Patrick Moore Gallery, 511 West 200 South 1. The Council will devote a maximum of 30 minutes to comments from the residents of District Four in the order in which the cards are collected. (Comments are taken on any item as well as on any other City business. Comments are limited to two minutes each.) 2. The Council will receive a presentation from Dr. Ted Liou relating to his observations on disaster preparation based upon his work during the Hurricane Katrina aftermath. 3. The Council will hold a refugee fact-finding discussion with the following representatives: (a)Jane Willie, Salt Lake City School District Involvement Coordinator;(b) Miro Marinovich,International Rescue Committee Director; (c) Steven Haw,Asian Association; (d)Rosemarie Hunter,University Neighborhood Partners and Hartland Project Director; (e)John Erlacher, Mountain View Elementary School Principal; and(f)Larry Broxton, Consultant and Refugee Grant Facilitator. 4. The Council will receive a briefing regarding changes to the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility Waste Hauling(Landfill)Program. 5. The Council will receive an update regarding the City Creek Center Development Permits. 6. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing regarding a proposed ordinance that would prohibit smoking tobacco products in City-owned parks,public squares,ball diamonds, golf courses, soccer fields, recreational areas,Library Square, City-owned cemeteries,trails and near mass gatherings. (Unfinished Business Item F1) 7. Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and announcements. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7600 FAX: 801-535-7651 WWW.SLCGOV.COM/COUNCIL EMAIL: COUNCIL.COMMENTS@SLCGOV.COM Salt Lake City Council Agenda Thursday November 9,2006 C. PUBLIC HEARINGS: (None) D. NEW BUSINESS: (None) E. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1. Ordinance—Adopt regulations prohibiting smoking tobacco products in City-owned parks, public squares, ball diamonds, golf courses, soccer fields, recreational areas,Library Square, City-owned cemeteries,trails and near mass gatherings. Consider adopting an ordinance enacting Chapter 15.30 of the Salt Lake City Code, prohibiting smoking in City-owned parks, public squares, ball diamonds, golf courses, soccer fields,recreational areas, Library Square, City-owned cemeteries,trails and near mass gatherings. (0 06-34) Staff Recommendation: Consider options. F. CONSENT: (None) 2 Salt Lake City Council Agenda Thursday November 9,2006 G. ADJOURNMENT: Dated: November 7, 2006 CBy: .,,ks `p Deputy City Recorder STA l•L OF UTAH ) : ss. COUNTY OF SALT LAKE ) On the 7th day of November,I personally delivered a copy of the foregoing notice to the Mayor and City Council and posted copies of the same in conspicuous view, at the following times and locations within the City& County Building, 451 South State Street, Salt Lake City, Utah: 1. At 5:00 p.m. in the City Recorder's Office, Room 415; and 2. At 5:00 p.m. in the Newsroom, Room 315. • Deputy City Recorder ubscribed d s orn to ore th 7`h day of November, 2006. NOTARY PUBLIC OF UTAH iffySTATE Comm9sinn si r e s t y Public residing in the State of Utah f" 9 A4 10,2007 SSOTT C.CRANDALL ,... 451 South State Strut Pm 415 Sail Lak°Uty,Utah 84111 zartrawasomoommameaS Approval: ' 1 CSC 'l {— ,K i'f � Executivf irector / Access agendas at http://www.slcgov.com/council/agendas/default.htm. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance of council meetings. We make every effort to honor these requests, and they should be made as early as possible. Accommodations may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids. The City and County Building is an accessible facility. For questions or additional information,please contact the City Council Office at 535-7600, or TDD 535-6021. Assistive listening devices are available on Channel I; upon four hours advance notice. Please allow 72 hours advance notice for sign language interpreters; large type and #2 Braille agendas. *Final action may be taken and/or adopted concerning any item on this agenda. After 5:00 p.m.,please enter the City & County Building through the east entrance. Accessible route is located on the east side of the building. In accordance with State Statute, City Ordinance and Council Policy, one or more Council Members may be connected via speakerphone. 3 Salt Lake City Council Agenda Thursday November 9,2006 DISTRICT FOUR TOUR Thursday,November 9, 2006 1. Tour guests will board the bus from 4:30 to 5:00 p.m. at the Patrick Moore Gallery located at 511 West 200 South. (The bus can park on 500 West, south of the gallery on the west side of the street.) 2. Medians-Recent ordinance change allows medians to be enforced from dusk b dawn. 3. Head south on 500 West. Shortened onramps Sunrise Apts. Project 4. Turn left on 600 South. Merge immediately to the right in order to turn right on 200 West. 5. Turn left on 700 South and head east. As you pass State Street... - State Street. -Decorative lights. -Medians could use help or beautification. -The Bayou,Plasma Ctr,Vintage Clothing store on east side of street 6. Pass Koko Kitchen, Sr. Center and Taufer Park 7. Turn right on 300 East and left on 800 South. Neighborhoods are slowly improving. Property owners are refurbishing areas. Good location—next to services. 8. Turn left on 400 East by RDA area/cottage street RDA project!Sego enforcement 9. Turn right on 600 South. Quick left turn onto Denver Street. LDS Church Soap Factory Moving to NWQ. Re-use issues. HOPWA housing will go to the north of the soap factory. Infill lot on 400 East bet. 500-600 South 10. Turn Left on 500 South heading west. Turn left on 300 East. Turn Left on 600 South. Trolley Square development and housing 11. Turn Right on 800 East and then left 800 South `Emilou's' Smith's Grocery Store/request for gas station. Pass Rowland Hall School Re-use issue when the school is vacant. Pass barricade—just appropriated$for design for 1100 East—great asset. 12. Left on 1200 East Street. DNA-car prowls. Speed bumps. 13. UDOT is adding left turn off of 1300 East 700 South which will greatly neighborhood vs.pass-through traffic. Fenway Street funding. 14. Continue north on 1200 East. At 600 South,turn right. 15. At 1300 East turn right. Pass McGillis School on right. Fast-moving traffic and bus stop across from McGillis. 16. At 700 South,turn right. 17. At 1100 East,turn right. Pass Judge Memorial. Request for historic district survey funds and expansion of University Historic District—will be included in budget amendment#2. 18. Pass 500 South. Character of n-hds Type of homes Upkeep Street parking issues 19. At 400 South,turn left. Go down to 1000 East and follow the curve heading north. Dividing line for historic district. Faultline Park/drug traffic Bollards vs.jersey barricades at the bottom of 1000 East 4 Salt Lake City Council Agenda Thursday November 9,2006 10th East Sr. Ctr. On east side and doctors' offices. Montessori School at 1000 East 200 South. 20. At 100 South,turn RIGHT. 21. At 1100 East,turn LEFT. Expansion of medical center/new construction. Cancer Wellness Ctr. On east side. 22. At South Temple,turn left. 23. At 900 East,turn left. 24. At 200 South,turn RIGHT. House of Hope(857 E 200 South) Don Layton(856 E 200 South) 200 South islands Dollar Store pod 25. Turn left on 800 East Pass old Grunts&Postures bldg. 26. Turn right on 300 South. Old Bryner Clinic on north side purchased by Catholic Community Svcs. for residential treatmert and alcohol treatment center. 27. Historic islands on 600 East. Emigration Apts/Townhouse Crossroads Urban Center Salvation Army on 500 East (They provide food,clothing and householdtems.) 300 South medians in the downtown 28. Brooks Arcade Bldg. Offices used by the City while City/County building was renovated. 29. SRO's. 30. Old Zephyr location 31. Rose Wagner 32. Greek community owns several apartment buildings on the north side of the street and may be refurbishing these properties. Looking at potential land exchange. 33. Turn Right on 300 West. Turn Right on 100 South. Turn Right on 200 West. Japanese Churches/Salt Palace. 34. Turn right on 200 South. New light rail stop site Shelter 35. Turn Right on 500 West. Turn Left on 100 South. Bring City Creek above ground. Gutted building on 100 So 500 West(northwest side)is going to be storage units across the street from the apt. building. 36. Centro Civico. 37. Turn Right on 600 West Grant's Tower and Property Management's progress w/property owners. 38. Make a U-turn mid-street and proceed south on 600 West. HOWA building and clubs on the right. 39. UTA fleet building on the right. 40. Turn Left on 200 South. Bus will drop off tour guests at Hong Kong Tea House, 565 West 200 South. Assuming inclement weather,the bus will wait until guests re-board after dinner and take them to the Patrick Moore Gallery 511 West 200 South, which is where the tour began. 5 FACT SHEET - DISTRICT FOUR BUS TOUR THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2006 Hospitals/Clinics • Salt Lake Regional Medical Center and Clinic • Reuse of former Bryner Clinic by Catholic Community Svcs. State Highways in District Four • 400 South • 500 South(I-15 to State Street) • 600 South(1-15 to State Street) • 700 East • State Street • 1300 East • West Temple (approximately 900 South to 400 South) • 300 West (400 South to South Temple) Group Homes Odyssey House 607 E. 200 S. (Adolescent Treatment) 625 S. 200 E. (Fathers and Children Program) 68 S. 600 E. (Adult Residential) 42 S. 500 E. (Women and Children's Residential Program) Utah Alcoholism Foundation 209 S. Douglas 1006 E. 100 S. Volunteers of America 718 S. 600 E. Catholic Community Services of Utah(former Bryner Clinic property) 745 E. 300 S. Helping Hand Association (The Haven) 974 E. South Temple Salvation Army 252 S. 500 E. YWCA 344 E. 300 S. Streets with Park Block-Type Islands • 200 South • 800 East • 600 East • 1200 East • 200 West • 400 West • 500 West Schools • Rowland Hall-St Mark's School, 970 East 800 South and 843 Lincoln Street • McGillis School, 668 South 1300 East • Judge Memorial, 650 South 1100 East • Our Lady of Lourdes, 1065 East 700 South • Bennion Elementary School, 429 South 800 East • Bryant Middle School, 40 South 800 East • East High School, 840 South 1300 East Parameters of RDA Granary District Starting at 300 West and 600 South, west to 500 West; south to 800 South; west to I-15; south along the I-15 to where the 900 South offramp curves to the east; east to 300 West, north on 300 West to 600 South. Parameters of RDA Depot District North Temple to 400 South; 400 West to I-15. Parameters of RDA Central City District 500 South to 800 South; 200 East to 500 East Parks Pioneer Park Reservoir Park (There are 12 neighborhood parks in District 4.) Senior Centers 251 East 700 South 237 South 1000 East Recreation Center 615 South 300 East Speed Bumps 1066 East 600 South 1120 East 600 South 1152 East 600 South 1218 East 600 South 1260 East 600 south 816 East Menlo Avenue 856 East Menlo Avenue COUNCIL DISTRICT NO. 4 BUS TOUR November 9, 2006 NAME: PLEASE PRINT TITLE AND/OR COMPANY YOU REPRESENT (-) 11' bt rs-1-e-r) f f h ( h✓ ya..j or titih Cirvi l I V iU CtAkir e cc 1��1-4•4 L N/24-r70 wig 7 ,)vv\- Utut.re.i bt Ci (DCiA+ -SCilor) t3iki-61 Okn 430 La- • oki;)\/( - (S--L")-v\A"-trNe,t. AT1/1"- '4f) \mot\415 1tarhAsizAhbi ir SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Dat+„- , I1116PUBLIC MEETING REGISTRATION FORM 11 f I /D 6' Q -�J` Agenda Item lun ,4440T', / Qp/T gyp. ► ' Name dd iAvv y &,CUM 6 Phone = - (please print dearly) Address KZ, 1' /O E-Mail Address Subject Deyttmn 7 1'V A tel 04 Poz,mi'-7Pc..w' A74z„vI 7 ►7'I wish to speak (O in support of) -or- (O in opposition to) the subject noted above. O I do not wish to speak; however, I would like to submit remarks (please use back of card). How did you learn about this meeting? /f 1iic .4,2wa.- I would like to receive information about: 0 my community council ❑ serving on a city board. To learn more about Salt Lake City government, view cable television channel 71 or visit our web site at http://www.slc.utus. The Council Office phone number is 535-7600. To submit comments to the Salt Lake City Council, call the 24-hour comment line at 535-7654; send a fax to 535-7651; e-mail individual Council Members from the web site or e-mail all Coundl Members at council.comments@ci.slc.ut.us PO_ Date Swirl SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC MEETING REGISTRATION FORM !a �T Agenda Item r Name IZASHMI Phone gc l - 3 4'l S 331 (please print dearly) Address ` g 5 "1 S'�` i u cC J U i ) 2 E-mail Address lick v)��v,��.t,�. C t•-)O t:wi t • Subject OKn 1 t C k A Ui tt i Al c Sal 0 K"rL,car i Pam' ;14wish to speak (i rin support of) -or- (D in opposition to) the subject noted above. 0 I do not wish to speak; however, I would like to submit remarks (please use back of card). How did you learn about this meeting? io:_S I would like to receive information about: O my community council O serving on a city board. To learn more about Salt Lake City government, view cable television channel 71 or visit our web site at http://www.sic.ut.us. The Council Office phone number is 535-7600. To submit comments to the Salt Lake City Council, call the 24-hour comment line at 535-7654; send a fax to 535-7651; e-mail individual Council Members from the web site or e-mail all Council Members at council.comments@ci.slc.ut.us -�•:�J ' rd SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL pat( a�v PUBLIC MEETING REGISTRATION FORM /— 9 —d ilb12"-11/, Agenda Item tor [ � Name r<.✓ ! "(" '", Phone .. - .,- / " cC (please punt dearly) Address " S---1 U [ t"�'' E-Mail Address Subject CI I wish to speak (a in support of) -or- (a in opposition to) the subject noted above. 0 I do not wish to speak; however, I would like to submit remarks (please use back of card). How did you learn about this meeting? 7/e* 4 r „ ► I would like to receive information about: 0 my community coundl 0 serving on a • board. To learn more about Salt Lake City government, view cable television channel 71 or visit our web site at http://www.slc.ut.us. The Coundl Office phone number is 535-7600. To submit comments to the Salt Lake City Council, call the 24-hour comment line at 535-7654; send a fax to 535-7651; e-mail individual Council Members from the web site or e-mail all Coundl Members at coundl.comments@ci.slc.ut.us (IL , ':;11ZZ trise SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Date 11)1 o PUBLIC MEETING REGISTRATION Forty ' df A, a "`',rT (, Agenda Item r Name foss„/ Phone (please print dearly) r� Address fie''" -. I' 9"X E-Mail Address APB'• ey. a Subject 1.-P*0•T- /.,.s X:gtre'eS, Y,�'jt �6r/,.1- 0,,) ❑ I wish to speak (❑in support of) -or- (❑ in opposition to) the subject noted above. 0 I do not wish to speak; however, I would like to submit remarks (please use back of card). How did you learn about this meeting? I would like to receive information about: 0 my community council 0 serving on a city board. To learn more about Salt Lake City government, view cable television channel 71 or visit our web site at http://www.slc.ut.us. The Council Office phone number is 535-7600. To submit comments to the Salt Lake City Council, call the 24-hour comment line at 535-7654; send a fax to 535-7651; e-mail individual Council Members from the web site or e-mail all Council Members at council.comments@ci.slc.ut.us 1111_�� Dar•" SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL ��tub PUBLIC MEETING REGISTRATION FORM --Q t �T. Agenda Item Vis Name Fs- 4-c�-- Phone tom(please print print clearly) Address E-Mail Address ( D 'rct`o,:\ czvc-N Subject 0 I wish to speak (O in support of) -or- (O in opposition to) the subject noted above. O I do not wish to speak; however, I would like to submit remarks (please use back of card). How did you learn about this meeting? I would like to receive information about: 0 my community coundl 0 serving on a city board. To learn more about Salt Lake City government, view cable television channel 71 or visit our web site at http://www.slc.ut.us. The Council Office phone number is 535-7600. To submit comments to the Salt Lake City Council, call the 24-hour comment line at 535-7654; send a fax to 535-7651; e-mail individual Council Members from the web site or e-mail all Council Members at council.comments@ci.slc.ut.us ♦►�-+.