The URL can be used to link to this page

05/21/2024 - Work Session - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA WORK SESSION May 21, 2024 Tuesday 2:00 PM Council meetings are held in a hybrid meeting format. Hybrid meetings allow people to join online or in person at the City & County Building. Learn more at www.slc.gov/council/agendas. Council Work Room 451 South State Street, Room 326 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 SLCCouncil.com 2:00 PM Work Session Or immediately following the 1:00 PM Redevelopment Agency Meeting 7:00 pm Formal Meeting Room 315 (See separate agenda) Welcome and public meeting rules In accordance with State Statute and City Ordinance, the meeting may be held electronically. After 5:00 p.m., please enter the City & County Building through the main east entrance. The Work Session is a discussion among Council Members and select presenters. The public is welcome to listen. Items scheduled on the Work Session or Formal Meeting may be moved and / or discussed during a different portion of the Meeting based on circumstance or availability of speakers. The Website addresses listed on the agenda may not be available after the Council votes on the item. Not all agenda items will have a webpage for additional information read associated agenda paperwork. Generated: 08:50:20 Note: Dates not identified in the project timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. Item start times and durations are approximate and are subject to change. Work Session Items Click Here for the Mayor’s Recommended Budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25 1.Informational: Updates from the Administration ~ 2:00 p.m. 15 min. The Council will receive information from the Administration on major items or projects in progress. Topics may relate to major events or emergencies (if needed), services and resources related to people experiencing homelessness, active public engagement efforts, and projects or staffing updates from City Departments, or other items as appropriate. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Recurring Briefing Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a 2.Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget: Metropolitan Water District Preview, Property Tax Proposal Follow-Up ~ 2:15 p.m. 10 min. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing about a proposed property tax increase by the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy, for Fiscal Year 2024-25. For more information visit tinyurl.com/MetroWaterDistrict. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, April 2, 2024; Tuesday, May 7, 2024; and Tuesday, May 21, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, April 16, 2024 and Tuesday, May 7, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 7, 2024 and Tuesday, May 21, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 3.Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget: Department of Public Lands ~ 2:25 p.m. 45 min. The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed Department of Public Lands budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25. For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY25. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, May 7, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 and Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 4.Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget: Golf Fund ~ 3:10 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed Golf Fund budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25. For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY25. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, May 7, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 and Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 5.Tentative Break ~ 3:40 p.m. 20 min. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Set Public Hearing Date - Hold hearing to accept public comment - TENTATIVE Council Action - 6.Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget: Information Management Services ~ 4:00 p.m. 45 min. The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed Information Management Services (IMS) budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25. The department provides technical support for the City. For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY25. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, May 7, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 and Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 7.Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget: Proposed Compensation and Benefits for City Employees ~ 4:45 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed Compensation budget, which accounts for personnel and payroll costs, for Fiscal Year 2024-25. For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY25. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, May 7, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 and Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 8.Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget: Justice Court ~ 5:15 p.m. 30 min. The Council will receive a briefing about the proposed Justice Court budget for Fiscal Year 2024-25. The Justice Court handles misdemeanor criminal citations, small claims, traffic citations and traffic school for moving violations. For more information visit tinyurl.com/SLCFY25. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - Tuesday, May 7, 2024 Hold hearing to accept public comment - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 and Tuesday, June 4, 2024 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action - TBD 9.Board Appointment: Sister Cities Board – Rose Kjesbo ~ 5:45 p.m. 5 min The Council will interview Rose Kjesbo prior to considering appointment to the Sister Cities Board for a term ending July 3, 2028. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 10.Informational: Central Business Improvement Area 2025 - 2028 Written Briefing - The Council will receive a written briefing about authorizing the Central Business Improvement Area for another three-year period from April 2025 - April 2028 (CBIA- 25). The City established the Central Business Improvement Area (CBIA) in 1991 and has been reauthorized every three years. The current contract was awarded to the Downtown Alliance in 2022 and will expire in April 2025, coinciding with the conclusion of the current assessment area, CBIA-22. The CBIA is a special assessment on commercial properties downtown for economic promotion activities. A second special assessment is levied for holiday lighting in the downtown. FYI – Project Timeline: (subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing - Tuesday, May 21, 2024 Set Public Hearing Date - n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment - n/a TENTATIVE Council Action - n/a Standing Items 11.Report of the Chair and Vice Chair - - Report of Chair and Vice Chair. 12.Report and Announcements from the Executive Director - - Report of the Executive Director, including a review of Council information items and announcements. The Council may give feedback or staff direction on any item related to City Council business, including but not limited to scheduling items. 13.Tentative Closed Session - - The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session. A closed meeting described under Section 52-4-205 may be held for specific purposes including, but not limited to: a. discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; b. strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; c. strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; d. strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; e. strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; f. discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and g. investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A closed meeting may also be held for attorney-client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 4:00 p.m. on Friday, May 17, 2024, the undersigned, duly appointed City Recorder, does hereby certify that the above notice and agenda was (1) posted on the Utah Public Notice Website created under Utah Code Section 63F-1-701, and (2) a copy of the foregoing provided to The Salt Lake Tribune and/or the Deseret News and to a local media correspondent and any others who have indicated interest. CINDY LOU TRISHMAN SALT LAKE CITY RECORDER Final action may be taken in relation to any topic listed on the agenda, including but not limited to adoption, rejection, amendment, addition of conditions and variations of options discussed. The City & County Building is an accessible facility. People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation, which may include alternate formats, interpreters, and other auxiliary aids and services. Please make requests at least two business days in advance. To make a request, please contact the City Council Office at council.comments@slcgov.com, 801-535-7600, or relay service 711. Ad m i n i s t r a t i v e Up d a t e s Ma y 2 1 , 2 0 2 4 ww w . s l c . g o v / f e e d b a c k / Re g u l a r l y u p d a t e d w i t h h i g h l i g h t e d wa y s t o e n g a g e w i t h t h e C i t y . Co m m u n i t y E n g a g e m e n t H i g h l i g h t s Co m m u n i t y & N e i g h b o r h o o d s sl c . g o v / c a n Ba l l p a r k N E X T / R D A Ba l l p a r k n e x t . c o m Pl a n n i n g sl c . g o v / p l a n n i n g Th r i v i n g i n P l a c e En g i n e e r i n g • 21 0 0 S o u t h R e c o n s t r u c t i o n ( 7 0 0 E a s t t o 13 0 0 E a s t ) • La n e C l o s u r e s s t a r t M o n d a y • Bu s i n e s s e s r e m a i n o p e n • Ea s t b o u n d r o a d c l o s u r e c o m i n g e n d o f Ju n • Vi r g i n i a S t r e e t R e c o n s t r u c t i o n • Ma y 2 7 t h s t a r t • On e l a t e n o r t h b o u n d o n l y t h r o u g h co n s t r u c t i o n • 11 0 0 E a s t R e c o n s t r u c t i o n ( 9 0 0 S t o L o g a n Av e ) • Wo r k i s i n f u l l s w i n g – on e l a n e t r a f f i c ne a r c o n s t r u c t i o n z o n e s Co m m u n i t y & N e i g h b o r h o o d s sl c . g o v / c a n Ba l l p a r k N E X T / R D A Ba l l p a r k n e x t . c o m sl c . g o v / p l a n n i n g Th r i v i n g i n P l a c e UD O T Co m m u n i t y & N e i g h b o r h o o d s sl c . g o v / c a n Ba l l p a r k N E X T / R D A Ba l l p a r k n e x t . c o m Pl a n n i n g sl c . g o v / p l a n n i n g Th r i v i n g i n P l a c e Ho u s i n g S t a b i l i t y • HU D 2 0 2 5 -20 2 9 C o n s o l i d a t e d P l a n • Co m m u n i t y S u r v e y o p e n u n t i l O c t o b e r 2 0 2 4 Pl a n n i n g Pu b l i c U t i l i t i e s • Mo b i l e B u s i n e s s T e x t A m e n d m e n t - Po s t p o n e d • D4 T e x t A m e n d m e n t s f o r S p o r t s , E n t e r t a i n m e n t , Cu l t u r a l , a n d C o n v e n t i o n D i s t r i c t – Ju n e 1 2 • St r e e t L i g h t i n g M a s t e r P l a n I m p l e m e n t a t i o n • PU s e e k i n g f e e d b a c k f r o m r e s i d e n t s u n t i l J u l y Co m m u n i t y & N e i g h b o r h o o d s sl c . g o v / c a n Ba l l p a r k N E X T / R D A Ba l l p a r k n e x t . c o m sl c . g o v / p l a n n i n g Th r i v i n g i n P l a c e Ma y o r ' s O f f i c e Co m m u n i t y & N e i g h b o r h o o d s sl c . g o v / c a n Ba l l p a r k N E X T / R D A Ba l l p a r k n e x t . c o m Th r i v i n g i n P l a c e Ev e n t s Ev e n t N a m e St a r t D a t e Ev e n t L o c a t i o n Ho s t i n g O r g a n i z a t i o n ( s ) AC E F u n d e d Ba l l p a r k B i t e s 05 / 2 2 / 2 4 Je f f e r s o n P a r k Sa l t L a k e C i t y E v e n t s No Fo c u s o n F e s t M a y : M e n t a l H e a l t h ( S e e i t Th i s W a y ) 05 / 2 2 / 2 4 Fi t 2 R e c o v e r Me n t a l H e a l t h y F. i . T . Ye s Bu s k e r F e s t 05 / 2 5 / 2 4 Re g e n t S t r e e t d o w n t o w n / s u r r o u n d i n g th e E c c l e s t h e a t r e Sa l t L a k e C i t y A r t s C o u n c i l No Sp r i n g D o g T r a i n i n g 05 / 2 6 / 2 4 Me m o r y G r o v e P a r k Sa l t L a k e C i t y C o r p o r a t i o n No Yo g a i n t h e P a r k 05 / 2 6 / 2 4 Pi o n e e r P a r k Sa l t L a k e C i t y E v e n t s No Ba l l p a r k B i t e s 05 / 2 9 / 2 4 Je f f e r s o n P a r k Sa l t L a k e C i t y E v e n t s No Do w n t o w n F a r m e r s M a r k e t 06 / 0 1 / 2 4 Pi o n e e r P a r k Ur b a n F o o d C o n n e c t i o n s o f U t a h Ye s Gi r l s o n t h e R u n U t a h S p r i n g 5 K R a c e 06 / 0 1 / 2 4 Su g a r H o u s e P a r k Gi r l s o n t h e R u n U t a h Ye s Ut a h P r i d e 2 0 2 4 06 / 0 1 / 2 4 Wa s h i n g t o n S q u a r e P a r k Ut a h P r i d e C e n t e r Ye s Ga r d e n F e s t i v a l s a t S u r v i v o r W e l l n e s s "B l u e s & B B Q " F e s t i v a l 06 / 0 2 / 2 4 Su r v i v o r W e l l n e s s Su r v i v o r W e l l n e s s Ye s Yo g a i n t h e P a r k 06 / 0 2 / 2 4 Pi o n e e r P a r k Sa l t L a k e C i t y E v e n t s No Ev e n t s a r e c o l l e c t e d f r o m A C E f u n d e d e v e n t s , C i t y s p o n s o r e d e v e n t s , a n d p u b l i c l y p e r m i t t e d e v e n t s . Th i s i s n o t me a n t t o b e a n a l l -i n c l u s i v e l i s t o f a l l e v e n t s g o i n g o n i n t h e C i t y . P l e a s e v e r i f y i n f o r m a t i o n b e f o r e a t t e n d i n g . Ho m e l e s s R e s o u r c e C e n t e r U t i l i z a t i o n : • HM I S d o i n g s o m e c l e a n u p • We s t V a l l e y , Mi l l e r , K i n g H R C s & Y R C a l l re t a i n a d d i t i o n a l b e d s + S a n d y M V P En c a m p m e n t I m p a c t M i t i g a t i o n / R a p i d In t e r v e n t i o n : • EI M - Fo l l o w u p @ W a r m S p r i n g s / V i c t o r y Ro a d L a s t w e e k : V i c t o r y R o a d 3 d a y s • RI T - J o r d a n R i v e r S u r p l u s C a n a l , 1 7 0 0 S, Co t t o n w o o d P a r k , Y R C a r e a Ka y a k C o u r t : @ P i o n e e r P a r k l a s t w e e k d u e t o pr o b l e m a t i c r i v e r c o n d i t i o n s Wi n t e r S e r v i c e s T a s k G r o u p : • We e k l y m e e t i n g s f o c u s i n g o n s i t e o p t i o n s , fu n d i n g a n d p r o v i d e r s e a r c h Ho m e l e s s n e s s Up d a t e Sh e l t e r s : 8 0 1 -99 0 -99 9 9 Ad d i t i o n a l S y s t e m I n f o r m a t i o n : Sa l t L a k e V a l l e y C o a l i t i o n t o En d H o m e l e s s n e s s ( S L V C E H ) en d u t a h h o m e l e s s n e s s . o r g / sa l t -la k e -va l l e y Ut a h O f f i c e o f H o m e l e s s Se r v i c e s ( O H S ) jo b s . u t a h . g o v / h o m e l e s s n e s s / i n d e x . h t m l Item G9 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Sam Owen, Policy Analyst DATE:May 21, 2024 RE:Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget: Metropolitan Water District, Property Tax Proposal MOTION 1 I move the Council close this public hearing and adopt the resolution. MOTION 2 I move the Council close this public hearing and not adopt the resolution. CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM:Sam Owen, Policy Analyst DATE: May 21, 2024 RE:Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake & Sandy Property Tax Proposal ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE A majority of the five Metropolitan Water District Board Trustees appointed by Salt Lake City will briefly present to the Council about the 2024 property tax proposal. This is one requirement in the State law that governs how the District sets its property tax levy. The Council is scheduled to decide on the property tax proposal at its formal meeting, May 21, 2024. Each City Council of the member cities, Salt Lake City and Sandy City, must approve the proposal for the tax to increase. Sandy City approved the proposal following their hearing earlier in May. As discussed in previous briefings, if Salt Lake City does not approve the tax proposal, it does not move ahead, and the District could instead increase water sales prices to member cities to recover the revenue. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy stores, treats and conveys culinary water supplies for Salt Lake City and Sandy City. The District is one of the taxing entities that appears as a line on the property tax bill for Salt Lake City property owners. Water is delivered to City residents through Salt Lake City Public Utilities. The District is proposing a property tax increase that would generate new property tax revenue from Salt Lake City taxpayers, netting an additional estimated $6.77 million. Cost impact from the tax proposal to a residential property of median value in Salt Lake City ($596,000) would be about $49 annually. Property tax makes up about one quarter of the District’s annual revenue. The remainder comes from a regular capital assessment to member cities, as well as water sales, primarily to member cities. The District also proposes bonding revenue of about $24.3 million for the new fiscal year. Item Schedule: Briefing: May 7, 2024 Public Hearing: May 7 & May 21, 2024 Potential Action: May 21, 2024 (property tax proposal) Page | 2 The District highlights a current grouping of required capital improvements and projects totaling $117.9 million. Anticipated annual fiscal impact is an estimated $9.3 million per year, from just these new capital expenses. These figures capture part of the District’s planned capital improvement program expenses. The Council reviews the rest of the District’s budget, and does not formally adopt it. The Council appoints five of the seven-member Board of Trustees. The total FY25 expenditures and revenues figure is an estimated $100.3 million, up from last year’s total $51.2 million. Budget figures could shift pending outcome of the property tax proposal.  FY 2 5 T e n t a t i v e B u d g e t Sa l t L a k e Ci t y C o u n c i l M e e t i n g Ma y 2 1 , 20 2 4 Thank you for the opportunity to provide this report to the Council. The Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake & Sandy has tentatively adopted a tentative budget that includes a proposed property tax that exceeds the certified rate that would normally apply for fiscal year 2025. Pat Comarell, Cindy Cromer, Joan Degiogio, and I represent a majority of the Trustees appointed by Salt Lake City to the Metro Board. We are providing this report under Utah Code Section 17B-1-1003. The District’s tentative budget includes a property tax of 0.00035, which is an increase from the current certified rate of 0.000200 for Salt Lake City. The proposed tax increase would generate $8,639,514, between Salt Lake City and Sandy City. These additional funds will be used to meet the District’s increased costs, including Cottonwoods Connection Project, Deer Creek Dam Intake Project, Jordan Aqueduct System Capital and O&M costs, and Central Utah Project OMR&R costs. The District’s General Manager discussed these costs and the purpose of the property tax increase in more detail during the May 7th work session. The proposed property tax rate increase would generate approximately a 72% increase in the property tax revenue for the District, between Salt Lake City and Sandy City. We are happy to answer any questions the Council has. 1 Memo TO: City Council leadership DATE: February 2, 2024 FROM: Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake & Sandy SUBECT FY25 Proposed Increase to the Certified Tax Rate CC: MWDSLS Board of Trustees ISSUES The Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake & Sandy (“District”) needs an increase in revenue to address critical water infrastructure and to pay for the cost increases from other entities (i.e., Central Utah Water Conservancy District, Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District, and Provo River Water Users Association). The following is a summary of these critical capital projects and costs from other entities: Description Annual Cost Type of Expense Long-Term Financial Impact Entity responsible for securing funding Cottonwoods Connection Project (District/SLC/SC) Purpose: Required project to address aging infrastructure and Salt Lake Aqueduct seismic and other elements of resiliency. $2,276,800 Capital $41.5 Million (repayment of 30 year loan/bond) Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake & Sandy Deer Creek Dam Intake Project (PRWUA costs) Purpose: Required project to replace aging dam infrastructure that delivers 85,000 AF of water (80% of water portfolio) to the Salt Lake Valley. $1,240,000 Capital $37 Million (30 years repayment) Provo River Water Users Association Jordan Aqueduct/Jordan Valley Water Treatment Plant Capital and O&M (JVWCD costs) Purpose: Address aging infrastructure that delivers water to Northwest quadrant of Salt Lake City. $5,023,680 (5 year average) Capital and O&M $32.5 Million (10 years of capital projects) Jordan Valley Water Conservancy District Central Utah Project OMR&R (CUWCD costs) Purpose: Expenses related to the District’s investment in Central Utah Project water. $1,501,500 O&M and repair and replacement of CUP facilities $6.9 Million (forecasted target increase) Central Utah Water Conservancy District Total $9,371,370 $117.9 Million 2 RECOMMENDATION To meet the District’s revenue needs, the board of trustees recommends increasing the certified tax rate to 0.00035. By way of information, the District’s maximum tax rate is 0.0005. In 2008, the District increased the certified rate to 0.00035. Over time, the rate has eroded as the value of properties has increased. Since 2008, the District has not implemented a certified rate increase. Taxes are a reliable source of revenue and the investment in water infrastructure projects will benefit future generations. The investment in capital projects that will last more than 75 years supports generational equity. AUTHORIZATION FROM SALT LAKE CITY AND SANDY COUNCILS As of January 1, 2015 current statute (17B-2a-608) states than increasing the certified tax rate requires approval by “the legislative body of each municipality that appoints a member to the board of trustees under Section 17B-2a-604.” The appointed board of trustees of the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake & Sandy must receive approval from their appointed authority to increase the certified tax rate to 0.00035. The timing of the city councils’ approving the District’s certified tax rate needs to occur after the District adopts the tentative FY25 budget on April 15, 2024 and before the budget public hearing on May 20, 2024. The statutory deadline for budget adoption is June 22, 2024. With the approval of both city councils, the certified rate would increase as budgeted and be formally adopted after a Truth in Taxation hearing in August. A question to be resolved is how the two cities want to present the tax increase to their councils for approval. Attachment A describes in more detail the statutory requirements of each city council. CONCENSUS FROM CITY COUNCILS There must be consensus from both councils and each city will be taxed at a uniform and equal rate. If either council does not approve an increase to the certified tax rate, then the District will propose an increase to the water rate. The water rate must also be uniformly applied to all cities comprising this District. The District will propose an 39.33% water rate increase to both member cities (36.33% generates the revenue equal to the property tax and the 3% water rate increase was already forecasted in the FY25 budget). Table 1 calculates the annual impact of an increase to the certified tax rate to Sandy City and Salt Lake City property owners. On average, a property owner in the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake & Sandy’s service area would see an annual property tax increase of $47.00. 3 Table 2 represents the net revenue generated from the certified tax rate increase. The District would receive an additional $8.6 million in tax revenue. Table 2 also shows the estimated tax revenue from each member city. Table 3 represents the current water sales revenue and the projected water rate increase of 36.33% to match the revenue net revenue increase of the proposed property tax. Table 1: Annual impact of property tax increase to Property Owner City Median Market Value of Property Taxable Home Value (55% of median) Current Year Tax Rate Proposed Next Year Certified Tax Rate Percent Increase Annual Increase to property owner Monthly increase Sandy $628,000 $345,400 0.000216 0.00035 62.04% $46.28 $3.86 Salt Lake $576,000 $316,800 0.000200 0.00035 75.00% $47.52 $3.96 Table 2: Dollar amount generated from an increase in the certified tax rate City 2023 Tax Year Certified Tax Rate 2023 Tax Revenue Proposed Certified Tax Rate Estimated 2024 Tax Revenue Net Revenue Increase Sandy City 0.000216 $3,010,170 0.00035 $ 4,877,590 $1,867,420 Salt Lake City 0.000200 $9,030,509 0.00035 $15,802,603 $6,772,094 Total MWDSLS Taxes $12,040,679 0.00035 $20,680,193 $8,639,514 Table 3: Dollar amount generated from an increase to water rates City FY24 Water Sales Revenue Percent Increase Estimated FY25 Water Sales Revenue Net Revenue Increase Sandy City $ 6,658,388 36.33% $ 9,077,381 $2,418,993 Salt Lake City $17,121,570 36.33% $23,341,836 $6,220,266 Total MWDSLS Water Sales to Member Cities $23,779,958 36.33% $32,419,217 $8,639,259 RESOLUTION NO. _____ OF 2024 (Authorizing the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy (MWDSLS) to Increase its Property Tax for FY 2025) WHEREAS, the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake and Sandy (“District”) was established in 1935 with a primary function to create a firm water supply for its member cities. Salt Lake City is the founding member and Sandy City joined the District in 1990; and WHEREAS, due to inflation and commitments, the District cannot meet its budgeting needs and asks approval from Salt Lake City and Sandy City to levy a property tax increase for fiscal year 2025 (“FY 2025”). A special district board of trustees may approve a property tax increase only after the conditions of Utah Code Section 17B-1-1003 have been satisfied or considered satisfied for each member of the board of trustees; and WHEREAS, due to a unique provision in the Metropolitan Water District Act, the District requires that both the city councils of Salt Lake City and Sandy City approve the tax increase by motion. The tax levy must be uniform as to all property taxed by the District; and WHEREAS, Utah Code Section 10-6-133(1) requires that, at a regularly scheduled meeting, the City Council set a proposed property tax rate before June 22 of each year, or September 1 in the case of a property tax rate increase under Sections 59-2-919 through 59-2-923, the governing body of each city at a regular meeting or special meeting called for that purpose, shall by ordinance or resolution set the real and personal property tax levy for various municipal purposes; and WHEREAS, after due consideration, the City Council of Salt Lake City has determined this action to be in the best interest of the City and its residents. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, as follows: 1. Public meetings to consider the increase in the District’s proposed tax rate were held on May 7, 2024 and May 21, 2024 during which public comment was invited and allowed. 2. Given serious inflation, the serious draw-down of reserves, and commitments, including bond commitments, the District has to increase taxes above the certified rate, or increase charges for water, or some combination of the two for FY 2025. 3. Based upon information provided by District staff, a property tax increase is the preferred method to increase revenue although it is distributed differently across customers compared to a rate increase. The District has provided information that indicates property tax as a revenue source is likely to help secure better debt offerings and save customers money in the longer term, given the extensive infrastructure needs. 4. The District has not had a tax increase in years. District Board approval of a tax increase requires approval of the member city councils at open council meetings. 5. The City Council hereby approves the District’s proposed property tax rate of 0.00035. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, on __________, 2024. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By: CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM: Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office By: ___________________________ Mark Kittrell, Deputy City Attorney COUNCIL BUDGET STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY SLC Budget FY25 TO:City Council Members FROM:Allison Rowland Public Policy & Budget Analyst DATE:May 21, 2024 RE: CORRECTED - FY2025 BUDGET – DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC LANDS MAYOR’S RECOMMENDED BUDGET PAGES: - Key Changes, 58-59; Department Overview, 221-226; Staffing, 295-298 Please see corrections in red below. OVERVIEW The proposed Fiscal Year 2025 (FY25) budget for the Department of Public Lands, including the Golf Fund, would reach just over $50.2 million, which is 10.9% ($4.9 million) higher than in FY24. The increase would be due primarily to a $2.5 million increase in the Golf Division, as well as nearly $1.2 million more in the Parks Division. The distribution of funding among types of expenditures in FY25 would continue the shifts begun in FY24, particularly the increase in Capital Expenditures while Operations and Maintenance would remain mostly flat $- $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 Golf Parks Trails and Natural Lands Urban Forestry Public Lands Administration Planning and Design FY23 Actual FY24 Adopted FY25 MRB Trends in Public Lands Divisions Item Schedule: Briefing: May 21, 2024 Budget Hearings: May 21, June 4 Potential Action: June 11 Department of Public Services 3 (see chart below). Relative to FY23, the FY25 MRB Personal Services costs (pension and merit changes, salary, and insurance rate changes) would continue to account for the largest share of growth, increasing by 35%, to $24.7 million. In contrast, Charges and Services, which make up a much smaller share of the budget, would grow much faster since FY23, by 48%. Capital Expenditures would grow faster still since FY23 (1,070%), as work funded by the 2022 Public Lands Bond, which got underway in 2023, continues. Operations and Maintenance spending has dropped by one third since FY23, though the FY25 MRB proposes a 5.1% increase relative to FY24. See Section C, below, for additional information on concerns with maintenance levels. The Council may wish to ask whether Glendale Park reconstruction is the main driver of the rapid growth in Capital Expenditures since FY23, or if other projects are contributing substantially. The Federal Land and Water Conservation Fund originally funded the City’s purchase of the site, and the City is required to show substantial progress on Glendale Park reconstruction by Spring of 2024. Because the Golf Division is an Enterprise Fund, whose budget is supported primarily by revenue for services offered, it is briefed separately. The remaining Public Lands Divisions are supported by the general fund and Funding Our Future. They are discussed in the rest of this staff report. Public Lands General Fund Budget The proposed FY25 Public Lands Department budget (minus the Golf Fund) would reach $29.7 million dollars: 9.0% higher than the FY24 budget. This would continue the Department’s rapid growth, as the City responds to increasing public expectations for its open spaces, as well as rapid population growth. Since the Department’s inception in 2022, this amount would represent a 56% ($10.7 million) increase in general fund budget allocation in just four years. In addition, the Department is carrying out activities related to the $85 million GO Bond which voters approved in November 2022. Among the five Public Lands Divisions, the Parks Division would continue to receive the lion’s share of the overall budget in FY25, at 56% of the total, $16.6 million (see figure below, and additional information on each Division in section F). Parks also would see the second-biggest increase from FY24 among the Divisions, at $1.2 $0 $5,000,000 $10,000,000 $15,000,000 $20,000,000 $25,000,000 Personal Services Charges & Services Capital Expenditures O & M Other FY23 Actual FY24 Adopted FY25 MRB Shifts in Public Lands Expenditures Department of Public Services 3 million, or 7.6%. It would be exceeded only by the new Planning and Design Division, which would begin its first full year of operation with $1.7 million. The Council approved the new division last March, as part of FY24 Budget Amendment #4 (see item F5, below). Proposed Funding Changes Among Divisions in the Department of Public Lands FY22 Actual FY23 Actual FY24 Adopted FY25 MRB FY24-25 Change Parks 11,019,015 12,247,383 15,444,530 16,621,580 7.6% Trails and Natural Lands 1,403,976 3,886,105 4,755,123 3,992,477 -16.0% Urban Forestry 3,006,927 3,141,141 3,526,680 3,734,071 5.9% Public Lands Administration 3,598,566 5,473,498 3,547,945 3,699,086 4.3% Planning and Design ------1,668,798 -- Total 19,028,484 24,748,127 27,274,278 29,716,012 9.0% Staffing Levels A.New Positions. The proposed budget would add eight new FTEs to the Public Lands Department, including four which the Council already approved for the new Planning and Design Division as part of FY24 Budget Amendment #2. (Another five positions listed in the staffing document for Planning and Design would be transferred from the Trails and Natural Lands Division.) The Department’s four other new positions are funded for 10 months in the MRB, rather than one full year, which means additional funds would be needed to maintain the staffing levels in FY26: $337,315 for these FTES is included in the budget, compared to $404,778 in annualized costs. The salary and program costs of one of the new FTEs (a maintenance technician for Glendale Park) would come from Funding Our Future revenue, and the others would draw from the general fund. The new Parks and Public Lands Project Coordinator position would be funded from “within the Public Lands seasonal personnel budget.” Proposed Staffing Changes in Department of Public Lands Divisions FY22 Actual FY23 Actual FY24 Adopted FY25 MRB Change FY24-25 Parks 78.00 81.00 84.85 84.85 0 Trails and Natural Lands 7.00 29.00 37.15 32.15 -5.00 Urban Forestry 15.00 18.00 18.00 18 0 Planning and Design ------11.0 11.0 Public Lands Administration 17.35 15.35 17.85 19.85 2.00 Total 117.35 143.35 157.85 165.85 8.00 Department of Public Services 4 The Department also proposes to repurpose two existing FTEs to provide different functions: a Senior Florist position (Grade 18) in Parks would be reclassified as the Division Director for Trails and Natural Lands (Grade 35); and an Office Tech II position will be reassigned at the same grade from the Parks Division to provide customer service and administrative support for Public Lands Administration. BACKGROUND AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION A.Annual Report. Since the adoption of the Reimagine Nature Plan in 2022, the Department of Public Lands has tried to align its annual budget proposal with key goals of the plan. These goals, strategies, and results are outlined in the Public Lands Annual Report. Highlights of some topics of special interest to Council Members include: 1. Launching Keep Your Cool, which helped thousands of residents learn about the importance of trees and tree watering. 2. Saving nearly 30% more water in 2024 than in 2023, thanks to new irrigation systems and other turf and water reduction strategies. 3. Updating the 2016 Invasive Species Management Plan, with best practices in natural areas, and functional approaches for low-pesticide/no-pesticide management in parks, golf courses, gardens, farms, and orchards. 