- Date SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL / PUBLIC MEETING REGISTRATION FORM i/,Z ��-� A L Agenda Item 1 T---I - 1 ' a Name J 1 I C/A IBC l) M W//C l CL Pr Phone 33-C-- 86 3,6 (please print dearly) C ci fr oc+ /U// 5 t?2 8 Z'G 3 Address 5 SG U 7/� vc�ca tv•S' *' c v T g /C/ E-Mail Address Subject /IAifJT4///4'c A OPT? '577C /4965i.d-/,`-« - .w t 14,,,, rd w A" 7 40Z 4' ,A-7- S c i c eL,574 ® I wish to speak (ia1 in support of) -or- (CI in opposition to) the subject noted above. O I do not wish to speak; however, I would like to submit remarks (please use back of card). How did you learn about this meeting? I would like to receive information about: O my community council O serving on a city board. To learn more about Salt Lake City government, view cable television channel 71 or visit our web site at http://www.slc.ut.us. The Council Office phone number is 535-7600. To submit comments to the Salt Lake City Council, call the 24-hour comment line at 535-7654; send a fax to 535-7651; e-mail individual Council Members from the web site or e-mail all Council Members at coundl.comments@d.slc.utus LET US MAINTAIN AN OPTIMISTIC POINT-OF-VIEW FOR OUR DOWNTOWN Avoid statements like "Get ready for the heart of Downtown to close for business until the Grand Opening in 2011." This appeared in one of the major newspapers which started out the wonderful announcement concerning the plans for the two Malls-Block Downtown. In the future, let us present a very Optimistic Point of View concerning the many wonderful Projects which have been successful in the Downtown Area and which are about to take place to make us one of the Finest Downtowns in America. Our goal should be to create unified efforts by the News Media, The LDS Church, Civic Organizations, City Officials and the General Public to show there support and loyalty to Downtown during the constructionfieriod. By doing this, businesses Downtown will not only SURVIVE but THRIVE. In other words, our Downtown will become more prosperous than most any Major City in America. Richard M. Wirick _ ridl ` u ALL:: r " t_ ry � . } r' CW •' "" ' "It will help create one of the finest downtowns in America. But [during construction] we were counting on [Nordstrom and Macy's] to stay open. It's going to be rough onus." RICHARD WIRICK, .proprietor oFOxTord Shop Reaction downtown =fie z3 n tii y Salt Lake Tribune file photo Oxford Shop owner Richard Wirick hopes the city and LDS Church can help merchants survive the construction period on Main Street. Merchants are mixed on Main makeover BY CHRISTOPHER SMART The SaitLa/ce Tribune Downtown Salt Lake City's future looks bright-if five years distant. Merchants believe if they can hang on through construc- tion of the City Creek Center,business will be good.And ur- ban planners say the blueprints unveiled by the LDS Church could signal a renaissance for downtown. But Oxford Shop owner Richard Wirick worries that when Nordstrom and Macy's close in January to make way for the $1 billion project,small merchants could be stung by a lack of foot traffic. "That's kind of a nightmare,"he said."We were counting on them to stay open.It's going to be rough on He hopes the city and LDS Church can help ■��— merchants survive the lone construction pe- - a r r r r z' O Z) pvi �'�O �.c "a-'-� d 0 0 0 n 500 W. 4 r. cri rn s � ��_ ; fl n, o Q e . ,,,lai 8 = O0'CI CD 400 W.ta (� ., -To vi U N-j = d CD ertD C A- 0 i•® O ce' S _ w^++� O- �� •ti 300 W. �.ro w O1 �'' 200 W. c o d 7 CD o N•0 rt = `. West Temple J e -o ti vi , n v, ,, Q r 3 o °: m o a_, �D cD �o R nCO h o gz, obs • n Statea . ci ce a n ftft ® p o ,-.. 0. �.111UiI _. _. _, 300 E. o o 0 �r R,c N ✓s - - a C•c0 c0 k<O 11) N __ , • 4,. ...... t., bloc rn x t 7 j O w 6 657 n n, g a- _b v S ui S'• = = cn l� 3 N•C.. X a m y N x 7o Fe"� v-0 c••> �"i o. �` +~ i. �. 1' c-0 - rr, a ro rt (--,0 �� p n �ro ro= o °"-^ = trort v, -, 0 o, -4 o .=i oc , o .., o G • n n..-{ (D n eD •--:C fD -.C. lD Q .� e ` O p T.-O< O tD-O<i O 'rt _e c O = X rp q c'' B cu O-O O -eD rD b 5-O 0 O o O o, o -� O n O O ', 'I H o O. n � eD` •N .y-F co ? N O O ' O ,,O •', O H Or .rt► B = d ° A Ofii 'c O '' _ ' tt ], O O q '� cD ,.fir 7 D x eD or 0 r _ .0 m '-r N A ,,t, N n 3 O G-,Q < '3 a •-O ��., �• cc o 7 W d . w 0-o A m/D -• i� o a ep .< N W,, O 2-0 o, J n, O y 3 S• sp N 7 0 sO O, = a n, .0--.d n, 0 D i,: a, op (, iD b p m -„ vim, X.z NCi _•�• 7 N O..O ig ro eD O. _ -< e O it; .�-t N = O b O 0 N = Al W Q ts O yl•► .-•ID y 32 A 1,11 C O�. G N x _ �' a • ,.n - O y O c < o 0- O 7 m DJ O O a n . n• G1 \ ei 3 H .— eD «•.m '5 CD 'may y o Q< e roa CD y .a O a e ro e f O. S. _''n N C C.L] n► y�pq '•� IIC, _ .O CD rt rp y ` -O " O n G n c Cu N ro 1 = d O- ip 1A - to• 0 -+ i. 1 n _ o' o % ro o CL o 0 n g3 n o o " o m C tet o < a e3 Lro ,h — N< ' eb O =• d'O h -D O eD � * ( rt rt • nn m =? c _. or c spur+��ac _ N o Z 0 'C oo �I r c v,cn o, r 0, = _ ..4 c, = x a, u. t c c o r=a o i O = LP.0 c LT,p = a.' Q WCon o o Q O ts. n CC x" O _,C < to n-'- _ , (D , O a n rnr Nti ;< eD G . co 0; ro O s O H O O O N v, .•�, O N n= O, < � �ro a �� o �O' O ff$ d d.y W -O+. ON ro to d W r ff, �„� n = rD = o, n N rt N G C co eD rs O n fD 0`.c I T g O Fr' :C.' O, C ,'O, O a' o,L --,. --, — ••► N c CD H cu _�-, -,i-► H H 1 CD et, oiDm r��--+„ O XO ey moo- rD .- o,A a x 7--0 = n3 -o C0 c r.CI _ a, --.-" c.� .+ o eft =..•. ...q co b r �3 < ID O •, N O N O, C O .D ° < -..c o <i II. ii `D co v= -' •o Cu pr -or. y `<a c o�y7O N v o n m_�c o m ," ro o�O .n O'0 �` T, .+h n C ro O C p�-o -�i eD a N Q = C i0 1=-.p, O N O n c r, = = W 0 '-. t O N CD .0 "'•• o 0, r o, eL e7 f"'� , -, n e ^, rD co (p ••� -a O (D !► • O�e"O n, eD Gc2 o _ Q .O O < �' C eD rp O 0, �D •<e> t7 G n O n, O O w-< �p d < C 1 CD N. o' _ = C, J iD •eD n Q O. * e-t N �• N = O� Q / 00.. OW; N N c G Q l9 OG w< =i30 d o c O N ".,= _.. 'p 7 `'1 n C. = y O c N Iv j3 \ro -, ''' 0 cu x n Q�' II IF 'D• Ori eD � c A t 1.(I CI .rrLL��.: r �y 1 .. o O c <-..--,,. ..,--_,- Q• D �R N o a Q •p eo < _ o R1 0 c ! ■ r\ ' ^ �� Y ' r c v a i ,'r _ a Z I- Zr i� Z o c� rlN. p. `•.F 'R. [ m v, _, o- o o y --. �'. Q rrir c o rn m�CD i., pj m' it �JlZ. eij4. (.� � (D n, Q n, 7C +)IN i , ( �(r, Lk 3 {� c/�' r c s c _ 10 Cr O cD c?- C' n- m O GZ! l k_l' (),g '.e N fD C� to '� N �'I Z fl, cD j� ( rA 9t�A o ram- c o o O `° Cu O •`o n�, r Z x 3 J, V c 5 N m II y 4 N : 6 p a n ^ n O N Q O N N �. H _ 76 . . 1), k 1. ,-,_, (..1 ; S" _ . rin o `�l (Ai 0 ^ v t� :::,. a (D ___ N n o G9 Q b m oD11} "1 j* n 1 �D C_. ci_a n n m r N O D o N o D -o U N Ni. o Cu �. N N O G7 y O cD eD �' n Q �< O p _ O <^ 1 1LL'tJ) jI . Ui. hU N ch. o c � t a CU CU _ h. =_- ;__D, (D I(. ).\ ri). il1 : 'A fTU. !It oc rD 0 v> -> 0 L fl^ E� i • C Q- 0. N a-, P' C, r'', `e `o O < n 3c _D : 0kq r o ;V,j Iv �' ° OO -. cQ1 a � CDnt> CO y Cu 'a t t. '44 rrr SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL `�� PUBLIC MEETING REGISTRATION FORM 1.)/ Agenda Item p ►T Name C cam' (-D L n� `' Phone < 1 LI - 1 4 .7 L (please print dearly) Address c) (39 E-Mail Address c, I bLi k- -t 1 L ;, Subject C c'� 2 �„�1 ��.;,.�- CI I wish to speak (li in support of) -or- (din opposition to) the subject noted above. • 0 I do not wish to speak; however, I would like to submit remarks (please use back of card). How did you learn about this meeting? I would like to receive information about: 0 my community coundl 0 serving on a city board. To learn more about Salt Lake City government, view cable television channel 71 or visit our web site at http://www.slc.utus. The Council Office phone number is 535-7600. To submit comments to the Salt Lake City Council, call the 24-hour comment line at 535-7654; send a fax to 535-7651; e-mail individual Council Members from the web site or e-mail all Council Members at council.comments@ci.slc.ut.us REFUGEE FACT-FINDING DISCUSSION November 9, 2006 Background: Council Members Carlton Christensen and Nancy Saxton have been meeting over the last two years with representatives from the Salt Lake City School District, as well as representatives from the Mayor's Office and various county and state agencies, to discuss refugee issues influencing the Salt Lake City community. These discussions have provided Council Members Christensen and Saxton a glimpse of the needs of the refugees, the programs and funding available to fill those needs, and areas where funding and resources are lacking. Some of the discussion topics have included the lack of adequate housing, the need to teach work skills, cultural issues, conflicts between refugee groups, overcrowded elementary schools, literacy, and language barriers. During the City Council retreat in January, 2006, the Council agreed to hold a refugee fact-finding discussion during one of their future Work Sessions. This evening, representatives from various agencies have been asked to provide five-minute presentations to the City Council in order to educate the Council and the public, and provide an opportunity for the Council to ask questions for clarification purposes. The presenters include the following: 1. Jane Willie: Family Involvement Coordinator, SLC School District 2. Miro Marinovich: Director, International Rescue Committee 3. Steven Haw: Asian Association Sh p,t Eti(~) 4. Rosemarie Hunter: University Neighborhood Partners and Hartland Project Director 5. John Erlacher: Principal, Mt. View Elem. School, SLC School District 6. Larry Broxton: Consultant and Refugee Grant Facilitator -eat Salt Lake City School District 440 East First South TEL: (801) 578-8599 Salt Lake City Utah 84111-1898 FAX: (801) 578-8685 Refugee Fact Finding Meeting of the Salt Lake City Council November 9, 2006 Family Involvement Program The job of the Family Involvement Assistant is done for the purposes/s of assisting parents and families of students in schools; conveying information regarding federal, state, and/or district activities and procedures; strengthening relationships between families and schools; assisting with communication with families; and assisting with learning opportunities for parents, families, and students. Three pressing issues pertaining to our refugee students/families and Family Involvement: 1. Need for cultural competency training of all Family Involvement Assistants. 2. Language/communication barriers with refugee families; lack of on-site language- specific translators. 3. Family Involvement program sustainability needed to continue to meet the needs of refugee families and to continue collaborative efforts with resettlement agencies. Jane Pasimeni Willie Family Involvement Coordinator Salt Lake City School District 440 East 100 South #209 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Phone: 801.578.8561 Email: jane.willie@slc.k12.ut.us FAX: 801.578.8291 Salt Lake City School District Refugee Count By Grade Level: 2006-07 Count of Sort alpha Grade Total 1 47 2 56 3 75 4 37 5 56 6 50 7 59 8 56 9 62 10 69 11 42 12 48 K 47 PK 12 Grand Total 716 11/6/2006 Salt Lake City School District Refugee Count By Country: 2006-07 Country Born Total Afghanistan 27 Africa 63 Belarus 1 Bosnia 61 Bulgaria 1 Burma/Myanmar 1 Cambodia 2 Chad 1 China 26 Congo 12 Croatia 10 Cuba 15 Dominican Republic 2 Ethiopia 16 Gambia 2 Haiti 1 Honduras 6 Iran 12 Iraq 11 Ivory Coast 7 Kazakhstan 1 Kenya 50 Kosovo 7 Liberia 26 Libya 1 Malaysia 1 Moldova 2 Nepal 4 Nigeria 1 Pakistan 23 Phillippines 10 Rawanda 5 Romania 1 Serbia 2 Sierra Leone 7 Slovakia 2 Somalia 159 Sudan 80 Thailand 4 Togo 3 Tonga 28 Uganda 2 Vietnam (South) 19 Zimbabwe 1 Grand Total 716 11/6/2006 Salt Lake City School District Refugee Count By Language: 2006-07 Language Total African Acholi 5 Afrikaans (S Africa) 4 Albanian 7 Amharic (Ethiopa) 2 Arabic 34 Bengali 2 Bosnian 47 Burmese 1 Cantonese 2 Chinese 9 Creole 5 Croatian 5 Dari 5 Dinka 19 English 105 Farsi 25 French 13 German 2 Karen 1 Korean 1 Krahn 11 Kru (Liberia) 7 Kurdish 7 Lamala 1 Lingala 2 Mabian 11 Madi 1 MaiMai 52 Mandarin 3 Mavi Mavi 8 Mushunguli 5 Nepali 2 Nuer(Sudan) 14 Other 3 Other Slavic 2 Pashto (Pakistan, Afganistan) 5 Persian 3 Philipino/Tagalog 2 Punjabi 4 Samoan 1 Serbian 1 Serbo-Croatian 11 Somali 167 Spanish 23 Swahili (S Africa) 21 Talug (Asian) 2 Thai 2 Tongan 17 Twampa 7 Ukrainian 1 Urdu 9 Vietnamese 17 Grand Total 716 11/6/2006 Salt Lake City School District Refugee Count By Ethnicity: 2006-07 Ethnic Total African American 415 Asian 125 Caucasian 99 Hispanic 25 Other 22 Pacific Islander 30 Grand Total 716 11/6/2006 }. i l iii '� ( Al S9 •�, I If '. ''4* I ID;' Cot ,, ' 'z, 1 ?07 �0. .i '' 72, 78 O ,-V:1 .• , . .. V -,` i. , �J--. to .,,x, tit (1) cii) a -, , , . CI C : U -- : ‘-- WI, I 1 _ , iiiiii:104. co) . ..11 ~�= _ s. N v -.gym.. j g .:. �-�,` .: �+ ,O 4-1M ' � ma y-•. c,, -44 r ._._ >'0��..yyy v ' -, ... 1.11818 ' '''°"4"' -,;.;.t.,-.-,..•';''',.,• •-,_-,.. Y" cts '1) '7"t" ►.ems 4 N q O (IDQ' CT /P P> O_ O ( O cn� W O `C3 !, nC r m liti 6,,,,, .., cn , ,_, ,_.,, ,..• p..) • K ,'S ":F `lad 'E ' f Cr t �� w I . I .,� r zj +� 'v" Y r 4 O s ,zrl L, k 4c_a • ,.' dq 0 !D T3 Y _ ti "ts1'= • • : 4 ' i i if* ' '''' -'-.7-4;'''''' ''• —‘i:-J4.:,---,,...'.—,...-[:-A '''.,,....,:iftr.. gi. i, • \ ,r. c .3-11,-'Yn, wtrt gLr,..v5i .ems V is . �.g .}# t 4' f 1 t� �'� a„i y s �., €. r f} it o `... r , '. :''• '''i'' 1' " ''-' USA 1 , 'V1,-,-,'-:':-.:--?". --4 vitotiV,--. •:,. ,r_ "r` , Ca _ r. 4 4V--,-:, 'ii ... `.g 1 1 f, 6+ 8 a fC iw -J ,� ' . d- "t r:114 , ..i. ,q4 pi.,,, ---t. t • .� a / E C 1 �t ., *y‘4618 � j ,qiii v • ..,, CZ: 4114 Pql L .„, , : , . _ ..... ., .. . .... ,,,,,_ , , ... cc (I) , .._ ,:4 .,1, • C.I.,.,„t cs.) , IV s '10111, • • • • • ":":: : '14 , .,:::„.:,,,,;.:,..,4,..., .. i t;ks• - CJ OP jai .. /�'.g~' J� .-•l O"" ��'� ..::„.:_„‘ f r ss Gl N � r r .coIvrACArr'o O p:, .-:'go r- <j O +fir }A• 9�. _. [ - a ^-h N , `.. rt, z ' ' L •`� titi p'' P C7Q '"'n �' CA C GYr A"' g E 6 p (D ',. Q f * k - • x p n CD T. 7 cr LIB �„ �Y� <' ! �- ('D r .• a T- .' . 'tea ,.� '.. 'r Y - .Y 1C". 6 '" Cr .3 INEEx " ` i • 6 IY` - • a �:: ' At ,-' �1 4 1 v 1 e ,t, ' / �" ' +r ' c • t u f.[ .,may W1F' .. ;. Ai V2 ,'� M. +'')G I�'''AAF y '' .7,,( ,, :'•4 s � ;l *ca yt '• ;;• [ f ' 1. ` \i.. A 1�, OZ t a i- .. ? t '�w is f - n !.s • • • 4,.,_ . ..,„. .--„-.........t....A:. ,11. '.,.,. t ., IT, ' , Aiti;JA; . ',..,.;_ •. I -• 4N. -t4,..itif(f'',A., _ 4r • co• i )• 0y_ L :rr , , r- fl ; c v 78 a °' cct 2-4 .� a c�a 6 y b• aVA > -5 � V yt ▪ v >~ N .fl cd O aJ +' cif. ; ¢ y Oc z tcC v p s L) a) U +J •� -,- g (61, -- ' - 'JD 5 �� v `) -, O cz "' '•0 ▪ by can O J --,.. aJ rot v r p -� va aH cu �it '`' . O . s-: .2 aJ aJ ,S, a�i v cad cc1 'd at cu p . p N .., .•0 vi v U 'd ct3 O ~ U at) a s ce E s.. as _ ,_ cdj Z CU Q cn cub. p Ov -0 , x 0 v .ctS LI y" U 4.) 1"� (uQ., cli 5 v a) 2 bA v E . y U ro c3 «S v as �] -, v +., , a> cd Q, c/) C , . ,, vC ;: a Q, v O Q 0 v O. s Q Cl.) sq. !�" .t~ Os. VD v s. °� '� vi N v bA a) v .xo a a -j .F., U Y UC o s. • CC: 00 a) O v; O QJ aJ cd p CC U LT, p O +� O N W '`O., O p trp ii�`7"•MIM o m Q m �°j O re-)0 in v • aso _ ad 2 t'y "" tct — -[i . via, ov - 2a, r.. 5 C Z ,.., ,, 0 ,,,, ,__ -•-• ;.,4 , ,•_,‘ �r• ctY a.) Gl N s-, cu ••,-, s., s" ��, vai cn a)013.4Q 0 p, Q Q aJ Q, UWN � < �; V ci e t p (fin Aa .�, ( .-1- z n) to) rD N ,-r �s N ,a n•, Aa Ra �. V tnt1 ti n O_ - tar -,-1 tl cn c rr " j A cn ,y r t pa M nn CD W ' • rr a, rD C ,- .to,. 1 CIQ pa .� 6 0 6 ` ab } UflHi1_el) r' r G • INF • r, w np " 0Oxn to O p 0 n. " C1 r`�¢, a pro ro Q- t�*t r, . rD pa n ,� r rt r as _s*sa�1 ky s- O O "''4 pa _` ._ COv .-r rr v W` N va '� O Chi '• O Cl �-• :S .ter rD :3 Pa �, ••t CI,QD -. w cn O O O :1. v rt r ,,.5 awl\= n O - ~ CIQ rp p `,, fici) C 111111, Pa , . € `. CtQ tom . -d 11 4. a, O ,_ ; ; o...,,, i.41C: ,:,),-- 't,i';',.::_. , .,,,,., `� y v - . f l 1 u# r, c� �• bA cdIs.IIIIIC. - ---,I:, U - OO tt uw . +a -a:,]. cn • 0 �O .^. Q. O Q - u qj • U O E • �` cd (. ` IL_ `� .......... rr U _U j N ct N ..� C7 C7 .� g5' cc c ) • • i biD ¢, O r ,•- N O U z. ~ N _ O _ a ' OI) cnv ,Op -. ,. ca.) p 4-. ,.., u - •El', U cC CID O O _v p sue. al Y W S�. 01 v `- . V 0 V) c. 'i CD �, Y,r U v v U b O - 3 !., v� '�1 ("NIcoU bA O O .° v p f' x a V ++ U 'C3 ^-, m U In.,Z O p -� ,by p sue. a .r. c� oP' U v rn w CI. o '� o `D p p o t" �7 a n ,- rD (0 FL r"' �' + ,0,� �. C `C ,-ems x itt, ....e(i,. - to,,,,.._----A, 1 p cn o O O • �' s o rJq n .- _ rD illtk O C o ,t d x ',� = 0 ,. ro �* to t� N ni C C 0 n _ - ett„, As e-' to Q - v' 1 A> - n - _, • n , 1 4 `G o -2, n '- n n O U Q (D _ yP " CD v¢ � t �' r A. a Cp n �perD' is x n .-I. cn P 0. c.Ct o + �- � O m O co O- G. O co n' P? p r� h7 !L.' ,,yam • �' v ��+ # CJq '-'. ^ n N n0 r v 'G eh G A ti, L3 si' A C--" viatif " . 1 r C C v ,.t tv O cn cn a rD O �+ 0 ,., , Y e4 O (D �1 r CS CI+ n tJ'Cf O CD-t =•�� .. ti n r' r. to o x �.. co n O C v; a ,-+ 0 . is iii r'D CS O rat '' n '-0 O CD C _ - C ¢• N e tit t O "d bA'77 CCt�, a �, �-+ .� O O O O Q x - v v Q- .N O O -" D1J v ,c n �y U cd v y O u 4 V 'v) O y ''' bA p O v� ' 9. p C4 U r-. 'FJ ,� v 0 C.-.) bjo " n r CV Ste'" C`i) v E 7,y .-., . 4J , W CI U O O U O v p '� t ? n .v v p Q 3 b��A p O G� w/ �" +' +' v cv p v s ., • t,� O E4! U cl) 4. O v v v A O QQ., ul p C - r' O OO - v v� Nc pO � CI L. - O ,' } 'Z (© Mg a L o v C D 3 0 . : rtd 'C3 cd , 'd O 78 V �' • cct • v vv,-� - S� v cl C . . I.! (» �" I-) a,) c� C • • O +r cla •-, •a s-, v v +� v v v ... 2 U cd �. E Z...) by •.. N � .L. � 7 U v W..) iV. v +O! G !tv' O v ! Ov :: .:7 a¢ ' I' i.+� w "rrl � v •� I) cd v O O -v a, U C) N(4 Ctt y v " o = 7;1/4:-':,:,;,..,, C .711 F.0 w 0I Z7 .U 0 r-. O O A,) 8 O 'fit 3 `cg C "S cp !D N W p 1: E. .:. ib�5, .'z. ,may. fD rn. (D 'Z$ fn '��.5' �' ry A) �• Sv CD r+ p� CS' U: Ifi cc) Ig• Ufl !oD "" CD $ r r ((it; ` O CD i••t ""1 j O A> "' 0 O CI CD CI) CD iJUH a n n. f,CD '10 p O ... t 0.. ' ''0 pn ¢• rD, n r eD ate"' a> P el 5' O " Pa" Q.. `.3 O � O r0r r�r s O C r v O CD `.� �+ �, � ""S �" cm, 'C3 x (1). D ryf P r* tD Up r+ t3, n miliiiiiii. ,:::,‘,: 5 Cra tv �t .t n O P r„' '* CD ". w fD i k p (� p O U4' p CD Y v `� ray O C) n `� 0 to 0- p C• 6 . CIQ Z1, 0 CD O Z a O y ,-r • `U ¢ P 5 O P '3 CD ¢, 0, z"-. vcn n O .CDt — — ,; (� pa O O CI, rr �• • rD rn cr A' �'• 0 'C O' �- UQ co O 0. • is - q. r $1' -• O .ry A� 'rt r•,_ h - U' -I ,,N.- QP .mot `L3 O �. CD A� CM) O O r r rr r * -t ao "; - Y o n v r* "t M C• 'CS Vn CD n '71 , 'C3 0' p "t P� n CD "t .-t , „ic. . t,, `,,,„1,.' "[...:.` '‘' „,..ilter4,%%,h,','& '10 11) .-I- 9 tT1 co N n y �' -,.#ems. r s #, CD CD Vq Z1. hz3 _ .' CAD CD �• ,, �5 • CD o �"S•. rD 5 rD n _i tom.+ ro OfDy Q, C� �^ ,fit , ) A.. - , .,. — , rrt 00 J ' p� rrt O 1-1 Cn 'C. ,........0..-- 9-I 1.9 I •H iR Z`�0"°06 2z Y� /j.,' 3AiNC` c • 0 • 0 fill t '5 U i V 2 E. m - 3 o Vi- u i f ,a,;y >; :1'cu +. •• �' y ..-' t Fw0 \ c0 eC, .. .- it' ", g g hO � O � v 0 6, C b .i .0moE Oi m. Of +o V e EA r 0 O — ,., vl Q' ..It y O = 6, 'Li E C .2 c o = 4 73 v 'i. o a i = •; v .2 v It • • '•4 wvi \ O N p O C a E N lit i 11 - .': 'P." c, C L d I o o c V L.1. 1 ®� o w o i Y v I 0 • t $ 1( 1 2 5 0 ,a, rII E v E « ntilL11 01 '1 _ ( r'c L.,' m O w 0 c . 3 E v `o o .. o o T. c c t 14, i d n E . 1 o. n ., :2., 1 t :1J" - y oE _5u Z c 2,A � o ,_Na C N .0 WC N L O _ X V .- t D N wc E g o a .0 2, un o ,; °' Z ' .- o w •y ' C r rn E a 5 E o. Ql E .08 Eo c c n, o 3 i u O c m c C .p.. o u t. aT+ w y C u p Q n 0- . m , h a c °u v u Z c Lv, z o uo u `m?c 3 A o+ u Y N a Z N vi 5 ?, - 0 0_, C . a.. a0., - c L'p Ec „cu, g c Y v .`o u N > u .0 0 - O b h O 72 vi C ' E u 2 > O = h u ,e 'a o O O E `° N _ e u 0 0 V '� ti 4. ¢O t ' in .g c m n Lvr � 0 ... 0-. et h a.' °'. L .0 o.V.n >0 00 `V Q ,.9 > c c t E c E I. v 0 0 a E u rE 3 , v O p ON v E H 'a E 01 0 O v ..y = .� c c c Cam- 61 v a 4, 0 o O• . u Ti V 0 O, = 0 0 O m E C > > .c c n o v u v i CS '� PS v N ON d U 9 U d H m H G Vl N v�i H N v tQa 9 N r y y 0 �. -V 0 G C. .0 2 6: 7 c c d A E •v 7 o c c c�'i, o E c • o u 3 y �` c ��oo c . E c o r 'CS E O o o c. ;� rn B a o c a9 >- 'CS `° o .- E i, E .o ,1 t O 0 i h c, C E a 4, O a z E 2 H •W �' O O •' Ea MM.;iIiII Jfl E • o Q o,,c • Z ' ,IkliS � �cu EcoYYZ F ' B 3 E oQ N o m ' \ A ` 4= E o T4!o E $o f c l u = `u c o m 'o c S ✓.,' cn L t E A c Y 0 j E o a —�j't• ,Vv.;,..... • B u g t = o, i . . o o 7RR EN j O, C j mg.- L o - Yo ' i o V u w n % m E E o, O .Z . t J D y; C c W E _ v Ti- w a .'' o, G N n `o a�i 'c W m a .. u u m .t. 0 3 c i w-- c o E a c v E v d m 14 • • 4 S • • u > u 2''' ' vO C) Ct C > A 2 2 v c o -oO ( o..N- Q., y a 0 n m EuO 'C v > c > u u ry 4, z O 4, r 4Y Y v oO "et a C • 0 O •z 8 23 a v a E t n EZ c $ ,vcc u �'] ; u E a r ( �q` ; g o c H o, .E n[e 4 w c L .o -- 'E ` L a� 9 3 u c' y ¢ E 1, a a "E ) r 3 v `w° u o u o u L L C R - W ti L i w5 ' , — a c E J{ a $ u A co @ ' i` r .. ... . ... . i ,,... is . ,,k.,...: , .. „ 0: Ida �� t� c.� • N , XV 1.'1111)iiip . , . , 1 vi *:G , ... . , • .....- fp 101% * O sj N �- 3 O rc�a Gca ° .� .. 'v o 7• � QO 00 • -✓ "@ p- - ,o �,�o o ✓ ��c Ilia '8cac� o 7N o7 . ••• ', o- rA • • O .i*.f, r " . 05 05 la N� G� D G ' lir (3 o CS 0) °a, Q, v c9 •1111:-.01: m o o � cL9 yr . . • y .o co c L. $ E f c o � > --o g a y CE, o a Q -ca� i i /Il al co C13E o � CA 1D CA ea y ,� G u cri - CO z .41. 8 o ._ v Ta a "w 0%, 3 r Y 3 v a al N ° ? °' E r cO o m )_, CU $ C Cr 3 0 oc p an C .S O r •a `^�`a U ,G d arm . .W O rn > > CD co O r h •C L a) nm ya3 a) in O o a O c c Q #. io n H n Qi S o) 3 ° a m c o = a C 0 •> may y a ra a s C.) ' O . w w U U CO) • y a c cc . it„ o r c CD I (D " i a c c • U a IL `v E U L` ycm O a 1_ . . a) CO o m y t (^ C �' m CO Q o' f ID • a o v c r a ° c c U w L uJ ..�" d •C CO a o w 3 r m a. li , "6 c > a co U CO a L L y a a c c a o. •c o 3 1-1 > ° t a rn a`, La `O E ay �.' o �- L = K a� o v e n r � k Q. E !a c- c = o a �� o d a u, .c Ca + Cr o O N V.p 2 .W E ra _c a •c c c a m a s ° • »o a c .aa) m L -0 U mU1 � ° oaa) Q 3 `- N ` OcmN m �" N U Z �7 a U a w .a.. _ .c N ' ° mac — X0 3 � �� a ; = a m Uw � � ra i Q)S. J • mac! 0 CET - V - ., : CU • o i0 M • CO 02)4.4 o` a U ? as !� o U U L :13 cu '� r C. o ;' a c V c 0 OF W aF pg,RP go11111111 1 Q `(o ` Z�n i *NJ 0 - . a L �o fir' ''' . .µ Q Q •aX rrw 1 . • • 10 c ` „ft I 4 ti �r a o c Q1 co � A co Fimmiip /11 gi p 3 NOV 0 2 2006 RICHARD GRAHAM SA A, G, IITY GORPORATIDI 1 ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSO PUBLIC SERVICES DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES MAYOR COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL TO: Rocky Fluhart, DATE: November 2, 2006 Chief Administration Officer THRU: Sam Guevara Chief of Staff FROM: Rick Graham, Director 0197 Public Services Department SUBJECT: Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility Waste Hauling Program STAFF CONTACT: Rick Graham 535-7774 Linda Hamilton, Director 468-3780 Salt Lake County Public Works Department DOCUMENT TYPE: Briefing Report RECOMMENDATION: No Council action requested. BUDGET IMPACT: None DISCUSSION: Salt Lake City and Salt Lake County jointly own the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility (Landfill). A Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) is set up between the City and County that spells out the role and responsibility of each government agency. Under the MOU the County is responsible for management of the Landfill. Management is an executive function, and in the case of the Landfill management decisions are held by the County Mayor and his administrators. The City and County jointly own the Transfer Station located at 3300 South and 500 West. Municipal waste from both the City and County is hauled to the Transfer Station, and then is reloaded and transferred to a permanent landfill site for final disposal. Since 1999 the City's and County's municipal waste has been hauled from the Transfer Station to private landfill sites under a contractual agreement with Allied Waste. Allied Waste owns the private landfill sites. Currently the Transfer Station waste is hauled to Tooele County. As a private customer, Allied Waste also hauls waste it collects from its 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 148, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 801.535.7775 FAX: 801-535.7789 WWW.SLCGOV.COM commercial customers to the Landfill. The contract between the Landfill and Allied Waste allows the Landfill to cancel the contract on 30 days notice. Two recent events have dramatically affected the operation and financial viability of the Landfill. First, 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. Second, the amount of waste hauled to the Landfill has declined significantly. The Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council (Landfill Council)is established under the MOU to represent the interests of the City and County by overseeing the operation of the Landfill. In action to reverse the financial hemorrhaging caused by the recent events the Landfill Council issued a waste hauling RFP for the purpose of considering an alternative waste hauling program. Based on the results of the RFP, and other management considerations the Landfill Council recommended to the City and County Mayors that the contract with Allied Waste be terminated and a new contract be awarded to a private waste hauler that would truck waste from the Transfer Station to the Landfill. This recommendation received unanimous support by the Landfill Council. It is also supported by both Mayors. Attached, is an analysis of this issue prepared by Salt Lake County. It describes the current situation and recommends three (3) actions the Landfill could take to restore financial stability to the Landfill operation. The analysis also reports that the Landfill has a current estimated life of 49 years. In conclusion, changes to the Solid Waste Management environment in Salt Lake County forced a change to the current Landfill operation. The attached analysis will show that the decision to hire a private hauling contractor to truck waste from the Transfer Station to the Landfill, coupled with the restructuring of disposal prices will increase operating income at the Landfill by $2,375,000. PUBLIC PROCESS: This issue was fully discussed in open public meetings held by the Landfill Council. Analysis of Current Financial Problems at Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Operations Purpose Statement Assess the current financial situation of the Salt Lake Valley Landfill and Transfer Station Explore existing capacity in Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Propose a course of action to address the financial loss associated with lower tonnage being received at the landfill Current Situation Two recent events have dramatically affected the operation and financial outlook of the Solid Waste Management Division. First, the previous arrangement of hauling waste via rail to the ICDC facility in Carbon County ended. Second, the amount of waste going to the Salt Lake Valley (SLV) Landfill has declined significantly. Until April of 2006, Allied Waste (a private solid waste management corporation) annually hauled roughly 165,000 tons of waste collected from commercial customers to the SLV Landfill. Allied also hauled roughly 165,000 tons annually from the SLV Transfer Station to its landfill in Tooele. In April, Allied opened its own transfer station to maximize its profit. The result is that Allied now diverts 40% of the waste it previously took to the SLV Landfill to its transfer station. This action, with all other things being equal, represents an estimated annual loss of income at the SLV Landfill of $1,130,000 ($4,300 per day). It is very likely that this situation will worsen as Allied's transfer station becomes fully operational and is able to divert more tonnage to its landfill. In the meantime, the SLV Landfill continues its contract with Allied to haul waste from the SLV Transfer Station to Allied's landfill. We are paying $23.85 per ton for hauling and disposal. Continuing the current agreement with Allied will reduce the annual owners' dividend which currently is supporting a program in the Salt Lake Valley Health Department and Salt Lake City's recycling program. Allied recently submitted a proposal for a new agreement. Its proposal stated the County would guarantee Allied 165,000 tons of waste annually and Allied would seek to supply 160,000 tons. Allied stated it could not guarantee 160,000 tons because of uncertainty regarding its contracts. Unless there is a ton for ton swap,the proposed agreement does not work financially for the SLV Landfill. There were other issues in Allied's proposal that were less advantageous than the current agreement as well. It did not make good business sense to do anything other than reject Allied's proposal, simply because the contract price to haul and dispose of waste at $23.85/ton exceeds managements projected cost at $18.50/ton to do the same. Plan to Restore the Financial Stability of Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Operations The SLY Landfill can stop the financial hemorrhaging by taking three actions. First, the Landfill Council recommended hiring a private hauling company to haul City and County waste from our transfer station to our own landfill for S5.50 per ton plus a fuel surcharge. This will replace the waste Allied has diverted to its landfill. Additional revenue from Allied will be lost; however, the high cost to haul and dispose at $23.85/ton will also be eliminated. An alternative to hiring a private hauling company to haul City and Cotmty waste from our transfer station to our own landfill was to purchase trucks and trailers and self haul the waste. 1 Second, increase the use of the SLV Transfer Station by other commercial haulers by making its pricing structure more competitive. Current policy restricts other commercial haulers from taking waste to our transfer station. Third, phase out our existing contract with Allied Waste over the next six months. The current Allied contract has a 30-day cancellation provision. Financial Analysis The spreadsheets below identify four scenarios and the financial implications of each. The first scenario represents actual revenues and expenditures for 2005. A one-time transfer to designated fund balance was eliminated for comparability. This scenario reflects operations prior to the opening of Allied's transfer station. Operating income in 2005 was $4,035,496. These funds go toward owners' dividend, which are currently supporting Health Department programs for the County and recycling for the City, pre- subtitle D closure, module construction, restoration and end use, facility replacement, equipment replacement, capital improvement, environmental liability, and post-subtitle D closure/post closure costs. Scenario 1: 2005 Baseline Description Landfill (L/F) T-Station (T/S) L/F f T/S Actual 2005 Total Tons 626,705 140,197 Total Revenues $13,805,617 $3,939,444 $17,745,061 Total Costs $8,866,208 $4,843,357 $13,709,565 Operating Income $4,939,409 ($903,913) $4,035,496 The second scenario represents the projected budget for the balance of 2006. Reflected is the loss of 1 30,000 tons from the waste stream compared to 2005 tonnage levels. The tons lost by customer is as follows: Allied Waste—45,100 tons, Waste Management— 40,900 tons, Ace Disposal — 32,200 tons, A-1 Disposal— 6,400 tons, all others —5,400 tons. It illustrates the impact of Allied diverting 40% of its waste stream away from the SLV Landfill and continuing the contract with Allied wherein it trucks the majority of City and County waste to its landfill. The SLV Landfill and Transfer Station lack hauling capacity and therefore have limited ability to manage income. In essence, income at these facilities become more dependent on Allied's operation than in-house operations. Thus, scenario three is presented expanding hauling capacity. • Scenario 2 : 2006 Projected Budget - Status Quo-Continue Allied Contract/Lose 40°10 of Allied Waste Stream and loss of additional tons Description Landfill (L/F) T-Station (T/S) LJF + T/S Projected Budget 2006 Total Tons 497,459 130,059 Total Revenues $11,918,631 $3,719,444 $15,638,075 Total Costs S8,019,685 S4,731,959 S12,751,644 Operating Income $3,898,946 ($1,012,515) $2,886,431 The third scenario represents the same operating assumptions as scenario two but on a pro forma basis eliminating the profit made by the division during the transition period. The operating income would have been reduced to $866,991. Scenario 3: If the Contract change was not made: Description Landfill (L/F) T-Station (T/S) L/F + T/S Total Tons 408.518 165.000 Total Revenues S10,649,956 $3,719,444 $14,369,400 Total Costs $8,683,113 $4,819,296 S13,502,409 Operating Income $1,966,843 ($1,099,852) $866,991 The fourth scenario represents the recommendation of the Landfill Council, Public Works Department and CFO Office; to contract a private hauling company to haul City and County municipal waste to the SLV Landfill. The assumptions in this scenario are that Allied will divert 80% of its waste to its transfer station rather than the current rate of 40% and assumes the SLV Transfer Station adopts more competitive rates so that other haulers are encouraged by price to use the transfer station. The pro forma projects the addition of 200 tons per day, which is believed to be a realistic estimate. Attached are letters from Waste Management and Utah Independent Waste Handlers and Recyclers, which represent most of the smaller hauling companies, indicating their willingness to bring waste to the SLV Transfer Station if prices are competitive and their waste does not go to their competitor, Allied Waste. Reflected in the budget is the elimination of the hauling/disposal costs to Allied at $23.85 per ton and the inclusion of the hauling costs to a private hauling company at $5.50 per ton plus a fuel surcharge. On a forward looking basis, operating income increases by S2,375,000. This increase will inure to the benefit of Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City via increased dividends and funds for the purposes identified above. 