4. Completing an innovative stormwater management system at the Regional Athletic Complex (RAC) which eliminates the need to use the Public Utilities drainage system and includes a comprehensive mosquito management plan. 5. Protecting City stormwater infrastructure by proactively clearing debris from the City Creek riverbed in response to 2023-24 snowpack levels and the rapid onset of warm weather in early spring 6. Conducting an ADA Accessibility Audit in Parks with the Mayor’s Office ADA Coordinator, assessing the ADA compliance of various elements and amenities—like play features, parking, walkways, sports fields, and seating—in every park. 7. Elevating the Green Loop project at Mayor Mendenhall’s direction, beginning with the Green Loop pop-up event in the summer, and followed by planning and designing the 200 East section. 8. Engaging directly with more than 4,500 individuals, prioritizing traditionally under-represented communities, for Public Space Visioning that significantly influenced the design of public spaces. B. Staffing Issues. 1.Vacancies. Skilled labor vacancies remain difficult to fill in the Department of Public Lands because of high demand and pay along the Wasatch Front. For example, the Department reports that City salaries for irrigation/plumber positions are below-market. 2.Seasonal Staff. The Department has succeeded in hiring seasonal staff this year to fill most positions: 132 seasonal and part-time positions have been hired, with 53 positions still vacant. Still, serious challenges remain. In response to staff questions, the Department stated: “Many of our usually [regular seasonal] staff have declined to return due to conditions in the parks. We have been able to hire new staff to our team in large Department of Public Services 5 part due to the seasonal staff pay increases from the previous two years. This comes with the unfortunate drawback of having to train new staff each season. [Meanwhile,] Ensuring staff safety remains a serious concern. We have had several "close calls” with negative interactions this year between our parks staff and hostile individuals. Some areas have needed police officer support to safely perform park maintenance. Staff can spend 40-50% of their time picking up litter and trash in parks and along the Jordan River when people are living and camping there. The increase of litter pickup means that they are unable to attend to normal park maintenance and landscaping duties. As the homeless population and crime in our parks increase, morale sinks. While we do all we can to train and incentivize existing staff and new hires, it is clear that their work is comprised of less time beautifying parks and more time cleaning up trash, property misuse, and vandalism. The occasional serious run- ins with potentially dangerous people and the growing presence of drug use and trafficking in public green spaces affects retention and has caused greater turnover than in previous years. Some full-time staff have quit, other regularly returning seasonals no longer show up, and when many candidates have a choice between a Salt Lake City parks job and another municipality, they choose the other city. This is compounded by the market rate used to pay SLC parks staff being [equivalent] to places like Sandy City, Provo and Logan. The work in SLC is much more challenging and less hospitable than other cities in Utah and the pay is intentionally the same.” 3.Funding Our Future Staffing in Public Lands. The total amount of Funding Our Future revenue used in Public Lands in FY25 would rise to $2.4 million, from $1.8 million the year before. Most of the increase would be in the form of employee-related expenses, like the 5% proposed cost of living salary increase, and pension and insurance rate changes. The use of FOF revenue in this Department began with the FY23 City budget, when 21 Park Rangers and associated program costs were funded with this sales tax revenue. In FY24, eleven new Public Lands FTEs, along with many seasonal employees, were shifted to this funding as well, and one more FTE is proposed be added in FY25. B. Maintenance Issues. 1.Council Concerns and Department Response. Council Members have expressed concerns recently about how the Department of Public Lands is balancing its substantial number of new projects with the need for day-to-day maintenance at existing properties. For example, they are receiving complaints from the public about overflowing trash containers, and poor lawn maintenance. In response to a Council staff question, the Department acknowledges the problem, and responded as follows: “The Parks Division is continually outpaced by the impacts of people living on, misusing, and vandalizing public lands all while aging infrastructure demands more staff time to maintain an adequate level of function. This is the main reason traditional parks work seems to be falling behind. Parks staff have to repair damaged turf, broken irrigation systems, riverbanks, overflowing trash cans, and vandalized fixtures, valves, playsets. Park staff are now responding to camp mitigations, ruined toilets, stolen wire from light poles, and abandoned trash/property to the point that maintaining Department of Public Services 6 3. and beautifying parks to a higher standard is not possible. In addition, lower wages along with the stigma of working in Salt Lake City's gritty and sometimes dangerous parks has the Parks division losing staff because they can get equal or better pay from surrounding municipalities. Many skilled labor positions go unfilled - especially those who can work in the private sector trades or other municipalities where drug use, violence, and vandalism don't exist. Equipment is aging and breaking more and more often, and our Fleet Division has struggled to get vehicles and key equipment repaired and returned in a timely fashion. These are Salt Lake City issues that can only be improved with more full-time Park Maintenance Technician positions with associated seasonal staff and newer equipment/vehicles. Parks has time-tested protocols and schedules to keep ahead of the springtime rush, but the aforementioned problems are outpacing our team's ability to respond as quickly as they used to.” The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration whether the shift in the Department’s expenditures toward planning and implementing new projects (as reflected in the FY24 and FY25 MRB expenditures) needs to be re-balanced with greater emphasis on maintenance. 2.Adequately Maintaining SLC’s Public Lands. In May 2023 the Department prepared and presented an analysis titled Adequately Maintaining SLC’s Public Lands in response to an FY22 Council Legislative Intent. It estimated what would be needed to fully fund ongoing maintenance for all of its public lands (including those in the Golf Division) and concluded that $35.4 million would be needed for one-time costs, along with $10.2 million and 54 new FTEs on an ongoing basis. This analysis is not expected to result in immediate budgeting for these amounts, but rather to aid the City’s elected officials in annual budget considerations and inform incremental steps in coming years. The summary of these costs appears in Attachment C1. In response to a staff question, Public Lands outlined its progress in a few key areas in FY24, and its plans for FY25: Rising Wages: Higher seasonal salaries (now starting at $17.00 /hour) increased the number of seasonal applicants in FY24 and improved stability in the seasonal workforce. Investing in Full Time Employees: -In FY 24, the Trails and Natural Lands team was allocated six new FTE Natural Resource Technicians. “This is a significant increase in maintenance capacity and has lowered our average acres maintained per Natural Resources FTE from 633 acres to 211 acres per FTE.” - Parks: In FY24, Parks added the following FTEs: 1 Park Maintenance Technician, 1 Electrician, 1 General Maintenance Worker, 1 Central Control Irrigation Specialist, 1 Irrigation Technician, .5 Sr. Warehouse Operator. Insufficient Planning and Project Delivery: “The FY25 budget includes two FTEs for the Planning and Design Division to help address the backlog of existing capital improvement projects, accelerate project delivery timelines, and implement better planning to reflect the departments and the City’s evolving needs.” Aging Infrastructure: “For the FY 25 CIP process, Public Lands shifted how we were approaching capital improvement application process to focus primarily on asset Department of Public Services 8 replacement of aging infrastructure. The Planning and Design Division submitted eight internal applications for FY25. Six of the eight applications were focused on key asset replacement. It will continue to be critical to address asset replacement through the CIP and annual budget cycle to address these asset replacement needs. Public Lands is currently soliciting proposals from consultants to complete our Capital Asset Plan to better address asset replacement and capital needs. This will be complete in FY 25 and guide all future CIP applications.” The Council may wish to consider requesting an update on Adequately Maintaining SLC’s Public Lands analysis in time for the FY26 budget discussions. 3.Unfunded Maintenance. The Parks Division and the Trails & Natural Lands Division will take on new unfunded maintenance responsibilities listed below in FY25 at new properties throughout the City. This year, maintenance will be provided through contractual services or seasonal labor using one-time funds, but new sources will need to be found for subsequent years. 300 West complete - street improvement waterwise plantings and more than 300 trees. Section of Life on State - includes landscaping and trees between 600 S to 800 S. Portion of 9-Line Trail (300 West to State Street and North frontage along Liberty Park) - maintenance. Sunnyside pedestrian improvements - maintenance for green medians and park strips. Roundabout at 1000 W and 700 S - landscape maintenance. Weed abatement complaints throughout the City - handled by Parks Division. Marmalade Park – unique water feature, main plaza, tree-lined corridor with lawn. Foothill Trailheads - new amenities at all trailheads including signage, garbage, dog bags. 4.Constituent Request Management (CRM) software. The Department reports “Responses to constituent inquiries have improved after hiring a part-time Office Technician and relocating an Office Technician II to Public Lands Administration.” C.Consolidated Fee Schedule (CFS). The Public Lands finance team works with the City Finance Department to ensure that the CFS has been fully vetted, including coordinated cost analysis and adjusting charges as appropriate. D.Public Utilities, Fuel, and Contractual Charges. Unlike many other City departments, Public Lands pays utilities fees on the infrastructure it maintains, such as watering and lights in parks, some park strips, roundabouts, and traffic island irrigation, as well as fuel. Year-to-year fluctuations have been substantial in recent years, and depend on weather conditions, the City’s new asset purchases, contractual changes, and more. The annual Utilities and Contractual budget request is based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus the proposed rate increases for public utilities. Public Lands Estimates for Utilities, Contracts, Fuel Payments FY22 FY23 FY24 Adopted FY25 MRB Department of Public Services 9 Utilities 162,500 332,157 451,800 549,300 Contracts 79,000 391,468 159,000 197,200 Fleet Fuel - 162,938 38,700 50,300 Total $241,500 $886,563 $649,500 $796,800 E.Division Details. 1.Parks Division ($15,982,287; 84.85 FTEs). The Parks Division is charged with oversight and care of all City Parks, the Salt Lake City Cemetery, and the Regional Athletic Complex. The Division notes that this year, “Parks will be saving costs through equipment upgrades, turf-care strategies resulting in cost and water savings, lighting upgrades to energy-efficient fixtures, and anti-vandalism related strategies designed to lower repair and replacement costs.” a.Staffing Changes. The Parks Division would add two new positions. i Parks and Public Lands Project Coordinator. The MRB states that funding for this position “is to be identified within the Public Lands seasonal personnel budget.” Implement deferred maintenance projects and asset renewal maintenance funding, and also review, inspect, and coordinate new Public Lands projects and those in other City departments. ii Parks Maintenance Tech III. FOF $76,700 for 10 months, $92,040 in FY26. For maintenance of Glendale Park, Phase I. (See below for ongoing maintenance costs of new amenities.) b.Glendale Park Progress Update. The Department reported the following on progress at Glendale Park: “Design for Phase 1 is complete, and the City is working with the low bidder to negotiate a construction contract. We anticipate starting construction on Glendale Phase 1 in six to twelve weeks. The construction period for Phase 1 is expected to take nine months if there are no weather- related delays. We anticipate Phase 1 opening to the public in late spring/ early summer of 2025. Proposals for a landscape design firm to complete schematic design of the park is ongoing, with selection anticipated for this summer. Schematic design for the entire park should conclude by Fall 2024. Full design for construction will follow for funded amenities and be complete by summer of 2025. Glendale Phase II construction is anticipated to take 9-12 months. Phase II will be open to the public by summer of 2026. Timelines for potential future phases are unknown and based on securing additional funding. Currently we are evaluating proposals for landscape architecture and design firms to complete schematic design of the remaining amenities of the Park. At that point, we will have planning level cost estimates that will allow us to imore accurately determine what we can accomplish with current funding, and what will require additional funding and may be a part of additional Department of Public Services 10 phasing. Due to the cost and special skills required to design and construct an aquatic center, it is likely that may be an additional, third phase.” c.New Glendale Park Maintenance Funding. Progress in the reconstruction of Glendale Park has spurred requests for new ongoing funding for both maintenance of amenities and a new position to carry out these duties. (The new FTE is described in the Staffing Changes section above.) In response to a staff question, the Department of Public Lands noted that the $106,8oo listed in the FY25 MRB as an ongoing expense reflects an error that will need to be corrected in a future budget amendment. The true amount would be $66,500, to be spent on maintenance supplies for Phase I amenities: the playground, basketball court, multi-use grass area, pavilion, shrub beds, art, and parking lot with planted islands. d.Regional Athletic Complex (RAC). Since the facility opened, revenues have consistently failed to keep pace with expenses. The general fund subsidy is estimated to grow to over $900,000 in FY25. Staff note: When the RAC was approved by voters in 2003, the City estimated it would need some sort of ongoing general fund subsidy. The amount identified at the time was $200,000. The Council may wish to request a full briefing on the Regional Athletic Complex for a future work session, along with strategies the Administration is pursuing to help manage the general fund subsidy. 5.Trails and Natural Lands Division ($3,992,477, 32.15 FTEs). a.Staffing Changes. The Trails and Natural Lands Division would lose five FTEs to the new Planning and Design Division in FY25: one Planning Manager, and four Parks and Public Lands Landscape Planners. A Trails and Natural Lands Division Director position would be created, by “repurposing” a Senior Florist position from the Parks Division and raising the grade to 35 from 18. The ongoing cost of this change would be approximately $55,000 annually depending on the level of experience of the individual being hired and subsequent pay and benefits selected. b.Foothill Trails Maintenance. In conjunction with the FY22 budget, the Council adopted a budget contingency that halted construction in the Foothill Trails while community concerns were addressed. Additional information on the budget contingency and subsequent Department and community work related to this issue can be found in Attachment C3. $0 $200,000 $400,000 $600,000 $800,000 $1,000,000 $1,200,000 $1,400,000 $1,600,000 $1,800,000 FY17 Actual FY18 Actual FY19 Actu al FY20 Act ual FY21 Actu al FY22 Act ual FY23 Act ual FY24 Adopted FY25 MRB Revenue Expenses General Fund Subsidy Regional Athletic Complex (not inflation-adjusted) Department of Public Services 11 The Division also notes that it recently increased trail maintenance capacity by selecting three on-call trail maintenance contractors to assist work in the Foothills Natural Area. This will help reduce future deferred trail maintenance. 6.Urban Forestry Division ($3,734,071, 18 FTEs). The Urban Forestry Division is proposed to remain at 18 FTEs in the proposed budget, the same as in FY23 and FY24. Last year, the Division noted that investments from FY23, along with efficiency improvements, were likely to result in noticeably elevated service levels in the upcoming budget year, and that it now has a higher capacity for work completion and customer interaction than ever before. 7.Public Lands Administration ($3,752,082; 19.85 FTEs). Public Lands Administration is not formally a division, but it is treated as one in this staff report for simplicity. The size of the staff would grow by two FTEs in FY25: a Deputy Director of Public Lands would be moved from Trails and Natural Lands, and an Office Tech II would be moved from Parks. Neither would experience a grade or salary change. The Office Tech would provide customer service and administrative support for Public Lands Administration. A list of Citywide events organized by the Department of Public Lands can be found here. 8. Planning and Design Division ($1,668,798; 11 FTEs). This division was separated from the Trails and Natural Lands Division and initially staffed in FY24 Budget Amendments #2 and #4. This is unusual, since a new division is typically approved only in the context of the annual budget. At that time, four existing Landscape Architects were transferred from the Public Services Department (Engineering Division), and a Planning and Design Division Director position was created to replace the existing Department of Public Lands Trails and Natural Lands Planning Manager position, with an increased pay grade. The MRB proposes reclassifying one of the transferred Landscape Architects as a Senior Architect and would create a second, new Senior Architect position as well. It would also create one new Senior Public Lands Planner position. Another four Public Lands Planner positions would be transferred to Planning and Design from the Trails and Natural Lands Division. i Senior Public Lands Planner. $121,979 for 10 months, $146,375 in FY26; ongoing operational costs $4,000. Help complete projects faster, reduce project managers’ workload and plan for evolving needs. ii Senior Landscape Architect. $138,636 for 10 months, $166,363 in FY26; ongoing operational costs $4,000. Help complete projects faster, reduce project managers’ workload and plan for evolving needs. ATTACHMENTS Attachment C1. Public Lands Maintenance Needs Estimates, 2023. Attachment C2. Summary of the FY22 Foothills Trails Budget Contingency & Forthcoming Foothills Plan Evaluation and Recommendations Report. Department of Public Services 11 Attachment 1. Public Lands Maintenance Needs Estimates. The following chart is reproduced from Adequately Maintaining SLC’s Public Lands, a document written in response to a Council Legislative Intent and presented to the Council in the May 2, 2023, Work Session, page 30. One-Time On-Going New FTEs Notes/Other Goal 1. Evolving our Workforce Afternoon Parks Crew $120,000 $598,000 7 Invest in full-time employees $696,000 $1,367,925 21 7 new FTEs for each year (total of 3 years) Park Inspector $72,500 $116,000 1 Trails and Natural Lands Operations $585,000 $1,116,195 12 Goal 2. Grown Gap: Matching Growth with Growth Public Lands Acquisition Plan & Strategic Capital Plan $300,000 N/A Additional Planning Team $115,500 $605,160 5 Budget Amendment 2 new FTE Budget Insight FY24 3 new FTE Goal 3. Address the City’s Aging Infrastructure Begin regular cycle of asset replacement $5,000,000* May increase 5-10% annually Irrigation System Replacement (14 properties) $13,061,148**$2,000,000*** Large Equipment Replacement $3,322,576 Golf Division Irrigation System Replacement at Three Courses $11,850,000 Goal 4. Improve Stewardship through Partnerships Development Community Park Activation Grants $55,000 $125,000 1 1 vehicle, equipment & office supplies Increase budget for general communications, engagement, and volunteerism activities $25,000 Department of Public Services 12 One-time equipment purchases for enhanced outreach capacity (vehicle, trailers, etc.)$125,000 Enhanced Park Usage Data Gathering $70,000 Goal 5. Resolve Structural Imbalances Weed Abatement $290,000 $326,695 Goal 6. Urban Forest Resilience Additional Arborist Crews $457,500 $202,800 2 Temporary $100,000 for three years Golf Course Arborists $457,500 $202,800 2 $100,000 for three years Storm Damage & Recovery $160,000 Revolving Account Urban Wood Reutilization $3,777,500 $171,500 1 Goal 7. Reduce or Eliminate Crime and Antisocial Behavior Two Animal Service Officers (SLCO) $150,000 $275,000 2 TOTALS $35,435,224 $10,202,075 54 $2,360,000+ *We are funded for an asset replacement plan that will determine this number **Estimates for only high-priority projects ***Estimated annually 10 years for aged systems that need replacement Attachment C2. Summary of the FY22 Foothills Trails Budget Contingency & Forthcoming Foothills Plan Evaluation and Recommendations Report. Compiled by Austin Kimmel, City Council Public Engagement / Communications Specialist In March 2020, the Council adopted the Foothills Trail System Plan. The following summer, Phase I trail construction began, resulting in over 15 miles of newly built trails. In May 2021, concerns were raised about the Plan’s planning process and construction methods, and Phase I construction was paused. In the Council's adoption of the Fiscal Year 2022 (FY22) budget, the Council adopted a budget contingency requesting the Administration work with various stakeholders to review the Foothills Trail System Plan and subsequent implementation. The contingency outlined the Council's request to the Administration to hire outside experts to evaluate the Plan's land preservation and stewardship strategies, respect for Tribal concerns, and identify strategies for improvement. The contingency has been provided below for convenience: Department of Public Services 14 2. Conditional appropriation about future dollars spent on foothill trails–Existing and new funds for the construction, modification and decommissioning of trails built under the Foothills Trail System Master Plan, Phase 1, will be placed on hold contingent on the Administration’s review in collaboration with a broad spectrum of community stakeholders of: a.the implementation to date of the master plan; b.identification of adjustments or additional engagement as warranted; and c.the Council’s authorization to move forward after the Council evaluates the results of the process. The City Council is willing to provide funding to the Administration for one or more outside experts who can objectively evaluate the technical and public policy aspects of the trail changes and additions completed to date and anticipated in the masterplan. That written evaluation should focus on, but not be limited to, the extent to which trail planning and development have been consistent with the vision, goals, and principles in the Master Plan, including best practices, strategies for the preservation and stewardship of the land; and respect for Tribal concerns. In addition, the written evaluation should include an analysis of how the process could be adapted to better meet the needs and desires of all users. Existing and new funds for environmental studies will not be on hold, so long as such funds are not used for construction or decommissioning of trails. Existing and new funds for maintenance or repair of existing trails will be on hold, but may be released incrementally by the Council as information about adherence to best practices and progress on community feedback is received. Since the FY22 contingency was adopted, the Department of Public Lands hired three consulting agencies to independently evaluate the 2020 Foothills Trail System Plan from three distinct areas of expertise: 1.SWCA Environmental provided a baseline pre-NEPA (National Environmental Policy Act) ecological and cultural report to inform future areas for trail development, restoration, and conservation. 2.SE Group evaluated the Plan and the subsequent Phase I trail construction. It also provided several recommendations for the Administration. 3.DEA Inc. assisted the department with public communication efforts. At a future meeting (date to be determined), the Council will be briefed on the steps the Department of Public Lands has taken following the Council's adoption of the FY22 contingency, the findings by the hired consulting agencies, and recommendations for future trail development and maintenance. The Council will also consider the department's request that the City Council approve said findings and recommendations and remove the hold on trail construction funding. Approximately $380,000 remains in existing Foothills Master Plan Capital funding. 1 Pu b l i c L a n d s F Y 2 4 -25 B u d g e t Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r • AD M I N I S T R A T I V E – 17 . 8 5 F T E s , 4 . 9 1 P T • PA R K S – 84 . 8 5 F T E s , 5 3 P T (I n c l u d i n g G r a f f i t i R e m o v a l , R e g i o n a l A t h l e t i c C o m p l e x , C e m e t e r y , a n d G r e e n h o u s e ) • UR B A N F O R E S T R Y – 18 F T E s • TR A I L S & N A T U R A L L A N D S – 11 . 1 5 F T E s , 9 . 3 5 P T • PL A N N I N G & D E S I G N – 9 F T E s (P l a n n e r s & L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t s ) • PA R K R A N G E R S - 21 F T E s Pu b l i c L a n d s 9 . 0 8 1 6 1 . 8 5 5 8 . 1 8 PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r 2 PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r 3 Pu b l i c L a n d s Or g a n i z a t i o n a l Ch a r t PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Ov e r v i e w o f C h a n g e s (D e p a r t m e n t ) In s i g h t s De s c r i p t i o n 1 In f l a t i o n a r y & C o n t r a c t u a l 2 Ne w Pr o p e r t y M a i n t e n a n c e 3 Tr a i l s & N a t u r a l L a n d s D i v i s i o n Di r e c t o r Ap p o i n t m e n t 4 Ac c e l e r a t i n g PL P r o j e c t Im p l e m e n t a t i o n 5 Pa r k P r o j e c t C o o r d i n a t o r 6 FO F T r a n s f e r : FY 2 4 O n e -T i m e Ex p e n s e to F Y 2 5 P L C I P Fu n d Cu r r e n t Pr o p o s e d G F Pr o p o s e d F O F To t a l $2 7 , 2 9 5 , 2 7 1 $1 , 1 4 1 , 4 6 5 $3 1 7 , 5 0 0 $2 8 , 7 5 4 , 2 3 6 FT E : 1 6 1 . 8 5 PT E : 6 7 . 2 5 FT E : +3 PT E : +2 . 1 9 FT E : +1 PT E : 0 FT E : 1 6 0 . 8 5 PT E : 6 9 . 4 4 4 Be n d i n t h e R i v e r , J o r d a n R i v e r C o r r i d o r 5 Ke y C h a n g e s / I n s i g h t s I n s i g h t D e s c r i p t i o n F T E s F Y 2 0 2 4 G e n e r a l F u n d R e q u e s t F Y 2 4 F O F ( B u d g e t T r a n s f e r ) D e p t . S c o r e 1 In f l a t i o n a r y & C o n t r a c t u a l I n c r e a s e s 0 $7 9 6 , 8 0 0 $0 18 2 Ne w P r o p e r t y M a i n t e n a n c e 1 $0 $3 1 7 , 5 0 0 16 3 Tr a i l s & N a t u r a l L a n d s D i v i s i o n Di r e c t o r 0 $0 $0 18 4 Ac c e l e r a t i n g PL P r o j e c t Im p l e m e n t a t i o n 2 $2 7 4 , 6 1 5 $0 18 5 Pu b l i c L a n d s P r o j e c t C o o r d i n a t o r O n e -Ti m e 1 $7 0 , 0 0 0 $0 16 6 Tr a n s f e r F O F F Y 2 4 o n e -ti m e t o F Y 2 5 F O F CI P F u n d 0 $0 $6 8 3 , 1 5 2 16 T O T A L 4 $ 1 , 1 4 1 , 4 1 5 $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 6 5 2 PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Ov e r v i e w o f C h a n g e s (A d m i n ) Cu r r e n t Pr o p o s e d To t a l $3 , 5 4 7 , 9 4 5 $7 9 6 , 8 0 0 $4 , 3 4 4 , 7 4 5 FT E : 1 7 . 8 5 PT E : 4 . 3 1 FT E : 0 PT E : 0 FT E R e p u r p o s e : +1 FT E : 18 . 8 5 PT E : 4 . 3 1 6 Co t t o n P a r k Pi o n e e r P a r k C o m m u n i t y E n g a g e m e n t 7 #1: In f l a t i o n a r y & Co n t r a c t u a l In c r e a s e s PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r De t a i l s Pe r c e n t In c r e a s e Co s t s P r o v i d e d B y : C o s t T y p e Wa t e r 20 % S L C P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s * $5 1 3 , 5 0 0 On g o i n g Se w e r 15 % S L C P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s $5 , 9 0 0 On g o i n g St o r m w a t e r 10 % S L C P u b l i c U t i l i t i e s $1 0 , 0 0 0 On g o i n g Po w e r 5% Ro c k y M t . P o w e r $1 4 , 4 0 0 On g o i n g Na t u r a l G a s 5% BP R e p E s t i m a t e $5 , 5 0 0 On g o i n g Fl e e t F u e l & Ma i n t . 5-10 % F l e e t D i v i s i o n $5 0 , 3 0 0 On g o i n g Co n t r a c t u a l 3% In t e r n a l C a l c u l a t i o n * * $1 3 8 , 9 0 0 On g o i n g Ma t e r i a l s & S u p p l i e s 3% Co n s u m e r P r i c e I n d e x $5 8 , 3 0 0 On g o i n g T O T A L $ 7 9 6 , 8 0 0 30 0 W e s t 8 Fi n a n c i n g f o r N e w l y A c q u i r e d P r o p e r t i e s : PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r I S t r e e t B i k e P a r k Ma r m a l a d e P l a z a C o n c e p t 90 0 S o u t h a n d 9 L i n e L a n d s c a p i n g On e o f t h e t o p p r i o r i t i e s f o r t h e A d m i n i s t r a t i o n i s ma i n t a i n i n g o u r e x i s t i n g p r o p e r t i e s . Th e r e f o r e , t h e n e w Ca p i t a l A s s e t P l a n n i n g C o m m i t t e e o v e r t h e n e x t s e r v a l mo n t h s w i l l b e r e v i e w i n g a l l u n f u n d e d m a i n t e n a n c e f o r t h e en t i r e G e n e r a l F u n d . a. Th e y w i l l a s s e s s a n d e v a l u a t e t h o s e n e e d s b a s e d o n th e C a p i t a l A s s e t P l a n n i n g M a t r i x . b. On c e t h e m a i n t e n a n c e n e e d s a r e s c o r e d a n d as s e s s e d , t h e c o m m i t t e e w i l l c o m e b a c k t o t h e Ad m i n i s t r a t i o n a n d t h e n t h e C o u n c i l , w i t h f u n d i n g op t i o n s f o r t h e s e ma i n t e n a n c e n e e d s . PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Ov e r v i e w o f C h a n g e s (P a r k s ) In s i g h t s De s c r i p t i o n 2 Ne w P r o p e r t y M a i n t e n a n c e 5 Pa r k P r o j e c t C o o r d i n a t o r Cu r r e n t Pr o p o s e d G F Pr o p o s e d F O F To t a l $1 5 , 4 4 4 , 5 3 0 $0 $3 1 7 , 5 0 0 $1 6 , 4 9 2 , 3 8 0 FT E : 8 4 . 8 5 PT E : 5 3 FT E : +1 PT E : 0 FT E R e p u r p o s e : -2 FT E : +1 PT E : +2 . 1 9 FT E : 8 4 . 8 5 PT E : 5 5 . 1 9 9 Ta u f e r Pa r k P l a n t i n g 10 #2 : N e w P r o p e r t i e s a n d G r o w t h • Ne w P a r k s Gl e n d a l e P a r k P h a s e I PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Gl e n d a l e P a r k P h a s e 1 S i t e P l a n • Con s t r u c t i o n c o n t r a c t a w a r d e d m i d -Ju n e w i t h c o n s t r u c t i o n i n th e n e x t e i g h t w e e k s . • T h e c o n s t r u c t i o n p e r i o d a p p r o x i m a t e l y 9 -10 m o n t h s . • Pl a n t i n g w i l l l i k e l y o c c u r i n s p r i n g 2 0 2 5 . • De l a y s h a v e b e e n c a u s e d b y e x t e n s i v e bu i l d i n g p e r m i t r e v i e w pe r i o d s , c o n t r a c t o r a v a i l a b i l i t y a n d n e g o t i a t i o n s , a n d o u r o w n co s t -sa v i n g s e f f o r t s t o s a f e g u a r d t a x p a y e r d o l l a r s w h e n i n i t i a l bi d s c a m e b a c k t o o h i g h e a r l i e r t h i s y e a r . • T h e P a r k ’ s a n t i c i p a t e d o p e n i n g i s n o w S p r i n g 20 2 5 I t e m F Y 2 5 G F C o s t Ma i n t . T e c h I I $7 6 , 7 0 0 Se a s o n a l S t a f f $4 0 , 3 0 0 Ut i l i t i e s , f u e l , f e r t i l i z e r , s a l t , s u p p l i e s $6 6 , 5 0 0 Ve h i c l e s $1 3 4 , 0 0 0 To t a l G e n e r a l F u n d $ 3 1 7 , 5 0 0 11 #5: Pr o j e c t Co o r d i n a t o r PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r In t e r n a l D e p a r t m e n t C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s Fu n d i n g o u r F u t u r e : $6 8 3 , 1 5 2 As s e t R e n e w a l : $ 2 5 0 , 0 0 0 ¼ C e n t S a l e s T a x $ 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 Ma i n t e n a n c e o f a c t i v e tr a n s p o r t a t i o n c o r r i d o r s o n l y • Im p l e m e n t p r o j e c t s i n i t i a t e d w i t h i n t h e D e p a r t m e n t • Co n d u c t p r o j e c t r e v i e w s • In s p e c t i o n a n d c o o r d i n a t i o n w i t h C i t y s t a f f a n d c o n t r a c t o r s • Pr o v i d e d i r e c t i o n c i t y p r o j e c t s , s u c h a s : • Li f e o n S t a t e , 3 0 0 W e s t L a n d s c a p e , 9 L i n e • Re d e s i g n 2 1 0 0 S o u t h , r o u n d a b o u t s , e t c . Pu b l i c L a n d s p l a n t i n g a t 3 C r e e k s 21 0 0 S o u t h R e d e s i g n 12 Pu b l i c La n d s Pr o j e c t Co o r d i n a t o r FT E Al l o c a t i o n & I t e m F Y 2 5 G F C o s t Ab s o r b e d w / i n e x i s t i n g b u d g e t Pr o j e c t C o o r d i n a t o r $0 $9 9 , 0 0 0 Ve h i c l e $6 7 , 0 0 0 IM S S u p p l i e s $3 , 0 0 0 As s o c i a t e d M a t e r i a l s , F u e l , S u p p l i e s $9 , 0 0 0 F l e e t M a i n t e n a n c e $5 , 0 0 0 To t a l G e n e r a l F u n d $ 7 0 , 0 0 0 $ 1 1 3 , 0 0 0 PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r De b r i s C l e a r i n g f r o m C i t y C r e e k Fu n d i n g f o r t h i s p o s i t i o n w i l l b e r e -ev a l u a t e d n e x t y e a r t h r o u g h th e z e r o -ba s e d b u d g e t i n g p r o c e s s Mi l l e r P a r k 13 #3: Tr a i l s & Na t u r a l La n d s Di v i s i o n Di r e c t o r Ap p o i n t m e n t PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Th r e e C r e e k s Jo r d a n R i v e r P a r k w a y Fo o t h i l l s M a i n t e n a n c e T e c h n i c i a n I t e m P a r k s Tr a i l s & N a t u r a l L a n d s Pa r k s F l o r i s t - 1 F T E TN L D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r +1 F T E Se a s o n a l S a l a r i e s +$ 5 0 , 0 0 0 -$5 0 , 0 0 0 Sa l a r y $ 5 1 , 0 6 4 $ 1 0 5 , 5 7 4 HR h a s p l a c e d t h e T N L D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r o n t h e Ap p o i n t e d P a y P l a n 14 #4 A c c e l e r a t i n g P L P r o j e c t Im p l e m e n t a t i o n I t e m F Y 2 5 C o s t T y p e (1 ) S e n i o r P u b l i c L a n d s P l a n n e r ( 3 1 ) $1 2 1 , 9 7 9 O n g o i n g (1 ) S e n i o r L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t ( 3 4 ) $1 3 8 , 6 3 6 O n g o i n g As s o c i a t e d M a t e r i a l s & S u p p l i e s $8 , 0 0 0 O n g o i n g IM S C o m p u t e r s $6 , 0 0 0 O n e T i m e To t a l $ 2 7 4 , 6 1 5 PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Cu r r e n t Pr o p o s e d To t a l $1 , 4 8 1 , 5 7 3 $2 7 4 , 6 1 5 $1 , 7 5 6 , 1 8 8 FT E s : 9 PT E : 0 FT E : +2 PT E : +0 FT E : 1 1 PT E : 0 Pi o n e e r P a r k E n g a g e m e n t PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Wa r m S p r i n g s P u b l i c E n g a g e m e n t Gr e e n L o o p P o p U p P a r k 15 Ac c e l e r a t i n g P L P r o j e c t De l i v e r y 0 10 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 20 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 30 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 40 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 50 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 60 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 FY 1 4 F Y 1 5 FY 1 6 FY 1 7 F Y 1 8 FY 1 9 F Y 2 0 F Y 2 1 FY 2 2 F Y 2 3 FY 2 4 Ca p i t a l P r o j e c t s S u p p o r t B u d g e t Op e r a t i o n a l B u d g e t To t a l C a p i t a l I n v e s t m e n t 20 2 4 M a y o r P l a n Li v a b i l i t y : M a k e d o w n t o w n a p l a c e f o r e v e r y o n e: Wo r k i n g e v e r y d a y t o i m p r o v e q u a l i t y o f l i f e f o r a l l re s i d e n t s i n t h e f a c e o f p o p u l a t i o n g r o w t h , i n c r e a s i n g d e v e l o p m e n t , a n d e c o n o m i c u n c e r t a i n t y . • Pa t h f o r w a r d d e l i b e r a t e l y a n d c o l l a b o r a t i v e l y o n t h e Gr e e n L o o p by d e v e l o p i n g a c o m p r e h e n s i v e c o m m u n i t y e n g a g e m e n t p l a n , e n s u r i n g t h a t th i s a s s e t w i l l b e b e n e f i c i a l t o e v e r y i m p a c t e d r e s i d e n t a n d b u s i n e s s . • Id e n t i f y C i t y -ow n e d l o c a t i o n s p r o x i m a t e t o Gr e e n L o o p th a t c o u l d s u p p o r t f a m i l y -ce n t e r e d d e v e l o p m e n t . • Fi n a l i z e St a t i o n C e n t e r pr o p e r t y d i s p o s i t i o n f o r f i r s t a n c h o r d e v e l o p m e n t a n d b e g i n c o n s t r u c t i o n o n d e v e l o p m e n t a n d p u b l i c i m p r o v e m e n t s . • Co m p l e t e P h a s e 1 o f Gl e n d a l e P a r k , i n c l u d i n g p l a y g r o u n d , b a s k e t b a l l c o u r t a n d p a r k i n g a r e a . • Sh a r e i n f o r m a t i o n w i t h t h e l a r g e r c o m m u n i t y a b o u t t h e s t a t u s o f t h e Fl e e t B l o c k re z o n e a n d t h e f u t u r e p r o j e c t t i m e l i n e . T h i s w i l l b e f o l l o w e d by p u b l i s h i n g a R e q u e s t f o r Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s ( R F Q ) t o g e t d e v e l o p m e n t t e a m s c o n t r a c t e d t o c o n d u c t c o m m u n i t y e n g a g e m e n t a n d b e g i n d es i g n fo r t h e r e d e v e l o p m e n t o f t h e F l e e t B l o c k . Ca p i t a l P r o j e c t s : Wo r k t h a t n e e d s t o b e d o n e o v e r t h e n e x t 1 0 y e a r s t o m a n a g e o u r e x i s t i n g a s s e t s , h e l p Sa l t L a k e C i t y g r o w i n t o a m a j o r A m e r i c a n c i t y , a n d p r e p a r e f o r t h e O l y m p i c s . • Fi n a l i z e a w o r k f l o w p l a n t o a d v a n c e t h e c o m m u n i t y e n g a g e m e n t , f i n a n c i n g , a n d e v e n t u a l i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f t h e “ Gr e e n L o o p .” • De v e l o p a c l e a r p a t h f o r w a r d w i t h s t a t e a n d p r i v a t e p a r t n e r s t o t r a n s f o r m t h e C i t y ’ s m a i n a r t e r i e s o f 5 0 0 S o u t h a n d 6 0 0 S o u t h in th e Gr a n d Bo u l e v a r d s , s t a r t i n g w i t h c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f a t a r g e t e d b i l l b o a r d o v e r l a y z o n e . • De v e l o p a 1 0 -ye a r Ca p i t a l A s s e t P l a n . Re s i l i e n c y : Co n s t a n t l y s t r i v e f o r e n v i r o n m e n t a l a n d e c o n o m i c r e s i l i e n c e t o m a i n t a i n o u r q u a l i t y o f l i f e i n t o th e f u t u r e . • Co o r d i n a t e f o o d e q u i t y a n d ur b a n a g r i c u l t u r e wo r k a c r o s s C i t y d e p a r t m e n t s w i t h t h e a i m t o i n c r e a s e e f f i c i e n c y o f C i t y r e s o u r c e s a n d p r o p o s e po l i c y r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s t o a c c e l e r a t e p r o g r e s s t o w a r d a n e q u i t a b l e a n d r e s i l i e n t f o o d s y s t e m i n S a l t L a k e C i t y . • De v e l o p d e s i g n s c e n a r i o s f o r n a t i v e p l a n t p r o p a g a t i o n , p u b l i c u r b a n a g r i c u l t u r e , a n d / o r u r b a n w o o d r e u t i l i z a t i o n pr o g r a m s a t P u b l i c L a n d s De p a r t m e n t p r o p e r t i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e c i t y ’ s w e s t s i d e n e i g h b o r h o o d s . 