3 Scenario 4: Contract Haul; 200 TPD from commercial c $24/ton; lose 80°I0 Allied waste Description Landfill (L/F) T-Station (T/S) L/F + T/S Budget Request 2007 Total Tons 592,518 217,000 Total Revenues $10,023,956 $4,867,444 $14,891,400 Total Costs $8,662,113 $2,986,766 $11,648,879 Operating Income $1,361,843 $1,880,678 $3,242,521 s 1zx + gp 17, kx-VEl. " v^.:ex c s't�s °"`r r�i N: Life of the landfill The current estimated life of the SLV Landfill is 49 years with a capacity of disposing 35 million tons. This calculation does not include an additional 170 acres already owned by Solid Waste Management that yields an additional capacity of 16,400,000 tons, or 23 years. If we entered into an agreement with Allied where it seeks to supply 160,000 tons annually and is successful in doing that, the life of our landfill would not be extended. We would be close to a ton for ton swap of waste with Allied. There are a couple of events that might affect the capacity at the SLV Landfill including the pending development of the west bench. Each of these events is briefly addressed below. Removing waste from old landfills It is possible the County may have to move waste from its old landfill (that Salt Lake County leased from the LDS Church) to its current landfill. There is roughly 610.000 tons at the old landfill,. If we had to accept all the waste from the landfill, it would utilize 2% of the 35,000,000 ton capacity at the current site. That would reduce the life of our landfill by only one year. There is also an old City landfill that is estimated to contain roughly the same amount of debris as the old County landfill. If we removed all the debris from the old City landfill it would reduce the capacity of our landfill by another 2%. Removing the debris from both the old landfills would reduce the capacity at our existing landfill by roughly 4%, or two years. 4 It is likely, however, that Allied and others would compete for that waste. It is entirely possible that the SLV Landfill would not need to take the waste. Earthquake To provide some perspective, the California Northridge earthquake generated 5,250,000 tons of debris. An earthquake of that magnitude would use 15%, or 7.35 years, of the capacity of the current landfill operations. West Bench The west bench is likely to develop over the next 45 to 70 years. It is incomprehensible that during that timeframe no new technology would be developed to make better use of waste. In fact, we have had a meeting with a company that stated that current technology is in use in Europe to recycle 100% of our waste stream. If, however, we assume an increase in population from the West Bench of 1/2 million over 50 years starting in 2010, the life of the current operating landfill would be reduced by five years. In summary. if there was a convergence of events including level growth on the west bench, a Northridge size earthquake, and removal of debris from both the City's and County's old landfills, capacity at the SLV Landfill would be reduced by 14.4 years. If, however, we add existing owned and permitted capacity of 16,400,000 tons (or 23 years), the net affect would be to reduce the life of the owned and permitted SLV Landfill to 58 years. Privatization The division of Solid Waste is an enterprise fund. As such, it is operated like a business. Private alternatives are available in the Salt Lake County market. However,.Public Works management has been advised by Management Partners, a national consulting firm, that privatizing public landfills often leads to pride increases due to the oligopolistic nature of the industry. It is management's belief the landfill is currently operating at an efficient level. Indeed, the tipping fee of the SLV Landfill is among the lowest in the state. A much more detailed analysis should be conducted before considering privatization as an option: 5 Conclusion There have been changes in the solid waste environment in Salt Lake County that create the need for changes to our current operations. The County Mayor has adopted the unanimous recommendation of the Landfill Council to hire a private hauling company to haul waste from the SLV Transfer Station to the SLV Landfill. This decision, coupled with a new pricing structure at the SLV Transfer Station, is projected to increase operating income at the SLV Landfill by $2,375,000 (or$9,000/day). Capacity at the SLV Landfill, including the permitted 170 acres, can absorb: • Waste from Salt Lake County's and City's old landfills • Debris from an earthquake the size of the California's Northridge earthquake • Expansion on the west bench Even after absorbing solid waste material from these events, the landfill has an estimated remaining life of 58 years. Additional properties are also available for acquisition to expand capacity for another 29 years. Solid Waste Council is comprised of: • Rick Graham, Salt Lake City's Public Services Director • Ryan Dupont, Head of the Division of Environmental Engineering Division at Utah State • Russ Willardson, Public Works Director for West Valley and representative for the Council of Governments • Kent Miner, Salt Lake Valley Health Department • Linda Hamilton, Salt Lake County's Public Works Director • Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility Financial Analysis-Summary Scenario 1: 2005 Baseline Description Landfill (LIE) T-Station (T/S) LIE + T/S Actual 2005 Total Tons 626,705 140,197 Total Revenues $13,805,617 S3,939,444 S17,745,061 Total Costs S8,866,208 S4,843,357 S13,709,565 Operating Income $4,939,409 ($903,913) $4,035,496 ,_. ,�.., F.t .' .l;:<;' �{-„,.,, a., 4<..•w ,�,.St0;*,, ,.:,..b.. ,„, to .a� ...,, - a;..�; .:,qb t�'�"�T?+;:.� r�'hY- tz %; Scenario 2 : 2006 Projected Budget - Status Quo-Continue Allied Contract/Lose 40% of Allied Waste Stream and loss of additional tons Description Landfill (L/F) T-Station (T/S) L/F + T/S Projected Budget 2006 Total Tons 497,459 130.059 Total Revenues S11,918,631 $3,719,444 $15,638,075 Total Costs S8,019,685 $4,731,959 $12,751,644 Operating Income $3,898.946 ($1,012,515) $2,886,431 Scenario 3: If the Contract change was not made with existing tonnages Description Landfill (LIF) T-Station (T/S) LIF + T/S Total Tons 408,518 165,000 Total Revenues $10,649,956 S3,719,444 S14,369,400 Total Costs $7,984,283 $5,518,137 S13,502,420 Operating Income $2,665,673 ($1,798.693) $866,980 Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility Financial Analysis-Summary Scenario 4: 2007 Budget Request - Contract Haul; 200 TPD from commercial @ $24/ton; lose 80°I0 Allied waste Description Landfill (L/F) T-Station (T/S) L/F + T/S Budget Request 2007 Total Tons 592,518 217,000 Total Revenues $10,023,956 $4,867,444 $14,891,400 Total Costs $8,511,549 $3,137,330 $11,648,879 Operating Income $1,512,407 $1,730,114 $3,242,521 j -I -i d r 0 < 0 -i 2S0500 -0 CO 'D X3 (f1 O xl � � O1 � S Ni v --1a O n aON co m a Er'D D 0Nu N < N < < N _D tO < a � O g O N D ' nn0O N C CO U) D 13lm tD N N . ii N a a a z N . N O to al cv w 77 a c D m m v O m m o _ v n o> N v. Xo m (D m (D O N a (D to O Ow O N ;U (n < T W C 7 O. _-3 (D �. = X CD -n O c) _ O N W ty m o 0 0 o m m g m m o o m 3 ii aal I tv � 0 ill w _ 0 Os -> N N r o o 7 CD M N am+ Co V CAD N O) Q) CO Sc Sc CD (L) O N G d m O n; V N O) 0) _ - - A -1 C Ol N Q) -+ O O — N - N (ll W O O) (9 (D .i O C C O C O OD (0 G D) 0, = 0 CO Co w N C V) W -, C. C0 fJ) V) N W O Co C -• A O CO CO a -D R' CD 00 o r -+ N co O -+ C..) N A CD C 0 m 0 C N W A O C G ' r Sctli (D CD CD C. 0- lD t -C2 I'. -, O C(X) C) O N CD = (n �G ACDCD O) aq < r w i+ CU O d Sc G A I)) n. N N (O N t7 C CO O C,,, Cn co = A D (0 N Sc CO -I C -� A -) C) C W (ll W -' ~ A -' W N Co A v hi C - N -1 W da O C 0, W -, -I- --, A 4' N N CO CO N O 5- Co co A C O O) O _, _, O O �1 W -Co (D A C.O O U) CO C 01 O Q �' N c0 co Q A - CO O -J CD c6 O) O W W 6) A A '' O CD co cJ) O) C En Eq fA N O AO C W A -1 C:),O CD A -+ W CA C N -1-CD = co '' Cn .-.• CD N C W O O O -D1 C O) Vt Cb CA a coCJ Sc Scn — — a) 0.) A _ —i C., ' A A 1- CO N C Cn O) W tJ 0 N N Sc Co R) N w Sc O Sc W W 4) _ N Cr/ -- C co coA - D. --' -� W 09 O 0 O) a, cD 0 _ A C O 0) co (I) 0, -+ 0) N A Os7 Cn CD O A O N c0 W 44 v C C O O O C 0-) C A (n O ---I Co 71 N 0) --, A C (n C -1 Cn -) N x' Sc 0-) -+ N CO (D cD CO N A 6) Cl A a -' co O) N CD A s C C A cT O A m co co < --� Cn N D CJ) C)) CO N A 69 Cn W W N cT N N NQ (T 0) O) O -co (11 O N _ U) A D A CA m y w O f0,4:: -! _ L W W W W rN O) W O CC C -+ CC .� A t3) A CJ 0) W 'il -IA C A N -+ O CD A -- O O 0) 0) + 0 cn EA N -+ O) O r W O O W iiJ (D W CA 6> G G A O)to w mo - C C 0) cn 0) C C) -, _�N -, N O (T O G CD O O 0D7 -+ N L O -+ A Cn C) A CP u. c0 co N �I Cn N W O V) 0) A 0) 0) O (....) 0) co (✓ W Co L N C W "T1 -4 C -+ O O C W . 0 eA Sc a, O O O C. C -, CCCDwa01 A A -, O N C co VI C (D O W A Cn W < A -. .0 �1 1D0 -{ 0 (0 A Cn '. O tT W C. W C D) " 4 A O) - CC�i �' — N --) N co co tq A 6) -. C. G C C) N 0 0 (D In r r r r =) -1 -1 n _ =O s D O-0 O N 7.7 p^ � -4 5 � F [,- 0,- --! C> --1 O � -t m m � ro n, _ o 0 o m ro m a o m m 'o < < 15 9, roFe, n - m O a m 7 ; 1, a(Nt, 4 a T N m s c fl, �-$ "R v, to -o B m 3 m , o a� o m m 03 .7 D ro O v a� a `° E. w u < T 0 0 N n p 0 O p C1 0 = 0 n m m 3 w m - 4- m a o $ m' m ° C) y 0 O CO o ° - ro ro Cu n ro m n CO m n m m a in' to W - Cc0 A L. -, A O N O 0 A Co-Cr, _{Sri ID 03 _.+ 0 W C0 - L tD (D- 4- 0 V Co(D a - 1J o 0 co 4.02 N 0) C. to L 6, L N co 0,(D (O 0, 03 tD O CM a L, a N CO J co CU 1 tT A 1- - lD 03 (D A-co O'Co O 4- Co Co C) O v L _ (n U O W co co -+ Co O A C1 = tU Cn A 0 O IV Ul -0 N (O O O cc' N A A 0) O Cc N(n O A Cm to 1D 2 0 a N (.,, (D 01 00 A 0) 0,•11 j b+ V Co 0,0 O Co(p C1 -n co a to +.-co O Co N a -_+. C1 U, A m-.40 -A A = 0 Cn 0 0 0 0 N(n O a, co r. Co `G A N CO0 0 0, (n 0 W 0. 0 tV N 0 tD A 0) a K Al Cn 0 O CO 0--_+. N it, O 0 CO CO N ro N A 03 A03 1 co _. -' CD CO A -O+co 44 on N CO O a O 0, Co Ur A -7"if 'd Co A 0 O f O p A A CO iD (O0, CO 0 CO CD 0 C)N A , -4 Co CO In -Co S N O WO COO .OP V O-, 0 cn into O V Oto O N 0 a 0 COA CD Cm (0 O 0 O U)fD O w A co O c:n1 A W W A CO -I.. 1, O V i .... V 0 0, W A CU td (J j O O V j O) co to in VI N '� N (D O W O O O$3 Cn N 0) -p m v m A- A Of O O O O-. A 41 N A a tT (.n U, Ctt A 0 N CO V1 N MO O A A ID O O CO O p O O (0 O 0 0 Co A el O Cl1 CO p' m -i en A W QVI 0 W N,- - Lb O V V 0 A V 0N N N 0 A 0, N In 0- N 00, 0 O 0) �A 0)O W ((n 0 CO N <-1 (0 0)CO • N N (n 404 N V en en N m N A A 0 O O cD O Cv O O A A O O O N(J 0 • N $3 (J N N at CJ CO CO 0 C- 0 _, A A A V -+ O-.1 Co i N -1 Co Co, O _`N a (n N CO CO A A N U 0 CO 0 i m O) 0 • M N W.NC t"" (0l, N V O V CO CP (p O CM CO O A A A .,7+ O O' O O O) -�Co 0 O O cO-0 O O(n N co V O CJ N A (n (n O co CO A to 0 A O O V N O N Cn 0 ON-4C.31 O 0 A N CO O O ID CO N A A O A O O O O 0, 0 0(D W V A -+ 0, co4,9 co m,01 cm O v 0 T 0 9 p) N N OAACOA (Dn A a 0 0 0, W 0) 0 0 co Co A A N a < 0 0,Cm CO A p,'O V, A N O, A a a. p, N O Co L- N (V A N W N OD W 0 0 A W 0 0 0-+ (n o ro r O A n 73 -I 5 f r O , -1 n -4 p -i 0 r- b r- r- -1 -I C) S 0 - n O-1 O 0 m d K ° m v; ° .1 o 9 D a v n m w m - o 0 0 rU Co 0 o m 0 m °i n a �u v"9. _ N n v n.ry a o m m c �, m CO - 7 = m a m c m n = --�'-i rn a, O 0 C� C a o r 5. a d m v - o p m CO o m 0 m -m - 3 Co .C...' m 2." Cc > > 'o �. 0 0- 0 S" N 3 w u J o a n o . -o 'O rn _a N co lw N , y N j D N .2..�:rt D D. _, a d N O O O 0 =O n Q. n 8 ^ cca COO -, u m n w y N d- O O n - O C) O `NG CT 0 0- o 0 a" j n R� 0 0,.00 (0a S m C a N m r 10 at Tw 4,e'noCD T NO CD O - o- o i �CG O u OA C,m OO O ,� -"G u A, _ �m utiy CO O Fw 0 Ao CO We o aw coo in m c O-10 -. CO CO NJ 0 (➢ .0.CoANCoCa 0 - CCC Aw Cfl o - n W co o, CC ry CD v uI = A A A 0 n. t 0), OmCD 0 0 0 n Co q- 0N N P 0I nI '' uI A.0- r iv w N CC n N rP Cn (n D SZ m CD 2.-Ca 0 0 A CD 0O. w `G V 00 CD C, O 0 O 0 N < r m wis., 0 CC N iA N OW 0 N a NI -CD 0 O 0-CD Co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 QOi N r co Ca G i _I A 0LatiC d Nito - CO (A - 0, A C0 A -CoO F. .y 01 N A to 0D "O CD --, A QI 0 0 A A A O o N 0 Co u 0 Co U) 0 .lop C ro A co N in Cn o - cc -a 0I = W N CO co Ca CD C-.I 0 co la, a. A A A N -Co N N -+ C) ID `n .0: -I 0 C.0 W Cn CO -I N m[ V j - _, ..+ j N CO N A O ,•�,�,. D �+ N CO (D COCil � (CC (0T CO CO co N m W aT 0 -.... 0C O N A W O O -� 0 Cn O CT CJ 7 Di.0A A A D 0 W CO Cii 4 C 0, ?- W A A A A O 000 00 0 0 V 0 0 V 0 0 Cn 0 m 0I -4 fa N COO 0 N A -n N `. !n0 A -. V V C U W: Co -Co cn 0, -A -_ a p t: to 0V DO C, 0 0 0 CD O On 0, 'O 0 ) < -1 j V A DC N 0 .64 -a CO o V 0 Co N :0. cAr, -Ca j -co IJ N CIQ t -aO Cam 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N Mn A N " N Ca Ca (.>co co W [p O A Cn C C (T V On A A A -.I 0) Cr, CO v 0--, D 0 0 V 0 C Co -• -+ (A I, O V O N A NJ CO W Cr,O no ‘.0 V CT COO • 0 0 P A A co CaO 0 Cn m O CD A 8 O Cn A 3 W N Co O O A O O O • W -+ coO O N m O W O A O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 W W 0 0 Cn W N C m O 0 0 J O O CD G W A , co W O cc O, A 01 w m -I .03 O - U O X^O N w A O 4-A c. O a. - C U) C-%O A N N Ch O O 0 CD 0 CT O , L N C) C ,V C O - w Cu N p Off) -co 0 C.,0 CO 0 0 -J 0 0 0 0 0 N co G )• ir O G x -i (- 0 r 1 n -4 G --1 m r r- r 7 -i -1 C) O t7 G P (n CC 7 N G a C) 0 G N O D N O ^ 9' �' J -' = 0 O O D Ci U CD �' N Cu Y rd. k C C) o 0 W C) CC r - D - - % - n O n N 7 7 - 7 V iU N ¢ 0 u..T7 0 N W - O y O O N -L¢ N 0 CO. a N o 3 v E. a m N a N < N CP 7 N p =4 N a 7 S CaD _ C) Cu oP. Rl_I a n 7 ^O ^ O CC) VN () O aj- S'- _- -- N W t0 7 7 E. N O O.O W N D CT Cr 0 O N a a W N 7 Ct Cu 0-4 . N O N W - .U) W N r O Cl, � a-. a CD U, 4- Co L 4 N.. N LO Cl1Cl 01 in U p _ -. : (L COO (.. Cr,G O.G aY PO U)CO Li li N CO Cn O) J g 9.- 7CD O N N (n to Cn G(n A in - O U C G D in fac A 0 0 0 -4a O O O G Jb m a LU 0 CD O N• N O O 3 tO to W 6) N J --• Cn A CD CO T a T Cr,j -• CO Co -)IV -' 7 r,co Cn V Cn,r, a n Cr -CD A CO A a, [O a •• _ 0 CD o0 Cn C, O O O O - C.CD in IC D 7 CM V N (U .t Cn A 4.7 N CD N N CD A A 0- a N. A 0 0 W 01 V N A. _ CO -CD in 74 Cn CO CA N 0 .N.� -' O CD.P v co N V co CD V. v N In co J A N W d Np A O A -4 O O O O COj A A Q Cn Q W A O A i O O O W O(J.- 0 CC--' 7 _ to CO N- CD O CO co _ � N cn CD V V-4 Co A' C N ✓ O N a N N E. O O J O N o m O P O V(W71 O COD (n to v ar A Co (.) . CO. V O N Cl PO N 0) 0)A ....I(r) 0 0 /R N -'I A CD 4A V N cC/1 'WI 04 A -4 Can V O^ N T -a V N A A O O O CO CA U)CC Cn CD N A O 'A • O 0 O CO O Cn .4 W 0) 0 0 A V W " 0 A 4Aj O 0 0 0 0 O O O O O 0 0 0 Cn O CD CD 7 C 0 O A -•CP v V 1IN d cn m -Co O) A 1C1 O O CD 0 0 0 CJ))C, Co OCO 7 m- N Cn RC) y 0) CaCD O CU d m CJ) [n -+CD 0- 41 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ro 7 Co -4 A N N N A W N O _ N(D N CO CO O N O 0, A O A - A f/) O (n in CO .. in fR CO (n CT V--, !J CD A CT O V)Co CA N p N a, N O in O co 0 N N N Cn CT W CD ID Co J V -• Cn-C' [t) in in A O O CO 1 O O U)0) O)0 CD (n O O)t- tD W N � 0. 0 O A O O O O 0 0 -•O - -4 0 0 CO 0 A CO V W Co O O O O G 0 m Co 0 0 0 Co N ¢O)O CO O O O O O Cn O Ui W CO -• Co O CD 0) A W W -; --J O in W O `I - O M_ IN., -4 -+ Cn Cn CON al W A O m A co O a Cn in 0 0 0 0 0 CT O V N N W N < Cn N W CD Cn CD D. 0 Cn -4 0) N 0 C'1> A GT CO W CT N O Co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 co CC 0 W ' A NJ • m ]J O MEMORANDUM DATE: November 6, 2006 TO: City Council Members FROM: Russell Weeks RE: Proposed Ordinance: Prohibiting Smoking Tobacco Products in City Parks, Recreational Areas, Cemeteries and Near Mass Gatherings CC: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rocky Fluhart, Sam Guevara, Ed Rutan, Chris Burbank, Gary Mumford,Boyd Ferguson,Abbie Vianes,Thomas Guinney This memorandum addresses items pertaining to a proposed ordinance that would prohibit smoking tobacco products in city parks,public squares,Library Square,recreational areas, cemeteries and near mass gatherings. The City Council held a public hearing on the proposed ordinance on October 17. Since the October 17 public hearing some changes have been made to the proposed ordinance. In addition, a Council Member has forwarded an option for the full City Council to consider. Council staff also has continued to research aspects of the issue. The staff research portion has been included in a section titled New Information. That section appears after sections of updates to the proposed ordinance, options,potential motions, and issues for consideration. UPDATES TO THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE Since the October 17 public hearing the following changes have been made to the proposed ordinance: • The City's proscription against littering has been emphasized in the preamble. • In the Definitions section (15.30.010) language has been added to the definition of"city park" to clarify that the Administration would retain the authority to designate smoking areas. • The Definitions section also includes language that would exempt sidewalks, "any portion of which is located on the perimeter of the park,within 15 feet of a street adjacent to the outside edge of the park," from the prohibition. • Also in the Definitions section the term"mass gathering" has been defined as an outdoor assembly of 100 or more people instead of an assembly of 500 or more people. • In the Prohibitions section(15.30.020)the prohibition of smoking tobacco products has been expanded to include light-rail stations and within 25 feet of bus stops. • The fine for a citation for smoking tobacco products has been set at"not to exceed $25," instead of$299.Police officers still may have the discretion to issue a warning for a first offense. It should be noted that after an October 10 briefing before the City Council, the proposed ordinance was changed to clarify that the proposed prohibition included golf courses and the Sunday Anderson Westside Senior Citizen Center, the Unity and Sorensen centers, Raging 1 Waters, the Northwest Multipurpose Center, the Dee Smith Tennis Facility, and Wasatch Springs (the former site of the Children's Museum of Utah). According to the Administration,the areas listed are recreation areas. The term"city-owned property" also was added to the definition of "mass gathering"to clarify the proposed prohibition would not extend to private property. OPTIONS • Adopt the proposed ordinance. • Do not adopt the proposed ordinance. • Amend the proposed ordinance. POTENTIAL MOTIONS • I move that the City Council adopt an ordinance enacting Chapter 15.30 of the Salt lake City Code prohibiting smoking in City Parks,Recreational Areas, and Cemeteries, and near Mass Gatherings. • I move that the City Council consider the next item on the agenda. • I move that the City Council adopt an ordinance enacting Chapter 15.30 of the Salt lake City Code prohibiting smoking in City Parks,Recreational Areas, and Cemeteries, and near Mass Gatherings with the following amendments: (Council Members may propose amendments.) • I move that the City Council adopt an ordinance enacting Chapter 15.30 of the Salt Lake City Code based on the following language: Smoking tobacco products or carrying lighted tobacco products shall be prohibited within 50 feet of any outdoor location where people line up or congregate to use or enjoy municipal services including but not limited to: 1. Public events such as sporting events, entertainment, speaking perfoi niances, ceremonies,pageants, fairs and concerts; 2. Any children's play area in parks or public green spaces; 3. Any place within parks or public green spaces that attracts children such as picnic tables,picnic bowers, fountains,rides and exhibits and swimming pools and organized athletic activities; 4. Any place where food or drink is offered for sale including concession stands, kiosks and vending carts; 5. Light rail,bus and other transit stops. Council Member Eric Jergensen has proposed the last motion. It is based on an ordinance in Davis, California.The Council Member will speak to the motion at the City Council briefing on November 9. ISSUES/QUESTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION • At an October 10 briefing and in a later telephone conversation with City Council staff, Salt Lake Valley Board of Health Member Thomas Guinney suggested that the Salt Lake City Cemetery be exempted from the smoking prohibition. Would the City Council wish to exempt the cemetery or retain it in the proposed ordinance'? 7 • As noted earlier, the revised ordinance has set the fine for a citation for violating the ordinance at a maximum of$25. Is the proposed fine enough to deter potential violations? NEW INFORMATION FOR NOVEMBER 9 MEETING The following information is based on continued reading of the 2006 report of the Surgeon General titled The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke, a California Air Resources Board Study, and other items. The Surgeon General's report on Page 632 quotes the Americans for Nonsmokers Rights as reporting that 577 jurisdictions nationwide had"passed ordinances covering outdoor areas, including restriction on smoking in outdoor areas near an enclosed building where smoking is prohibited and in sports and entertainment venues as well as in places where the public congregates,such as parks,beaches and plazas," as of January 2005. Council staff's October 6 memorandum quoted a Chicago Tribune article as estimating the number of cities that had restricted tobacco use outdoors at 400. The report also quoted the California Clean Air Project as reporting that 57 cities in California—including San Diego,Los Angeles, Sacramento, and San Francisco—restrict or prohibit tobacco smoking in at least some outdoor venues. SAN FRANCISCo The San Francisco Board of Supervisors adopted an ordinance in February 2005 that a San Francisco Legislative Analyst Office report described as "among the most comprehensive" in California. (Please see Attachment A.) The ordinance prohibited smoking"on any unenclosed area of property in the City and County of San Francisco that is open to the public and under the jurisdiction of the Recreation and Park Commission or any other City depai lnient if the property is a park, square, garden, sport or playing field, pier, or other property used for recreational purposes." (Ordinance,Attachment B,Page 2) It should be noted that the ordinance exempted golf courses and has no effect on private property, school district grounds, or public areas outside the City's jurisdiction.The ordinance went into effect in June 2005. (Please see Attachment C.) The Legislative Analyst Office report noted that 11 cities and one county that had enacted outdoor smoking restrictions beyond the requirements of California state law. It also noted that "all city laws rely on public education, signage and voluntary compliance while providing citation authority to peace officers." (Attachment A, Page 2.) The San Francisco ordinance set fines for violations at not more than $100 for a first offense, $200 for a second offense within a year of the first violation and $500 for each additional violation within a year of the first violation. The Legislative Analyst Office had no estimate of the number of citations issued after the ordinance went into effect. Council staff plans to check further to obtain an estimate. 3 DAVIS,CALIFORNIA Davis was among the cities listed in the Legislative Analyst report. According to the report, Davis does not have a specific ban on smoking tobacco in public parks but its municipal code "prevents smoking in most enclosed public spaces as well as designated locations outdoors." (Attachment No. 1, Page 6.) Davis ordinance prohibit smoking tobacco products: • At"public events including but not limited to sports events, entertainment, speaking performances, ceremonies,pageants and fairs." • In"any place where food and/or drink is offered for sale," • In"any children's play areas, and public gardens." Violations are infractions carrying a$50 fine for the first violation and $200 and$500 respectively for second and third violations. (Attachment A, Page 6.) OTHER INFORMATION City Council staff memorandum for the October 10 briefing noted that the Surgeon General's 2006 report said, "The scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke."The memorandum also said the report appeared to focus mostly on the effects of secondhand smoke in homes and in workplaces. The Surgeon General's report indicates on Page 158 that, "Homes and workplaces are the predominant locations for exposure to secondhand smoke." One California study indicated that outdoor areas accounted for about 16 percent of exposure to secondhand smoke among adult male non-smokers and 13 percent of exposure to secondhand smoke among adult female non-smokers. However, outdoor areas accounted for 27 percent of exposure to secondhand smoke among children aged 6 to 11 years and 17 percent of children who were infants to five years of age. (Please see Attachments D and E.) INFORMATION FOR OCTOBER 17 MEETING There is a variety of new information pertaining to this issue. Council staff has broken the information into sections with a series of subheads. Staff put the new information before the Options and Potential Motions sections of this memorandum because the information may pertain to options and motions the City Council may consider. CHANGES TO PROPOSED ORDINANCE Since the October 10 briefing, the Administration has made a limited number of changes in the proposed ordinance to clarify it. The changes are: • Under the Definitions section, adding golf courses to the umbrella term "city park," and deleting"pocket parks" and"linear parks" because the two categories are not used as legal terms to describe public park property in Salt Lake City. Mini-parks fall under city- owned parks, and the Park Blocks linear parks on 500 West Street already are defined as public squares. It probably also should be noted that this version and earlier versions of 4 the proposed ordinance exempts "designated smoking areas" from the term "city park." Finally, other City sites that may be considered recreation areas are the Sunday Anderson Westside Senior Citizen Center, the Unity and Sorensen centers,Raging Waters, the Northwest Multipurpose Center, the Dee Smith Tennis Facility, and Wasatch Springs (the former site of the Children's Museum of Utah), according to the Administration. • The definition of"mass gathering"has been changed to read: "Mass gathering means an outdoor assembly of 500 or more people on city-owned property that reasonably can be expected to continue for two or more hours."The words "city-owned property" have been added to differentiate between events on public property and events on private property. COMMENTS BY THOMAS GUINNEY,SALT LAKE VALLEY BOARD OF HEALTH Staff contacted Mr. Guinney to discuss items he mentioned at the City Council briefing on October 10,Mr. Guinney is working with others to prepare potential legislation to bring to the Legislature.The potential bill would address prohibiting smoking tobacco products in parks and other outdoor venues. During the telephone discussion with City Council staff Mr. Guinney made several observations about what might be an effective law: • Municipalities adopting ordinances that prohibit tobacco smoking in public outdoor venues lay a foundation of showing a need for statewide legislation. • The goal of the potential legislation would be to"institute cultural change"in which people of their own volition would not smoke in outdoor public venues.Mr. Guinney estimated that attaining the goal would take about three years. • The most effective law is one that the public enforces by itself. Given those, Mr. Guinney suggested some potential changes to the proposed ordinance: • Prohibitions against smoking tobacco products on sidewalks, in the Salt Lake City Cemetery, and on golf courses should be eliminated. The suggestions are based in part on the experience of the group Mr. Guinney is working with to prepare legislation and in part on the functions of sidewalks, cemeteries and golf courses. It should be noted that the current ordinance would prohibit smoking only on sidewalks in the interiors and the perimeters of parks, according to the City Attorney's Office. • The infraction fine of$299 is too high because instituting social change should not be punitive. Potential enforcement of an ordinance could be an ascending scale of oral warning, written warning and a fine at a minimal cost,possibly$25. It should be noted that the $299 fine in the ordinance is a not-to-exceed cap and could be less. It also should be noted that the fine is the same as the fines for a variety of other proscribed conduct in City parks. An ordinance "should be something that tells the smoking community, `We're going to work with you,"'Mr. Guinney said. 5 COMMENTS BY POLICE CHIEF CHRIS BURBANK The following comments by Chief Chris Burbank were made based on a City Council request during the October 10 briefing: Any ordinance banning smoking in certain areas will be challenging for the Police Department to enforce. Although smoking is a considerable health problem,we believe this is not necessarily a law enforcement issue that should compete for already scarce resources,especially in light of the demands placed upon the Police Department by serious crime incidents such as narcotics and part one crime. Enforcement of any version of the ordinance would solely be based on encounters that occur while officers are going about their daily routines. We would not anticipate or desire calls coming into the Police Depait,iient regarding individuals smoking in banned areas. This certainly has the potential to overwhelm our dispatch center. Sincerely, Chris Burbank Chief of Police ESTIMATED COST OF INSTALLING NO-SMOKING SIGNS In response to a City Council question,the Administration estimates that the total cost to the City to install signs informing the public that smoking is prohibited under the ordinance is $11,244. The Administration estimates that about 400 signs would be necessary to inform the public at all locations addressed in the ordinance—except for the Bonneville Shoreline Trail. According to the Administration, the Salt Lake Valley Health Department would pay for the actual signs. The City would pay for 400 sign posts at$15 each, nuts and bolts, and labor. ADDITIONAL COUNCIL STAFF RESEARCH During the October 10 briefing some questions were raised about levels of concentration of tobacco smoke in an outdoor area. Council staff obtained a copy of Measurements of Outdoor Air Pollution from Secondhand Smoke on the UMBC(University of Maryland at Baltimore's Catonsville) Campus. The item is a study of outdoor smoke concentration at that campus, particularly around building entrances.'The study was done by James Repace, a research physicist and former senior policy analyst and scientist with the Environmental Protection Agency and a consultant for the Occupational Health and Safety Administration. A summary of the study: • Very few published data are available on outdoor levels of SHS (secondhand smoke). • A 2004 pilot study by another researcher indicated that secondhand tobacco smoke concentrations at outdoor patios, airport sidewalks, parks and public sidewalks ... at times where tobacco smokers were intermittently active ... in some cases could be comparable to concentrations in indoor settings. • Secondhand smoke concentrations are more variable outdoors than indoors because outdoor secondhand smoke did not accumulate, and outdoor transient peaks