16 17 #6: FO F Tr a n s f e r : FY 24 On e -ti m e FY 25 CI P PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Tr a n s f e r A m o u n t Fl e e t F u n d – Eq u i p m e n t P u r c h a s e O n e -ti m e ($ 7 7 5 , 3 5 0 ) IM S F u n d – Co m p u t e r P u r c h a s e O n e -ti m e ($ 1 7 , 5 0 0 ) PL A n n u a l i z e d N e w P o s i t i o n s C o s t O n g o i n g $1 1 4 , 6 9 8 Un a l l o c a t e d F O F C I P B a l a n c e $5 , 0 0 0 T O T A L F Y 2 5 T R A N S F E R T O F O F C I P $ 6 8 3 , 1 5 2 In F Y 2 4 , P u b l i c L a n d s m o v e d F O F f u n d i n g t o s a l a r i e s t o h i r e 1 1 n e w s t a f f f o r 1 0 mo n t h s . In ad d i t i o n , $7 7 5 , 3 5 0 w a s t r a n s f e r r e d t o F l e e t t o p u r c h a s e v e h i c l e s a n d $ 1 7 , 5 0 0 t o I M S f o r Co m p u t e r s f o r t h e n e w e m p l o y e e s . Th i s y e a r w e r e q u e s t t h e o n e -ti m e f u n d i n g b e r e t u r n e d t o F O F C I P a n d $1 1 4 , 6 9 8 b e m o v e d t o s a l a r i e s t o c o v e r t h e a n n u a l i z e d c o s t o f t h e s e n e w p o s i t i o n s . We a r e a l s o r e q u e s t i n g th e $ 5 , 0 0 0 u n a l l o c a t e d i n F Y 2 4 b e i n c l u d e d i n t h e F Y 2 5 F O F C I P t o t a l . Ov e r v i e w Re q u e s t e d Pr o g r a m s 18 PU B L I C L A N D S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Ba l l F i e l d a t E n s i g n D o w n s P a r k I n s i g h t D e s c r i p t i o n F T E s F Y 2 0 2 4 G e n e r a l F u n d R e q u e s t F Y 2 4 F O F (B u d g e t Tr a n s f e r ) D e c i s i o n m a t r i x S c o r e 1 In f l a t i o n a r y & Co n t r a c t u a l I n c r e a s e s 0 $7 9 6 , 8 0 0 $0 18 2 Ne w P r o p e r t y Ma i n t e n a n c e 1 $0 $3 1 7 , 5 0 0 16 3 Tr a i l s & N a t u r a l L a n d s Di v i s i o n D i r e c t o r 0 $0 $0 18 4 Ac c e l e r a t i n g P L P r o j e c t Im p l e m e n t a t i o n 2 $2 7 4 , 6 1 5 $0 18 5 Pu b l i c L a n d s P r o j e c t Co o r d i n a t o r 1 $7 0 , 0 0 0 $0 16 6 Tr a n s f e r F O F : F Y 2 4 O n e - ti m e t o F Y 2 5 F O F C I P Fu n d 0 $0 $6 8 3 , 1 5 2 16 T O T A L 4 $1 , 1 4 1 , 4 1 5 $ 1 , 0 0 0 , 6 5 2 TH A N K Y O U Pr e s e n t e d K r i s t i n R i k e r , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r Wi t h s u p p o r t f r o m : Gr e g g E v a n s , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 COUNCIL.SLCGOV.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL BUDGET STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY25 TO:City Council Members FROM:Jennifer Bruno DATE:May 21, 2024 RE: FY2025 BUDGET – GOLF ENTERPRISE FUND MAYOR’S RECOMMENDED BUDGET PAGES: Key Changes p. 70-71; p. 104-105; Staffing document: p. 298 ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Golf Enterprise fund collects the revenue generated and pays most of the expenses associated with the activities of SLC Golf, a division of the Department of Public Lands. SLC Golf operates six golf courses, providing greens maintenance; golf clinics, camps, lessons, events; and management of retail pro shops, cafés, and cart rentals. The Golf Enterprise has 34.15 full time employees assigned to operations and relies on a number of seasonal employees as well. The recommended expenditure budget for the Golf Fund would increase by $1.4 million (13%) for Fiscal Year 2025, for a total of $12.2 million, not including Capital Investment, which is budgeted separately. The recommended budget for Golf Capital Investment is $8.2 million, which includes funds not spent in previous years (see page 6 for a list of projects). In recent years, the Golf Fund has relied on subsidies from the general fund for operational costs and debt service, which is unique among enterprise funds. This practice has allowed the fund to use the $2 per round “CIP fee” for true capital investments rather than offsetting operational costs. The FY25 recommended budget would hold the subsidy to the Golf Fund essentially flat compared to FY 24, around $2.1 million. (see summary chart on page 5 for detail, including indirect benefits of Golf green space justifying the investment from the general fund). Key elements of the budget proposal include: Funding approximately $8.2 million in CIP improvements, including continuing the $2-per-9 hole-round CIP fee to help the Golf Fund catch up on years of deferred maintenance, and prioritizing investment in Rose Park irrigation infrastructure and a new driving range facility at Glendale to increase usable days in inclement weather. Note: Several of these projects were initially funded in FY 24 and are part of the backlog of projects in the City. Item Schedule: Briefing: May 21, 2024 Budget Hearings: May 21, June 4 Potential Action: June 11/13 (TBD) Page | 2 Continuing general fund transfers for various Golf fund expenses, to free up resources so that Golf can invest in deferred capital projects, and recognizing indirect value of golf green space even for not golfers (more on this on page 5) Continuing the centralized call center model for course reservations (started in 2020 as a pilot) with savings realized from staffing restructuring within the department. The Administration notes this has improved customer data collection and distributed workload more efficiently. Typically, Golf Fund revenue is generated by user fees, including green fees, cart rental fees, range ball fees, merchandise purchases, lessons, concessions and rental fees. The 2020 season showed improvement in rounds-played trends, as SLC Courses were re-opened before County courses, and local residents were not traveling as often and looking for ways to safely recreate outside. When looking at course utilization data (which factors in weather and “playable days”), the overall revenue per golf start has seen a steady increase since 2019. KEY BUDGET ISSUES & POLICY QUESTIONS A. Golf Fund Revenue and Rounds Trends. Golf revenue has improved in recent years, since reaching a low in FY17, and for FY 25 is projected to exceed the high experienced in FY 22 as a post-pandemic year. The increases in earned revenue in recent years are significant to the extent they indicate the potential of the Golf Fund to improve its financial position. However, the Golf Fund has continued to experience difficulties in fully covering operating expenses at the City’s six golf courses in addition to capital expenditures. This is why the Administration is proposing to continue the previous years of general fund transfers for FY 25 (detailed in the next section). For FY 25, general greens fees provide 41.6% of annual revenue. Cart rentals provide almost 16.4% of annual revenue, which is a slight decline from FY 24 to reflect actual revenue. Retail sales and driving ranges combined add another almost 13.2%. Personnel costs are typically around 56% of the total, including part-time, seasonal workers. Water and upkeep costs are also difficult to reduce while preserving the City asset and maintaining playability. Page | 3 Note: Regular Transfers from the general fund began in FY 17, increasing in FY 20 (see next page for more detail). $- $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $3,000,000 $4,000,000 $5,000,000 $6,000,000 FY 1 5 FY 1 6 FY 1 7 Ac t u a l F Y 1 8 Ac t u a l F Y 1 9 Ac t u a l F Y 2 0 Ac t u a l F Y 2 1 Ac t u a l F Y 2 2 Bu d g e t F Y 2 3 Bu d g e t F Y 2 4 Bu d g e t F Y 2 5 Golf Revenue Sources and Trends Green Fees Golf Cart Rental Driving Range Fees Retail Merchandise Sales CIP Fee on rounds, passes Miscellaneous (Includes GF Transfer) 0 2,000,000 4,000,000 6,000,000 8,000,000 10,000,000 12,000,000 14,000,000 16,000,000 FY15 FY16 FY17 Actual FY 18 Actual FY 19 Actual FY 20 Actual FY 21 Actual FY 22 Budget FY 23 Budget FY 24 Budget FY 25 Historical Golf Fund Revenue Page | 4 Staff note: This is a different, and potentially more accurate reflection of Golf Course usage than “Rounds Played” which can be affected by several factors. It factors in “starts” at each course (whether the person finishes 9 or 18 holes) and playable days (which factors actual weather data). It also allows the Administration to calculate revenue for each person who steps on a Golf course, regardless of whether they play 9 or 18 holes. The Council may wish to discuss this metric more with the Administration to understand. B. General Fund transfers/subsidy – The Administration is proposing to continue the practice started in FY 17 of transferring funds from the General Fund to cover various expenses in the Golf Fund. The Administration indicates that these transfers are necessary in order enable the Golf fund to use its “CIP Fee” dollars for capital expenditures instead of helping balance out operational expenses. See background section on page 8 for more on this concept, including research indicating other municipal courses following similar paths. The recommendations are as follows, and are reflected in the Non-Departmental budget on page 61 of the budget book: 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 120% 140% 160% 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 Course Utilization Bonneville Forest Dale Glendale Mtn Dell Nibley Park Rose Park $(300,000) $(200,000) $(100,000) $- $100,000 $200,000 $300,000 $400,000 $500,000 $600,000 $700,000 Bonneville Glendale Forest Dale Mountain Dell Nibley Rose Park Net Operating Income Bonneville Glendale Forest Dale Mountain Dell Nibley Rose Park Page | 5 C. Indirect and Non-Financial Benefits of Golf’s Green Space. The Golf Fund owns over 1,000 acres of property across six courses—a substantial amount of publicly-owned green space. Acreage in the City helps mitigate the urban heat island effect in addition to the aesthetic value of green space. Over a third of this area (381 acres) sits outside the urban area, at Mountain Dell in Parley’s Canyon, which serves the additional function of City watershed protection. GOLF PROPERTY Course Maintained acres Other acres Total acres Bonneville 125 55 180 Forest Dale 55 6 61 Glendale 160 16 176 Mountain Dell 260 121 381 Nibley 46 6 52 Rose Park 140 16 156 Total 786 220 1,006 Former Golf properties Jordan River Par 3 (maintained by Public Lands as disc golf) 22 - 22 Wingpointe (Airport property, not maintained) 194 The Administration has indicated that there are Citywide benefits to maintaining golf courses as partially- funded green open space, though they acknowledge that the non-golf benefits are experienced by most taxpayers in a passive manner. In response to a question from FY 21, the Division noted the following, which is still relevant from a policy perspective: “Much of the non-golf use is passive in nature, and the access and preservation of the open public spaces provide many opportunities and benefits to the public such as: Trees and Open Space. Contributes benefits to air quality, urban heat islands, urban wildlife interfaces and Other activities include winter time access, walking, snowshoe, dogs, and trails. Public access to clubhouse and cafe’s FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY 24 FY 25 proposed notes Reimburse Fees paid by the Golf Fund to IMS $ 138,800 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 $ 150,000 $ 350,000 $ 350,000 ongoing Reimburse other Administrative Fees $ 220,000 $ 306,582 $ 315,779 $ 655,114 $ 356,302 $ 356,302 ongoing Rose Park Infrastructure Investment $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Golf indicates that this will be completed and not needed after FY 26 Living Wage adjustments $ 181,000 $ 246,000 $ 370,100 $ 370,100 $ 370,100 $ 370,100 ongoing GF support of Golf Debt for Irrigation Improvements made in FY 18 (previously ESCO) $ 445,078 $ 460,585 $ 484,000 $ 493,239 $ 510,427 $ 528,213 ongoing until 2032; amount increases annually to $677,044 1,484,878$ 1,713,167$ 1,869,879$ 2,168,453$ 2,086,829$ 2,104,615$ General Fund Transfers to Golf Fund Page | 6 Public meeting space at Forest Dale Jordan River Trail Glendale and Rose Park Disc Golf and Footgolf at Rose Park” D. Golf CIP. The proposed budget includes a continuation of the $2 per 9 hole round CIP fee. This fee, along with the General Fund transfers, will allow the Golf Division to continue to invest in much needed, deferred capital projects. Attachment 1 includes a list of capital projects by course, estimated costs, and priority, totaling $27,275,000 million. The Division acknowledges that the revenue generated from these fees are not sufficient to catch up on all of these projects and is investigating longer-term solutions, although the FY 23 budget started progress in this direction. $4.9 million was approved in FY 23, $7.1 million was approved in FY 24, and $8.3 million is proposed in FY 25. The Administration proposes the following uses for the FY 25 allocation: Background – The Golf CIP fund was established as the repository for a Council-initiated surcharge of $1 per round for the purpose of catching up on deferred maintenance and critical capital projects FY 2025 Proposed Golf CIP projects Project Proposed Amount Notes Tee Box Leveling 60,000$ Initially funded in FY 24. Will address tee boxes at all 6 courses over the next 3 years. This was consistently raised by customers as a needed improvement. Pump Replacement 25,000$ This will replace the first of five irrigation pumps at glendale, one per year, as they are all nearing the end of their life expectancy. $20,000 funded in FY 24. Maintenance Equipment 456,538$ Multi-year plan to upgrade maintenance 1quipment for all 6 courses. Bonneville Driving Range Fence Replacement 900,000$ Removing damaged fencing and replacing with new fencing along driving range at Bonneville Golf Course. Nibley Property Fencing Project 55,000$ Replacing property fencing at Nibley, particularly along the northern perimeter Driving Range Project at Glendale 1,500,000$ Planning phases of a proposed double-decker driving range at Glendale Golf Course, which will expand the usable months of the driving range and double the capacity. The Administration will work with a design consultant to determine total cost. Construction was scheduled to start in Spring 2024, although the project has experienced delays due to the overall backlog in City CIP projects. Rose Park Irrigation Improvements 4,400,000$ The current system is 65 years old. The project includes re- design for efficiency which may reduce water usage by up to 40%. The Administration indicates they will strive to ensure that all existing trees receive adequate water, as that has been a concern at other courses. Staff has inquired about the status of this project. Cart Path Improvements 525,000$ This includes improvements for all courses, including modifying, where possible, for use by non-golfers during the off season. Bridge Improvements at Forest Dale 74,000$ This project will replace bridges at Forest Dale Golf Course that are prone to washouts during heavy rain events. Glendale On-Course Restroom 150,000$ This will replace a portable on course restroom. It is a frequent request of Glendale customers. Nibley - Range Hitting Pad Extension 20,000$ This will increase the number of driving range stalls at Nibley Golf Course, which may have a positive impact on driving range revenue. Golf Carts - Nibley 206,305$ This will facilitate the purchase of 31 golf carts for Nibley Golf Course, as the current fleet is due for replacement. Old carts tend to have a negative impact on cart rental revenue. Total 8,371,843$ Page | 7 E.at all City courses (first initiated in FY 12). At the time it was established the Council’s intent was that these funds not be used to cover operational deficits, although in the years before the ongoing General Fund subsidy, it was used in that way. F. Water/Drought Planning – Water costs affect the operational budgets of the Golf Fund’s 644.5 irrigated acres as well as the overall water usage in the valley. Although each year the water budgets are fixed, weather conditions determine actual expenditures at each course. The department provided the following information relating to water conservation: “Through initiatives implemented in concert with the City's Water Shortage Contingency Plan, the Golf Division maintained a reduced water use by 36% in FY22 compared to this time in FY21. The Golf Fund Administration plans to continue water saving techniques in FY25 wherever possible, and, although turf repair projects will be undertaken due to the harsh drought over the past several years, may require additional water use in some circumstances.” The following chart shows water usage in gallons, by course (staff note: budget fluctuations can occur due to rate increases and don’t always exhibit true water conservation) For context, the following is the number of irrigated acres at each course: G. Parks and Golf Expenses Comparison. In 2017, at the request of the Council, the Public Services Division provided a comparison of annual maintenance and operations costs-per-acre for Liberty Park ($10,682 per acre) versus the average for golf courses ($7,288 per acre). These were offered as only rough figures, since at that time data collection was not systematic. There were also a number of important limitations to the data, including that Liberty Park has especially high costs because of special features and 0 20,000,000 40,000,000 60,000,000 80,000,000 100,000,000 120,000,000 140,000,000 160,000,000 Bonneville Glendale Forest Dale Mountain Dell Nibley Park Rose Park Water Usage by Course (Gallons) FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 Irrigated Acres Bonneville 120 Glendale 105 Forest Dale 56 Mtn Dell 149.5 Nibley Park 50 Rose Park 164 Total 644.5 Page | 8 events, as well as year-around use. In addition, most golf courses were not on secondary water at the time, though Liberty Park was already. An update to this comparison would be useful, specifically, for parks of different classes (regional, community, neighborhood) and each of the golf courses. Data on average daily users would also be of interest, since most parks are used much more intensively than golf courses. The Council may wish to ask the Administration for an update on these efforts. H. Fees and Market Comparison – Staff inquired about competitiveness in the market area. The Administration indicates they are comfortable with Salt Lake City prices, given recent increases in neighboring courses, and has provided the following information for context: ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. Golf Advisory Board. The terms of all current board members have expired and the board is current not meeting. The Administration indicates that they are evaluating consolidating efforts with the Parks, Natural Lands, Urban Forestry and Trails (PNUT) board. The Council may wish to weigh in on this. If the board is no longer desired the Council would need to amend City code. B.The golf fund offers several loyalty and youth/senior discount programs. More information can be found on SLC Golf’s website: https://www.slc-golf.com/product-category/memberships/ C. Comparative Research in 2019. The Finance Department conducted a review of many municipally- owned golf course systems around the country, as well as a more in-depth review of the accounting laws governing enterprise funds in the State of Utah. Key takeaways from the Administration following their review: i.Cities of Salt Lake City’s population size do not typically have such extensive public golf systems. Most of the comparisons are with larger cities in the West. ii.No other system studied charges administrative fees—although the same municipalities do charge fees to other enterprise funds. iii.All but one municipal system operated with a structural and persistent deficit. All those deficits were supplemented with ongoing support of the municipal general fund. iv.The State of Utah has legal and accounting barriers that the Finance Department has interpreted to prohibit simply “absorbing” the Golf Fund into the City general fund. They Course Management WD9Reg WD9Sen WD9Jun WE 9 WD18Reg WD18Sen WD18Jun WE 18 9 Cart 18 Cart Notes Schneiter's Bluff Private 17.00 17.00 10.00 17.00 34.00 34.00 20.00 34.00 9.00 18.00 Schneiter's Riverside Private 17.00 17.00 10.00 17.00 34.00 34.00 20.00 34.00 9.00 18.00 Nibley Park SLC - City Club 13.00 11.00 N/A 17.00 NA NA NA NA 8.00 NA M-F, SS After 12 Rose Park SLC - City Club 13.00 11.00 N/A 17.00 26.00 22.00 NA 34.00 8.00 16.00 M-F, SS After 12 Nibley Park SLC - RATES 17.00 15.00 9.00 17.00 NA NA NA NA 9.00 NA Rose Park SLC - RATES 17.00 15.00 9.00 17.00 34.00 30.00 18.00 34.00 9.00 18.00 Mick Riley Salt Lake County 17.00 15.00 11.00 17.00 NA NA NA n/a 10.00 NA SR & JR M-TH, FRI BEFORE 11, S&S AFTER 3 Meadow Brook Salt Lake County 16.00 14.00 10.00 17.00 32.00 28.00 20.00 34.00 10.00 20.00 SR M-F, JR M-F and S&S AFTER 3 Mountain View Salt Lake County 16.00 14.00 10.00 17.00 32.00 28.00 20.00 34.00 10.00 20.00 Forest Dale SLC - City Club 14.00 12.00 N/A 18.00 NA NA NA NA 8.00 NA M-F, SS After 12 Forest Dale SLC - RATES 18.00 16.00 10.00 18.00 NA NA NA NA 9.00 NA Stonebridge West Valley City 18.00 14.00 9.00 18.00 36.00 28.00 18.00 36.00 10.00 20.00 SR & JR M-F, SS after 1 The Ridge West Valley City 18.00 14.00 9.00 18.00 36.00 28.00 18.00 36.00 10.00 20.00 SR & JR M-F, SS after 1 Glendale SLC - RATES 19.00 16.00 10.00 19.00 38.00 32.00 20.00 38.00 10.00 18.00 Riverbend Salt Lake County 19.00 16.00 11.00 19.00 38.00 32.00 22.00 38.00 10.00 20.00 Eaglewood Private 20.00 20.00 12.00 20.00 40.00 40.00 24.00 40.00 10.00 20.00 JR M-TH Glen Eagle Private 20.00 18.00 12.00 20.00 34.00 32.00 24.00 36.00 10.00 20.00 SR M-F, JR M-F, SS after 12 Old Mill Salt Lake County 20.00 15.00 12.00 20.00 40.00 30.00 20.00 40.00 10.00 20.00 SR & JR M-TH Bountiful Ridge Bountiful City 18.00 18.00 18.00 21.00 36.00 36.00 36.00 42.00 10.00 20.00 River Oaks Sandy City 22.00 18.00 18.00 22.00 40.00 40.00 33.00 40.00 10.00 20.00 SR & JR M-TH South Mountain Salt Lake County 29.00 25.00 18.00 29.00 58.00 50.00 36.00 58.00 Price includes cart SR & JR M-TH Park City Park City 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 10.00 20.00 Glendale SLC - City Club 15.00 12.00 N/A 38.00 30.00 24.00 NA 38.00 9.00 18.00 M-F, SS After 12 Valley View Davis County 15.00 15.00 10.00 38.00 30.00 30.00 20.00 38.00 9.00 18.00 SR & JR M-F, SS after 12 (2022 rates posted 3/1/22) Davis Park Davis County 15.00 15.00 10.00 38.00 30.00 30.00 20.00 38.00 9.00 18.00 SR & JR M-F, SS after 12 (2022 rates posted 3/1/22) Bonneville SLC - City Club 18.00 15.00 N/A 44.00 36.00 30.00 NA 44.00 10.00 20.00 M-F, SS After 12 Mtn Dell SLC - City Club 21.00 18.00 N/A 44.00 36.00 30.00 NA 44.00 10.00 20.00 M-F, SS After 12 Bonneville SLC - RATES 22.00 19.00 11.00 44.00 44.00 37.00 22.00 44.00 10.00 20.00 Mtn Dell SLC - RATES 25.00 22.00 11.00 44.00 44.00 38.00 22.00 44.00 10.00 20.00 Soldier Hollow Gold State of Utah NA NA NA NA 80.00 57.00 42.00 85.00 Price includes cart Soldier Hollow Silver State of Utah NA NA NA NA 80.00 57.00 42.00 85.00 Price includes cart Wasatch Mtn.State of Utah NA NA NA NA 80.00 57.00 42.00 85.00 Price includes cart Sorted by Weekend 9-hole Rate Updated 5/14/2024 Commented [LW1]: This chart is hard to read- would it be better as an attachment so it can be larger, landscape? Page | 10 appear to mean that SLC Golf must remain a separate enterprise fund. To confirm this interpretation, the Attorney’s Office has been asked to provide an opinion on the matter. v.Similarly, there are legal and accounting barriers to the general fund “assuming” the Golf Fund’s ESCO (existing secondary water-system debt). However, the general fund is permitted to provide funds to the Golf Fund to pay these debts. vi. The Administration does not indicate any interest in selling or developing Golf property for a different use. Given the proposed elimination of Administrative Fees currently paid to the general fund by other Enterprise funds (such as the Airport), the Council may wish to request the Administration’s key public policy findings that support the notion of not charging Administrative fees and supporting the debt of an enterprise fund. There is close scrutiny on the topic of Administrative fees, which is the allocation of expenses to departments and entities. To preserve the integrity of the City’s cost allocation system, the Council may wish to ask the Administration to provide a more formal assessment of the public benefit and reasoning for this change to be included in the public record. D. 2014 Council Policy Principles. A number of Golf Fund policy issues come up with regularity over the years. The Council adopted Guiding Policy Principles for Changes to the Golf Enterprise Fund (Attachment 2) in 2014. The Council may wish to discuss whether it would be helpful to discard, or review and update these to determine relevance to the FY23 budget and policy goals of the Council at this point. 1. The City has a longstanding general policy of not subsidizing enterprise funds with general tax dollars, and the Council’s Policy Principles discourage general fund subsidies to the Golf Fund specifically, although in recent years there have been limited exceptions made to this rule. As part of these guiding policy statements, the Council also agreed that City-owned open space should be protected. 2. The traditional rationale for charging recreation fees for some amenities is related to the need for “exclusive” use of recreation facilities, like baseball diamonds and soccer fields during league play, or park pavilions for parties. Golf has been considered more similar to these exclusive uses than to “non-exclusive” uses like walking on a trail or playing catch on a grassy area, but there may be reasons to re-examine this view given the passive and/or indirect benefits identified above. E. General Background Information relating to Golf Fund financial history. As an enterprise fund, the Golf Fund is charged with managing and maintaining the courses within the revenues that it can generate through its operations. The Council has been concerned about the financial sustainability of the Golf Fund since at least 2007. As early as 2004, deficits began to appear in the Golf Fund, though these problems typically were described as temporary anomalies, rather than longer-term structural issues, and were covered with the Golf Fund’s then-substantial fund balance, that was built up in the late 90s and early 2000s when Golf was significantly more profitable. In 2014, after then-Mayor Ralph Becker indicated that he would close courses to address these budget issues, the Council adopted a series of policy statements to define their shared view of how the system should serve golfers, as well as the limits of what could be done to change the system. Staff note: Recent budgets have not been consistent with some of these policy statements, and recent Council’s have not affirmed that they agree with the policies adopted in 2014. Later that year, the Council embarked on a process of information gathering and pursued an extensive process to gather ideas from the public. The Council also hired a municipal finance consultant to identify options that could help the Golf Fund maintain financial solvency over the long term. In late 2014 and early 2015, a Council-appointed citizen task force reviewed all the information assembled, including the consultant’s report and all of the public’s ideas for Council consideration, and provided their recommendations to the Council. The process culminated in the Council’s own recommendations to the Administration in February, 2015 (Attachment 3). Page | 11 Then-Mayor Biskupski’s Administration was optimistic about potential for Golf’s turnaround, and proposed a more incremental approach to change along with more general fund financial support. The guiding policy ultimately articulated was that City golf courses should be subsidized because they are “public open spaces” that nearly pay for themselves—unlike traditional parks, which do not raise significant revenue to offset their own maintenance costs. Another initiative was to plan for more trail uses at Jordan Par 3 and around Rosepark, which would require substantial capital investment (a formal plan has not been transmitted, and funds for these plans have not been identified). As noted above, an RFI was published for a “TopGolf”-like experience at Nibley (2019), but did not attract any proposals. ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 – List of Golf Capital Improvement Projects Attachment 1 Golf CIP Projects Backlog Course Description Priority Year Estimated Cost Bonneville Cart Path Construction High 2023 $750,000 Forest Dale Cart Path Construction High 2023 $130,000 Forest Dale Clubhouse Exterior Painting High 2022 $20,000 Forest Dale Irrigation Controllers High 2022 $40,000 Forest Dale Resurface Parking Lot High 2022 $100,000 Glendale Cart Path Construction High 2023 $250,000 Glendale Resurface Parking Lot High 2023 $200,000 Mountain Dell Cart Path Construction High 2023 $1,000,000 Mountain Dell New Maintenance Building High 2023 $500,000 Mountain Dell Resurface Parking Lot High 2022 $350,000 Nibley Park Irrigation System High 2025 $1,750,000 Rose Park New Irrigation System High 2022 $3,100,000 Rose Park Clubhouse Landscaping High 2021 $20,000 Rose Park Cart Path Construction High 2022 $200,000 Rose Park Maintenance Building High 2023 $500,000 Bonneville New Clubhouse Low 2030 $3,000,000 Bonneville Range Netting Repair Low 2028 $50,000 Mountain Dell New Clubhouse Low 2030 $5,000,000 Nibley Park New Clubhouse Low 2030 $1,500,000 Rose Park New Clubhouse Low 2035 $2,000,000 Glendale Clubhouse Roof Replacement Medium 2026 $80,000 Mountain Dell Irrigation System Medium 2028 $4,500,000 Nibley Park Maintenance Building Medium 2025 $500,000 Nibley Park Debris Management Area Medium 2025 $30,000 Nibley Park Perimeter Fencing Medium 2024 $40,000 Rose Park Resurface Parking Lot Medium 2024 $200,000 Bonneville New Maintenance Building Moderate 2026 $1,000,000 Bonneville Parking Lot Resurfacing Moderate 2022 $350,000 Bonneville Clubhouse Cart Staging Area Resurfacing Moderate 2022 $15,000 Nibley Park Cart Path Construction High 2024 $100,000 Total $27,275,000 1 Go l f F Y 2 4 -25 B u d g e t Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r & K r i s t i n R i k e r • FY 2 5 P R O P O S E D B U D G E T T O T A L - $20 , 4 6 8 , 6 3 6 • 6 F U L L -SER V I C E G O L F C O U R S E S – 1, 1 0 2 A C R E S OF MA I N T A I N E D G R E E N S P A C E • 5 D R I V I N G R A N G E S W I T H 1 5 F R E E P R A C T I C E A R E A S • FY 2 3 9 -HOL E E Q U I V A L E N T R O U N D S – 42 5 , 6 9 8 • 5- YEA R A V E R A G E – 40 9 , 4 0 6 • 59 % OF A L L R O U N D S B O O K E D O N L I N E Go l f 25 3 34 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r 9 Ro u n d s Pl a y e d Pa s t Te n Ye a r s 42 1 , 0 3 5 42 3 , 4 3 2 41 5 , 8 3 1 36 5 , 6 7 1 34 3 , 6 7 0 35 5 , 6 5 5 35 0 , 5 5 0 37 4 , 1 3 9 45 5 , 5 5 6 44 1 , 0 8 7 42 5 , 6 9 8 FY 1 3 FY 1 4 FY 1 5 FY 1 6 FY 1 7 FY 1 8 FY 1 9 FY 2 0 FY 2 1 FY 2 2 FY 2 3 9-Hole Equivalent Rounds TO T A L S L C G O L F R O U N D S | F Y 1 4 - FY 2 4 Cl o s u r e o f Wi n g p o i n t e & J o r d a n R i v e r P a r -3 5 Go l f Co u r s e Ut i l i z a t i o n Ca l e n d a r Y e a r 20 1 8 20 1 9 20 2 0 20 2 1 20 2 2 20 2 3 To t a l S t a r t s 26 7 , 8 8 7 25 1 , 6 9 0 30 4 , 9 1 6 32 7 , 4 7 6 31 2 , 6 0 7 32 9 , 9 1 6 Pl a y a b l e D a y s 26 4 22 6 24 7 25 1 20 8 23 1 Av g . U t i l i z a t i o n 58 % 64 % 86 % 90 % 10 5 % 10 0 % To t a l R e v e n u e $7 , 1 1 4 , 1 2 3 $6 , 7 7 5 , 8 6 8 $8 , 2 3 2 , 2 1 9 $9 , 9 5 0 , 1 9 2 $1 0 , 0 4 1 , 9 6 0 $1 0 , 7 1 8 , 5 7 5 Re v e n u e / S t a r t $2 6 . 5 6 $2 6 . 9 2 $2 7 . 0 0 $3 0 . 3 8 $3 2 . 1 2 $3 2 . 