were more 6 sensitive to distances between someone smoking tobacco and people near the person smoking and to wind conditions. • The 2004 pilot study indicated that at distances of 1 meter to 2 meters (1.1 yards to 2.2 yards) from a tobacco source, mean outdoor secondhand smoke-particle concentrations declined by about 75 percent. • Tne 2004 pilot study indicated that for each point source (number of tobacco smokers) tobacco plume concentration will increase in strength and decrease with distance from the source and higher wind speeds. • Mr. Repace's own study indicated that secondhand smoke odor can be smelled from as far away as 7 meters (23 feet), and irritation to people's tissues from secondhand smoke could start at 4 meters (13 feet) from the source of the secondhand smoke. • It is only after 7 meters(23 feet)that particulate matter and other items connected to smoking fall to "background levels." • The larger the number of smokers, the greater the concentration of secondhand smoke, and the greater the potential for secondhand smoke concentration to dissipate at distances greater than 7 meters. The study concluded that the university should place ashtrays and signs warning smokers to refrain from smoking at least 20 feet away from building entrances. OPTIONS • Close the public hearing and consider adopting the proposed ordinance. • Close the public hearing and do not adopt the proposed ordinance. • Close the public hearing and adopt the proposed ordinance with amendments. • Close the public hearing and refer the proposed ordinance to a future meeting for further discussion and consideration. • Continue the public hearing to a future meeting for more comment. POTENTIAL MOTIONS PERTAINING TO THE PUBLIC HEARING • I move that the City Council close the public hearing. • I move that the City Council close the public hearing and refer this matter to (a future meeting) for further consideration. • I move that the City Council continue the public hearing to (a future date), and consider the next item on the agenda. PERTAINING TO THE ISSUE • I move that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance. • I move that the City Council move to the next item on the agenda. • I move that the City Council adopt the proposed ordinance with the following amendments: ■ That sidewalks on the perimeters of parks and recreation areas be exempted from the ordinance. (This amendment would allow 7 people smoking tobacco to continue walking along sidewalks on the edges of parks instead of crossing the street.) • That sidewalks, the Salt Lake City Cemetery, and golf courses should be eliminated as areas where smoking tobacco products would be prohibited. (Suggestion,by Tom Guinney.) • That the Director of Parks shall have the authority to designate areas where smoking tobacco products is permitted within the public property affected by the ordinance. (This amendment is based on issues of proximity between people who do not smoke and those who do at the October 10 briefing. It should be noted that the Administration holds that the Director of Parks already has the authority to designate smoking areas.) • That smoking tobacco be prohibited within (25, 30, 35, 40) feet of areas where people congregate within the boundaries of parks, including areas such as playgrounds, water features,bowers, picnic areas, concession stands and sporting courts, and in the Salt Lake City Cemetery, and recreational areas. (Again, this potential motion deals with people's proximity to each other in places of activity in outdoor public facilities. Also,please see Bullet No. 3 under Issues/Questions for Consideration.) • That smoking tobacco products be prohibited within(25, 30, 35, 40) feet of all publicly-owned places where people congregate including sidewalks, streets, bus stops, and other outdoor facilities and venues. (This proposed amendment stems from the City Council briefing on October 10.) • That the $299 infraction fine be omitted from the ordinance and replaced with the following enforcement—Oral warning for first offense, written warning for second offense, $25 citation for third offense. (Suggestion by Tom Guinney.) KEY POINTS • The proposed ordinance would prohibit smoking tobacco in all "city-owned parks,public squares, ball diamonds, golf courses, soccer fields, and other recreation areas,Library Square, city-owned cemeteries, and trails, but not designated smoking areas."It also would prohibit smoking tobacco products within 50 feet of all mass gatherings—defined as an"outdoor assembly of 500 or more people on city-owned property that reasonably can be expected to continue for two or more hours." • Salt Lake City has 72 public parks and recreation areas, one public cemetery, and two areas designated as "public squares, malls and pleasure grounds,"golf courses, and a variety of trails where the ordinance would appear to apply." • The proposed ordinance would create a separate chapter in the City Code to prohibit smoking tobacco in City-owned outdoor facilities. The penalty for violating the proposed ordinance would be an infraction punishable by a tine "not to exceed ... $299."The fine would be the same as the penalty for all other violations of park and playground rules include drinking alcoholic beverages, injuring animals and destroying public property. 8 • The proposed ordinance may be viewed as a step in concert with a Salt Lake Valley Board of Health resolution adopted February 3, 2006 in which the Board found it "prudent, reasonable and necessary"to urge municipal legislative bodies in Salt Lake County to adopt an ordinance that would"protect the public health and welfare by prohibiting smoking in public parks, gathering places,recreational areas, and plazas."III • Salt Lake City has amended rules and regulations for public parks several times to proscribe activities and conduct that may have been allowed previously. • Police Chief Chris Burbank said that the Police Depar latent probably would not add personnel to enforce the ordinance when violations occur as officers encounter them on their daily routines. • The proposed ordinance exempts Native Americans using a"traditional pipe"as part of a native tribal religious ceremony and people"smoking or using smoking materials to exercise protected First Amendment activity, such as smoking or use of materials for bona fide religious purposes." Issues/Questions for Consideration • Is it in the public interest to prohibit smoking tobacco in Salt Lake City public parks? • Should sidewalks on the perimeters of parks and other public facilities be included in the proposed prohibition? • Although the proposed ordinance has been described as a public health issue, and others have spoken of prohibiting smoking in public parks as a way to initiate cultural change, the proposed ordinance also represents a change in the social compact that will have an effect on a sizeable minority--nonetheless a minority of Salt Lake City residents. Under the social compact,the issue may not be a right to smoke tobacco or a right to be free from tobacco smoke,but the right of the majority and a minority to enjoy public facilities without intruding on each other. Given that,is there a way to address the concerns of both groups? Given that, do the public health benefits of prohibiting smoking tobacco outweigh the rights of tobacco smokers to enjoy public facilities? Discussion/Background The Administration transmittal includes the executive summary of a report of the United States Surgeon General titled The Health Consequences of Involuntaty Exposure to Tobacco Smoke. The summary contains a variety of conclusions starting on Page 9 and ending on Page 14 that City Council members may wish to review.However, the major conclusion cited by the Administration is found on Page 9 and says, "The scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke."The report appears to focus mostly on the effects of secondhand smoke in homes and in workplaces. A document attached to this memorandum and titled Tobacco Prevention and Control in Utah provides the following statistics: • Although adult tobacco smoking in Utah since 1999 has declined at twice the rate of the rest of the United States, and tobacco smoking by youths has decreased significantly, more than 200,000 people in Utah continue to use tobacco!'' 9 • The figure translates into an overall rate of 11.2 percent of Utah's population. Broken down further the rate is 13.4 percent among men; 9.4 percent among women; 4.8 percent for people with college degrees; and 30.2 percent for people with less than a high-school education. The report also indicates that people"among some racial and ethnic communities"also have a higher rate ofsmoking tobacco than the overall percentage.v • More than 1,100 adults in Utah die each year as a result of their own smoking, and an estimated 140 to 250 deaths among adults, children and babies are caused by secondhand smoke exposure.vr Given similar national and statewide figures, the Salt Lake Valley Board of Health on February 3, 2005 adopted a resolution in which the Board"hereby supports advocates and urges the various municipal legislative bodies in Salt Lake County to enact ordinances within their jurisdictions establishing all public parks, gathering places,recreational areas and plazas as smoke free."vr1 The Board of Health resolution cited a variety of findings about the effects of secondhand smoke, including the potential of children to model their behavior after adults. The resolution also noted that city councils in Clinton, Sandy and West Jordan had adopted ordinances restricting smoking tobacco in outdoor public places. It should be noted that at the February 3, 2005 meeting the Board adopted the resolution instead of an outright regulatory ban"at this time."According to minutes of the meeting: The staffs research has shown that although a number of communities have found it prudent for the health of their citizens to ban smoking in parks and on beaches, so far these communities have all done so by ordinances enacted by their municipal legislative bodies. Further, given the Board of Health's narrow authority specifically designated by the State Legislature to adopt measures that promote and protect public health,regulations the Board adopts must be supported by sound scientific evidence demonstrating a rational relationship between the regulated behavior and its threat to the public's health. Currently, staff believes that preliminary research is promising,but does not meet this standard.Therefore,until more conclusive scientific research can demonstrate a stronger relationship between outdoor tobacco smoke and negative health effects, they recommend that instead of adopting a regulation,the Board adopt a resolution encouraging the local legislative bodies of Salt Lake County to adopt"smoke-free venues"ordinances."' It should be noted that cities in the nation have adopted ordinances prohibiting smoking tobacco in public outdoor areas. The Administration transmittal indicates that communities in 28 of the 50 United States have ordinances/regulations or policies that prohibit smoking at parks, zoos, and youth sports, trails and beaches. City Council staff found one site on the Internet with a link to an article in the Chicago Tribune that estimated the number of cities nationwide that have restricted outdoor smoking at 400. Council staff could not find the article in the Chicago Tribune archives to determine the date of article. According to the California Clean Air Project, 57 cities in that state— including San Diego, Los Angeles, Sacramento, and San Francisco—restrict or prohibit tobacco smoking in at least some outdoor vcnues.rr 10 Here is a list of Utah cities that have restricted or prohibited smoking tobacco in public outdoor venues: • Clinton—adopted an ordinance in 2003 that restricted smoking in public parks. • Sandy—in 2004 restricted smoking in public parks and baseball fields. • West Jordan—adopted an ordinance in 2004 restricting smoking in public parks and the rodeo arena. • Logan—adopted an ordinance in 2005 prohibiting smoking in public parks. • Hyde Park—adopted an ordinance in 2005 prohibiting smoking in public parks. • Midvale—adopted an ordinance in 2006 prohibiting smoking in parks and outdoor areas. • Riverton—adopted an ordinance in 2006 prohibiting smoking at playgrounds, and sports fields. • Spanish Fork—adopted an ordinance in 2006 prohibiting tobacco use in outdoor recreation facilities. • South Jordan—adopted an ordinance prohibiting tobacco use in parks, recreational areas and the city cemetery on September 5, 2006. In addition,the Utah State Fair has designated smoke free zones since 2004. Cache County prohibited smoking tobacco on the first night of its 2006 county fair. Summit County created smoke free areas at its fairgrounds in 2006,and Tooele County restricted smoking in county-owned places in 2006.x As noted in the Key Points section,the proposed ordinance would prohibit smoking in about 80 to 85 public parks or areas and within 50 feet of an event on city-owned property that drew 500 or more people for two or more hours. Public squares such as Washington Square and the 500 West Park blocks would be included in that number because City Code 15.12.020 which establishes public squares says in part,restrictions relating to public parks and playgrounds under this code, as amended, shall be fully applicable to the public properties designated in section 15.12.030 of this chapter." Tobacco smoking still would be permitted on City streets, sidewalks and designated smoking areas.However,the smoking prohibition would include sidewalks within City parks, public squares, Library Square,recreational areas and cemeteries and extend to sidewalks around the perimeter of those facilities. It probably should be noted again that the penalty for violating the proposed ordinance is an infraction with a fine not to exceed$299,but police officers will have the discretion to issue a warning for a first offense if they deem it is in the best interest of the city. Clearly, Salt Lake City government has proscribed activity and conduct in public parks. A copy of City regulations from 1920 includes a prohibition of unleashed dogs and a requirement that dogs be on a six-foot leash. The prohibition was unaltered until fairly recently. It appears that the City prohibited the consumption and possession of alcoholic beverages in 1965, according to City records. Please see Attachment No. 6. Please see Attachment No. 1. [u Please see Attachment No. 2. 11 'v Tobacco Prevention and Control in Utah,Page 2. v Ibid,Pages 2 and 6. v�Ibid,Page 7. v"Please see Attachment No. 2. VI I Please see Attachment No.4. IX Please see Attachment No. 5. X Al! statistics from Tobacco Prevention and Control in Utah, Page 17. 12 ATTACHMENT A Banning Smoking in Outdoor City Parks and Recreational Areas LEGISLATIVE ANALYST REPORT (OLA#:027-04) To: Members of the Board of Supervisors From: Adam Van de Water, Office of the Legislative Analyst Date: October 25, 2004 RE: Banning Smoking in Outdoor City Parks and Recreational Areas Summary and Scope of Request Supervisor Alioto-Pier requested the Office of the Legislative Analyst(OLA)review and summarize no-smoking laws in Los Angeles, Santa Monica, and Beverly Hills looking specifically at implementation, enforcement, and effectiveness of each ban. Supervisor Alioto-Pier also requested the OLA make policy recommendations related to the proposed ban here in San Francisco. Executive Summary State law currently prohibits smoking or disposing of any tobacco-related products within 25 feet of a playground or tot lot sandbox area. Violations are infractions punishable by a fine of$250. In the last five years the cities of Beverly Hills, Carson, Davis, El Monte, Huntington Beach, Los Angeles, Malibu, Pasadena,Redondo Beach, San Fernando, and Santa Monica have all enacted additional restrictions on outdoor smoking. The cities of Beverly Hills, Carson, El Monte,Huntington Beach, Pasadena, San Fernando, and Santa Monica go the furthest, covering all park areas in their entirety "from curb to curb" and establishing infractions of$100 to $250 per violation. The cities of Los Angeles and Davis prohibit smoking in designated areas of parks, including playgrounds, athletic fields,picnic areas, and gardens. All cities surveyed rely on voluntary compliance and public education outreach efforts. Other than required new signage, no cities have experienced significant increased costs for enforcement or implementation and all cite cooperation with the new policies if a general lack of awareness. The OLA was unable to find any reliable studies of the impacts of these recent smoking bans in city parks but anecdotal evidence from parks managers and nonprofit organizations suggests that they have reduced smoking and second-hand smoke in public parks and have decreased smoking-related litter. 