4 9 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r Ke y C h a n g e s / I n s i g h t s 3 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r In s i g h t De s c r i p t i o n FT E s FY 2 0 2 4 R e q u e s t MS C W S c o r e 1 Re v e n u e I n c r e a s e N/ A $9 0 8 , 7 4 9 Mu s t 20 2 Ad m i n i s t r a t i v e F e e s N/ A $4 8 0 , 8 5 7 Sh o u l d 22 3 In f l a t i o n a r y & C o n t r a c t u a l I n c r e a s e s N/ A $2 6 6 , 0 5 9 Mu s t 22 4 Go l f C o u r s e R e -In v e s t m e n t s N/ A $1 , 3 3 8 , 4 6 8 Mu s t 20 T O T A L $2 , 9 9 4 , 1 3 3 #1 : R e v e n u e I n c r e a s e s 3 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r Re v e n u e C a t e g o r y FY 2 4 FY 2 5 Di f f e r e n c e Gr e e n F e e s $5 , 7 5 7 , 4 7 9 $6 , 4 2 7 , 6 1 8 $6 7 0 , 1 3 9 Dr i v i n g R a n g e F e e s $6 5 2 , 6 2 0 $7 3 4 , 0 3 6 $8 1 , 4 1 6 Go l f C a r t R e n t a l F e e s $2 , 2 5 8 , 2 2 4 $2 , 2 3 9 , 2 9 6 ($ 1 8 , 9 2 8 ) Pa s s S a l e s $5 0 3 , 1 2 1 $4 6 8 , 0 3 9 ($ 3 5 , 0 8 2 ) Co n c e s s i o n s $9 4 , 6 0 6 $1 2 9 , 7 5 1 $3 5 , 1 4 5 Re t a i l S a l e s $1 , 0 2 4 , 0 0 0 $1 , 0 6 0 , 7 0 0 $3 6 , 7 0 0 Ot h e r $2 , 4 2 0 , 0 1 7 $2 , 5 5 9 , 3 7 6 $1 3 9 , 3 5 9 T O T A L $1 2 , 7 1 0 , 0 6 7 $1 3 , 6 1 8 , 8 1 6 $9 0 8 , 7 4 9 20 20 2 4 G r e e n F e e I n c r e a s e s 7 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r Fe e T y p e s Bo n n e v i l l e Fo r e s t D a l e Gl e n d a l e Mo u n t a i n D e l l Ni b l e y P a r k Ro s e P a r k 9 H o l e s 18 H o l e s 9 H o l e s 9 H o l e s 18 Ho l e s 9 H o l e s 18 H o l e s 9 H o l e s 9 H o l e s 18 Ho l e s Pu b l i c $2 2 $4 4 $1 8 $1 9 $3 8 $2 5 $4 4 $1 7 $1 7 $3 4 Se n i o r $1 9 $3 8 $1 6 $1 6 $3 2 $2 2 $3 8 $1 5 $1 5 $3 0 Yo u n g A d u l t $1 7 $3 4 $1 5 $1 5 $3 0 $2 0 $3 4 $1 3 $1 3 $2 6 Ju n i o r $1 1 $2 2 $1 0 $1 0 $2 0 $1 5 $2 2 $9 $9 $1 8 Ci t y C l u b $1 8 $3 6 $1 4 $1 5 $3 0 $2 1 $3 6 $1 3 $1 3 $2 6 Se n i o r C i t y C l u b $1 5 $3 0 $1 2 $1 2 $2 4 $1 8 $3 0 $1 1 $1 1 $2 2 Ca r t - Pe r R i d e r $1 0 $2 0 $9 $1 0 $2 0 $1 0 $2 0 $9 $9 $1 8 Pr i c e I n c r e a s e Pr i c e D e c r e a s e An n u a l M e m b e r s h i p P r o g r a m - Ye a r f r o m d a t e o f p u r c h a s e Ci t y C l u b $1 0 0 Se a s o n P a s s P r o g r a m - Ma r c h 1 5 t h r o u g h N o v e m b e r 1 5 Ci t y P a s s $1 , 7 0 0 Se n i o r C i t y P a s s $1 , 3 0 0 Ju n i o r C i t y P a s s $4 0 0 #2 : A d m i n i s t r a t i v e F e e s : Ge n e r a l F u n d T r a n s f e r 3 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r Op e r a t i o n s F u n d FY 2 4 FY 2 5 Ch a n g e Go l f S t a r t i n g W a g e $3 0 5 , 1 0 0 $3 0 5 , 1 0 0 - Eq u i t y P a y A d j u s t m e n t s $6 5 , 0 0 0 $6 5 , 0 0 0 - IM S C o s t s $3 5 0 , 0 0 0 $3 5 0 , 0 0 0 - Ad m i n O v e r h e a d C o s t s $3 5 6 , 3 0 2 $3 5 6 , 3 0 2 - CI P F u n d GF S u p p o r t ( R o s e P a r k S t a b i l i z a t i o n ) $5 0 0 , 0 0 0 $5 0 0 , 0 0 0 - ES C O $5 1 0 , 4 2 7 $5 2 8 , 2 1 3 $1 7 , 7 8 6 To t a l $2 , 0 8 6 , 8 2 9 $2 , 1 0 4 , 6 1 5 $1 7 , 7 8 6 22 #3 : I n f l a t i o n a r y & C o n t r a c t u a l I n c r e a s e s 3 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r Ca t e g o r y FY 2 5 I n c r e a s e Wa t e r – 20 % I n c r e a s e $2 0 0 , 0 1 0 Se w e r – 15 % I n c r e a s e $1 , 2 7 5 St o r m W a t e r – 10 % I n c r e a s e $3 , 7 9 0 Ot h e r E q u i p m e n t & S u p p l i e s $6 0 , 9 8 4 T O T A L $2 6 6 , 0 5 9 22 #4 : G o l f C o u r s e R e -I n v e s t m e n t s 3 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r FY 2 4 FY 2 5 Te e B o x L e v e l i n g P r o j e c t i o n s $6 0 , 0 0 0 $6 0 , 0 0 0 Ca r t P a t h I m p r o v e m e n t s $5 2 5 , 0 0 0 $5 2 5 , 0 0 0 Dr i v i n g R a n g e F e n c e - $9 0 0 , 0 0 0 Ot h e r C a p i t a l P r o j e c t s $3 2 5 , 2 2 0 $3 2 4 , 0 0 0 Gl e n d a l e D r i v i n g R a n g e I m p r o v e m e n t P r o j e c t $1 , 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 $1 , 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 Ro s e P a r k I r r i g a t i o n P r o j e c t $4 , 4 0 0 , 0 0 0 $4 , 4 0 0 , 0 0 0 To t a l $6 , 6 1 0 , 2 2 0 $7 , 7 0 9 , 0 0 0 Ch a n g e $1 , 0 9 8 , 7 8 0 20 BB Op e r a t i o n a l Ex p e n s e s Pe r s o n a l S e r v i c e s 47 % Re t a i l M e r c h a n d i s e 7% Op e r a t i n g Su p p l i e s 9% Ut i l i t i e s 2% Wa t e r 10 % Ch a r g e s & S e r v i c e s 25 % To t a l E x p e n s e s F Y 2 5 : $ 11 , 5 6 7 , 4 7 2 Pe r s o n a l S e r v i c e s Re t a i l M e r c h a n d i s e Op e r a t i n g S u p p l i e s Ut i l i t i e s Wa t e r Ch a r g e s & S e r v i c e s TH A N K Y O U Pr e s e n t e d M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r Wi t h s u p p o r t f r o m : Gr e g g E v a n s , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r 5 Ro s e Pa r k St a b i l i z a t i o n – En d i n g F Y 26 FY 2 0 FY 2 1 FY 2 2 FY 2 3 FY 2 4 FY 2 5 FY 2 6 T O T A L GF S u p p o r t 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 3, 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 Ro s e P a r k I r r i g a t i o n (1 , 8 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) (1 , 8 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) Se t t l i n g P o n d (1 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) (1 , 1 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) Ra n g e E x p a n s i o n / F e n c e (6 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) (6 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 50 0 , 0 0 0 (1 , 3 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) (6 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) (1 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) 0 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r Go l f C o u r s e W a t e r U s e P a s t S i x Y e a r s 3 GO L F F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y M a t t K a m m e y e r , D i v i s i o n D i r e c t o r 0. 0 0 20 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 40 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 60 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 80 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1, 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 1, 2 0 0 , 0 0 0 . 0 0 Bo n n e v i l l e 1 2 0 A c r e s Gl e n d a l e 1 0 5 A c r e s Fo r e s t D a l e 5 6 A c r e s Mt n D e l l 1 4 9 . 5 A c r e s Ni b l e y P a r k 5 0 A c r e s Ro s e P a r k 1 6 4 A c r e s Gallons Per Irrigated Acre Fi s c a l Y e a r G a l l o n s P e r I r r i g a t e d A c r e F Y 1 8 -FY 2 3 FY 1 8 FY 1 9 FY 2 0 FY 2 1 FY 2 2 FY 2 3 GO L F D I V I S I O N A R E A S O F F O C U S De v e l o p pr o g r a m s t h a t in t r o d u c e n e w se g m e n t s o f pl a y e r s t o t h e sp o r t a n d fo s t e r a l o v e an d r e s p e c t f o r th e t r a d i t i o n s an d v a l u e s o f th e g a m e . GR O W T H E GA M E DE V E L O P O U R TA L E N T Pr o v i d e im p r o v e d em p l o y e e tr a i n i n g a n d le a d e r s h i p op p o r t u n i t i e s , re s u l t i n g i n in c r e a s e d ef f i c i e n c i e s a n d cu s t o m e r se r v i c e . Fi n d w a y s t o im p r o v e t h e ap p e a r a n c e , pl a y a b i l i t y , fu n c t i o n a l i t y , an d e f f i c i e n c y of C i t y -ow n e d co u r s e s a n d cl u b h o u s e s . Se e k op p o r t u n i t i e s t o re s p o n s i b l y in t e g r a t e g o l f as s e t s a n d pr o g r a m s i n t o th e c o m m u n i t y , pr o v i d i n g in c r e a s e d v a l u e to b o t h g o l f e r s an d n o n -go l f e r s . IM P R O V E T H E AS S E T S BE A CO M M U N I T Y PA R T N E R CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL BUDGET STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY25 TO: City Council Members FROM:Kira Luke Budget and Policy Analyst DATE: May 21, 2024 RE: FY 2024-25 Budget – Information Management Services (IMS) Department Budget book pages: Key Changes: 61-62, Department Overview: 201-209 DEPARTMENT AT-A-GLANCE The Department of Information Management Services (IMS) provides technical support for General Fund departments and Enterprise Funds in the City. In addition to technical support, in recent years, IMS has also consolidated the City’s multimedia and engagement services, centralizing communications roles that were previously spread throughout multiple City Departments. The Department also includes the City’s Data Analytics and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) division which streamlines access to and interpretation of the City’s abundance of data. IMS is operated as an Internal Service Fund, which means that its source of revenue comes from charging fees to the City departments and funds based on the services provided. In recent fiscal years, IMS’s budget has grown due to consolidating software subscriptions withing their budget, rather than distributing throughout each department. Similar to the General Fund, IMS has its own Fund Balance that can be drawn from to accomplish budget recommendations. NOTE: The numbers shown in the department overview of the Mayor’s Recommended Budget (MRB) pages 205-206 are inaccurate. The correct breakdown of the IMS Department’s budget is below. Mayor Recommended Budget Information Management Services $ 40,526,281.81 Personnel Services $ 16,318,573.99 Charges And Services $ 20,646,642.32 Operating And Maintenance $ 3,334,265.50 Capital Expenditures $ 226,800.00 Grand Total $ 40,526,281.81 The Mayor’s recommended budget for IMS totals $40,526,282 which is an increase of $1,824,111 or 5% over the final adopted budget for Fiscal Year 2023-24 (FY24). Page | 2 FY24 Adopted FY25 Proposed Difference Percent Change $38,702,171 $40,526,282 $1,824,111 5% Major themes visible in the IMS budget this year reflect the Department’s continuing role as the City’s hub for technology, communication, and innovation: Inflationary impact on contract expenses and salaries Maintenance to keep software and hardware up-to-date and in compliance Continued centralization of: fund management for citywide software resources Citywide communication and branding strategy The $1.8 million increase is largely due to the Citywide 5% salary proposal and benefits increases, plus some other budget requests including contractual increases and one new position. These increases are offset by removing some one-time expenses, and savings from consolidating systems. For more information, see following list of changes. Key Expense Changes in FY25 $1,566,767 in contractual increases, which includes licenses for new staff and increased costs from vendors. This covers software used throughout the City like Microsoft, Adobe, and Accela. As the software industry has transitioned to the software subscription model, the cost to the City continues to rise at the rate of $1+ million each year. IMS confirms that this rate is expected to continue in future budgets. The Department reports evaluating ways to consolidate and save costs by continuing to compare what comparable organizations pay, and what comparable vendors charge. $1,261,668 proposed salary and benefits increases Base to Base Changes $ 261,823 5 % Salary Proposal $ 528,926 Insurance Decrease $252,321 Pension Changes $63,293 $134,813 for a new position, Data Privacy Manager, outlined below in “Additional Information” Reduction of $2,060,000, from FY24’s onetime expense to fund new radios Onetime reduction of $1,000,000 savings realized in discontinuing older systems that have been replaced by Workday POLICY QUESTIONS 1.Communication centralization: Over the past few years, IMS has gathered significant resources to enable them to provide communication, engagement and design services to all City Departments. (Timeline and information on page 4). a. The Council may wish to ask for an overview of Communications staff throughout the City, and more information about how the staff housed Page | 3 within departments helps to advance each department’s message, and how the centralized resources in IMS complement those efforts. b. The Council may also wish to ask about benefits and challenges with having this model, especially in terms of coordination and general issues the City has faced with the number of separate applications departments purchase, opportunities to share platforms and engagement tools, etc. c. The Council may wish to ask for the goals the Communications teams have in terms of improving connection with the public, awareness of City projects, and successful responsiveness for constituents. 2.Constituent Resource Management Software (CRM): IMS is working on the development of a new mobile app, and is currently piloting an internal support program to improve resolution on complex cases. a.The Council may wish to discuss to what extent CRM use has enabled Departments to gather new insights on constituent requests and resources used to respond. b. The Council may wish to ask what, if any, obstacles the department may be experiencing on the path to adoption from more City Departments. c.The Council may wish to ask for more information on the timeline and anticipated features for the new app and improved mobile access. 3.Security: the City’s network security provides protection for everything from constituent data to major City infrastructure. The Department reports frequent and intensifying attacks on the City’s network. Over the past years IMS has put additional resources to network security, and the current budget continues funding for security testing and a new cybersecurity analyst position. The Council has received closed session cybersecurity briefings in the past to stay informed on the City’s security profile. The Council may wish to discuss if it would be helpful to receive semi-annual briefings. 4. Equity: The City has supported a few initiatives over the past few years to address the digital divide through adoption of a Digital Equity Policy, increasing access to laptops by donating surplus or out-of-date inventory, and funding for public-facing wireless access points. a. The Council may wish to ask about staffing resources required to administer these programs. b.The Council may wish to ask for any insights IMS has learned about public wifi use, and whether they could inform promotion of public spaces or events. c. The Council may wish to ask for any other updates on the role Salt Lake City plays in addressing the digital divide. 5.City Surveys: In addition to the biennial resident survey, the survey tool funded in FY23 allows multiple panel surveys a year, like the one completed in Spring 2023. a.The Council may wish to discuss how more frequent survey results could be presented and used to inform policy. b.The Council may wish to discuss the benefits and different applications of opt-in vs random sampling surveys. c.The Council may wish to ask how the survey administration model ensures that Salt Lake’s diverse demographics are adequately represented. ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION New Staff Positions: Page | 4 Total Full Time Employees (FTEs) if adopted: 101 Data Privacy Manager: 1 FTE, $134,813 (full year cost: $161,776) This position is intended to help the City comply with House Bill 491, which was adopted in March 2024 and went into effect May 1 2024. While the bill doesn’t outright require governments to have employees devoted to data privacy, it does establish a number of tracking, training, and reporting requirements. It also requires governmental entities to create a formal privacy program to outline the City’s policies and procedures for following the State’s requirements. Details are included in the full job description in Attachment 1. Centralized City Communications timeline In terms of how the public interacts with the City, the City’s communications and engagement staff are responsible for creating an effective and successful dialogue for residents to know more about current projects and City events, and to give feedback. Throughout the City’s departments are multiple positions focused on furthering the messages and updates of each department. In addition to those positions, is a centralized staff within IMS. In reviewing the IMS budget, it seemed helpful to outline how the centralized communications staff positions have evolved over time. IMS has traditionally hosted the City’s Media Services division, with the technology and engagement professionals who have run SLC’s video services and channels. (5 communications-related FTEs as of FY21, all in Media Services) FY22: IMS took a prominent role in consolidating citywide communication resources, and absorbed four employees and added one new position to establish a centralized communications and engagement team (10 communications-related FTEs as of FY22) FY23: another two employees were added, one for additional graphic design support and another for general civic engagement support. (12 communications-related FTEs as of FY23) FY24: Around this timeframe, the communications-related FTEs are organized into two separate subgroups, Media Services, and Communications and Engagement, both housed within the Innovation Division. FY24 also added three FTEs: a communications director (recently hired) for the Communications and Engagement division (now known as the Public Affairs Lab [PAL]), a social media specialist, and media specialist working specifically with the media services division. (15 communications-related FTEs as of FY24 – 9 in Media Services and 6 in PAL). A Civic Engagement Manager position is vacant, and one Civic Engagement specialist is anticipated to start this month. These positions were held vacant until the new Communication Director was hired. IMS has provided the following updates: The Communications director started in January 2024 and has been working with departments on establishing good working relationships with departments and communications staff throughout the City. The team has held workshops open to all City communications staff. IMS launched a style guide website to assist with centralized branding. Page | 5 IMS will be creating the first ever Media, Innovation, Communication, and Engagement strategic plan during FY25. This strategic plan will complement the IT strategic plan IMS is currently working on. Appendix II (Page 8) provides a list of projects the centralized graphic design team has done to support multiple departments in the past year. Ongoing initiatives: Radio Project Completion: Salt Lake City is scheduled to migrate to the new statewide network in October. IMS now hosts a Radio Replacement Fund, similar to the PC Replacement Fund to manage general fund radios. Last fiscal year, IMS’s fund balance was used to ensure that all radios were upgraded to meet the standard for the new network. This required a combination of new radios and upgrading components of existing radios, which will still need to be replaced over time as they fail. Radios have a life expectancy of 7 (handheld) to 10 (mobile) years. Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) Initiative: The IMS budget is the central fund for the City’s Workday software. The software is a central system that tracks and manages processes including: Project management Risk management & compliance Supply chain operations Human Resources o Performance management o Recruitment & onboarding o Learning management Financial systems Document management and archival IMS provided the following update on implementation: The Payroll and Financial modules went live in July of 2023. The release covered many of the components Workday provides but HR, Finance, and IMS will continue to add on functionality to improve City services. The City is currently working with an outside consultant to do a health and security check on our implementation which is slated be completed at the end of the fiscal year. Based on this health check the City will make the recommended changes and then begin working on enhancements to Workday. In the past few fiscal years, many staff resources have been devoted to implementing Workday. In IMS, staff providing software support for Workday will continue to be ongoing for the foreseeable future. The Innovation and Project Management Team had been heavily involved with the rollout, but are now continuing to support other projects. See Appendix I (page 7) for a full list of projects staff involved in the Workday implementation are now supporting. Constituent Relationship Management (CRM) Software: The CRM is a huge overhaul to the way that constituents report service requests to the City. It is a major implementation process and essential to get right, since it will serve as a frequent touchpoint Page | 6 for constituents interacting with the City, and directly affects how the public views the customer service the City offers. The Administration has made progress moving the CRM ahead with technical features and greater use by departments. As cases are entered into the system, obstacles and delays are identified and staff in IMS and the Mayor’s office work with departments to resolve issues. As we all know – either through experience or stories – the process to get the CRM functioning in the City has been slower than desired over the past several years. To report on the current status, here is a quick list of the recent accomplishments and upcoming projects: Since 2022, the focus has been on internal coordination & system refinements: o City staff have gotten familiar with case creation, monitoring, and closure. o Cross-department improvements have been made to ensure the cases are properly documented and shared, and constituents are contacted. o From a behavior standpoint, this has been the largest hurdle. City staff have always processed these requests in email and adjusting the CRM has taken time. Last year, the “guest experience” was the main focus. This involves: o isolating certain automated interactions and making improvements, especially when automated responses cause confusion or frustration. o creating and publishing the “mySLC.gov” user interface for online submission. o develop dashboards for at-a-glance monitoring of the cases. o Building the “Knowledge Base” which will have articles to explain City processes, standard Q&A, etc. This year, the user experience will continue to be developed through: o department training & consistency, o the mySLC interface, o release of a new mobile app (although the app was scheduled last year, the delay gave more time to the internal work with City staff to ensure cases were being efficiently addressed). o Monthly updates to the Council during the Administration’s Work Session briefings. o Other coordination with department heads and exploring the use of the data in policy and budgeting decisions. As with any technical project, each of these steps require significant time for testing, training, feedback and improvement. Goals of the CRM: Help staff keep track of public requests for service or information, and contact information Automate work assignments Track responses or flag needed follow-ups on a topic Save staff and constituents time by providing a knowledge base to answer common questions Provide data elected officials can use in making service level decisions. Apprenticeships: Update from the Department: Page | 7 IMS continues to have a strong apprenticeship program. The department has two established relationships with Salt Lake City School District and the State of Utah Refugee Services where the majority of our apprentices come from. The current apprentices from the state are working in the Data Analytics and GIS team to assist in data management. The apprentices from the school district are a part of our customer experience team working on computer replacements and user support. Civic Engagement Surveys The Innovation and Project Management Team coordinate the biennial city survey and manage the contract with Y2 Analytics. The results of the latest biennial survey were recently presented to the Council. The contract with Y2 Analytics also includes a panel model, where the City request surveys of a smaller, self-selected panel group on different topics. Digital Equity Initiatives The Department provided the following updates (in italics) on these projects related to the City’s Digital Equity Policy: Free Wi-Fi IMS has been rolling out City Connect (free public wifi) in all City buildings as we replace our access points across the City. In FY24 we completed the roll out to all City buildings that had sufficient bandwidth to support this. Over this summer IMS is working to increase our fiber infrastructure that is necessary to provide more public wifi.  Laptop donation IMS is working with Finance on streamlining this process and will discuss these recommendations/ideas with the City Council. Due to our limited storage space IMS would like to be able to donate consistently ever 2-3 months. IMS plans to do our next donation in July. Appendix I: Current work for staff previously assigned to Workday implementation Technology d. mySLC e. SLC Radio Project f. Transition to Versaterm g. .gov Migration h. Public Utilities Billing Replacement i. Teller j. S2 Building Access k. Technology Release Communication Standards l. Technical Project Management Toolkit Policy & Procedures IMS Strategic Plan Smartsheet Governance Technology Project Management Community Council Relationship Page | 9 Housing Stability Project Tracker Diversified Response Data Dashboard Resident Surveys Digital Front Door Collaboration Digital Donation Program Retention Schedules (2) Change Management Governance Project Management Toolkit AI Usage and Procurement (2) Capital Right of Way Coordination Revised CIP Process and new Capital Plan (2) Green Loop Downtown Project Coordination The software services division continues to provide significant support to Workday as we work through cleanup and enhancements that were not part of the initial go live. Integrations and automations by software engineering team. Expected to complete by end of fiscal year. Engineers will move on to other backlogged projects. Advanced reporting and improvements by the software support team. Expected to continue for next few years. The project managers that worked on the project have moved onto other projects including that were in the backlog. Appendix II: Graphic Design output for interdepartmental clients DATE PROJECT TITLE CLIENT/DIVISION MARKETING MATERIALS 2023-05 Memorial Day Social SLC Gov Social Post 2023-05 Foster Care Awareness Celebration Mayor's Office - Community Outreach Social Post, Flyer 2023-05 Foster Care Awareness Celebration Mayor's Office - Community Outreach Social Post, Flyer 2023-05 Foster Care Awareness Celebration Mayor's Office - Community Outreach Social Post, Flyer 2023-05 Foster Care Awareness Celebration Mayor's Office - Community Outreach Social Post, Flyer 2023-05 West Side Art Project – Fairpark SLC Arts Council Social Media, Ad, Flyer's, Lawn Sign 2023-05 West Side Art Project – Mayor's Project SLC Arts Council Social Media, Ad, Flyer's, Lawn Sign 2023-05 Metrics Chart IMS jpg 2023-05 CIP Book Images Finance .png 2023-05 Lunch and Learn Finance Social Media Assets Page | 10 2023-05 Drinking Water Public Utilities Social Media Assets 2023-05 Waterwise Public Utilities Social Media Assets 2023-05 Canyon Closed Public Utilities Social Media Assets 2023-05 Juneteenth Social s SLC GOV .png, canva 2023-05 Police Civilain Review Board Form Mayors office .PDF Form 2023-05 Molly's Going Away Mayors office .PDF Printed BiFold 2023-05 Procurement Flyer (Purchasing Community Outreach) Contracts and Purchasing / Finance Print ready pdf file 2023-06 Color Study SLC 2023-06 Uniting Communities Pow Wow Mayor's Office Social media, flyer, poster 2023-06 Grilling Safety Social Media Assets 2023-06 West Side Map for Public Art Site Selection SLC Arts Council 24 X 36 Posterboard 2023-06 West Side Match Game for Public Art Site SLC Arts Council Match Game Pieces 2023-06 #AMAslc Streets + Transportation Mayor's Office Communications Social Media Assets 2023-06 Newsletter Headers SLC Arts Council email headers 2023-06 4th of July Offices closed SLC GOV social 2023 - 07 EAB Award Swag EAB production sheet 2023-07 Refugees and New Americans welcoming message Equity and Inclusion Social Media Assets 2023-07 Addressing Homelessness Flyer Mayor's Office Flyer/ Social Flyers 2023-07 Addressing Homelessness - FAQ Mayor's Office Communications Digital Socials 2023-07 Sister City-Book Layout-Worth Their Salt Mayor's Office Book (PDF) 2023-07 Brand Presentation Mayor's Office PDF 2023-07 City Swag for Engagments/Events Mayor's Offfice PDf SPEC SHEET 2023-07 Uniting Communities social media Mayor's Offfice PNG social media asset 2023-07 Abridged Style Guide – Summer 2023 SLC PDF 2023-07 Art Council Banner Headers Art Council ON HOLD 2023-07 CIP Graphics Finance CIP PNG 2023-08 Capital and Operating Budget Book Finance .PNG 2023-08 North Temple Project Mayor's Office & CAN PDF Presentation 2023-08 Capital and Operating Budget Book 2023-2024 Finance 2023-08 We're Hiring SLC Social Media PNG social media asset 2023-08 Sticker and patch IMS .eps files 2023-08 Tumbler and water bottle IMS branded IMS .eps files 2023-08 Billboard Recorder's Office .PNG 2023-08 ACE logo update ACE .PNG and .EPS 2023-08 Kids School Yard Signs Mayors Office + Council PDF 2023-08 Living Color Gala Equity and Inclusion PDF, PNG 2023-08 Love your Block T-shirts Community Outreach .pdf Page | 11 2023-08 Welcome Letter / Envelope Details Community Outreach PDF, Word 2023-08 Love your Block T-shirts Design Love Your Block .ai, pdf 2023-08 HR - Job Marketing Graphic HR PNG 2023-08 Holidays - September 2023 SLC GOV 2023-09 BAC Brochure Boards & Commissions Indesign, PDF, brochure 2023-09 RCV Social Media Ads RCV Ads Social Media .ai, .jpg 2023-09 TSC TSC .psd 2023-09 Holidays - October 2023 SLC GOV 2023-10 Workday Banner HR .jpg, .png 2023-10 Clean Air SLC Branding Campaign Sustainability .ai, .jpg., .png, .eps 2023-10 Updates for 2024 Budget year Powerpoints Admin - Chief of Admin office 2023-10 Arts Council Donner Park - RFQ Arts Council - Econ Dev banner ads, web banner 2023-11 SLCmoves icon update Transportation 2023-11 Holidays - November 2023 SLC GOV 2023-11 CET Flowchart Civic Engagement .Pdf 2023-11 Memory Grove Leash Policy SM SLC Social Media .JPG 2023-11 Holidays-December 2023 SLC Gov 2023-11 Public Lands Social Media KEEP Your Cool Public Lands .JPG 2023-12 Good Neighbor Guide Brochure Mayors Office Trifold Brochure 2023-12 SLC International Airport AMA Mayor's Offfice 2023-12 Holidays - January 2024 Mayor's Office/SLCGOV 2024-01 SL CLEAR Branding Sustainability logo, PPT template, style guide, word template 2024-01 CANVA/ Digital Tools Survey SLC/IMS 2024-01 Branding Assets SLC 2024-01 Brand Presentation IMS-Civic Engagement PDF Presentation 2024-01 Holidays - Febuary 2024 SLC GOV Social Media .JPG 2024-01 Social Media - Code BLUE SLC GOV Social Media .jpg 2024-01 Funding Opportunities Flyer Mayor's Office - Outreach 2024-01 Funding Our Future 2023 Report IMS-Civic Engagement 2024-01 Arts Council How to Thrive as an Artist Arts Council How to Thrive as an Artist 2024-02 IMS Tech Fest Flyer IMS pdf 2024-02 Waste Management Schedule Changes Mailer Waste Management 2024-01 Bike To Work Social/Winter Event Mayor's Office/Community Events Page | 12 2024-01 Vector Logo Update Emergency Management / 911 Dispatch 2024-01 State of The City Assets 2024 Mayor's Office 2024-02 Holiday - March 2024 SLC GOV Social Media 2024-02 LYB Door Hanger Mayors Office – LYB pdf, ai 2024-02 LYB Inbound Flyer Mayors Office – LYB pdf, InDesign 2024-02 Branding SLC, Training Event IMS - Engagment Team ppt, style guides, pdf 2024-02 Crossing Guard Appreciation Shirt Design Mayor's Office .ai .eps 2024-02 LYB Header (Email)Mayors Office .png 2024-02 Kudos & Cheers Program cards IMS .docx, png 2024-02 Proposed Rate Change Mailer Waste & Recycling .ai, pdf 2024-03 Affordable Housing AMA Mayors Office 2024-03 SLC Branding Sharepoint Portal IMS - Media and Web team 2024-03 SLC's Gender Equity Ordinance Event Graphic Mayors Office pdf, ai 2024-03 Council District Map Mayors Office png, ai 2024-03 Bike To Work Social/Spring Event Mayor's Office/Community Events 2024-03 Yard Sign Mayors Office – LYB .ai 2024-03 CleanAirSLC-lawn-Socials Sustainability .PNGS, .AI 2024-03 Arts & Economic Prosperity 6 (AEP6) Arts Council/EconDev 2024-03 B&C Brochure Light Boards & Commissions 2024-03 Intiated Annex Graphic Recorder's Office 2024-03 Decal Research –Sego Update Fleet 2024-03 CleanAirSLC-Lawn-Full-Sheet Sustainability pdf, InDesign 2024-03 Mayors Office Standee Banner- Outreach Mayor's Office - Outreach 2024-03 Mayors Proposed Budget Book Finance 2024-03 SharePoint Branding Site IMS 2024-03 Sego Branded/ City Bandanas Mayor's Office 2024-03 Holiday - April 2024 SLC GOV Social Media 2024-03 Sego Branded Tissue Paper Mayors Office 2024-03 CleanAirSLC-Web-Headers Sustainability 2024-03 Abridged Style Guide Spring 2024 SLC 2024-04 CleanAirSLC-E-BikeVoucher- HalfSheet Sustainability 2024-04 CleanAirSLC-Lawn-Half-Sheet Sustainability .PDF, INDD 2024-04 Work With SLC Purchasing & Contracts Division pdf, jpg 2024-04 Legislative Affairs Divison Resources, Logo, Annual Reports, Faq sheet, etc. Legislative Affiars Division Page | 13 2024-04 CIP Book Finance png, psd 2024-04 Certificates and Award Template Office Of the Chief Admininstrative Officer 2024-04 Mayors Recommended Budget Book Finance 2024-04 Bike To Work Social/SummerEvent Mayor's Office/Community Events 2024-04 Bike To Work Stickers (4 PK 2024) Mayors Office 2024-04 Park Bingo Mayor's Office 2024-04 City Standee Banner Mayor's Office 2024-04 Justice Courts Word Doc Template Justice Courts 2024-04 Holidays - May 2024 SLC GOV Social Media 2024-04 LYB Award Recognition Sign Mayors Office – LYB 2024-04 Mayors Office Standee Banner Mayor's Office 2024-04 Neighborhood Business Improvement Program Brochure Housing Stability Division 2024-04 Purchasing and Contracts Management Standee Banner Purchasing and Contracts 2024-04 RDA Apricort Sticker CRA/RDA 2024-04 SLCCRA (RDA) Rebrand CRA/RDA 2024-04 Waste and Recycling Car Wrap Waste & Recycling 2024-05 Housing Stability SM Update for CDBG SLC GOV Social Media 2024-05 Logo Update Justice Courts Job Profile: Data Privacy Manager Job Code: XXXXX Proposed Pay Grade: 34 Job Classifications: 600 Job Family: XXXX Job Profile Summary: The Data Privacy Manager will play a crucial role in ensuring compliance with new state laws regarding data privacy within IMS and City departments. Incumbent will oversee the implementation of privacy programs, monitor ongoing dataset examination, coordinate customer notification in the event of data breaches, and manage reporting requirements. Compliance with these laws will be a key performance metric for this role. Job Description TYPICAL DUTIES: Develop and implement privacy programs to ensure compliance with state laws and regulations. Collaborate with IMS and City departments to assess current data processing activities and identify areas of non- compliance. Document non-compliant processing activities and develop strategies for bringing them into compliance. Oversee ongoing dataset examination to ensure that only the minimum amount of personal data necessary is being processed. Coordinate with legal and IT teams to provide notice to individuals affected by data breaches, in accordance with state law requirements. Conduct privacy training programs for employees and monitor completion to ensure compliance with training requirements. Serve as a liaison between the organization and regulatory agencies on privacy matters. Stay up to date on changes in privacy laws and regulations and assess their impact on the organization. Prepare and submit annual reports on data sharing and processing activities to the relevant state privacy officer or chief privacy officer. Collaborate with contractors to ensure compliance with data privacy requirements in contractual agreements. Performs additional duties as assigned. MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS: Bachelor's degree in Information Technology, Computer Science, Law, Business Administration, or a related field. At least 3 years of experience in data privacy management, compliance, or a related field. Familiarity with relevant state laws and regulations regarding data privacy, including Utah state code 63A-19-401. Strong understanding of privacy principles, including data minimization, notice requirements, and breach notification procedures. Experience developing and implementing privacy policies, practices, and procedures. Excellent communication and interpersonal skills, with the ability to effectively collaborate with cross-functional teams. Demonstrated ability to manage projects, prioritize tasks, and meet deadlines in a fast-paced environment. Experience conducting privacy training programs for employees. PREFERRED QUALIFICATIONS: Master's degree in Information Technology, Cybersecurity, Law, or a related field. Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP) or other relevant certifications. Experience working in a governmental or public sector environment. Knowledge of data protection technologies and tools. Experience conducting privacy impact assessments and risk assessments. Familiarity with data governance frameworks and best practices. Experience managing data breach response and mitigation efforts. Ability to interpret and apply complex legal requirements to practical business situations. Strong analytical and problem-solving skills, with attention to detail. WORKING CONDITIONS: Light physical effort. Intermittent sitting, standing, and walking. Comfortable working conditions. Considerable exposure to stress resulting from complex problem solving and stringent project deadlines. The above statements are intended to describe the general nature and level of work being performed by persons assigned to this job. They are not intended to be an exhaustive list of all duties, responsibilities and skills required of personnel so classified. All requirements are subject to possible modification to reasonably accommodate individuals with disabilities. IM S F Y 2 4 -25 B u d g e t Pr e s e n t e d b y : A a r o n B e n t l e y , No l e W a l k i n g s h a w , a n d C h a d K o r b 1 Or g a n i z a t i o n a l C h a r t 2 IM S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y A a r o n B e n t l e y , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r ; N o l e W a l k i n g s h a w , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r ; C h a d K o r b D e p u t y D i r e c t o r • OF F I C E O F T H E C I O – 12 FT E s • IN N O V A T I O N & P R O J E C T S – 6 FT E s • NE T W O R K & S E C U R I T Y S E R V I C E S – 20 FT E s • SO F T W A R E S E R V I C E S – 29 FT E s • GI S a n d D A T A A N A L Y T I C S – 6 FT E s • MU L T I M E D I A S E R V I C E S – 9 FT E s • FI E L D S U P P O R T S E R V I C E S – 13 FT E s • CO M M U N I C A T I O N & E N G A G E M E N T – 6 FT E s 6 10 0 21 3 IM S S t a f f i n g IM S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y A a r o n B e n t l e y , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r ; N o l e W a l k i n g s h a w , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r ; C h a d K o r b D e p u t y D i r e c t o r Ov e r v i e w o f Ch a n g e s : FY 2 4 E x p e n s e Bu d g e t Pr o p o s e d Ch a n g e s FY 2 5 Re c o m m e n d e d $3 8 , 7 0 2 , 1 7 1 $1 , 8 2 4 , 1 1 1 $4 0 , 5 2 6 , 2 8 2 FT E s : 1 0 0 / P T E : 2 7 FT E : +1 / P T E : +0 FT E : 1 0 1 / P T E : 2 7 4 5% N e t Y e a r o v e r Y e a r C h a n g e IM S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y A a r o n B e n t l e y , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r ; N o l e W a l k i n g s h a w , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r ; C h a d K o r b D e p u t y D i r e c t o r Su m m a r y o f K e y C h a n g e s / I n s i g h t s 5 IM S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y A a r o n B e n t l e y , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r ; N o l e W a l k i n g s h a w , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r ; C h a d K o r b D e p u t y D i r e c t o r In s i g h t s & K e y Ch a n g e s FY 2 4 O n e T i m e M o n e y – Ra d i o • Du r i n g t h e a p p r o v e d F Y 2 4 b u d g e t , I M S w a s g i v e n m o n e y t o p u r c h a s e r a d i o s f o r t h e c i t y i n pr ep a r a t i o n f o r t h e n e w r a d i o s y s t e m g o i n g l i v e . T h i s w a s o n e -ti m e m o n e y , a n d t h e r e d u c t i o n w i l l no t o c c u r i n f u t u r e y e a r s . • ($ 2 , 0 6 0 , 0 0 0 ) Red u c t i o n i n b u d g e t FY 2 4 O n g o i n g m o n e y a p p r o v e d i n B A # 4 • Ve r s a t e r m Ca se S e r v i c e & C e l l e b r i t e • $3 9 7 , 6 8 8 on g oi n g Re d u c t i o n S t r a t e g y • Re d u c t i o n o f l e g a c y s y s t e m s a n d c o n s u l t i n g d u e t o t h e i m p l e m e n t a t i o n o f W o r k d a y • ($ 1 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 ) Red u c t i o n i n b u d g e t 6 IM S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y A a r o n B e n t l e y , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r ; N o l e W a l k i n g s h a w , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r ; C h a d K o r b D e p u t y D i r e c t o r Co n t r a c t u a l I n c r e a s e s • In c r e a s e c o s t o f S o f t w a r e S e r v i c e s • $1 , 5 6 6 , 7 6 7 on g oi n g In f l a t i o n a r y I n c r e a s e s • In c r e a s e d c o s t b a s e d o n I n f l a t i o n a r y • $7 8 3 , 2 9 3 on g oi n g Au d i o V i s u a l T e c h n o l o g y • Th e c i t y h a s a u d i o -vis u a l t e c h n o l o g y t h a t i s a g i n g a n d n e e d s t o b e r e p l a c e d f o r c o n t i n u e d op e r a t i o n s . • $1 9 6 , 3 8 2 on g oi n g 7 In s i g h t s & K e y Ch a n g e s IM S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y A a r o n B e n t l e y , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r ; N o l e W a l k i n g s h a w , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r ; C h a d K o r b D e p u t y D i r e c t o r Ra d i o R e p l a c e m e n t P r o g r a m • To m a i n t a i n a n d r e p l a c e t h e r a d i o s p u r c h a s e d d u r i n g F Y 2 3 a n d F Y 2 4 a n d m a i n t a i n t h e m o n a n on g oi n g b a s i s . • $5 0 0 , 0 0 0 on g oi n g N e w F T E • To c o m p l y w i t h H o u s e B i l l 4 9 1 . • Pr i v a c y M a n a g e r b a s e d o n H R a n a l y s i s , t h i s w i l l b e a P a y G r a d e 3 4 • $1 3 4 , 8 1 3 on g oi n g 8 In s i g h t s & K e y Ch a n g e s Ne w C i t y w i d e F T E T e c h R e q u e s t s • As n e w F T E s a r e a d d e d t o t h e c i t y . A d d i t i o n a l l i c e n s e s a n d c o m p u t e r s a r e n e e d e d t o s u p p o r t th e m . T h i s r e q u e s t i s f o r t h o s e e m p l o y e e s a n d t h e s o f t w a r e t h a t I M S u s e s . • $4 3 , 5 0 0 on g o i n g IM S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y A a r o n B e n t l e y , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r ; N o l e W a l k i n g s h a w , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r ; C h a d K o r b D e p u t y D i r e c t o r Su m m a r y o f K e y C h a n g e s / I n s i g h t s 9 IM S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y A a r o n B e n t l e y , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r ; N o l e W a l k i n g s h a w , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r ; C h a d K o r b D e p u t y D i r e c t o r TH A N K Y O U Pr e s e n t e d b y : A a r o n B e n t l e y , D e p a r t m e n t D i r e c t o r ; N o l e W a l k i n g s h a w , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r ; Ch a d K o r b , D e p u t y D i r e c t o r 10 CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL BUDGET STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY tinyurl.com/SLCFY25 TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke, Senior Analyst DATE:May 21, 2024 RE: Fiscal Year 2025 Compensation and Benefits Budget ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The total compensation budget includes salaries, supplemental pay, health insurance, pension costs, and other benefits. The proposed FY2025 budget includes: - $475.2 million for compensation across all departments (including enterprise funds) o General Fund makes up $298.9 million, which is 63% of the General Fund budget (historically it represented approximately 67% of the budget). o This is a $33.2 million (12.5%) increase to the compensation budget over the FY2024 adopted budget. - New staff: 62 new fulltime employees (FTEs) o 32.5 are in the General Fund o 4 added through midyear budget amendments in FY2024. - Salary increases: o 5% proposed general pay increase for all employees o market-based salary increases to maintain competitive compensation levels o previously agreed upon merit increases for represented employees - Benefits: o 3.66% medical insurance premium increase o higher contribution to employees’ Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) The Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) annual report is provided as Attachment 1 and a summary of the recommendations is in the Additional Info section. This report provides a summary of the total compensation budget, costs, historical context, and policy questions for Council consideration. Health Savings Accounts or HSA ($4.4 Million; Increasing Front-loaded City Contribution to Employee HSAs and Increasing Deductible Employee Pays) The Administration is proposing to continue the one-time annual contribution to front-load employees’ HSAs at the start of the fiscal year at higher amounts to adjust for higher deductibles. The contributions would amount to $1,000 for singles ($250 increase) and $2,000 for doubles and families ($500 increase). The total cost is $4,422,015 and assumes all vacant positions are filled. The General Fund covers $3,601,800 of that amount. HSA compatible high deductible health plans are subject to IRS regulations and minimum standards. The IRS increased the minimum deductibles for 2024 which are slightly higher than the City’s current deductibles. See the chart below to compare the new IRS standards compared to the proposed budget, which includes setting higher deductibles than the new IRS minimums. By setting the City deductible higher than the IRS minimum requirement, it avoids having to adjust these amounts every fiscal year and provides a significant (-2.84%) Project Timeline: Briefing: May 21, 2024 Budget Hearings: May 21 & June 4, 2024 Potential Action: June 11 or 13, 2024 Page | 2 reduction to the premium increase for FY2025. If the City did not select the proposed deductibles of $2,000 for single and $4,000 for double/family, the medical insurance premium increase is estimated to be higher at 6.5%. A few factors that affect the cost to the City versus the cost to individual employees: - A higher deductible reduces premiums because a greater cost is paid by the employee before the cost hits the shared insurance plan pool. - Shifting costs from the shared insurance pool to the individual employee deductibles causes the premium to be reduced. - The impact to individual employees is mitigated by the higher contribution from the City to employees HSAs, and it continues the same ratio of the HSA contribution set at 50% of the employee’s deductible. o Front loading HSAs with 50% of the employee’s deductible is meant to keep up with inflationary costs of medical services and help reach higher deductible levels. o The deductible maximum out-of-pocket cost an employee is responsible for also increases along with the higher deductible. Historically, the IRS increases the minimum deductible every two to three years. Medical Insurance ($3.2 Million across all departments for 3.66% Premium Increase) The Utah Retirement System (URS) requires cities to hold a medical plan reserve sufficient to cover at least 55 days of typical claims. PEHP provided the below chart showing the City’s annual medical insurance premium increases since FY2019 and the medical reserve balance measured in number of days of average claims that can be paid. In spring 2021 medical and prescription claims paid on a rolling basis by the City’s insurance increased and then levelled off possibly indicating pent up demand, which have since appeared to return to normal volumes. The table below summarizes medical insurance premium increases and plan reserve funding since FY2016. The estimated reserve balance is $13.1 million, which is 112 days of typical claims. The City maintained a larger reserve balance in recent years. This is primarily caused by two factors: first, claims were down during the pandemic when elective surgeries were halted by state order and people voluntarily delayed / avoided healthcare services. Second, PEHP recommends maintaining a larger than typical medical reserve because claims are taking longer to be submitted and processed than usual so the resulting number of claims may be larger than expected. Current City Plan Deductible 1,500$ 3,000$ Below new IRS HSA required minimums Proposed City Plan Deductible 2,000$4,000$ This deductible would reduce the FY2025 premium by -2.84% Old IRS Minimum Deductible 1,500$ 3,000$ Calendar year 2023 minimums New IRS Minimum Deductible 1,600$ 3,200$ This deductible would reduce the FY2025 premium by -0.60% Deductible Double or FamilySingle Notes Page | 3 As shown in the table and chart above, the FY2025 budget includes a 3.66% increase to premiums for the Summit STAR high deductible health plan (HDHP), the City’s only medical insurance plan. The cost of this increase is $3,212,778 of which $1,980,811 is covered by the General Fund. PEHP indicates national average medical insurance increases are 5% to 7%. Premium Holidays – There is no premium holiday planned for FY2025. The FY2024 budget included a true-up to align payment cycles as part of the transition to Workday, the new financial system, which in effect acted as a premium holiday for medical insurance which means the City and employees do not pay premiums for a pay period. When used, a single medical insurance premium holiday adds a one-time $1 million transfer to the General Fund from the Risk Fund. The City has used this approach in recent years, although the City had no premium holiday in FY2023. The FY 2022 budget had a single premium holiday, two in FY2021, one in FY2020, none in FY2019, and two in FY2018. Medical Insurance Premium Cost Increases by Plan Type for City and Employees – The two tables below summarize the premium increase cost impact to the City and to employees. The increase reflects the required annual actuarial contributions. 5% General Pay Increase for All Employees ($14.4 Million) The $14.4 million would provide a 5% base salary increase for all employees including those represented by a bargaining unit. Of that amount, $8.4 million is covered by the General Fund. It’s important to note that negotiations with the local fire union and police union were ongoing at the time the Mayor’s Recommended Budget was presented to the Council. It includes funding for a 5% base salary increase to those employees. Each 1% general pay increase to all employees is estimated to cost $2,792,206. The City has provided general pay increases to all employees in recent years when incoming revenues were growing. Although not directly tied to the consumer price index, sometimes this type of pay increase is referred to as a cost-of-living adjustment or COLA increase. There was a 5% base salary increase in FY2024, a 4.5% base salary increase for non-represented # of Days to Cover Typical Claims $ Amount 2016 5.0%86 $5.9 million 2017 6.6%76 $5.5 million 2018 3.5%76 $5.9 million 2019 7.0%71 $6 million 2020 7.5%106 $10 million 2021 4.5%115 $11.1 million 2022 3.5%94 $9.5 million 2023 6.0%118 $12.7 million 2024 2.9%120 $13.6 million 2025*3.7%112 $13.1 million Fiscal Year Premium Change Medical Reserve Account *FY2025 is an estimate from PEHP Plan City’s Biweekly Contribution Biweekly Increase to City Annual Increase to City Single $227.11 $7.62 $198.12 Double $511.01 $17.15 $445.90 Family $681.33 $22.88 $594.88 Plan Employee’s Biweekly Contribution Biweekly Increase to Employees Annual Increase to Employees Single $11.95 $0.40 $10.40 Double $26.90 $0.91 $23.66 Family $35.86 $1.20 $31.20 Page | 4 employees in FY2022 and FY2023 and no base salary increase for all City employees in the FY2021 annual budget because of the significant financial uncertainty facing the City during the early stages of the pandemic and was accompanied by a half-year hiring freeze. Employees did receive either a one-time $200 internet allowance or a $1,000 hazard payment. There was also a one-time bonus of $500 to all employees except for employees in the fire union and AFSCME union who received a one-time $2,000 bonus. Market-based Salary Adjustments ($921,000) Salary adjustments for benchmarked employee groups who lag local market pay rates by 2% or more are reported annually by the Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC). See Attachment 1 pages 9-13 for a detailed breakout of employee benchmarks lagging the market. This year, the Administration proposes funding market-based adjustments for employees that would still be lagging the market by more than two percent after the 5% base salary increase. This would cover seven job benchmarks identified as either slightly or significantly lagging the market; 23 job benchmarks would be brought to within 2% of market after the 5% general pay increase is factored into those salaries. The total estimated cost to the City for these adjustments is $921,000 of which $563,000 is covered by the General Fund and $358,000 by other funds. These annual adjustments are intended to ensure the City’s salaries are competitive in the local labor market. Represented Employee Merit Increases ($TBD) It’s important to note that negotiations with the local fire union and police union were ongoing at the time the Mayor’s Recommended Budget was presented to the Council. Merit increases or sometimes called step increases, are determined through collective bargaining between the City and the three recognized unions representing most City employees. Step increases are based on years of service for represented employees. These amounts are determined through negotiations and are part of the Memorandums of Understanding between each unit and the City. Step increases begin on an employee’s hiring anniversary date. See the Additional Info section for more on the City’s three bargaining units. Multiple Salary Increases for Some Employees (See policy question #1) It’s important to note that some City employees could receive two or more of the above salary increases (merit, negotiated, general 5%, and market-based adjustments) depending on what position they are in. The Administration is currently in wage negotiations with the fire union and the police union. Additional compensation changes for those represented employees may be recommended to the Council as part of the FY2025 annual budget based on those ongoing negotiations. Annual Compensation Plan Changes: (See Attachment 2 for redlined version of the plan) The proposed FY2025 Annual Compensation Plan has several adjustments to existing compensation items: -Changing the shift differential for non-represented employees who are not police sergeants and lieutenants from $1/hour to 7.5% of base hourly pay. This is meant to provide equity by matching shift differential provided to FLSA non-exempt employees represented by AFSCME. -Removing $65 uniform allowances for non-sworn employees in the Police Department and Watershed Management Division because those departments have agreed to provide uniforms directly to the employees. -Expanding bereavement leave from three to five days for incidents of miscarriage or stillbirth. Bereavement leave may be used consecutively or spread out non-consecutively within one calendar year from the date of death. -Several positions on the Appointed Pay Plan are being eliminated to reflect departmental organizational changes including 911 executive assistance, Airport Director of Operational Readiness and Transition, Deputy Fire Chief, REP Commission Policy Advisor, and Assistant Chief of Police. -Several positions on the Appointed Pay Plan are proposed to receive higher pay grades including the Arts Division Director (from 33 to 35), Business Development Division Director (from 33 to 35), Assistant Fire Chief (from 35 to 38), Deputy Chief HR Officer (from 37 to 38), Justice Court Judge (from 38 to 39), Communications and Content Manage in the Mayor’s Office (from 21 to 30), Deputy Chief of Police (from 37 to 38) -An adjustment to elected officials compensation, based on a review of the City Mayor’s salary compared to other city mayors and city managers (depending on the form of government) in Utah as well as Department Directors. Council Member salaries are set at 25% of the Mayor’s salary so those are also automatically adjusted with the annual budget per ordinance. Discontinuing Lifestyle Spending Account (Reduction of (-$500,000) for the General Fund) Page | 6 In the last annual budget, the Council approved funding for a new employee benefit called a Lifestyle Spending Account that provides $500 as an annual use-it-or-lose-it reimbursement to full-time employees. Unused funds for individual employees do not accrue over multiple fiscal years (i.e., a spending account not a savings account). The total cost across all departments was estimated at $2 million of which half a million was from enterprise funds. Eligible reimbursement categories varied from childcare, out-of-state medical expenses, student loans, home down payments, physical fitness, and emotional wellness. The Administration stated the eligible reimbursements are meant to be flexible in response to employee needs. A third-party administrator manages the program for a fee after a request for proposal (RFP). Employee Utilization of the Lifestyle Spending Account The benefit is being provided on a calendar year basis in 2024. Final figures on participation won’t be known until early calendar year 2025. The City could reevaluate this benefit after the first full year is completed. The Administration provided the following status update on participation: “participants since January 2024 have numbered 1276. There have been 2,355 transactions for Physical Wellness; 850 transactions for Financial Wellness, 493 transactions for Social Wellness, 128 transactions for Emotional Wellness and 329 transactions for Personal Wellness. Note: The total number of transactions is greater than participants because many employees utilized the LSA funds multiple times and/or in multiple categories. Dental Plan Premium 1% Increase (no budget impact to the General Fund) The FY2025 budget includes a 1% increase to the dental premiums paid biweekly by employees (the City does not contribute towards dental insurance for employees). This is first dental premium increase in nearly a decade and reflects increasing utilization across all three plan options of single, double, and family. For the past several years dental premiums were unchanged or even reduced which was possible for the preferred and premium dental plans because the dental reserve had a healthy balance to absorb the revenue decreased from lower premiums. The dental reserve has a balance estimated to cover 116 days of typical claims. Pension Contributions (Reduction of (-$1,368,659) for the General Fund) For the third year in a row, changes by the Utah Retirement System (URS) are resulting in a net decrease for the General Fund. This year the decrease is over $1.3 million in lower costs for the General Fund. The reduction was almost (-$1.3 million) in FY2024 and (-$30,000) in FY2023. This trend is expected to continue. The reductions are mostly caused by Tier 1 employees retiring. Tier 1 employee retirements are generally more expensive for the City than Tier 2 employees who are becoming most of the workforce. Tier 1 enrollment ended in July 2011 partly because of the financial fallout from the Great Recession. Large mandatory contributions occurred in the years after the 2009 recession to make up for retirement system funds lost during the financial crisis. Retirement funding and rates are based on a rolling five-year average of investment returns. URS has an established process to change rates that requires audited financial and investment return information as of December 31 annually. Mandatory 0.7% Payroll Deduction for all Employees in Tier 2 Retirement Systems Page | 7 State law limits city contributions to employee pensions in the Tier 2 retirement system to 10% of the employee’s annual salary. The actuarial analysis URS relied upon for these retirement systems accounted for less wage growth than occurred in recent years which causes higher future benefits for the members. Investment returns from the system’s funds were insufficient to cover the higher-than-expected future benefits. As a result, greater contributions are required to cover the higher future benefits. Once the cost of these contributions exceeds the 10% employer (city) contribution rate the remaining portion (0.7% this year) is automatically taken from employee salaries through payroll deduction. An employer may increase salaries to offset the required employee contribution but an employer may not directly pay the employee’s required contribution to the pension plan. $1.5 Million to Potentially Move Away from Self-Insured Workers Compensation Plan The Insurance and Risk Fund includes $1.5 million one-time to explore moving the City away from the current self-insured model of workers compensation. The funding is a placeholder pending further research into workers compensation insurance options. Any change would likely occur mid fiscal year to coincide with the start of calendar year 2025. The actual cost of a workers compensation insurance plan could be more or less than the placeholder budget. Medical Coverage Changes Like most years, there are adjustments to expand coverage for some types of treatment. Through the Midtown Employee Clinic, new certified dietitian services will be available from group meetings to private one-on-one appointments. Federal law is also requiring expanded coverage for costly prescriptions utilizing eligible manufacturer coupons. The Administration reports the cost of these coverage changes is negligible to the plan. Vacancy Report (299 Vacant Positions) (See policy question #3 and Attachment 3 for the list of vacant positions by department) HR and Finance provided a vacancy report dated May 7, 2024 which provides a snapshot in time of current positions that are unfilled across all departments. The table below summarizes vacancies in the May 7, 2024 snapshot report by department. At the time of publishing this staff report, a more detailed report was requested to show the duration of vacancies throughout the year, the associated budget that is unused, and to clarify whether some divisions are included or were missed such as Fleet and Golf. The report found 301 vacant positions in the City. It’s important to note that some of the positions listed are grant funded, some are part-time, and some in the 911, Fire, and Police Departments are authorized but unfunded so help with turnover (hiring entry level positions shortly before expected retirements / terminations). POLICY QUESTIONS 1.Balancing Multiple Salary Increases for Employees – The Council may wish to ask the Administration how the proposed annual budget balances some employees receiving multiple salary increases with other employees that may receive a single increase. It’s important to note that some City employees could potentially receive two or more of the above-mentioned salary increases (merit, negotiated, general 5%, and market adjustments) depending on what position they are in. 2.Expanded Parental Leave from Six to 12 Weeks at TBD Time in FY2025 –The Administration stated that parental leave expansion is being developed to offer 12 weeks instead of paid leave instead of the current six. In addition, the requirement to use Short-term Disability Insurance would be eliminated. a. The Council may wish to ask the Administration when the expanded parental leave benefit might return to the Council for consideration to amend the FY2025 Annual Compensation Plan. Department Vacant Positions Police 60 Public Utilities 57 Airport 49 Public Services 23 Public Lands 21 Community & Neighborhoods 20 911 18 Fire 17 IMS 6 RDA 6 Finance 4 Attorney's Office 4 Council Office 4 Economic Development 3 Sustainability 3 HR 2 Justice Court 1 Mayor's Office 1 TOTAL 299 Page | 7 b. The Council may wish to review the estimated financial impacts of the expansion, perhaps due to the shift away from short-term disability coverage, and increased costs for departments if temporary help is needed. c. The Council may also wish to ask the Administration whether a placeholder in Nondepartmental for smaller departments that may not have available vacancy savings to cover the cost (this is a similar approach to how the City handles retirement payouts). 1.Number, Duration, and Cost of Vacancies and Zero-Based Budgeting – The Council may wish to confirm that the Administration will include evaluation of vacancies in the zero-based budgeting exercises planned for FY2025, and could consider a legislative intent on the topic. The Council may also wish to request the Administration provide a more detailed vacancies report annually such as the number, duration, and unused budgets from vacancies by position and by department. 2.Metrics – The Council may wish to ask the Administration what metrics are tracked related to compensation, benefits, and the City’s workforce and share metrics that Council Members would find valuable. Examples in recent discussions have included annual departmental turnover (voluntary and involuntary), benefits utilization rates, time from job posting to hiring date, duration of vacancies and unused budget amount. 3.Workers Compensation Insurance vs. Current Self-Insured Plan – The Council may wish to ask the Administration what factors prompted the $1.5 million placeholder to explore moving away from a self-insured approach for workers compensation and instead potentially use an insurance plan? ADDITIONAL & BACKGROUND INFORMATION A. Citizen’s Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) Findings and Recommendations (See Attachment 1 for the CCAC 2024 Annual Report) Each year the CCAC is responsible for preparing and submitting a written report, with any recommendations, to the Mayor and City Council for their consideration. The full CCAC report had a briefing for the Council at the March 26, 2024 work session and is included as Attachment 1. One role of this Committee is to study and compare the City’s salary groups, or job benchmarks, against the salaries of comparable employers, especially those that compete with the City for talent, to see if the City’s compensation levels are competitive in the current job market. A summary of the Committee’s recommendations is available on page 2 of the attachment and is copied below for reference. 1. No Less than a 5% Salary Adjustment to Maintain Competitive Position in Market – Considering the impact of current market conditions, including labor shortages, increased cost of labor and inflation on employer salary budgets in 2024, the Committee recommends leaders increase the City’s overall salary budget by no less than 5%. 2. City as a Pay Leader in the Market – The Committee continues to express its support for the City’s compensation strategy to position Salt Lake City as an area pay leader for employees. The Committee has long recognized that Salt Lake City employees deal with a volume of diverse situations and problems not seen by most other municipal entities in the state. Therefore, it is in the City’s best interest to attract the most capable employees to all positions and to encourage them to stay. The Committee believes that compensation should be an important factor in this equation and that this policy will prove beneficial to the City’s citizens in the future. 3. Market-based Salary Adjustments – Furthermore, as funds permit, the Committee recommends the Mayor and City Council appropriate financial resources necessary to grant market salary adjustments for employees in benchmark jobs identified in this report as lagging market. - Priority should be given to those lagging significantly; and, - Second priority should be given to those lagging slightly behind the market. Detailed breakdowns of which job benchmarks are leading or lagging the market are available in Attachment 1 for AFSCME employees on page 9, Fire and Police employees on page 11, and Non- represented employees on page 13 B. Longevity Pay Page | 9 As a long-standing policy, the City offers employees, except elected officials, a monthly longevity pay benefit based on years of employment as detailed in the below table. In total, approximately 49% of the City’s total workforce receive longevity pay. C. Long-term Disability for All Employees ($1.2 million) The City began providing long-term disability insurance for all employees in FY2023. This converted the existing long-term disability benefit from a voluntary opt-in program to a City sponsored program for all employees. The total cost is estimated at $1.1 – $1.25 million of which $750,000 comes from the General Fund. The benefit provides a percentage of an employee’s annual salary after short-term disability runs out which is typically after 12 weeks. Short and long-term disability benefits are intended to provide income security when an employee is unable to work, such as after an injury or illness. This was necessary to bring City into compliance with URS regulations and is a benefit offered by many other municipalities in Utah. D. Bargaining Units The City has three bargaining units with which the Administration negotiates compensation and comes to agreements through three-year Memorandums of Understanding (MOU) – Salt Lake Police Association, International Association of Firefighters Local 81, and the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) Local 1004. Agreements with City bargaining units are developed prior to and after the Mayor presents the recommended annual budget, depending on the timing of negotiations concluding. The recommended budget includes total compensation adjustments for all City employees, both union represented and non-represented alike. However, depending on the outcome of negotiations, recommendations for union employees may be modified. Negotiations are governed by the 2011 Collective Bargaining Resolution. Approximately two-thirds of City employees are represented by a bargaining unit. E. City Historical Medical Claims PEHP provided the below chart showing actual claims in blue bars and projected claims as a red line if the City had remained on a traditional health care plan instead of moving to a high deductible health plan in 2011. The chart shows that the City is estimated to have saved money each year since the plan changed. Years of Employment Monthly Benefit Annual Benefit Number of Employees Total by Category Six $50 $600 512 $307,200 Ten $75 $900 392 $352,800 Sixteen $100 $1,200 288 $345,600 Twenty $125 $1,500 492 $738,000 1684 $1,743,600TOTALS Page | 10 ATTACHMENTS 1. Citizens Compensation Advisory Committee or CCAC 2024 Annual Report 2. Redlined FY2025 Annual Compensation Plan for Non-represented Employees 3. May 7, 2024 Vacancies by Department Report (a snapshot in time) ACRONYMS AFSCME – American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees CCAC – Citizens Compensation Advisory Committee COLA – Cost-of-living-adjustment OR Cost-of-labor-adjustment FTE – Full-time Employee FY – Fiscal Year HDHP – High Deductible Healthcare Plan HSA – Health Savings Account MOU – Memorandum of Understanding PTSD – Post Traumatic Stress Disorder RFP – Request for Proposals URS – Utah Retirement System g�$..,,,' \cf);,,.I Date R ece1. ved : _03/08/2024 Date sent to Council: 03/08/2024 _ ERIN MENDENHALL MAYOR HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT DEB ALEXANDER CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER ,,,,,,,,.,,...... ,,,,, uo• ,,,,, CI1Y COUNCIL TRANSMIITAL TO: DATE: FROM: SUBJECT: Salt Lake City Council Victoria Petro, Chair March 4, 2024 Deb Alexander, Chief Human Resources Officer Human Resources Department 2024 Citizens' Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) Annual Report STAFF CONfACTS:Deb Alexander, Chief Human Resources Officer (801) 535-6610 David Salazar, Compensation Manager (801) 535-7906 DOCUMENf TYPE: Information Item RECOMMENDATION: This report is for informational purposes. Consideration should be given during the city's annual budget review process, as it relates to employee compensation. The city council is tentatively scheduled to receive a formal presentation of the annual report during a work session on March 26, 2024 from Committee Chair Brandon Dew. CI1YCOORDINATION: n/a BUDGET IMPACT: n/a BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: This report includes information and the following recommendations relating to employee compensation, as required by city ordinance (City Code, Title 2, Chapter 2.35 - Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC). In an effort to advise city leaders, this year's report highlights the following specific topics reviewed by the committee during the past year, including: Labor shortages, cost of labor and inflaction continue to drive 2024 salary budgets Local area market pay comparison Elected Officials, Department Directors & other key city leaders -Appendicies including supplemental and supporting information P.O. Box 145464 349 South 200 East, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, UT 84114-5464 www.slcgov.com TEL 801-535-7900 Specific recommendations in this report, include: 1.Considering the impact of current market conditions, including labor shortages, increased cost of labor and inflation on employer salary budgets in 2024, theCommittee recommends leaders increase the City's overall salary budget by no less than 5%. In conjunction with the City's plans to grant actual general and/or merit increases, the Committee recommends an overall increase to the city's salary range structures of no less than3%. 