1 Approval of Supervisor Alioto-Pier's proposed "curb to curb"prohibition of smoking in City parks, plazas, piers, gardens, and recreational fields would make San Francisco the first county in the state to do so. San Francisco's Proposed Policy State law currently prohibits smoking in most enclosed public spaces or places of employment' and provides a$250 fine for smoking or disposing of any tobacco-related products within 25 feet of a playground or tot lot sandbox area. The San Francisco Health Code currently prohibits smoking in certain buildings and enclosed structures including bars, restaurants, sports stadia, child care facilities, places of governmental assembly, polling places, health and educational facilities, business and nonprofit organizations, theatres, aquariums, libraries, museums, and convention halls. Sup. Alioto-Pier's proposed legislation would further prohibit smoking, on any unenclosed area of property in the City and County of San Francisco that is open to the public and under the jurisdiction of the Recreation and Park Commission or any other City department if the property is a park, square, garden, sport or playing field, pier, or other property used for recreational purposes. This would include the entire outdoor section of Golden Gate Park, all piers used for recreational use under Port control, all City-owned plazas and squares such as Union Square, and public golf courses such as Harding Park. The proposed law would not apply to private property, San Francisco Unified School District grounds, or to public areas outside the jurisdiction of the City such as the Presidio and Ocean Beach. As such, the proposed outdoor smoking policy would be the first for a California county and among the most comprehensive in the state. The proposal calls for violations to be treated as infractions punishable by a fine of$100 for the first violation, $200 for the second violation within a year, and $500 for the third violation in a year. Only peace officers - uniformed police and sheriff- may issue citations. Other Jurisdictions At least eleven other California cities and one county have enacted outdoor smoking restrictions that exceed state law. These include the City of Davis, Los Angeles County, and ten cities in the Los Angeles region -Beverly Hills, Carson, El Monte, Huntington Beach, Los Angeles, Malibu, Pasadena, Redondo Beach, San Fernando, and Santa Monica* All city laws rely on public education, signage, and voluntary compliance while providing citation authority to peace officers and, in some cases,park rangers and 2 environmental health officers. These municipalities report success with this method and have issued citations only on rare occasions of repeat offense or refusal to comply. Cities such as Beverly Hills, Carson, El Monte, Huntington Beach,Pasadena, San Fernando, and Santa Monica have all banned smoking in city parks from "curb-to-curb." Interestingly, larger cities such as Los Angeles and Davis, have limited smoking prohibitions to designated areas within public parks such as picnic areas, gardens, playgrounds, and recreational facilities. The OLA could not find any reliable studies of the measurable impact of these laws but anecdotal evidence from nonprofit organizations and public works,parks and health department staff suggests that they have reduced both smoking and smoking-related litter in public parks . However, due to a general lack of awareness of the new policies,parks and public works officials report that cigarette litter, while reduced, is still prevalent. The details of each city's policy are summarized in Table I and further outlined in Appendix A below. Table I: Outdoor Smoking Restrictions in Other California Jurisdictions Prohibited Act Parks Affected Penalty Smoking or W/in 25'of a playground or disposal of tot lot on private and public ' $250 State of CA cigarette, cigar, or other tobacco- school grounds and city, Infraction related product county, or state park grounds $100 In all city public parks,curb Infraction San Smoking tobacco to curb and any City park, Francisco or any other weed square, garden, sport or ($500 and (Proposed) or ' playing field,pier, or other $5°°f°r P plant. p Yl g subsequent recreational property violations w/in I yr) Smoking any W/in 25'of playgrounds, Infraction, tobacco products bleachers,backstops, sports court- Los Angeles including pipes, fields and courts, and picnic determined cigarettes, and areas fine cigars Burn, chew, or In all city public parks, $100 dispose of cigar, Infraction Pasadena cigarette or curb to curb and in or upon tobacco-related playgrounds and recreation ($200 and product centers $500 for subsequent 3 violations w/in 1 yr) Infraction, Beverly Smoking In all city public parks, curb court- Hills to curb determined fine pSmoking or Santa disposal of any In all city public parks, curb- $250 Monica cigarette, cigar or to-curb Infraction tobacco $50 Infraction Smoking any Public events,public cigar, cigarette, ($200 and Davis pipe, weed,plant, gardens, children s play $500 for or combustible areas, and where food and subsequent substance drink are offered for sale. violations w/in 1 yr) Conclusion It is currently illegal to smoke in bars,restaurants, and most enclosed public meeting places in California. Supervisor Alioto-Pier has proposed extending this restriction to all City parks and all City plazas,piers, gardens, and recreational fields. If approved, San Francisco would be the first county in California to prohibit smoking in all parks from "curb to curb." Approval of the proposed ordinance is a policy matter for the Board. Appendix A: Outdoor Smoking Restrictions in Other CA Jurisdictions State of CA On August 6, 2001, Governor Davis signed AB188 prohibiting the smoking or disposal of any "cigarette, cigar, or other tobacco-related product" within a playground or tot lot sandbox area and establishing a$100 fine for any violation4. The law became effective January 1, 2002 and applies statewide to all playground and tot lots "located on public or private school grounds, or on city, county or state park grounds." On September 15, 2002 the State raised the fine to $250 and expanded the scope of the bill to include any area within 25 feet of a playground or tot lot sandbox area. Los Angeles On August 2, 2002, the City of Los Angeles added Section 41.50 to the Los Angeles Municipal Code prohibiting smoking, 4 Within 25 feet of areas where playground equipment has been installed for public use by children,play pits,play structures, bleachers, backstops, sports fields, ball diamonds, basketball, handball, tennis and paddle tennis courts, and areas posted to require permits to be reserved for picnics. The policy is primarily self-enforcing though park rangers have the authority to issue infractions. According to Acting Chief of the Park Ranger Division Albert Torres, the policy is "working very well" and "gives rangers and police officers probable cause to approach violators." Pasadena On February 5, 2004, the Pasadena City Council approved the City's Tobacco Use Prevention Ordinances making it, unlawful for any person to possess a burning tobacco or tobacco-related product, including but not limited to cigars and cigarettes, to chew tobacco or tobacco-related products, to dispose of lighted or unlighted cigars or cigarettes or cigarette butts, or any other tobacco-related waste, in or upon any dedicated city park,playground, or recreation center. The Public Health Department has responsibility for enforcement of the measure, which is an entirely complaint-driven process. Environmental Health Officers may issue citations for infractions which carry fines of$100 for the first offense, $200 for the second offense within one year, and$500 for each additional offense within one year. However, according to Tobacco Control Section Coordinator Statice Wilmore, the Public Health Department has only had 2 call-in violations since the ordinance was passed. In both cases, the violator had left the scene and no citation was issued. The City conducted an initial public education campaign, including a press release to newspapers,production of an education flyer, and outreach to all 21 city-owned parks. As a result, according to Ms. Wilmore,people no longer smoke in parks (choosing instead adjoining areas or sidewalks where it is still permitted) and the Depaitinent of Public Works has noticed a decrease in the number of cigarette butts. Santa Monica In April 2003, the Santa Monica City Council added section 4.44.040 to the Municipal Code prohibiting smoking or disposing "any cigarette, cigar or tobacco, or any part of a cigarette or cigar, within the boundaries of any public park." Any violation was deemed an infraction punishable by a fine of$250. Santa Monica's ordinance applies to the entire boundaries of public city parks and has come to be referred to as a "curb-to-curb"prohibition. According to a February staff report from the Community and Cultural Services Department(CCSD), the cities of 5 Beverly Hills, Carson, San Fernando, Huntington Beach and El Monte had also extended the smoke free policy to include entire parks (curb-to-curb). According to Elaine Polachek in the Santa Monica Open Space Management Division of the CCSD, enforcement of the measure has relied on voluntary compliance as a result of increased signage, a public education outreach campaign, and reminders from park rangers. The City has not increased enforcement, does not issue tickets for violations (except in the rare case of a refusal to comply), and has not measured the impacts on smoking or littering in the parks since the ordinance passed last year. Davis The City of Davis does not have an explicit smoking ban in public parks but does have an extensive smoking control policy. Chapter 34.02.010 of the Davis Municipal Code prevents smoking in most enclosed public spaces as well as designated locations outdoors including: at "public events including but not limited to sports events, entertainment, speaking performances, ceremonies, pageants and fairs", in "any place where food and/or drink is offered for sale," and in "children's play areas," and "public gardens." Violations of the smoking control policy are infractions punishable by a fine of$50. Second and third violations within one year are also infractions punishable by fines of $200 and $500 respectively. Beverly Hills In the summer of 1999, the Beverly Hills City Council enacted a three-month trial smoking ban in public parks. After positive reports from staff, in August 1999 the City Council gave approval to the Director of Recreation and Parks to create a policy banning smoking curb-to-curb and permanent signs were erected. Like Santa Monica, the ban relies on voluntary compliance, though park rangers do have limited citation authority. If a warning is ineffective, rangers can collect "field interview cards" to register violators'names and addresses with the police department, and, in rare cases of chronic abuse, can issue citations. In the five years since the policy was initiated, the City has only issued one (1) such citation. According to Patricia Agnitch of the Beverly Hills Recreation and Parks Department, while there have been no studies of the impact of the policy on the parks, "it has certainly led to cleaner parks and a healthier environment." Supervising Park Ranger Steven Clark agrees though he notes that cigarette butts are still prevalent in some picnic areas, most likely due to lack of awareness of the no smoking policy. This is likely due to minimal 6 signage and enforcement together with a large number of tourists accustomed to smoking outdoors. I California's Law for a Smoke Free Workplace(Labor Code 6404.5) z See Article 19F for definitions and exceptions. Los Angeles County and the cities of Malibu and Redondo Beach specifically address public beaches and are not discussed in more detail below as public beaches in San Francisco are the jurisdiction of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. 4 Adding Section 104495 to the CA Health and Safety Code. 5 Section 8.78.051 7 • ATTACHMENT B AMENDMENT OF THE WHOLE — 12/9/04 FILE NO. 041307 ORDINANCE NO. S! I [Prohibiting smoking on unenclosed areas of City parks and recreational areas in San iI Francisco open to the public.] 2 +j 3 Ordinance amending the San Francisco Health Code by adding Article 19 I, 4 encompassing Sections 1009.80 et seq., to prohibit smoking on any unenclosed area of 5 property in the City and County of San Francisco that is open to the public and under 6 the jurisdiction of the Recreation and Park Commission or any other City department if 7 the property is a park, square, garden, playgroup;sport or playing field other than a golf 8 course, recreational pier, or other property used for recreational purposes. 9 Note: Additions are sinle-underline italics Times New Roman; 10 deletions are . Board amendment additions are double underlined. 11 Board amendment deletions are . 12 Be it ordained by the People of the City and County of San Francisco: 13 Section 1. The San Francisco Health Code is hereby amended by adding Article 19 I, 14 encompassing Sections 1009.80 et seq., to read as follows: 15 Article 19 1 16 PROHIBITING SMOKING IN CITY PARK 17 AND RECREATIONAL AREAS 18 Sec. 1009.80. DEFINITIONS. 19 For purpose of this Article, "smokin_q"or`to smoke"means and includes inhaling, 20 exhaling, burning or carrying any lighted smoking equipment for tobacco or any other weed or 21 plant. 22 23 24 25 Supervisors Alioto-Pier,Dufty BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 1 12/2/2004 j:lastcirkslord..smoking in parks.doc 1 1 Sec. 1009.81. PROHIBITING SMOKING IN CiTY PARK AND RECREATIONAL 2 ; AREAS. 3 (a) Smoking is prohibited on any unenclosed area of property in the City and County of 4 ' San Francisco that is open to the public and under the jurisdiction of the Recreation 5 and Park Commission or any other City department if the property is a park, 6 square, garden, playground, sport or playing field, pier, or other property used for 7 recreational purposes. 8 (bj Nothing in this section is intended to change the provisions of Health Code Section 9 1009.22(b) regulating smoking in sport stadiums. 10 .(c) Each City department with jurisdiction over property subject to this Article shall post 11 signs in appropriate locations to provide public notice that smoking is prohibited. 12 (d) The provisions of this Article do not apply in any circumstance where federal or 13 state law regulates smoking if the federal or state law preempts local regulation or if 14 the federal or state law is more restrictive. 15 (e) The provisions of this Article do not apply to playgrounds or tot lot sandbox areas, 16 in and around which smoking is prohibiting by California Health and Safety Code 17 Section 104495. 18 (f) The provisions of this Article do not apply to piers primarily used for commercial 19 purposes, 20 (g) Theprovisions of this Article do not apply to golf courses. 21 Sec. 1009.82. VIOLATIONS AN€3 PENALTIES AND ENFORCEMENT, 22 Any person who violates this Article isjuilty of an infraction and shall be punished by a 23 fine not exceeding one hundred dollars WOO for a first violation, two hundred dollars (. 200 24 for a second violation of this Article within a year of a first violation, and five hundred dollars 25 Supervisors Alioto-Pier,Dufty BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 2 12/2/2004 1:\astclrks\ord.-smoking in parks.doc 1 ($500) for each additional violation of this Article within a year of a first volation. of-two 2 . Any peace officer, and 3 pursuant to California Penal Code, Title 3. Section 836.5 any Park Patrol Officer 4 ' (Classification No. 8208) and Supervisor Park Patrol(Classification No. 8210). shall have the 5 authority to enforce the provisions of this Article. Punishment under this Article shall not 6 preclude punishment pursuant to any provision of law proscribing the act of littering. 