2.The Committee continues to expresses its support for the City's compensation strategy to position Salt Lake City as an area pay leader for employees. The Committee has long recognized that Salt Lake City employees deal with a volume of diverse situations and problems not seen by most other municipal entities in the state. Therefore, it is in the City's best interest to attract the most capable employees to all positions and to encourage them to stay. The Committee believes that compensation should be an important factor in this equation and that this policy will prove beneficial to the City's citizens in the future. 3.Furthermore, as funds permit, the committee recommends the mayor and city council appropriate financial resources necessary to grant market salary adjustments for employees in benchmark jobs identified in this report as lagging market. Priority should be given to those lagging significantly; and, Second priority should be given to those lagging slightly behind market. 4.Considering the current Administration, while not new, is starting a new term and given the potential for changes in leadership throughout the city, the Committee recommends no specific action be taken at this time for department directors and other key city leaders. The advice of the Committee is to allow additional time for city leaders and any potential changes in organizational structure to be thoroughly evaluated against the market findings, as detailed in the report, before making any significant pay decisions. PUBLIC PROCESS: n/a EXHIBITS: 2024 Citizens' Compensation Advisory Committee Annual Report SALT LAKE CITY CITIZEN S’ COMPENSATIO N ADVISOR Y COMMITTE E ANNUAL REPORT 2024 PURPOSE & INTRODUCTION The Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee (CCAC) was formed with the purpose of “…evaluating the total compensation levels of the city's elected officials, executives and employees and making recommendations to the human resources department, mayor and the city council…” (City Code Title 2, Chapter 2.35.050). Each year the committee is responsible for preparing and submitting a written report to the mayor and city council containing, among other things, recommendations on the “appropriate competitive position for the city relative to the compensation practices of comparable employers,” “wages and benefits of the city’s elected officials, executives and employees” and “general recommendations regarding the mix of compensation for the city’s employees, e.g., base salary, benefits, incentives” (City Code Title 2, Chapter 2.35.050.A.6) To provide city officials with the most valuable and relevant information, this report includes the Committee’s recommendations based on review of current economic conditions, salary budget forecasts, and local area market pay analysis including a more specialized review of wages paid to the City’s firefighters and police officers compared with other public entities in the state of Utah. Additional information intended to provide insight to comparable salaries paid to elected officials, department heads, and other key city leader in U.S. cities considered similar to Utah’s capital city are also highlighted in this year’s report. Respectfully, Citizens’ Compensation Advisory Committee Brandon Dew, Chair Jana Bake, Vice-chair J. Clair Baldwin Jeff Herring Casey Lund Mike Terry Jeff Worthington 1 Section One: Labor shortages, cost of labor and inflation continue to drive 2024 salary budgets Economic Factors While fears of resurgent inflation dominated much of the economic landscape in 2023, WorldatWork researchers make note in their 2023-24 Salary Budget Survey of the cautious optimism the nation’s economy is gradually cooling. As inflation begins to stabilize, focus is now turned to emerging demographic trends that suggest a tight labor market and unmet labor demands will be the reality of the foreseeable future. Now, even more than inflation, low unemployment rates and an on-going scarcity of labor are what continue to drive up the local cost of labor and dominate employers’ view when setting salary budgets. Salary Budget Forecasts Similar to trends previously set in 2022 and 2023, research among global compensation consulting firms Mercer, WorldatWork, and WTW (formerly known as Willis Towers Watson) confirms salary budget and wage increases are generally stabilizing just below the substantial 4.4% average salary increase given by U.S. employers in 2023. According to Mercer's U.S. Compensation Planning Survey November 2023 (see Appendix A) edition, U.S. employers forecast raising their merit increase budgets by 3.5% and total salary increase budgets by 3.8% on average for 2024. WorldatWork’s “2023-24 Salary Budget Survey” (see Appendix B) of 2,146 participants found U.S. employers are projecting a continuance of 4.1% pay increase budgets in 2024 and 3.6% average merit increases. Willis Towers Watson (WTW) research (see Appendix C) also confirmed employers are planning an overall average salary increase of 4.0% for 2024. In addition to the foregoing salary budget projections, more detailed statistics obtained from WorldatWork’s 2023-24 Salary Budget Survey report provide insight to the projected and actual increases reported by participants based on the type of increase (Figure 1) and other factors including state, industry, and organization (Figure 2). 2 Figure 1 – Median Salary Increase Budgets, by Type of Increase Projected 2023 Actual 2023 Projected 2024 General Increase/COLA 3.0 %1.1 %1.0 % Merit Increase 3.5 %4.0 %3.5 % Other Increase 1.0 %0.8 %0.8 % Total Increase 4.0 %4.0 %4.0 % Note: “General Increase/COLA,” “Merit,” and “Other” do not add to the “Total Increase” because not every organization provides all three types of increases. When considering the added perspective of factors including state, industry, and organization size, it appears employers in the local Salt Lake City labor market are more likely to see overall salary budget increases ranging between 4-5% (Figure 2). Figure 2 – Median Total Salary Increase Budgets, by State, Industry, and Organization Size Projected 2023 Actual 2023 Projected 2024 By State, Utah 4.0 %4.0 %4.0 % By Industry, Public Administration 4.0 %5.6 %5.0 % By Organization Size, 2,500 - 9,999 4.0 %4.5 %4.0 % Finally, when considering the impact on and need for salary structure adjustments, WorldatWork salary budget survey participants are projecting a 3.0% median increase in 2024 to range minimums and maximums (Figure 3). Figure 3 – Salary Structure Increases, by Employee Category Projected 2023 Actual 2023 Projected 2024 Non-exempt Hourly 3.0 %3.0 %3.0 % Exempt Salaried 2.5 %3.0 %3.0 % Officers/Executives 2.5 %3.0 %3.0 % RECOMMENDATION: Considering the impact of current market conditions, including labor shortages, increased cost of labor and inflation on employer salary budgets in 2024, the Committee recommends leaders increase the City’s overall salary budget by no less than 5%. In conjunction with the City’s plans to grant actual general and/or merit increases, the Committee recommends an overall increase to the city’s salary range structures of no less than 3%. 3 Section Two: Local area market pay comparison The ability to effectively attract and retain key talent is based on management, adaptability, administration of the city’s pay structures, and employee base wage and salary rates. The committee reviewed market pay data obtained primarily from multiple locally based private or public employers with operations along the Wasatch Front. This approach was used because recruitment and applicant pool data historically has strongly suggested the city draws its talent from the local area and competes with other local employers for said talent. Results of the market pay analysis conducted this year were presented by the city’s human resources staff using the compensation management tool offered by Payfactors to aggregate the latest sources of market pay information available. To facilitate this review, the city organized 85 benchmark groups from its 1,045 active jobs (roughly 8% of jobs). The committee reviewed job pricing information obtained for each of the 85 benchmark job titles highlighted in this report. In total, these benchmarks cover 1,265 employees which represents approximately 38% of the city’s regular, full-time workforce. Because market data is not available to price all jobs, it is important to note that if a job title is not shown as a benchmark title it is instead tied to a benchmark for pricing purposes. For example, Accountant III is designated as the benchmark job for related titles in the same job family, including: -Accountant I -Accountant II -Accountant III (benchmark) -Accountant IV If market pay data indicates a particular benchmark job is significantly below market, then all levels of the job should be reviewed for potential pay adjustments—not just the benchmark job. This way the pay differences between levels of the same or similar jobs are appropriately maintained. The results of this year’s local market pay analysis are displayed in three separate work groups. This is done not only to account for the differences in each group’s unique wage structure and pay practices, but to also gauge the City’s success more effectively at positioning itself as a pay leader. These three work groups include: AFSCME Public Safety (including Firefighters, Police Officers, and Public Safety Dispatchers) Non-Represented Employees The Committee continues to follow the guidelines listed below when determining an individual benchmark job’s compensation position relative to the market: 4 -Significantly lagging when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is less than or equal to 90%. -Slightly lagging when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is between 90.1% and 98%. -Competitive when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is between 98.1% and 109.9%. -Significantly leading when data indicates the benchmark job’s position relative to market is greater than or equal to 110%. GROUP FINDINGS & OVERALL SUMMARIES: Among the AFSCME workgroup, a total of 37 benchmark jobs, covering 402 employees, were evaluated (representing 45% of the total jobs surveyed). Market median (50th percentile) pay rates were compared to the Salt Lake City’s wage schedule top rate. AFSCME Summary Benchmark Job Count Overall Average Market Position Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)2 90% Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)6 95% Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)19 105% Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)10 114% Overall Market Comparison 37 104% The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading. 5 AFSCME Breakout 2023 - Job Title (Job Code)SLC Top Rate (union only) # SLC Incumbents Market Salary (50th Percentile) Market Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs Market Median) Crime Scene Technician II (001779)$57,450 7 $64,700 89% Plans Examiner I (002127)$76,627 4 $84,900 90% Plumber II (000854)$64,792 1 $69,300 93% Water Meter Technician II (002714)$57,554 3 $61,700 93% Building Inspector III (001967)$84,469 7 $90,400 93% Maintenance Electrician IV (000168)$68,869 2 $71,800 96% Arborist II (001375)$59,238 4 $60,200 98% Asphalt Equipment Operator II (000909)$57,554 27 $58,600 98% Laboratory Chemist (002743)$80,454 2 $81,300 99% Evidence Technician II (002277)$57,450 1 $57,500 100% Senior Secretary (003030)$55,619 68 $55,200 101% Public Safety Dispatcher (002629)^$74,214 0 $72,842 102% Fleet Mechanic (002675)$66,726 41 $65,600 102% Water Meter Reader II (006326)$49,525 3 $48,700 102% Custodian II (006090)$40,227 2 $38,600 104% Painter II (001347)$60,986 1 $58,600 104% Business Licensing Processor II (001964)$61,298 3 $59,100 104% Industrial Electrician IV (002658)*$80,454 18 $77,400 104% General Maintenance Worker III (002490)*$64,792 6 $62,000 105% Airport Airfield Operations Specialist (002619)**$76,627 23 $72,100 106% Senior Utilities Representative - Customer Service (000199)$55,619 22 $52,100 107% HVAC Technician II (006050)$68,869 0 $63,600 108% Metal Fabrication Technician (001925)$68,869 9 $63,600 108% Waste & Recycling Equipment Operator II (002347)$57,554 5 $53,500 108% Water Plant Operator II (000966)$66,726 21 $61,900 108% Water Reclamation Facility Operator II (002722)$64,792 22 $59,400 109% Water System Maintenance Operator II (000975)$59,238 9 $54,400 109% Judicial Assistant II (002084)$61,298 9 $55,600 110% Airfield Maintenance Electrician (002746)*$93,184 15 $85,000 110% Carpenter II (001349)$60,986 11 $55,100 111% Concrete Finisher (001852)$62,899 21 $56,500 111% Civil Enforcement Officer I (001893)$63,398 0 $56,400 112% Airport Environmental Specialist II (002745)$84,469 11 $74,500 113% Warehouse Support Worker - Airport (002022)$53,726 5 $47,000 114% Engineering Technician IV (000829)$69,472 1 $58,500 119% Parks Maintenance Technician I (002847)$48,069 0 $39,600 121% Office Technician II (001191)$55,619 11 $45,100 123% * = New Job this year **= Market salary normalized to Salt Lake City ^= Select entities used in comparison. Compared against market median topped out rate. 6 As a result of Resolution No. 201 (see Appendix E), as passed in June of 2023 by the City Council, the Committee decided to reassess the evaluation methodologies being used for comparison for the Public Safety workgroup. As stated in the resolution, the “policy objective is to ensure that the City’s firefighters and police officers are paid wages commensurate with or close to top of the market wages paid by public entities for such occupations in the State of Utah, especially among the State’s largest public safety agencies.” The Committee’s assessment involved determining criteria for which other public safety agencies should be included in the comparison, specifically for firefighter and police officers, while striving to follow the intent of the resolution. The Committee decided that the primary focus should be comparison to the top rate of pay found among the largest agencies in Utah. The threshold established on what constitutes a large agency was set at 90 or more full-time employees. The agencies included in the comparison results are as follows: FIRE o Ogden City o Park City Fire District o Sandy City o South Davis Metro Fire Agency o South Jordan City o Unified Fire Authority o Weber Fire District o West Jordan City o West Valley City POLICE o Layton City o Ogden City o Provo City o Sandy City o State of Utah o Unified Police Department o Utah County o Weber County o West Jordan City o West Valley City As alternative options for consideration, the Committee also refined the comparison further to determine the average top rate and median top rate among the selected agencies with 90 or more full-time employees. The market comparison for each breakout is illustrated below for each job. A total of 5 benchmark jobs, covering 659 employees, were evaluated (representing 7% of the total jobs surveyed) for the Public Safety workgroup. The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading for the Top Rate breakout option. 1 Council Formal Meeting, June 13, 2023 – Item 17 7 Firefighter and Police Officer - Top Rate 2023 - Job Title (Job Code)SLC Top Rate # SLC Incumbents Market Salary (Top Rate) Market Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs Market Top Rate) Police Officer (002654)$94,162 79 $108,206 87% Firefighter / Engineer - all levels $83,762 57 $96,541 87% Fire Captain (008040)$102,502 44 $114,962 89% Firefighter / EMT - all levels $78,291 70 $85,874 91% Firefighter / Paramedic - all levels $90,438 79 $97,972 92% The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading for the Average Top Rate breakout option. Firefighter and Police Officer - Average 2023 - Job Title (Job Code)SLC Top Rate # SLC Incumbents Market Salary (Average Top Rate) Market Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs Market Average Top Rate) Fire Captain (008040)$102,502 44 $108,686 94% Firefighter / Engineer - all levels $83,762 57 $88,611 95% Firefighter / Paramedic - all levels $90,438 79 $92,134 98% Police Officer (002654)$94,162 49 $95,032 99% Firefighter / EMT - all levels $78,291 70 $77,530 101% The following list includes all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading for the Median Top Rate breakout option. Firefighter and Police Officer - Median 2023 - Job Title (Job Code)SLC Top Rate # SLC Incumbents Market Salary (Median Top Rate) Market Comparison (SLC Top Rate vs Market Median Top Rate) Firefighter / Engineer - all levels $83,762 57 $88,478 95% Fire Captain (008040)$102,502 79 $107,657 95% Firefighter / Paramedic - all levels $90,438 79 $92,186 98% Police Officer (002654)$94,162 49 $94,806 99% Firefighter / EMT - all levels $78,291 70 $76,877 102% 8 Among the Non-Represented Employee workgroup, a total of 44 benchmark jobs, covering 204 employees, were evaluated (representing 52% of the total jobs surveyed). Market pay rates (calculated as the 50th percentile) were compared to the non-represented employee actual median wages/salaries. Non-Represented Summary Benchmark Job Count Overall Average Market Position Significantly Lagging (Less than or equal to 90% of market)2 83% Slightly Lagging (Between 90.1% and 98% of market)15 95% Competitive (Between 98.1% and 109.9% of market)16 102% Significantly Leading (Greater than or equal to 110% of market)10 116% Overall Market Comparison 43 99% As with the other groups, the corresponding list ranks all related benchmark jobs sorted by those which are most significantly lagging to most significantly leading. 9 Non-Represented Breakout 2023 - Job Title (Job Code) SLC Median Employee Salary # SLC Incumbents Market Salary (50th Percentile) Market Comparison (SLC Median vs Market Median) Licensed Architect (002779)$100,573 2 $123,500 81% Cybersecurity Engineer II (002794)$117,909 1 $138,600 85% Software Engineer III (002145)^$110,882 0 $122,000 91% Paralegal (002201)$74,880 6 $82,200 91% Principal Planner (001733)**$81,524 11 $89,382 91% Human Resources Business Partner II (002811)$98,562 7 $105,800 93% Collections Officer (001376)$52,853 3 $56,300 94% Golf Professional II (002766)$86,432 2 $92,000 94% Legal Secretary III (002814)$69,888 4 $73,400 95% Senior Recruiter (002438)*$88,924 2 $93,200 95% Office Facilitator II (002804)$63,222 34 $66,200 96% Systems Engineer III (002800)$125,439 2 $130,800 96% Forensic Scientist II (001974)$74,922 2 $78,100 96% Professional Land Surveyor (001890)$86,617 1 $90,100 96% Golf Course Superintendent - 18 Holes (000936)$86,821 4 $90,300 96% Financial Analyst III (002773)$90,542 12 $93,800 97% Network Engineer II (002789)^$116,429 0 $119,900 97% Safety Program Manager (002790)$108,110 2 $109,200 99% Senior City Attorney (002319)$174,078 12 $175,700 99% Senior Human Resources Technician (001866)*$56,347 2 $57,000 99% Engineer IV (002198)$100,573 9 $100,900 100% Procurement Specialist II (000534)$74,955 1 $74,600 100% Auditor III (002822)$88,205 1 $87,700 101% Senior Claims Adjuster (002534)$84,698 1 $83,400 102% Executive Assistant (001989)$78,623 14 $77,000 102% HRIS Analyst (002155)*$102,036 2 $99,100 103% Licensed Clinical Social Worker/Clinical Mental Health Counselor (002585)$81,856 9 $78,900 104% Victim Advocate (001765)$55,058 6 $53,000 104% Employee Marketing & Communications Specialist (002225)^$74,955 0 $71,800 104% Real Property Agent (000370)$82,151 2 $78,300 105% Accountant III (001666)$84,786 9 $80,100 106% Learning & Development Specialist (002516)^$82,686 0 $77,300 107% Management Analyst (002757)$80,811 6 $74,200 109% Justice Court Judge (001601)$183,330 5 $165,200 111% Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Specialist (002154)$71,395 3 $64,000 112% City Payroll Administrator (001945)$77,111 2 $67,900 114% Program Coordinator - Arts Council (001799)$73,601 3 $64,700 114% Technical Systems Analyst III (002203)^$82,680 0 $72,600 114% Social Media Specialist II (002603)^$74,955 0 $64,300 117% Civic Engagement Program Specialist (001821)$69,610 2 $58,600 119% Business Systems Analyst II (002338)$98,163 5 $80,400 122% Software Support Administrator II (001729)$93,344 5 $76,400 122% Network Support Administrator II (001396)$71,178 11 $56,100 127% ^ = Comparing against compensation grade midpoint in lieu of median wage as job is currently vacant. *=New Job this year **= Market salary normalized to Salt Lake City 10 RECOMMENDATION: The Committee continues to express its support for the City’s compensation strategy to position Salt Lake City as an area pay leader for employees. The Committee has long recognized that Salt Lake City employees deal with a volume of diverse situations and problems not seen by most other municipal entities in the state. Therefore, as the capital city it is in the City’s best interest to attract the most capable employees to all positions and to encourage them to stay. The Committee believes that compensation should be an important factor in this equation and that this policy will prove beneficial to the City’s citizens in the future. Furthermore, as funds permit, the committee recommends the mayor and city council appropriate financial resources necessary to grant market salary adjustments for employees in benchmark jobs identified in this report as lagging market. 1.Priority should be given to those lagging significantly; and, 2.Second priority should be given to those lagging slightly behind Market. 11 Section Three: Elected Officials, Department Directors & other key city leaders During 2023, the City’s Human Resources Department conducted a special survey designed to compare salaries of Elected Officials, Department Directors, and other key city leaders with their counterparts from similar U.S. cities (see Appendix F). Responses received during this year’s survey compared salaries of incumbents from a total of 32 cities (35% response rate) whose population size is between approximately 100,000 to 600,000. Elected Officials Salary comparisons for elected officials were based on, and limited to, entities with a similar type of government structure. For Salt Lake City’s Mayor comparison, results were limited to other cities with full- time mayors; similarly for the City Council, results were limited to other cities with part-time councils. Department Directors & Other Key City Leaders The Committee also reviewed data obtained for appointed executives, including department heads and others in key appointed city positions. Salaries were analyzed and considered based on the normalized median salary comparisons. The salary data was normalized to match salaries reported by each participant to Salt Lake City’s labor market by applying a geographic assessor provided by the Economic Research Institute (ERI). The geographic assessor accounts for variations in cost of labor among the various cities’ geographic locations. RECOMMENDATIONS: Considering the current Administration, while not new, is starting a new term and given the potential for changes in leadership throughout the city, the Committee recommends no specific action be taken at this time. The advice of the Committee is to allow additional time for city leaders and any potential changes in organizational structure to be thoroughly evaluated against the market findings before making any significant pay decisions. Appendices Appendix A Mercer QuickPulse US Compensation Planning Survey 2024 Projections 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections Projected salary increase budgets holding, for now Results of the 2023 Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey December 04, 2023 Blog Home Here we are! It’s the end of 2023 and we have one more look at what employers are forecasting for salary increase budgets for 2024. In addition, we have insights to share on promotions, off-cycle increases, salary structure adjustments, and some hot topics, such as pay transparency. Take a peek and see how this stacks up with what you are planning for next year. Merit and total increase budgets Both merit and total increase budgets are relatively unchanged from the last time we conducted the US Compensation Planning survey in August of this year. On average, the more than 900 participants in the US are forecasting 3.5% merit increase budgets and 3.8% total increase budgets. Only the total increase budget changed from earlier in the year, decreasing from 3.9%. When comparing industries, there are some differences. Healthcare continues to project increase budgets that are below the average, at 3.1% for merit increases. Those industries projecting above the overall average are Insurance/Reinsurance and Services (Non-financial), at 3.7% for merit increases. With 49% of companies still reporting that their budget status is “preliminary,” it’s quite possible that we could see actual increases lower than projected when we survey again in Q1 of 2024. What’s important is that you take this information, along with other reputable sources, and determine what’s right for your company. Your annual increase budget should make sense for your industry, desired competitive positioning, financial outlook, etc. Additionally, ensure that your budget includes funds for any adjustments needed to realign particular jobs or employees to mitigate pay compression or any necessary market adjustments. Manager discretion for merit distribution A question that comes up from time to time, particularly when you are revising your total rewards strategy, is “How much discretion should managers have when it comes to delivering merit increases?” or other pay adjustments. To take a pulse check on where employers are with empowering managers to make pay decisions, we asked, “What limitations or rules do managers have when it comes to the determination of an individual's base salary increase?” It seems that the most prevalent rules that managers must work within: Fall within the overall budget Fall within the salary range Fall into a recommended range provided based on select factors (e.g., position in range and performance) Incorporate increases determined by compensation (e.g., market adjustments or pay equity adjustments) Not exceed designated caps for pay increase On the other hand, 1% of companies (about 9) said that they allow managers ultimate discretion when it comes to the increase, with no limitations. Another group of respondents said that “everyone receives the same increase” (about 3%) and others stated that merit increases were formulaic (about 6%). https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 1/5 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections How does that compare to the annual increase guidelines you are providing for your managers? Perhaps with more education and confidence to talk about pay, your managers could be given more discretion. Promotion practices Although not much has changed recently in promotion practices, it warrants consideration because promotions and career development play such a significant role in the employee experience and total rewards strategy. Employers on average are planning to promote a little less than 10% of their workforce in 2024. On average, employees can expect to see a 9.2% pay increase for a one-level promotion. Half of employers are managing promotions through their existing salary and wages budget, or some other expense process. Just under 1 in 4 companies have a standalone promotion budget and are planning an average of 1.1% to cover the increase in salaries due to promotions. Off-cycle increases As we’ve seen in the last couple of compensation planning reports, employers’ use of off-cycle increases has slowed, but not disappeared. Per capita base salary changes, found by comparing the average per person base salary change over a period of time, shows that pay has moved on average 4.6%, which is larger than what was reported as the actual increase delivered in March of 2023: 3.8% merit and 4.1% total increases. Approximately half of employers reported that they have provided or will provide off-cycle increases in 2023, citing retention concerns, internal equity, and market adjustments as the most common reasons for doing so. While two-thirds of companies don’t budget for off-cycle increases, most do have an extensive approval process that typically involves several levels of line management as well as Human Resources and Compensation. Salary structures For the 87% of employers who utilize a formal salary structure, 3 out of 4 adjust the structures annually. Another 8% adjust them every 2 years. Of those who plan to adjust their structure in 2024, the average projected salary structure increase is 2.9%. Sharing salary ranges We know that employers are having to be more transparent about their pay levels, whether because they are required by law or as a voluntary act to build trust among employees. Beyond where legally required, 28% of employers are including salary ranges in job postings nationally with another 10% planning to do so. But what exactly are they sharing? If you take a look at job posting boards like Indeed, it’s obvious that what’s being shared is not consistent. When looking at a particular job, what’s shared as the pay range varies widely. Employers in the US Compensation Planning Survey reported that they most commonly are using the following in job postings: National, market-based pay range, regardless of (job) location Geographically adjusted pay range, based on location of job posting Subset of the pay range (e.g., do not disclose the full maximum of the salary range) Addressing compression and internal equity Increased pressure to be more transparent about pay means that employers have to prioritize addressing pay compression and internal equity issues. Only 17% of the 951 survey respondents reported that they have not experienced compression or internal equity issues; another 18% stated they “don’t know” or are “unsure.” The remaining respondents stated that they have done the analysis and are making adjustments (36%), that they will make adjustments outside the annual increase cycle (11%), or that they plan to address in 2024 (17%). Timely insights direct to you Does any of this come as a surprise to you? Or, perhaps it differs dramatically from what your organization is planning for 2024? As you know, what’s important is that you understand what your competitors are doing and then make decisions that are right for your unique circumstances. Sign up today to be notified when the next Compensation Planning Survey opens — participants receive the results at no cost. Looking for other Mercer insights to help you plan for 2024? Give us a call at 855-286-5302 or email one of our associates at surveys@mercer.com. https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 2/5 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections 3.8% ..Mercer welcome to brighter r□, L.: :.J Increase rojections are holding Merit Total increase 3.8% 4.1% 3.9%3.8% 2022 2023 Actual increases Actual Increases 2024 Projected August 2024 Projected November .Ell Companies are sharing ranges in job postings Annrn;arh tn nnc:.tinn c::;al;arv r;annPc:. nn inh nnc:.tinnc:. https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 3/5 ■ 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections Mercer.com About us Contact us Terms of use Privacy Notice Accessibility statement Feedback Login-FAQs Cookie Notice https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 4/5 1/8/24, 2:41 PM Mercer QuickPulse™ - US Compensation Planning Survey | 2024 Projections Manage Cookies Asia: Client Solutions Team: 65 6398 2323 Australia/NZ: 1800 645 186 (Sydney) +61 2 8864 6800 (International) / 0508 645 186 (Auckland) +64 9 984 3500 (International) Canada: 1-800-333-3070 Europe/ME/Africa: +48 22 376 17 32 (Warsaw) Latin America: +52 55 9628 7307 (Mexico) United States: Customer Service: 1-800-333-3070 | Global Software Helpdesk: +800 8300 0042 (11-digit global number, local toll charges apply). In the US, 1-800-866-7474. ©2024 Mercer LLC, All Rights Reserved https://www.imercer.com/articleinsights/projected-salary-increase-budgets-holding 5/5 Appendix B Workspan Daily Inflation, Labor Market Drive Merit Pay Increases Inflation, Labor Market Drive Merit Pay Increases for 2024 Workspan Daily December 22, 2023 By Michael J. O'Brien Employee Compensation Key Takeaways Healthy salary increases. U.S. employers forecast raising their total salary budgets between 3.8% and 4.1% for 2024. Influencing factors. Inflation and the labor market’s voluntary turnover rate may be dropping, but organizations are continuing to use compensation to distinguish themselves from competitors. Other benefits to consider. Organizations need to take a total rewards focus to look beyond pay to further evaluate what employees value like healthcare and retirement. Inflationary pressures and concerns about a tight labor market continue to cloud the horizon as a trio of surveys point the way forward on 2024 compensation plans. U.S. employers forecast raising their merit increase budgets by 3.5% and total salary increase budgets by 3.8% on average for 2024, according to Mercer's U.S. Compensation Planning Survey November 2023 edition. WorldatWork’s “2023-24 Salary Budget Survey” of 2,146 participating organizations found U.S. employers are projecting 4.1% pay increase budgets in 2024 and 3.6% merit increases on average. Meanwhile, employers are planning an overall average salary increase of 4.0% for 2024, according to the latest Salary Budget Planning Survey by WTW. The pressures of the labor market, inflation and uncertainties continue to weigh-in for employers as they head into 2024 with their plans for pay increases, said Alicia Scott-Wears, a compensation content director at WorldatWork. Since the early 2010s, it has been typical to see U.S. salary budget increases in the range of 2.8 to 3.2%, Scott-Wears explained, so a salary budget range of 3.8 to 4.1% is a notable elevation — at average, 32% higher than pre-pandemic standard. “Still, a 4% increase is down from 2023, which saw actuals at 4.4%, so it’s a mild pullback, and globally, salary increase budgets are generally stabilizing or pulling back slightly in most cases,” she said. While both inflation and the labor market’s voluntary turnover rate may actually be dropping, organizations are continuing to use compensation as a main driver to distinguish themselves from competitors. “We are seeing healthy salary increases forecasted for 2024,” said Hatti Johansson, research director, reward, data and intelligence, at WTW. “Though economic uncertainty looms, employers are looking to remain competitive for talent, and pay is a key factor.” At the same time, she said, organizations should remember pay levels are difficult to reduce if markets deteriorate. “It’s best to avoid basing decisions that will have long-term implications on their organization on temporary economic conditions.” Trendspotting While pay growth remains strong for most organizations in the upcoming year, it is starting to slow down, according to Lauren Mason, senior principal, career, at Mercer. “We see that practices that had become the norm over the last two years — such as premiums for new hires and out-of-cycle pay increases — are slowing as well,” she said. Companies are becoming more prudent about their compensation spend, she said, as well as focusing on providing market and equity pay adjustments for employees as a result of pay compression or internal equity. The other trend is growth in hourly pay, according to Mercer research. The median internal minimum wage (a company’s lowest wage or starting rate for any position) is now up to $16.70, up from $15.50 in 2022. Across industries, median internal minimum wages vary, with the lowest rates being seen in retail (median of $13.80, which is notably the only industry below $15/hour), and the highest rate of $19.50 in energy. Retail also had the fastest growing internal minimum wage (up from $12.20 last year, an increase of 13%). “It’s a reflection of the need for retail hourly wages to keep pace,” Mason said, “as many employees have transferable skills they can utilize in front-line roles in other higher paying industries such as services, banking or manufacturing.” There were no major shifts in 2023 related to pay for performance strategies, Mason said, as the vast majority of employers continue to indicate that they utilize performance as a key factor for differentiating merit awards. However, one “emerging” area of compensation is skill-based pay, which Mason said can provide many benefits, “such as aligning pay strategies to hot skills and rewarding the attainment of new skills.” Inflation Frustration How much does inflation affect how organizations plan on using merit pay increases in 2024? Inflation certainly adds more pressure on pay increase budgets, said Mason, but employers view cost of labor as the primary factor when setting budgets. And while there is a strong correlation between the economy and salary budgets, there are many factors that play into pay increases, said WTW’s Johansson. “Even as inflation cools, salary increases are — again — above inflation,” she said, “due to a healthy job market and successful business performance in many industries.” These days, when getting pay right is the absolute minimum requirement, said Johansson, organizations also need to continue to supplement pay with non-monetary elements, like workplace flexibility and focusing on the employee experience. “Companies need to take a total rewards focus to look beyond pay to look at what employees value like health care and retirement,” she said. Looking Ahead in 2024 As the labor market and economy continue to stabilize and pay growth gradually moderates, employers should brace themselves for a shift in the compensation landscape next year, said Johansson. “In this environment, it becomes crucial to strategically allocate compensation investments where they are most needed,” she said. “This includes prioritizing faster-moving market segments, such as hourly pay, as well as skills that are in high demand.” It's also essential to provide market and equity adjustments for employees who may have fallen behind. “With pay transparency on the rise, employers will face mounting pressure to not only explain, but also defend employee pay levels relative to the market and peers,” Johansson said. “Navigating these challenges successfully — with tighter budgets — will be key to getting compensation right in 2024.” Additionally, top skills and top performers will be a priority for employers in 2024, said WorldatWork’s Scott-Wears. “Many employers have been challenged to retain top performing talent, so that may factor into allocations too,” she said. “Turnover is reportedly slowing globally, and inflation is easing slightly as well, so thoughtful allocations have the promise of being impactful with employees.” Editor’s Note: Additional Content For more information and resources related to this article see the pages below, which offer quick access to all WorldatWork content on these topics: About the Author Michael J. O'Brien Freelance Contributor at WorldatWork Michael J. O'Brien is a freelance writer for WorldatWork who has been covering the world of business since 2005. Appendix C WTW Survey Article 1/8/24, 2:43 PM U.S. pay raises to remain high 2024 WTW survey finds - WTW “ Though economic uncertainty looms, employers are looking to remain competitive for talent, and pay is a key factor.” Hatti Johannsson | Research Director, Reward, Data and Intelligence, WTW PRESS RELEASE (HTTPS://WWW.WTWCO.COM/EN-US/INSIGHTS/ALL- INSIGHTS#SORT=%40FDATE13762%20DESCENDING&F:@ARTICLEZ45XCONTENTZ45XTYPE= [PRESS%20RELEASE]) U.S. pay raises to remain high in 2024, WTW survey December 7, 2023 Concerns over economic uncertainty not deterring employers from increasing pay ARLINGTON, VA, December 7, 2023 – U.S. employers are planning an overall average salary increase of 4.0% for 2024. That’s according to the latest Salary Budget Planning Survey by WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), a leading global advisory, broking and solutions company. Though down from the actual average increase of 4.4% in 2023, the numbers remain well above the 3.1% salary increase budget in 2021 and years prior. Inflationary pressures (55%) and concerns over a tight labor market (52%) are the primary influencing factors behind salary increase budgets, both cited by over half of employers surveyed. Yet, inflation is slowing down from the highs of recent years, and the labor market is shifting, with voluntary turnover and attrition at 11% overall. While still a common concern, fewer organizations are reporting issues with attraction and retention, down from 60% in 2022 to 48% currently. “We are seeing healthy salary increases forecasted for 2024,” said Hatti Johannsson, research director, Reward, Data and Intelligence, WTW. “Though economic uncertainty looms, employers are looking to remain competitive for talent, and pay is a key factor. At the same time, organizations should remember pay levels are difficult to reduce if markets deteriorate. It’s best to avoid basing decisions that will have long- term implications on their organization on temporary economic conditions.” Still, employers seek to strike a healthy balance within their total rewards packages. Non-monetary actions are a big focus for employers looking to attract and retain. At most organizations, these include more workplace flexibility (63%); broader emphasis on diversity, equity and inclusion (60%); and improving the employee experience (55%). Additionally, most employers have committed to hiring staff in a higher salary range (55%), undertaking compensation reviews of specific employee groups (54%) and raising starting salary ranges (49%), which could also be seen as a reflection of the increased emphasis on pay transparency. https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/12/as-economic-uncertainty-looms-pay-rises-remain-high 1/3 1/8/24, 2:43 PM U.S. pay raises to remain high 2024 WTW survey finds - WTW Organizations also report moving toward greater work flexibility, as over half (55%) of employers offer a choice of remote, onsite or hybrid working, while 31% offer a flexible work schedule. As this trend grows, some companies are changing rewards in line with remote working: 13% of employers have taken action or are planning to change allowances, 10% of employers have or are planning to change benefits, and 11% have or are planning to adjust base pay. “With ongoing uncertainty, especially around pay transparency, we see organizations do better where there is a foundational level of understanding among all employees – on the compensation philosophy, the program design and how decisions about pay are made. Compensation is a sensitive topic and often managers feel uneasy when it comes to talking about pay. Our research shows the most commonly cited barrier to organizations communicating more openly about pay is the fear of employee reactions. We recommend training for managers on their role, how the compensation program works, and how to communicate it effectively. Improving the pay conversation goes a long way in improving the overall employee experience and further stabilizing the workforce,” said Sara Vallas, senior director, Employee Experience, WTW. About the survey The Salary Budget Planning Report is compiled by WTW’s Reward Data Intelligence practice. The survey was conducted in December 2023. Over 33,000 responses were received from companies covering over 150 countries worldwide. About WTW At WTW (NASDAQ: WTW), we provide data-driven, insight-led solutions in the areas of people, risk and capital. Leveraging the global view and local expertise of our colleagues serving 140 countries and markets, we help organizations sharpen their strategy, enhance organizational resilience, motivate their workforce and maximize performance. Working shoulder to shoulder with our clients, we uncover opportunities for sustainable success—and provide perspective that moves you. Media contacts Ileana Feoli Public Relations, Health Wealth & Career, North America Email (mailto:ileana.feoli@wtwco.com) +1 212 309 5504 (tel:+1 212 309 5504) Stacy Bronstein Email (mailto:stacy.bronstein@wtwco.com) Related products PRODUCT Salary Surveys Compete for and keep the talent you need with world-class salary surveys and salary benchmarking data across industries, countries and job levels. Getting compensation right is hard. We make it easy. Product Information (https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/solutions/products/salary-surveys) https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/12/as-economic-uncertainty-looms-pay-rises-remain-high 2/3 “ Improving the pay conversation goes a long way in improving the overall employee experience and further stabilizing the workforce.” Sara Vallas | Senior Director, Employee Experience, WTW 1/8/24, 2:43 PM U.S. pay raises to remain high 2024 WTW survey finds - WTW PRODUCT Global salary and employee benefits market practice reports Make informed workforce decisions with data from our extensive library of market practice reports, no participation required. Product Information (https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/solutions/products/global-salary-and-employee-benefits-market-practice-reports) Related insights See all insights (/en-us/insights/all-insights) Copyright © 2023 WTW. All rights reserved. https://www.wtwco.com/en-us/news/2023/12/as-economic-uncertainty-looms-pay-rises-remain-high 3/3 Appendix D Utah DWS Blog Article 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer Job Search (/jobseeker/index.html)Employers (/employer/index.html)Assistance (/assistance/index.html) The Utah Job Demand Buffer (/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah- job-demand-buffer) 26. December 2023 By Gwen Kervin Since March of 2022, the Federal Reserve has been raising interest rates in an attempt to cool inflation and slow the economy. However, so far, the effect on Utah’s labor market has been minimal. Constricted labor markets following the COVID pandemic caused employers to have a hard time filling open positions. Because employers struggled to find workers, a large gap developed in unmet labor demand. This elevated wages, which in turn lured marginal workers into the labor force, helping to fill some of the vacancies. While Utah continues to turn in job growth numbers, growth rates have come down from the highs experienced in 2021 and 2022, resulting in a reduction in the unmet labor gap. Because of this, any additional Fed rate moves could have a more immediate influence on the Utah labor market going forward. To understand the magnitude of the job buffer created by unmet Utah labor demand, it is helpful to look at the ratio of job openings to unemployed workers. The correlation between the two provides a proxy for how much labor is or isn’t available to fill job vacancies. In weak economies, there can be more idled workers than the volume of job postings. Conversely, in strong economies, there are more job postings than available workers. A balance between the two would be an economy with one available worker per job advertisement. However, when the volume of job openings noticeably exceeds the measure of available labor (the unemployed), it can serve as a signal that the labor supply internally is not sizable enough to support job growth. For example, in the early part of 2022, Utah’s ratio increased to 3.5. This implies that for every 350 job postings, there are only 100 available unemployed Utah laborers to fill the positions. If there are not enough workers internally to support growth, then attracting labor from outside the state is the needed remedy. Fortunately, Utah has been able to do just that as the state’s job growth remained at or above average through 2022 into the early part of 2023. However, as 2023 has progressed, the high ratio of job postings to workers has been moderating. Historically, Utah’s vibrant economy has kept this ratio above that of the United States. In fact, the only time that it approached levels near those in the nation was during and immediately following recessions. https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 1/6 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer Prior to the pandemic, this ratio was well above that of the United States, but fell closer to levels seen in the rest of the nation in response to the economic pullback tied to COVID-era restrictions. However, soon after, the openings-to-unemployment ratio rose sharply, reaching 3.5 in January 2022. Although the openings-to-unemployment ratio is still at historically elevated levels, indicating elevated labor demand, it is clearly coming down. In July 2023, Utah’s job-openings-to-unemployment ratio was at 2.1, which is still noticeably higher than the U.S. rate of 1.5. Job openings can come about either because an employer needs to fill an existing position that has become vacant, or because the employer has decided to create a new position. When employees quit their jobs to move to a new one, it creates churn in the labor market, but does not represent growth in jobs. The number of people quitting their jobs can be used to get an idea of what portion of overall job openings can be attributed to churn versus job growth. In the United States, the number of people quitting their jobs in the pandemic’s aftermath increased and stayed elevated. This increase prompted a new catchphrase — The Great Resignation. It is only recently that U.S. quits have returned to levels more in line with pre- pandemic activity. Correspondingly, U.S. job openings also increased during the same period, indicating that a large portion of the overall job openings were due to churn rather than new, job-growth positions. https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 2/6 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer A different picture emerges when looking at quits and job openings in Utah. The level of job openings in Utah increased several years before the pandemic hit. Increased quits were a part of this increase, moving higher at the end of 2017 and reaching a pre-pandemic high in the beginning of 2019. Nationally, churn and job growth were mostly flat before the pandemic, with largely little story to tell. Then the pandemic hit and created an instant recession. Recovery began shortly thereafter. Job openings went high in both the nation and Utah in the recovery period. Quits continued to remain low in Utah. On the other hand, quits across the United States began to rise. This largely says that in Utah the post-pandemic job openings increase was fueled more by job growth. Conversely, the national job openings seem fueled more by an overall shortage of labor which created a noticeable amount of labor turnover. Nationally, people were churning in search of better jobs and wages. Recent job growth numbers point to a loosening in Utah’s labor market. Monthly job growth estimates have come down from the highs seen in 2021 and 2022. It was in negative territory for most of 2020, but by 2021, it turned positive, with an average growth rate of 5.0%. By 2022, Utah’s average job growth rate was 4.2%, still well above historic highs. For comparison, from January 1991 through October 2023, Utah had a 2.7% average job growth rate, which is more in line with the growth rates seen in 2023. Year to date, the state’s average job growth rate is 2.6%. Utah’s tight labor market over the past several years has induced employers to raise wages to attract new workers, and it appears to have worked. Utah’s labor force participation rate, which accounts for those over the age of 16 who are either working or looking for work, has risen in the past year to 69.7% in September 2023. This is largely a full percentage-point increase in just the past half year. Given the population’s age distribution in Utah, a labor force participation rate close to 68.5% would point to a solidly employed labor force. A year ago, in September 2022, the labor force participation rate was at 68.8%. https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 3/6 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer Wages driven higher by the state’s tight labor market have induced marginal workers who typically remain on the sidelines to enter the labor market. Over the past year, groups that have historically seen lower labor force participation rates, including teenagers, older workers, and women with school age children, have been entering the workforce. Younger workers in Utah, between the ages of 16 and 19, have increased their labor force participation rates by 4.0 percentage points, while those over the age of 65 have increased their participation by 1.4 points. By comparison, teens in the U.S. have seen a decline in their participation rates. Older U.S. workers have increased their rates only slightly over the last year, and have yet to recover their participation rates from pre-pandemic levels. Working- age women in Utah, between the ages of 25 and 44, who might have stayed out of the labor force due to childcare needs, have increased their participation rates by 4.1 percentage points compared to U.S. women, who increased their participation rates by only 0.7 points. An overall tighter local labor market in Utah and a faster increase in average hourly earnings over the past year have encouraged higher labor force participation rates among these marginal workers in Utah than in the rest of the United States. While marginal workers have helped to fill vacancies, recent job posting data indicates that employers are scaling back their demand for labor. While several of the industrial sector’s job postings remain aggressive in Utah overall, total job postings are down 11.3% from September 2022 to August 2023. Data from Lightcast, a job posting aggregator, indicates that unique online job postings over the last year have declined the most in the professional, scientific and technical services, and administrative support sectors. The educational services and transportation and warehousing industries also saw significant declines in the number of online job postings. Some of these decreases can be attributed to a natural pause in job postings following a dramatic increase in hiring as employers sought to rehire lost workers following the COVID pandemic. For example, both the educational services and professional, scientific and technical services sectors, which have seen a decline in online job postings, saw some of the largest increases in employment from the fourth quarter of 2020 to the first quarter of 2023. https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 4/6 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer SearchEnter search term Higher wages and spending power have kept demand for services elevated, leading to an increase in job postings in accommodation and food services and other services, which includes repair, maintenance, and personal services. The state’s growing population and vibrant economy continue to support the construction sector, which saw a 3.9% increase in job postings over the past year. Finally, the health and social assistance sector, which had a difficult time attracting labor post COVID and will only grow as the population ages, has seen an increase in job postings as well. Tight labor markets in Utah have driven wages higher, luring marginal workers into the labor force, but there is evidence that Federal Reserve rate hikes have begun to loosen labor markets. The job buffer is declining, job postings are down, and job growth numbers have lowered to a more normalized level. However, there is still a healthy demand for workers in the accommodation and food services, construction, and health and social assistance sectors. Going forward, with the jobs gap reduced, the actions of the Fed are likely to have a more immediate impact on labor markets. The effects will have a stronger impact on broader U.S. labor markets, which have a smaller buffer and higher unemployment rates. However, higher interest rates could ultimately slow the Utah economy and soften labor demand going forward. Log in (/blog/Account/login.aspx) Home Utah Dept. of Workforce Services Blog (/blog/) Recent Posts New Adoption Tax Credit Available for 2023 Taxes (/blog/post/2024/01/04/new-adoption-tax-credit-available-for-2023-taxes) The Utah Job Demand Buffer (/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer) Utah's Employment Summary: November 2023 (/blog/post/2023/12/22/utah-s-employment-summary-november-2023) Growing Apprenticeship Opportunities in Utah (/blog/post/2023/11/28/growing-apprenticeship-opportunities-in-utah) Higher Education’s Role in Utah’s Workforce (/blog/post/2023/11/20/higher-education-s-role-in-utah-s-workforce) Utah's Employment Summary: October 2023 (/blog/post/2023/11/17/utah-s-employment-summary-october-2023) Manufacturing Resilience: Exploring Advanced Manufacturing in Utah (/blog/post/2023/10/23/manufacturing-resilience-exploring- advanced-manufacturing-in-utah) Utah's Employment Summary: September 2023 (/blog/post/2023/10/20/utah-s-employment-summary-september-2023) Labor Market Data (/blog/post/2023/10/11/labor-market-data) https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 5/6 1/9/24, 10:02 AM The Utah Job Demand Buffer FindZip Code or City Select Language Serving Utah's veterans (/blog/post/2023/09/28/serving-utah-s-veterans) Categories Blog (126) (/blog/category/Blog) Intergenerational Poverty (10) (/blog/category/Intergenerational-Poverty) Department (71) (/blog/category/Department) Refugee Office (14) (/blog/category/Refugee-Office) Service Providers (12) (/blog/category/Service-Providers) Youth (8) (/blog/category/Youth) Employers (67) (/blog/category/Employers) Job Seekers (59) (/blog/category/Job-Seekers) Explore Careers (14) (/blog/category/Explore-Careers) Job Preparation (14) (/blog/category/Job-Preparation) Training Resources (26) (/blog/category/Training-Resources) Veterans (10) (/blog/category/Veterans) Wages & Income (71) (/blog/category/Wages-Income) Labor Market (161) (/blog/category/Labor-Market) Temporary Assistance (19) (/blog/category/Temporary-Assistance) Utah State Office of Rehabilitation (33) (/blog/category/Utah-State-Office-of-Rehabilitation) Workforce Research and Analysis (71) (/blog/category/Workforce-Research-and-Analysis) Find a Workforce Services Location Translate this Page Powered by Translate (https://translate.google.com) Follow Us (/blog) (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCWFTWwPTm (https://www.linkedin.com/company/department- of-workforce-services) (https://twitter.com/JobsUT) (https://www.facebook.com/Utah.DWS) (https://www.instagram.com/jobsut/) Follow us on our Socials (https://jobs.utah.gov/followus.html Feedback (/jsp/feedback/) | Equal Opportunity (/department/contact/eo.html) | Contact Us (/department/contact/index.html) | Utah.gov Home (http://www.utah.gov) | Terms of Use (http://www.utah.gov/disclaimer.html) | Privacy Policy (http://www.utah.gov/privacypolicy.html) | Accessibility Policy (http://www.utah.gov/accessibility.html) © 2024 State of Utah A proud partner of the network https://jobs.utah.gov/blog/post/2023/12/26/the-utah-job-demand-buffer#continue 6/6 Appendix E City Resolution No. 20 - 2023 RESOLUTION NO. 20 OF 2023 Declaring Support for Top-of-Market Wages for Firefighters and Police Officers Employed by Salt Lake City Corporation WHEREAS, Salt Lake City is the capital city of the State of Utah, with growing public safety needs and service requirements. WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation (the "City") is committed to recruiting and retaining the highest skilled and trained firefighters and police officers to serve Salt Lake City's diverse and growing population. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution dated March 22, 2011 ("Collective Bargaining Resolution"), the City recognizes and engages in collective bargaining with the International Association of Firefighters Local 81, representing eligible employees ("IAFF") and the Salt Lake Police Association, representing eligible employees ("SLPA"). WHEREAS, pursuant to the Collective Bargaining Resolution, the City periodically negotiates the wages for employees represented by the IAFF and SLPA. WHEREAS, the Collective Bargaining Resolution establishes a process for negotiating wages for IAFF- and SLPA-represented employees, and any negotiated wages are presented to the City Council as part of the Mayor's annual budget. WHEREAS, in the fiscal year 2021, 2022 and fiscal year 2023 budgets, the City Council prioritized ensuring that the City's firefighters and police officers were paid wages commensurate with or close to top of the market wages paid by public entities for such occupations in the State of Utah. WHEREAS, the City Council desires to express the policy objective that for fiscal year 2024 and for future fiscal years, the City's firefighters and police officers be paid wages commensurate with or close to top of the market wages paid by public entities for such occupations in the State of Utah. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, the following: 1.In recognition of the unique challenges associated with being employed as a firefighter or police officer, especially in the capital city of the State of Utah, the Salt Lake City Council's policy objective is to ensure that the City's firefighters and police officers are paid wages commensurate with or close to top of the market wages paid by public entities for such occupations in the State of Utah, especially among the State's largest public safety agencies. 2.This Resolution shall be effective immediately upon passage. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this 13th day of June, 2023. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL Darin Mano, Chair ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:Approved as to form: Salt Lake City Attorney's Office Kath eNsi 3 12:55 MDT) Cindy Lou Trishman, City Recorder Katherine Lewis, City Attorney Jun 17, 2023 Appendix F Elected Officials, Department Directors & Other Key City Leaders The table below illustrates the normalized median wage of all responding entities for each job as surveyed by the Salt Lake City HR Department. Following best practices, a minimum of five entities were required to report on the composite of salary data to be used for comparison. 1: Compared against Full-Time ONLY Mayors 2: Compared against Part-Time ONLY City Council Members 3: Compared against select group of cities 4: Compared against additional cities beyond the general participant list 5: Compared against ACI-NA salary survey - Published 2022 Participant List City and County of Denver City of Boise City of Fresno City of Las Cruces City of Oakland City of Provo City of Seattle Des Moines Water Works City of Arvada City of Boulder City of Green Bay City of Las Vegas City of Oklahoma City of Reno City of Surprise Metro Nashville Government City of Baton Rouge City of Des Moines City of Kent City of Memphis City of Omaha City of Sacramento City of Tampa Pittsburgh Water & Sewer Authority City of Bellevue City of Everett City of Knoxville City of New Orleans City of Phoenix City of Salem City of Tempe West Valley City Job Code Job Title Number of Entities Average Years in Position Normalized Median 002626 911 DISPATCH DIRECTOR 14 4.5 $134,993 006440 BUILDING OFFICIAL 21 5.3 $139,383 002470 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 11 4.9 $175,120 002091 CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 25 6.0 $198,053 002475 CHIEF HUMAN RESOURCES OFFICER 26 4.1 $182,089 001578 CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER 23 7.3 $186,879 002514 CHIEF INNOVATION OFFICER 7 2.0 $164,699 007010 CHIEF OF POLICE 26 3.7 $219,565 000249 CHIEF OF STAFF 19 2.9 $163,795 000504 CHIEF PROCUREMENT OFFICER 13 4.7 $129,276 001553 CITY ATTORNEY 29 5.0 $220,515 002193 CITY BUDGET DIRECTOR 23 4.7 $140,540 000020 CITY COUNCIL MEMBER2 11 4.4 $23,964 004031 CITY ENGINEER 18 2.5 $163,068 000314 CITY RECORDER 16 3.2 $133,335 002342 CITY TREASURER 17 7.6 $151,200 000897 COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR 22 5.2 $152,710 002327 COMPLIANCE DIVISION DIRECTOR 7 1.9 $121,094 002511 DIRECTOR - REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 4 Insufficient Data Insufficient Data 002060 DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 17 3.9 $177,645 001992 DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 18 2.7 $177,045 006401 DIRECTOR OF HOUSING & NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT 19 3.5 $136,789 002581 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC LANDS 10 3.5 $170,790 000579 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC SERVICES 16 5.6 $201,366 001552 DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC UTILITIES4 22 4.9 $189,064 002899 DIRECTOR OF TRANSPORTATION (ENGINEER)10 2.6 $199,043 000021 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR - CITY COUNCIL OFFICE 10 7.2 $155,533 001551 EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF AIRPORTS5 16 N/A $349,600 002176 FACILITIES DIVISION DIRECTOR 22 5.9 $136,172 008010 FIRE CHIEF 25 4.9 $210,259 002177 FLEET MANAGEMENT DIVISION DIRECTOR 23 5.0 $124,614 002178 GOLF DIVISION DIRECTOR 10 8.1 $107,270 000539 JUSTICE COURTS ADMINISTRATOR 16 4.4 $136,659 000001 MAYOR1 15 5.6 $161,981 002405 PARKS DIVISION DIRECTOR 22 4.4 $143,713 004165 PLANNING DIRECTOR 21 4.1 $167,448 000002 SENIOR ADVISOR 11 3.3 $133,286 002036 SUSTAINABILITY / ENVIRONMENT DIRECTOR3 12 3.7 $149,165 002186 WASTE & RECYLCING DIVISION DIRECTOR3 12 3.7 $139,306 002326 YOUTH & FAMILY DIVISION DIRECTOR 9 6.6 $107,432 32# of 2023 Participants Prepared for and on behalf of the Committee by: Salt Lake City - Human Resources Department 349 South 200 East, Suite 500 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-5464 (801) 535-7900 Deb Alexander, Chief Human Resources Officer David Salazar, Compensation Manager Michael Jenson, Senior Compensation Analyst ATTACHMENT 3 - May 7, 2024 Vacancies by Department Report (snapshot in time) Compensation Grade Row Labels 02110 POLICE 0007609 Police Officer (Unfilled) 00308102 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0031802 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/14/2024) 0040204 Records Shift Supervisor (Unfilled) 0045601 Police Officer (Unfilled) 0045701 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0048101 Police Officer (Unfilled) 0049003 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0054301 Police Officer (Unfilled) 0060101 Police Officer (Unfilled) 0060601 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0061101 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0061203 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0062701 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0063304 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0065001 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0066203 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0069904 Accountant III (Unfilled) 0237703 Police Officer (Unfilled) 0240001 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0241403 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0268902 Office Facilitator II - Police Pawn Program (Position Fill:05/12/2024) 0270001 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0373001 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0380002 Police Officer (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0380801 Police Officer (Unfilled) 0384303 Police Officer (Unfilled) 0389401 Police Officer (Unfilled) 04296 Social Service Worker / Licensed Substance Use Disorder Counselor (Unfilled) 04398 Victim Advocate (Unfilled) 04521 Police Officer (Unfilled) 04529 Police Officer (Position Fill:07/09/2024) 04530 Police Officer (Unfilled) 04532 Police Officer (Unfilled) 04637 Licesed Clinical Social Worker (Unfilled) 04643 Social Work Manager (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 04648 Social Service Worker / Licens (Unfilled) 100357 Police Officer (Unfilled) 100364 Community Response Specialist II (Unfilled) 9009001 Victim Advocate (Unfilled) U0011 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0012 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0013 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0014 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0015 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0016 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0017 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0018 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0019 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0020 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0021 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0022 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0023 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0024 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0025 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0026 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0027 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0028 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0029 Police Officer (Unfilled) U0030 Police Officer (Unfilled) 03000 PUBLIC SERVICES 0072806 Engineer IV (May Underfill) (Unfilled) 0083101 Traffic Maintenance Operator II (Unfilled) 0083506 Traffic Maintenance Operator II (May Underfill) (Unfilled) 0085202 Asphalt Equipment Operator II (May Underfill to Level I) (Unfilled) 0087901 Senior Asphalt Equipment Operator (Unfilled) 0088004 Asphalt Equipment Operator II (Unfilled) 0094204 Asphalt Equipment Operator I (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0094305 Asphalt Equip Operator II (Unfilled) 01181 Maintenance Specialist II-Facilities (May be Underfilled) (Unfilled) 0127104 Fleet Mechanic (Unfilled) 0127902 Fleet Mechanic (Unfilled) 0244504 Asphalt Equip Operator II (Unfilled) 0301502 Traffic Signal Technician II (May Underfill) (Unfilled) 04136 Asphalt Equip Operator