7 Sec. 1009.83. DISCLAIMERS. 8 In adopting and undertaking the enforcement of this Article, the City and County of San 9 Francisco is assuming an undertaking only to promote the general welfare. It is not assuming, 10 nor is it imposing on its officers and employees, an obligation for breach of which it is liable in 11 money damages to any person who claims that such breach proximately caused injury. 12 APPROVED AS TO FORM: 13 DENNIS J. HERRERA, City Attorney 14 By: 15 FRE ERICK P. INFIELD Dep ty City Attorney 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Supervisors Alioto-Pier,Dufty BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Page 3 12/2/2004 j_\astclrks\ord.-smoking in parks.doc File No. 041307 I hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was FINALLY PASSED on February 1,2005 by the Board of Supervisors of the City and County of San Francisco. _ ) Gloria(L.. You a Clerk of the Board Fef1 ® j / 5eDate proved ayor !.T vit:Newsom File No. 041307 City and County of San Francisco 2 Printed at 1:43 PM on 2/2/05 Tails Report r� y °o, �� A City and County of San Francisco I Dr Carlton B.Goo(Bett Place San Francisco,CA 94102-4689 s 'll . City Hall '' _s,=� Tails ate' Ordinance File Number: 041307 Date Passed: Ordinance amending the San Francisco Health Code by adding Article 19 I,encompassing Sections 1009,80 et seq.,to prohibit smoking on any unenclosed area of property in the City and County of San Francisco that is open to the public and under the jurisdiction of the Recreation and Park Commission or any other City department if the property is a park,square,garden,sport or playing field other than a golf course, recreational pier,or other property used for recreational purposes. September 28,2004 Board of Supervisors—SUBSTITUTED January 25,2005 Board of Supervisors—PASSED ON 1.IRST READING Ayes: 8-Alioto-Pier,Ammiano,Daly,Dufty,Elsbernd,Ma,Maxwell, Sandoval Noes: 3 -McGoldrick,Mirkarimi,Peskin February 1, 2005 Board of Supervisors—FINALLY PASSED Ayes: 7-Alioto-Pier,Ammiano,Daly,Elsbernd,Ma,Maxwell,Sandoval Noes: 3 -McGoldrick,Mirkarimi,Peskin Excused: 1 -Dufty City and County of San Francisco I Printed at 1:43 PM on 2/2/05 SAN FRANCISCO /No signs posted on eve of outdoor smoking ban Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT C SFGiiite.com Return to regular view Milan free online videos at SAN FRANCISCO �� y No signs posted on eve of outdoor smoking ban ,_ 4,, . t4i; triPhikVire -Charlie Goodyear,Chronicle Staff Writer Saturday,June 25,2005 ,r With a law barring smokers from aol com lighting up in nearly all city-run open spaces in San Francisco scheduled to see what's here for you 0* take effect next Friday, "No Smoking" signs have yet to be posted, raising questions about how well the ban will be enforced. Six months ago, the Board of Supervisors passed what is believed to be the most comprehensive outdoor smoking ban in the country. The ban covers parks, squares, gardens and playing fields under city jurisdiction. First offenders could be slapped with a$100 fine issued by a police officer or member of the city's park patrol. At the time the legislation was passed, city officials estimated that more than 1,000 signs might need to be posted at hundreds of locations around San Francisco. But so far, the Recreation and Park Department has not budgeted any funds for the new signs, according to Supervisor Michela Alioto-Pier, who sponsored the legislation creating the ban. And department officials conceded last week that they haven't even created a mock-up of a sign that would alert residents to the new ordinance. "That's an outrage," Alioto-Pier said, adding that she had written Yomi Agunbiade,the department's acting general manager, a letter about the issue. "They're supposed to be implementing this next week. It's wholly irresponsible. " The signs are important because city officials are hoping that peer pressure will do more than ticket-writing police officers can in curbing smoking -- and the littering of cigarette butts --at city parks. But without the law clearly posted, civic-minded citizens might find it hard telling scofflaw smokers to "put it out." "I think it's fair to say it's going to be a slow rollout," said parks department spokeswoman Rose Marie Dennis, when asked about posting signs for the ban. "There's going to be some growing pains." At some of the 250 parks and recreation areas under the department's control, there are already so many signs listing local laws that it may be difficult to add an additional "No Smoking" sign. "We don't want to proliferate the parks with tons of signs," Dennis said. The lack of signs is bound to lead to confusion initially about where smokers can and can't httn://www.sf&ate.com/cai-bin/article.cai?file=/c/a/2005/06/2 sin o(Dr% '" SAN FRANCISCO/No signs posted on eve of outdoor smoking ban Page 2 of 2 smoke. While the law bans smoking in a park, square or other location with a primary recreation use, it does not specifically mention a plaza. Officials at the Department of Public Works, which has jurisdiction over U.N. and Hallidie plazas, said last week they had been advised by the city attorney's office that the ban will not apply to those locations. Similarly, Dennis said it is unclear whether the ban will be enforced at Union Square. But Alioto-Pier said she believes the law covers plazas and should be enforced there. The ban does not apply to golf courses, a controversial exemption that has prompted some supervisors who voted against it to call the ordinance elitist. "The impetus for this was the amount of cigarette butts we were finding on the ground," Alioto-Pier responded. "They leach toxins into our groundwater. Golf courses are very different. You pay to play on them, and they are immaculately maintained. In terms of secondhand smoke, you are making a choice to be there. In a park, you are not making a choice to be around people who are smoking." Dennis said her department may receive $10,000 from the Department of Public Health for signs. Parks officials are planning targeted enforcement for locations where illegal smokers are most active. Along with citations, officials also may revoke permits at events where smokers are ignoring the ban. E-mail Charlie Goodyear at cgoodyear@sfchronicle.corn. Page B - 2 URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2005/06/25/BAGPQDELKK1.DTL ©2006 San Francisco Chronicle --4---j 7flp=/c/n/2n65/nh/25/RAGP(IDFT.KK1 DTI.)'tv 11/7/?nnh ATTACHMENT D FIGURE 2.5 RELATIVE PERSON-MINUTES OF ETS EXPOSURE* IN DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENTS Adult Male Nonsmoker Outdoor Adult Female Nonsmokers Outdoor o 1r 16°t° 13% Work oh -CoV-11 35% oo Work ; 10 ::4:l'.ffirs::Av4::i 46% - , i Othe 0-•ftr)o:$ri,,,i,13;,b!-,:;-,;. `,f;,"i":,4r,},,i,1 r .4 , Ai,4 Indoor o::0:-1t.4..1,.!;.,t4lf: Other %s 23% o Indoo r z -4t 31% Home Home 20% 15% Adult Female Smokers Adult Male Smokers Work -`` g � � Outdoor 1 , Outdoor 12% t t 12° 1yy Work x Y� 26% � , a$ of 0;- Other Indoor Other 22% Home Indoor Home 29% 21% 53% *Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding errors. Data from 1989-1990. Source: Lum, 1994a,b Exposure Measurement and Prevalence Page 2-42 ATTACHMENT E FIGURE 2.5 (continued) RELATIVE PERSON-MINUTES OF ETS EXPOSURE* IN DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENTS Infants and Preschoolers Children School (0-5 years) Outdoor (6-11 Years) 0.5% 17% Outdoor r Other Home Indoor 62/o o � o ey 21/o Home Other 54% Indoor "tr Adolescents School 4.5% Outdoor (12-17 Years) 13% Home 41% Other Indoor 42% *Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding errors. Data from 1989-1990. Source: Lum, 1994a,b Exposure Measurement and Prevalence Page 2-43 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2006 (No Smoking in City Parks,Recreational Areas, and Cemeteries, and Near Mass Gatherings) AN ORDINANCE ENACTING CHAPTER 15.30 OF THE SALT LAKE CITY CODE, PROHIBITING SMOKING IN CITY PARKS,RECREATIONAL AREAS, AND CEMETERIES, AND NEAR MASS GATHERINGS. WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation(the"City")has authority to protect the public health, welfare, and sanitation; and WHEREAS, based on the findings of the Utah Legislature in Utah Code Section 78-38- .5,the City hereby finds that the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency(EPA)has determined that environmental tobacco smoke is a Group A carcinogen, in the same category as other cancer causing chemicals such as asbestos; and WHEREAS,the EPA has determined that there is no acceptable level of exposure to Class A carcinogens; and WHEREAS,the EPA has determined that exposure to environmental tobacco smoke also causes an increase in respiratory diseases and disorders among exposed persons; and WHEREAS,the United States Surgeon General has determined that secondhand smoke exposure causes disease and premature death in children and adults who do not smoke; and WHEREAS, the United States Surgeon General has determined that children exposed to secondhand smoke have an increased risk of sudden infant death syndrome, acute respiratory infections, ear problems,bronchitis,pneumonia, and more severe asthma; and WHEREAS,the United States Surgeon General has determined that exposure of adults to secondhand smoke has immediate adverse effects on the cardiovascular system and causes coronary heart disease and lung cancer; and WHEREAS,the United States Surgeon General has determined that the scientific evidence indicates that there is no risk-free level of exposure to secondhand smoke; and WHEREAS,reliable studies have shown that breathing side stream or secondhand smoke is a significant health hazard, in particular for elderly people,individuals with cardiovascular disease, and individuals with impaired respiratory function, including asthmatics and those with obstructive airway disease; and WHEREAS, the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute have reported that that between 35,000 to 40,000 nonsmokers,including 6,000 children, die each year from diseases caused by secondhand smoke; and WIN I-REAS,the Americans with Disabilities Act, which requires that disabled persons have access to public places and work places, deems impaired respiratory function to be a disability; and WHEREAS,the health care costs and lost productivity incurred by smoking-related disease and death represent a heavy and avoidable financial drain on our community; and WHEREAS,the United States Surgeon General has determined that concentrations of cancer-causing and toxic chemicals are potentially higher in secondhand smoke than in the smoke inhaled by smokers; and WHEREAS,the 2004 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance Survey indicates that 87% of Salt Lake County residents would support smoking restrictions at parks; and WHEREAS, cigarette butts are not biodegradable and discarding cigarette butts and tobacco onto the ground in places such as city parks,recreational areas, and cemeteries, and at the locations of mass gatherings is unsightly, unclean, and particularly hazardous to small children and animals who handle and sometimes ingest them,which can lead to serious health effects; and WHEREAS, littering in city parks and near mass gatherings, including littering of cigarette butts, shall not be tolerated; and WHEREAS, smoke free parks are important for the health of children and adults; and WHEREAS,because children imitate adult behavior, the elimination of smoking in places such as city parks,recreational areas, and cemeteries, and near mass gatherings furthers the goal of reducing youth smoking; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake Valley Board of Health, as a policy-making body designated by statute to protect the public's health,has deemed it prudent,reasonable, and necessary to support, advocate, and urge that municipal legislative bodies in Salt Lake County adopt an ordinance: (1)protecting the public health and welfare by prohibiting smoking in public parks, gathering places,recreational areas, and plazas; and, (2) guaranteeing the right of nonsmokers to breathe smoke-free air, and to recognize that the need to breathe smoke free air shall have priority over the desire to smoke; and WHEREAS,the City finds that the prohibition of smoking in the City's parks, recreational facilities, and cemeteries, and near mass gatherings serves to protect the health, safety, and welfare of persons in the City. 2 NOW, THEREFORE,be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Chapter 15.30, Salt Lake City Code,be, and the same hereby is, enacted to read as follows: Chapter 15.30 Smoking Prohibited in City Parks, Recreational Areas, and Cemeteries, and Near Mass Gatherings 15.30.010. Definitions A. "City park"means and includes city-owned parks,public squares,ball diamonds, golf courses, soccer fields, and other recreation areas,Library Square, city-owned cemeteries and trails,but not designated smoking areas specified by the city. For purposes of this chapter, "city park"does not include a sidewalk any portion of which is located on the perimeter of the park, within fifteen(1.5) feet of a street adjacent to the outside edge of the park. B. "Mass gathering"means an outdoor assembly of 5100 or more people on city-owned property that reasonably can be expected to continue for two or more hours. C. "Smoke"or"smoking"means and includes:possession, carrying, or holding a lighted pipe, cigar, or cigarette of any kind, or any other lighted smoking equipment, or the lighting or emitting or exhaling of smoke of a pipe, cigar, or cigarette or any kind, or of any other lighted smoking equipment. 15.30.020. Prohibitions Smoking is hereby prohibited in-all-city parks, light-rail train stations,within twenty-five (25)1 feet of bus stops, and within fifty(50) feet of amass gatherings. A violation of this ordinance is an infraction punishable by a fine not to exceed we hu,,dred ninety nine twenty-five dollars ($2-9925.00)but not by imprisonment. Police officers shall have the discretion to issue a "warning"if they deem it is in the best interests of the city for the first offense. 15.30.030. Exceptions A. American Indian/Alaska Native Ceremonies 1. A person is exempt from the restrictions of this chapter if the person: a. Is a member of an American Indian/Alaska Native tribe whose members are recognized as eligible for the special programs and services provided by the United States to American Tndians/Alaska Natives who are members of those tribes; b. Is an American Indian/Alaska Native who actively practices an American 3 Indian/Alaska Native religion, the origin and interpretation of which is from a traditional American Indian/Alaska Native culture; c. Is smoking tobacco using the traditional pipe of an American Indian/Alaska Native tribal religious ceremony, of which tribe the person is a member, and is smoking the pipe as part of that ceremony; and d. The ceremony is conducted by a pipe carrier, American Indian/Alaska Native spiritual person, or medicine person recognized by the tribe of which the person is a member and by the American Indian/Alaska Native community. 2. A religious ceremony using a traditional pipe under this section is subject to any applicable state or local law, except as provided in this section. B. First Amendment Activities A person is exempt from the restrictions of this chapter if the person is smoking or using smoking materials to exercise protected First Amendment activity, such as smoking or use of materials for bona fide religious purposes. 15.30.040. Posting of Signs "No smoking" signs or the international"No Smoking"symbol (consisting of a pictorial representation of a burning cigarette enclosed in a red circle with a red bar across it) shall be clearly and conspicuously posted in every city park. SECTION 2. EFFECTIVE DATE. That this Ordinance shall take effect on the date of its first publication. 4 { 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 (SEAL) Bill No. of 2006 Published: I:\Ordinance 061Enacting 15.30 re smoking in public parks 11-6-06.doc 5 odititoi 4k04. 444 C rye.lFIy! A'4A ( )40 ^* 4e4 R s0041to) 0ti k ?o4oe