II (Unfilled) 04153 Financial Analyst III (May Underfill) (Unfilled) 04156 Fleet Maintenance Coordinator (Unfilled) 04381 Asphalt Equip Operator II (Unfilled) 04382 Asphalt Equip Operator II (Unfilled) 04387 GIS Technician I (Unfilled) 04706 Clean-up Equipment Operator II (May Underfill) (Unfilled) 04851 Senior Engineering Construction Program/Projects Manager (Unfilled) 100367 Mason Apprentice - Maintenance Specialist I (Unfilled) 100374 Office Technician II (May Underfill to Level I) (Unfilled) 100500 Fleet Mechanic (Unfilled) 04000 PUBLIC LANDS 0106402 Assistant Golf Course Superintendent - Mountain Dell Golf Course (Unfilled) 0107102 Florist II (Unfilled) 0112101 Cemetery Equipment Operator (Unfilled) 0113903 Sprinkler Irrigation Technician III (Unfilled) 0114401 Parks Maintenance Technician II (May Underfill to Level I) (Unfilled) 0231903 District Supervisor (Unfilled) 0233301 Assistant Golf Professional - Mountain Dell Golf Course (Position Fill:05/12/2024) 02673 Parks Maintenance Technician II (Unfilled) 0309102 Cemetery Equipment Operator (Unfilled) 0380202 Head Golf Professional - Forest Dale Golf Course (Unfilled) 04493 Arborist II (May Be Underfilled to Arborist I) (Unfilled) 04691 Park Ranger (Unfilled) 04692 Park Ranger (Position Fill:05/20/2024) 04696 Park Ranger (Unfilled) 04703 Park Ranger Lead (Unfilled) 04713 Service Coordination Arborist (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 100380 Central Control Irrigation Specialist (Unfilled) 100382 General Maintenance Worker III (Unfilled) 100386 Special Projects Assistant (Unfilled) 710191H Parks Maintenance Technician II (Unfilled) 05000 JUSTICE COURTS 0308202 Justice Court Supervisor (Unfilled) 06000 COMMUNITY & NEIGHBORHOODS 0094901 Project Manager Housing (Unfilled) 0096503 Policy Director (Unfilled) 0099902 Community Development Grant Specialist (Unfilled) 0136801 Real Property Agent (Unfilled) 0225102 Housing Rehab Specialist II Un (Unfilled) 0261204 Building Inspector III (Unfilled) 0266204 Code Enforcement Officer III (May be under filled) (Unfilled) 0278303 Building Inspector III (Unfilled) 0380103 Principal Planner (Position Fill:06/03/2024) 0423501 Plans Examiner III (May be under filled) (Unfilled) 04658 Associate Planner (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 04740 Civil Enforcement Officer II (Unfilled) 100288 Project Assistant (Unfilled) 100347 Sr. Community Program Manager (Unfilled) 100348 Sr. Community Program Manager (Unfilled) 100349 Community Program Manager (Unfilled) 100350 Community Program Manager (Unfilled) 100495 Housing Stability VISTA Member (Unfilled) 90120 Community Development Grant Su (Unfilled) 90122 Community Development Grant Sp (Unfilled) 08000 MAYOR 910040 Know Your Neighbor Volunteer Coordinator - Mayor's Office (Unfilled) 11200 FINANCE 0135402 Financial Analyst III ( May underfill at a level II or I) (Unfilled) 100449 SLC Contingent Worker (Unfilled) 100502 Finance Grant Analyst (Unfilled) 910006 Grant Administrator (Unfilled) 11400 PUBLIC UTILITIES 0140602 Customer Services Mgr Pub. Uti (Unfilled) 0141706 Accountant IV (Possible under fill to a II or III) (Unfilled) 0141806 Accountant III (Unfilled) 0142902 Office Technician II (Unfilled) 0143604 Engineering Tech Iv Union (Unfilled) 0143803 Customer Service Collector / Investigator Utilities Specialist (Unfilled) 0146801 Engineering Technician V (Unfilled) 0147004 Engineer VII (Unfilled) 0147703 Engineering Tech III Union (Unfilled) 0148002 Eng Contracts Coor Public Util (Unfilled) 0148202 Utilities Development Review Specialist (Unfilled) 01486 Water Treatment Process Assistant Manager (Unfilled) 0152202 L&C Cross Conn Control Manager (Unfilled) 0153802 Wastewater Plant HVAC Technician II (may underfill to a I) (Unfilled) 0154001 Maintenance Electrician III (Unfilled) 01573 Senior Facilities Building Maintenance Worker (Unfilled) 0158707 Wrf Op II (Unfilled) 0159207 Wrf Op I (Unfilled) 0159504 Water Reclamation Facility Operator IV (Unfilled) 0159704 Wrf Op I (Unfilled) 0161107 Wastewater Plant Maintenance Operator IV (may underfill as a III, II, or I) (Unfilled) 0164002 Water Distribution System Operator I (Unfilled) 0166004 Watershed Ranger (Position Fill:05/12/2024) 0166902 Water System Maintenance Op II (Unfilled) 0167607 Water Distribution System Operator I (Unfilled) 0167907 Water System Maintenance Op II (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0169402 Water System Maintenance Op II (Unfilled) 0169802 Senior Water System Maintenance Operator (Unfilled) 0170401 Water System Maint Oper I (Unfilled) 0170501 Water System Maint Oper I (Unfilled) 0171203 Tech Systems Analyst IV (Unfilled) 0171314 Water Meter Reader II (Unfilled) 0172401 Water System Maint Oper I (Unfilled) 0399005 Wastewater Lift Station Worker (Unfilled) 04283 Ww Lift Station Lead Worker (Unfilled) 04330 Engineering Tech III Union (Unfilled) 04335 Water System Maintenance Op II (Unfilled) 04336 Water System Maint Oper I (Unfilled) 04403 Engineering Technician II (May be under filled) (Position Fill:05/26/2024) 04405 Engineering Tech III Union (Unfilled) 04410 Engineer Iv (Unfilled) 04415 Senior Utilities Representative - Office/Technical (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 04420 Office Technician II (Unfilled) 04600 AdministratIVe Sec I Union (Unfilled) 04623 Wastewater Lift Station Lead Worker (Unfilled) 04676 Water Conservatation Program Mgr (Unfilled) 04679 PU Sustainability Manager (Unfilled) 04793 Accountant III (Unfilled) 04854 Engineering Technician V (Unfilled) 100438 ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN IV (Unfilled) 100440 ENGINEER IV (Unfilled) 100441 ENGINEER IV (Unfilled) 100515 Safety Inspector (Unfilled) 100516 Warehouse Manager (Unfilled) 100517 Water Maintenance Manager (Unfilled) 100518 Project Coordinator (Unfilled) 100519 Talent Management Coordinator (Unfilled) 12030 FIRE 01818 Captain-Fire-83 (Position Fill:05/12/2024) 0191504 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) 0192302 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) 0386304 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) 100394 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) 100493 Medical Response Paramedic (Unfilled) 100494 Medical Response Paramedic (Unfilled) U0001 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) U0002 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) U0003 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) U0004 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) U0005 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) U0006 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) U0007 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) U0008 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) U0009 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) U0010 Firefighter EMT (Unfilled) 13000 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 0363503 Economic Development Office Manager (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 04743 Economic Development Office Manager (Unfilled) 910005 Econ Develop Project Manager (Unfilled) 14010 911 BUREAU 0177804 911 Disp. Communications Super (Unfilled) 0210206 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 0212005 911 Comm Bur Deputy Director (Unfilled) 0213002 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 0213202 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 0214401 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 0214603 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 0253303 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 0298108 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 0406801 911 Disp. Communications Super (Unfilled) 0407301 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 0422401 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 0422501 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 04288 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 04502 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 04543 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) U0032 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) U0033 Public Safety Dispatcher (Unfilled) 15010 ATTORNEY 0216503 Senior City Attorney - Litigation (Unfilled) 100287 Victim Volunteer (Unfilled) 100472 Special Project Analyst - Legislative Affairs (Unfilled) M0002 Associate City Prosecutor (Unfilled) 16000 HUMAN RESOURCES 04748 Senior Human Resources Technician (Unfilled) 04798 Senior Recruiter (May Underfill) (Unfilled) 19000 CITY COUNCIL 0217802 Op Mng & Mentor-City Council (Unfilled) 100352 Senior Policy Analyst (Unfilled) 100353 Constituent Liaison / Public Policy Analyst (Unfilled) 100354 Public Engagement / Communication Specialist (Unfilled) 54000 AIRPORT 0001001 Engineer Tech III (Unfilled) 0002801 Airfield Maintenance Specialist III (Unfilled) 0007901 Project Coord. III Airport-97 (Unfilled) 0011104 Airport Airfield Ops Spec (Unfilled) 0016401 Airport Contruction Manager (Unfilled) 0017001 Architectural Assoc IV Union (Unfilled) 0017105 Office Facilitator II Non Unio (Unfilled) 0018502 Aviation Services Manager (Unfilled) 0018702 Airport Lighting & Sign Technician (Unfilled) 0020201 Assistant Director, Construction Management (Unfilled) 0020302 Assistant Director, Project Delivery (Unfilled) 0020701 AP Eng Records Prog Spec Union (Unfilled) 0021403 Fleet Mechanic (Unfilled) 0023501 Airport Maintenance Electrician III (Unfilled) 00245 Instrumentation & Controls Technician IV (Unfilled) 0026602 Airport Operations Specialist – Terminal/Landside I (Unfilled) 0027705 Information Technology Support Manager (Unfilled) 0219704 Software Support Administrator II (Unfilled) 0230701 Project Coordinator II Airport (Unfilled) 0235002 Engineering Technician V (Unfilled) 0244706 Engineering Technician V (Unfilled) 0245601 Facilities Maint. Coordinator (Unfilled) 0248705 Network Systems Engineer II (Unfilled) 0254704 Air Environ Sustain Coord (Unfilled) 0259704 Airfield Maintenance Electrician (Unfilled) 0279102 Airport Operations Specialist - Terminal/Landside I (Unfilled) 0299802 Airport Architect (Unfilled) 0300803 Engineering Tech Iv Union (Unfilled) 0306806 Net Sup Adm III (Unfilled) 0306906 Network Support Administrator II (may underfill to an Admin I) (Unfilled) 0368408 Engineering Construction Prog (Unfilled) 0375001 Airport Airfield Operations Specialist (Unfilled) 04468 Facilities Maint. Coordinator (Unfilled) 04483 Net Sup Adm II (Unfilled) 04498 Assistant Manager – Air Service & Business Development (Unfilled) 04587 Airfield Maintenance Specialist III (Unfilled) 04593 Airfield Maintenance Specialist III (Unfilled) 04763 Network Systems Engineer II (Unfilled) 04805 HVAC Tech II (Unfilled) 04811 AIRFIELD MAINT ELECTRICIAN (Unfilled) 04825 Airport Operations Specialist—Terminal/Landside III (Unfilled) 04827 Airport Operations Specialist - Terminal/Landside II (Unfilled) 100420 General Maintenance Worker III (Unfilled) 100421 General Maintenance Worker III (Unfilled) 100422 HVAC Technician II (Unfilled) 100427 CMMS / Utilities Administrator (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 100428 Cybersecurity Engineering Manager (Unfilled) 100429 Technical Systems Analyst I (Unfilled) 100479 Energy/Utilities Management Coordinator (Unfilled) 57000 SUSTAINABILITY 0092301 Waste & Recycling Equip Op II (Unfilled) 04115 Waste & Recycling Education Specialist I (Unfilled) 04343 Waste & Recycling Equipment Operator II (Unfilled) 65000 INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SERVICES 0102309 Public Affairs Manager (Unfilled) 0120007 Network Support Adm III ( May underfill at a level II or I) (Position Fill:05/13/2024) 0302007 Network Support Admin II (May underfill at a level I) (Unfilled) 04755 Public Affairs Coordinator II ( May underfill at level I) (Unfilled) 04860 IT Support Lead (Unfilled) 710313H Office Technician II (Unfilled) 92010 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 0227005 Gallivan Center Director (Unfilled) 0243106 Office Technician II (Unfilled) 0363207 Senior Project Manager – Redevelopment Agency (Unfilled) 04051 General Maintenance Worker III (May be under filled) (Unfilled) 100488 Project Manager - Redevelopment Agency (Unfilled) 100489 Senior Project Manager – Redevelopment Agency (Unfilled) Ma y o r ’ s R e c o m m e n d e d C o m p e n s a t i o n & B e n e f i t s B u d g e t f o r F Y 2 4 -25 BB 20 2 4 S a l a r y B u d g e t F o r e c a s t Ma y o r ’ s R e c o m m e n d e d C o m p e n s a t i o n & B e n e f i t s B u d g e t f o r F Y 2 4 -25 BB FY 2 5 M a r k e t -ba s e d P a y A d j u s t m e n t s BB FY 2 5 M a r k e t -ba s e d A d j u s t m e n t s – Sa m p l e o f t a r g e t e d j o b t i t l e s Jo b F a m i l y Jo b P r o f i l e Job F a m i l y Jo b P r o f i l e Cr i m e S c e n e S u p e r v i s o r A i r p o r t P r i n c i p a l P l a n n e r Cr i m e S c e n e T e c h n i c i a n I A i r p o r t S e n i o r P l a n n e r Cr i m e S c e n e T e c h n i c i a n I I A s s o c i a t e P l a n n e r Se n i o r C r i m e S c e n e T e c h n i c i a n B i c y c l e P e d e s t r i a n C o o r d i n a t o r De p u t y P l a n n i n g D i r e c t o r Cy b e r s e c u r i t y E n g i n e e r I P l a n n i n g D i r e c t o r Cy b e r s e c u r i t y E n g i n e e r I I P l a n n i n g M a n a g e r Cy b e r s e c u r i t y E n g i n e e r I I I P l a n n i n g P r o g r a m s S u p e r v i s o r Cy b e r s e c u r i t y E n g i n e e r i n g M a n a g e r P r i n c i p a l P l a n n e r P u b l i c L a n d s P l a n n e r Ai r p o r t A r c h i t e c t S e n i o r P l a n n e r - C o m m u n i t y & N e i g h b o r h o o d s Ai r p o r t C o n s t r u c t i o n M a n a g e r S e n i o r T r a n s p o r t a t i o n P o l i c y A n a l y s t Ai r p o r t S e n i o r A r c h i t e c t P r o j e c t M a n a g e r Tr a n s i t P r o g r a m M a n a g e r As s o c i a t e L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t I I Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n e r I Ci t y A r c h i t e c t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n e r I I La n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t I I I Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n e r I I I Li c e n s e d A r c h i t e c t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n e r I V Se n i o r A r c h i t e c t Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n S e c t i o n M a n a g e r Se n i o r L a n d s c a p e A r c h i t e c t Ur b a n D e s i g n e r Zo n i n g A d m i n i s t r a t o r Pa r a l e g a l Pa r a l e g a l Cl o u d D a t a E n g i n e e r De v e l o p m e n t R e v i e w P l a n n e r I Da t a S c i e n t i s t De v e l o p m e n t R e v i e w P l a n n e r I I P r i n c i p a l S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e r De v e l o p m e n t R e v i e w S u p e r v i s o r S e n i o r S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e r Pl a n s E x a m i n e r I S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e r I Pl a n s E x a m i n e r I I S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e r I I Pl a n s E x a m i n e r I I I S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e r I I I Se n i o r D e v e l o p m e n t R e v i e w P l a n n e r S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e r T e a m L e a d Se n i o r P l a n s E x a m i n e r S o f t w a r e E n g i n e e r i n g T e a m M a n a g e r Ut i l i t i e s D e v e l o p m e n t R e v i e w C o o r d i n a t o r Ut i l i t i e s D e v e l o p m e n t R e v i e w S p e c i a l i s t Ut i l i t i e s P l a n n e r Ut i l i t i e s P l a n n e r & D e v e l o p m e n t C o o r d i n a t o r So f t w a r e E n g i n e e r I I I Cr i m e S c e n e T e c h n i c i a n I I Cy b e r s e c u r i t y E n g i n e e r I I Pl a n s E x a m i n e r I Pr i n c i p a l P l a n n e r Li c e n s e d A r c h i t e c t BB Co m p e n s a t i o n P l a n f o r N o n -Re p r e s e n t e d E m p l o y e e s – Sh i f t D i f f e r e n t i a l 1 Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B u d g e t Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r , C H R O Or g a n i z a t i o n a l Ch a r t 2 K e y Ch a n g e s / I n s i g h t s 3 Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r , C H R O 1 PE H P R e n e w a l 2 HS A C i t y S h a r e 3 UR S M i d t o w n C l i n i c N e w B e n e f i t 4 Pa r e n t a l L e a v e P o l i c y C h a n g e s Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r , C H R O BB IN S I G H T # 1 : P E H P R e n e w a l Th e I R S h a s a n n o u n c e d m i n i m u m d e d u c t i b l e s f o r H i g h D e d u c t i b l e He a l t h P l a n s ( H D H P ) w i l l i n c r e a s e f r o m $ 1 5 0 0 / $ 3 0 0 0 a n n u a l l y t o $1 6 0 0 / $ 3 2 0 0 a n n u a l l y , s i n g l e o r t w o -pa r t y / f a m i l y , r e s p e c t i v e l y . Th i s c h a n g e i s t h e l a t e s t i n t h e o n g o i n g ( 6 t i m e s ) i n c r e m e n t a l ch a n g e s I R S h a s m a d e i n t h e l a s t e l e v e n y e a r s . As a l w a y s , t h e c h o i c e w e m a k e a b o u t t h e m i n i m u m d e d u c t i b l e af f e c t s t h e h e a l t h i n s u r a n c e r e n e w a l r a t e , a s w e l l . G e n e r a l l y , t h e hi g h e r t h e d e d u c t i b l e , t h e l o w e r t h e p r e m i u m r a t e . Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r , C H R O BB IN S I G H T # 1 : P E H P R e n e w a l As a r e m i n d e r , d e d u c t i b l e s f o r e a c h t y p e o f c o v e r a g e c u r r e n t l y a r e : • $1 5 0 0 f o r s i n g l e p a r t y • $3 0 0 0 f o r t w o -par t y / f a m i l y Th e C i t y c o n t r i b u t e s 5 0 % o f t h e d e d u c t i b l e i n t o t h e e m p l o y e e s H e a l t h S a v i n g s Ac c o u n t ( H S A ) . In t h e p l a n y e a r 2 0 2 2 - 20 2 3 ( l a s t a v a i l a b l e d a t a ) , f o r a l l p l a n s ( s i n g l e , d o u b l e an d f a m i l y ) a b o u t 5 0 % o f e l i g i b l e e m p l o y e e s m e t t h e i r d e d u c t i b l e a n d 5 0 % d i d no t . Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r , C H R O BB IN S I G H T # 1 : P E H P R e n e w a l An n u a l I n c r e a s e An n u a l N e t E x t r a Pl a n P a r t i c i p a n t s M e t D e d u c t i b l e C os t T o E m p l o y e e D e d u c t i b l e N o t M e t HS A t o E m p l o y e e Im p a c t o f $ 1 6 0 0 / $ 3 2 0 0 D e d u c t i b l e - H S A l o a d e d a t 5 0 % - P r e m i u m i n c r e a s e o f 5 . 9 9 % Si n g l e ( 3 1 . 6 % ) 29 7 $6 7 . 4 9 64 3 ($ 3 2 . 5 1 ) Do u b l e ( 4 5 . 6 % ) 29 7 $1 3 9 . 3 4 35 4 ($ 6 0 . 6 6 ) F a m i l y ( 6 4 . 4 % ) 10 3 0 $1 5 2 . 4 5 57 0 ($ 4 7 . 5 5 ) Im p a c t o f $ 2 0 0 0 / $ 4 0 0 0 D e d u c t i b l e - H S A l o a d e d a t 5 0 % - P r e m i u m i n c r e a s e o f 3 . 6 6 % Si n g l e ( 3 1 . 6 % ) 29 7 $2 6 0 . 6 9 64 3 ($ 2 3 9 . 3 1 ) Do u b l e ( 4 5 . 6 % ) 29 7 $5 2 4 . 0 2 35 4 ($ 4 7 5 . 9 6 ) F a m i l y ( 6 4 . 4 % ) 10 3 0 $5 3 2 . 0 5 57 0 ($ 4 6 7 . 9 5 ) Di f f e r e n c e o f t h e $ 2 0 0 0 / $ 4 0 0 0 v s $ 1 6 0 0 / $ 3 2 0 0 Si n g l e ( 3 1 . 6 % ) 29 7 $1 9 3 . 2 0 64 3 ($ 2 0 6 . 8 0 ) Do u b l e ( 4 5 . 6 % ) 29 7 $3 8 4 . 7 0 35 4 ($ 4 1 5 . 3 0 ) Fa m i l y ( 6 4 . 4 % ) 10 3 0 $3 7 9 . 6 0 57 0 ($ 4 2 0 . 4 0 ) *J u l y 2 0 2 2 - J u n e 2 0 2 3 / 5 0 . 9 % T o t a l E m p B a s e M e t D e d u c t i b l e Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r , C H R O BB IN S I G H T # 2 : H e a l t h S a v i n g s P l a n ( H S A ) C i t y S h a r e HS A ha s b e c o m e a c r u c i a l c o m p o n e n t o f o u r e m p l o y e e s ' f i n a n c i a l an d h e a l t h c a r e d e c i s i o n s . Cu r r e n t l y , t h e c i t y c o n t r i b u t e s h a l f o f t h e d e d u c t i b l e a m o u n t : • $7 5 0 fo r s i n g l e p a r t y • $1 5 0 0 f o r t w o -pa r t y / f a m i l y An i n c r e a s e i n t h e e m p l o y e r c o n t r i b u t i o n t o t h e H S A - to c o n t i n u e to f u n d h a l f o f t h e e m p l o y e e ’ s d e d u c t i b l e - wi l l d e m o n s t r a t e o u r co m m i t m e n t t o s u p p o r t i n g o u r e m p l o y e e s ' o v e r a l l w e l l -be i n g i n li g h t o f ri s i n g h e a l t h c a r e c o s t s . Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r , C H R O BB IN S I G H T # 1 & 2 : C i t y S h a r e o f C o s t s Th e M a y o r ’ s r e c o m m e n d e d b u d g e t p r o p o s e s t h e c i t y s e t t h e m i n i m u m de d u c t i b l e a t $ 2 0 0 0 f o r s i n g l e s ; $ 4 0 0 0 f o r d o u b l e s & f a m i l i e s . Th e r e c o m m e n d e d b u d g e t p r o p o s e s t o c o n t i n u e t o c o n t r i b u t e h a l f o f t h e de d u c t i b l e f o r e m p l o y e e s t h e H e a l t h S a v i n g s A c c o u n t ( H S A . ) T h i s w o u l d $1 0 0 0 f o r s i n g l e c o v e r a g e a n d $ 2 0 0 0 f o r d o u b l e / f a m i l y c o v e r a g e . Ag a i n , a b o u t o n e -ha l f o f e m p l o y e e s m e e t t h e d e d u c t i b l e a t i t s c u r r e n t le v e l , s o a n i n c r e a s e t o t h e H S A w i l l b e a n i n c r e a s e d b e n e f i t f o r t h e h a l f wh o d o n o t . Ut i l i z i n g t h i s a p p r o a c h , t h e g e n e r a l f u n d w o u l d s e e a n o v e r a l l sa v i n g s o f ju s t u n d e r $8 3 0 , 0 0 0 , w h i l e a l s o p r o v i d i n g e m p l o y e e s w i t h m o r e v a l u e i n th e i r H S A . Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r , C H R O BB IN S I G H T # 3 : M i d t o w n C l i n i c D i e t i t i a n P r o p o s a l As t h e s a y i n g g o e s , " Y o u a r e w h a t y o u e a t . " R e c o g n i z i n g t h e p r o f o u n d i m p a c t o f n u t r i t i o n o n o v e r a l l he a l t h a n d p r o d u c t i v i t y , th e r e c o m m e n d e d b u d g e t pr o p o s e s t h e i n t r o d u c t i o n o f o n -si t e d i e t i t i a n se r v i c e s f o r t h e e m p l o y e e s . M i d t o w n C l i n i c c u r r e n t l y h a s a d i e t i t i a n w h o w i l l o f f e r p e r s o n a l i z e d gu i d a n c e a n d s u p p o r t t o h e l p em p l o y e e s ma k e i n f o r m e d c h o i c e s a b o u t t h e i r n u t r i t i o n a n d w e l l - be i n g . We a r e p l a n n i n g t o h a v e t h e d i e t i t i a n , i f f u n d i n g i s a p p r o v e d , t o c o n d u c t s e s s i o n s f o r t h o s e i n t e r e s t e d in e a c h d e p a r t m e n t . Em p l o y e e s w i l l t h e n h a v e a c c e s s t o o n e -on -on e c o n s u l t a t i o n s w i t h o u r Mi d t o w n Cl i n i c di e t i t i a n . T h e s e on e -on -on e s wi l l f o c u s o n i n d i v i d u a l h e a l t h g o a l s , d i e t a r y p r e f e r e n c e s , a n d a n y sp e c i f i c h e a l t h c o n c e r n s . In v e s t i n g i n p r e v e n t i v e h e a l t h c a r e m e a s u r e s t h r o u g h n u t r i t i o n c a n l e a d t o l o n g -te r m c o s t s a v i n g s b y re d u c i n g t h e i n c i d e n c e o f c h r o n i c d i s e a s e s , s i c k d a y s , a n d h e a l t h c a r e e x p e n s e s . A n d d e m o n s t r a t i n g a co m m i t m e n t t o e m p l o y e e w e l l -be i n g c o n t r i b u t e s t o a p o s i t i v e c i t y c u l t u r e . Co s t : $ 1 0 , 8 5 0 Be n e f i t s F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y D e b A l e x a n d e r , C H R O BB IN S I G H T # 4 : P a r e n t a l L e a v e P o l i c y C h a n g e s Be c o m i n g a p a r e n t i s a l i f e -ch a n g i n g e v e n t , a n d i t e s s e n t i a l t o o u r s u c c e s s t o s u p p o r t o u r em p l o y e e s t h r o u g h t h i s i m p o r t a n t t r a n s i t i o n . Cu r r e n t l y , fu l l -ti m e e m p l o y e e s wh o b e c o m e pa r e n t s t h r o u g h b i r t h , a d o p t i o n o r f o s t e r c a r e m a y t a k e u p t o 6 w e e k s p a i d t i m e o f f t o c a r e f o r an d b o n d w i t h t h e i r c h i l d . I f t h e b i r t h w a s b y c e s a r e a n d e l i v e r y , a n a d d i t i o n a l 2 w e e k s i s pr o v i d e d . We w i l l b e c h a n g i n g t h e p o l i c y t o p r o v i d e a m o r e c o m p e t i t i v e a n d c u r r e n t b e n e f i t o f 1 2 w e e k s pa i d t i m e o f f . W e w i l l e l i m i n a t e t h e r e q u i r e m e n t t o a p p l y f o r S h o r t -Te r m D i s a b i l i t y c o n c u r r e n t wi t h P a r e n t a l L e a v e . W e w i l l a l s o s t r e a m l i n e a n d i m p r o v e t h e a p p l i c a t i o n p r o c e s s fo r P a r e n t a l Le a v e . No t e : Wh i l e t h i s p o l i c y c h a n g e h a s n o d i r e c t b u d g e t a r y i m p a c t , c o s t s f o r p a r e n t a l l e a v e h a v e be e n c o m i n g f r o m d e p a r t m e n t a l b u d g e t s . Th a n k s ! ! CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5476 SLCCOUNCIL.COM TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 COUNCIL BUDGET STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO: City Council Members FROM: Sylvia Richards Policy and Budget Analyst DATE: May 21, 2024 RE: FY2025 BUDGET - JUSTICE COURT PROJECT TIMELINE: Briefing: May 21, 2024 Budget Hearings: May 21 and June 4, 2024 Potential Action: June 11 or 13, 2024 ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE The Justice Court handles misdemeanor criminal citations, small claims, traffic citations, and traffic school for moving violations. The Fiscal Year (FY) 2025 budget proposes a total budget of $5,958,110 and 43 full-time employees. There is an increase of $468,390 or 8.5% as compared to the FY 2024 Adopted budget. The proposed budget does not include any new programs or services. Information regarding the proposed budget is included on pages 49, 51, 57-58 and 209-213 of the Mayor’s Recommended Budget Book FY 2025. The primary increases to the budget include: Request for 1.0 New FTE - Community Outreach Case Manager ($73,635 for ten months or $88,363 annually including benefits) The Justice Court indicates it has increased its efforts to assist individuals who are unhoused. The number of individuals who were seen in court in 2024 has increased by 20%, and the number of cases heard in 2024 has increased by 103% as compared to 2022. As a result of the increase, the Mayor’s Recommended Budget requests a dedicated Case Manager position to investigate, organize and assist with the needs of the homeless population. Request for 10-Passenger Van ($62,000) Due to the increased demands to assist the unhoused in various ways, the Court is requesting a 10- passenger van for their ongoing needs. The Court Administration indicates that the “weekly demand of the current outreach events with employees and equipment, secondary meetings, conferences, Page | 2 training etc., the Court is trying to be as efficient and effective as possible with transportation needs. They indicate they have outgrown the Fleet Services loaner program. NOTE: The funding request of $62,000 for the van was moved to the Fleet budget which will be reviewed by the Council on May 30th. Additional personnel and compensation items  $($3,125) Pension Change  $15,375 Personal Services Base to Base Changes  $25,250 Health Savings Account  $90,540 Insurance Rate Increase  $251,987 Salary Proposal ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Performance measurements for the Justice Court are found on the last page of this staff report. Remote Hearings vs. In-Person Hearings Based on information provided by the Justice Court, the statistics below indicate that while remote hearings are highly preferred, in-person hearings are increasing. FY23 FY24 Annual Total Sessions* 1,069 1157 Remote 863 or 80.73% 809 or 69.92% In-Person 206 or 19.27% 348 or 30.8% *A “session” for purposes of tracking is defined as any given timeslot on a judge’s calendar on any given day. Each timeslot can contain multiple hearings. Court patrons are scheduling their arraignment hearings through doodle software which allows them to select a date and time that works for their schedule, which has drastically decreased the failure to appear rate, and is a valuable service provided to the community. Familiar Faces Familiar Faces is an example of one Justice Court program which reaches out to individuals experiencing homelessness who may have multiple low-level offenses and frequent interactions with law enforcement and the criminal courts. Working with community partners, the goal is to provide resources such as housing, employment, peer support and other benefits in a familiar, accessible, environment. Court cases can be dismissed if participants demonstrate willingness to complete incremental tasks each week indicating improvement in their quality of life and self-sufficiency, and access to resources to exit homelessness. This program promotes stability, accountability, access to court and community resources. The program was implemented in August of 2023, and the Court is currently working on program structure, a needs questionnaire, and data collection. Current data includes the number of events, participants, and cases. With the needs questionnaire, and future planning, the Court will be able to gather additional data regarding common barriers, outcomes, and potentially recidivism. Page | 3 Justice Court Background The Salt Lake City Justice Court is the largest municipal Court in the State of Utah with a very high volume of misdemeanor cases. The Court is a limited jurisdiction Court under the umbrella of the Utah State Court system. The Justice Court is responsible for and processes Class B and C misdemeanor, infractions and small claims cases, jury trials, appeals and expungements, video hearings, prisoner transports, and daily interaction with jails throughout the State of Utah. The Court monitors and tracks probation, warrants, community service, and restitution, collections of monetary penalties, appeals, expungements, and plea in-abeyance cases. The Court also provides traffic school, coordination of interpreter services, and any ADA needs that arise. The Justice Court judiciary, employees, and security team describe their environment as “dedicated to open and transparent access to the Court, bringing justice for all, and providing a safe and civil environment for dispute resolution”. Mission Statement: Ensure the highest standards of justice, professionalism, responsiveness, and respect for those we serve. Vision Statement Creating a Court that is just, equitable, and trusted by all. Court Core Values Excellence Having the desire to succeed and the motivation to reach our full potential, going above and beyond in to accomplish the task at hand. Respect Recognize and appreciate the value of each individual and their experience and situation. Integrity Doing what we say we are going to do, applying honesty and accountability with openness. Community Bridging the gap between Court, community, and other agencies, improving access to resources and information. Unity Supporting one another and fostering growth while reaching our goals and adhering to our values. Attachment: Justice Court Performance Measurements 1 Ju s t i c e C o u r t s F Y 2 4 -25 B u d g e t Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r Or g a n i z a t i o n a l Ch a r t 2 JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r Ov e r v i e w o f Ch a n g e s In s i g h t s De s c r i p t i o n 1 Co m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h C a s e M a n a g e r 2 Co m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h V a n Cu r r e n t 0 Pr o p o s e d To t a l $5 , 4 8 9 , 7 2 0 $1 5 0 , 3 6 3 $5 , 6 4 0 , 1 4 3 FT E s : 4 3 / P T E : 0 FT E : +1 / P T E : +0 FT E : 4 4 / P T E : 0 2 4 P r o g r a m # 1 : C o m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h Ca s e Ma n a g e r Th e n u m b e r o f i n d i v i d u a l s s e e n , a n d ca s e s h e a r d w i t h i n t h e u n h o u s e d co m m u n i t y i s i n c r e a s i n g . M o s t o f t h i s wo r k i s o u t i n t h e c o m m u n i t y a n d t h e pr o g r a m s h a v e e v o l v e d . W e n e e d a c a s e ma n a g e r t o b e t t e r t r a c k t h e s e in d i v i d u a l s t h r o u g h t h e “ s e q u e n t i a l in t e r c e p t m o d e l ” , i d e n t i f y r e s o u r c e a n d tr e a t m e n t g a p s a n d e v e n t u a l l y su c c e s s f u l c o m m u n i t y i n t e g r a t i o n . We a r e r e q u e s t i n g 1 F T E t o h e l p su p p o r t t h i s d e m a n d . JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r 5 P r o g r a m # 1 : C o m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h Ca s e Ma n a g e r It e m Co s t Ty p e Co m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h C a s e M a n a g e r ( 1 F T E ) $8 8 , 3 6 4 On g o i n g To t a l $ 1 12 JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r 6 P r o g r a m # 1 : C o m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h Ca s e Ma n a g e r Th e J u s t i c e C o u r t h a s i n c r e a s e d o u r e f f o r t s w i t h h o m e l e s s o u t r e a c h t h r o u g h o u t t h e c o m m u n i t y a n d i n th e c o u r t h o u s e . T h e n u m b e r o f i n d i v i d u a l s s e e n i n 20 2 4 ha s i n c r e a s e d b y 20 % an d t h e n u m b e r o f ca s e s h e a r d i n 20 2 4 ha s i n c r e a s e d b y 10 3 % si n c e o u r l o w i n 2 0 2 2 . T h e n e w e m p h a s i s w i t h o u t r e a c h pr o g r a m s , i n c l u d i n g F a m i l i a r F a c e s , i s r e s u l t i n g i n i m p r o v e d a n d c o m p r e h e n s i v e s e r v i c e s f o r o u r un h o u s e d c o m m u n i t y m e m b e r s . Du e t o t h e i n c r e a s e i n t h e s e s e r v i c e s , a n d e x p e c t a t i o n s , t h e c o u r t n e e d s a d e d i c a t e d c a s e m a n a g e r t o tr a c k t h e c a s e s i n t h e s e s p e c i a l i z e d c o u r t p r o g r a m s . W e n e e d a c a s e m a n a g e r w h o c a n a d d d e p t h t o in v e s t i g a t e a n d o r g a n i z e t h e m a n y n e e d s o f t h i s s e g m e n t o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n . C u r r e n t l y , t h e d e m a n d s an d r e s e a r c h n e e d s a t a c a s e l e v e l , a r e n o t b e i n g t r a c k e d o r m e t . We a r e r e q u e s t i n g t h i s n e w c a s e m a n a g e r p o s i t i o n t o m e e t t h e n e e d s o f t h e c o m m u n i t y a n d s e r v e mo r e u n h o u s e d c o m m u n i t y m e m b e r s t h r o u g h o u r s u c c e s s f u l c o u r t o u t r e a c h p r o g r a m s . JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r 4 P r o g r a m # 2 : C o m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h Va n Th e j u s t i c e c o u r t ’ s c o m m i t m e n t t o th e s e c o m m u n i t y p r o g r a m s h a s in c r e a s e d d r a m a t i c a l l y . W e a r e a t th e p o i n t w e n e e d o u r o w n v a n t o mo v e s t a f f a n d e q u i p m e n t ef f i c i e n t l y t h r o u g h o u t t h e c i t y . We a r e r e q u e s t i n g 1 v a n , ap p r o x i m a t e l y 1 0 p a s s e n g e r , t o he l p s u p p o r t t h i s d e m a n d . JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r 54 1 36 1 34 0 31 7 33 6 37 9 78 6 75 5 65 5 54 2 55 4 11 0 0 0 0 10 17 18 15 0 20 0 40 0 60 0 80 0 10 0 0 12 0 0 20 1 9 20 2 0 20 2 1 20 2 2 20 2 3 20 2 4 Y T D Ou t r e a c h A n n u a l T o t a l s Pe o p l e S e e n Ca s e s H e a r d No . o f E v e n t s P r o g r a m # 2 : C o m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h Va n It e m Co s t Ty p e Co m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h V a n $6 2 , 0 0 0 On e T i m e To t a l $6 2 , 0 0 0 7 12 JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r 6 P r o g r a m # 2 : C o m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h Va n Th e c o m m u n i t y o u t r e a c h a n d h o m e l e s s c o u r t p r o g r a m s h a v e i n c r e a s e d i n p o p u l a r i t y e a c h y e a r . T h e se r v i c e s h a v e e x p a n d e d , a n d t h e n e e d h a s g r o w n . T h e j u s t i c e c o u r t c o n t i n u e s t o b e e x p e c t e d t o t a k e a le a d e r s h i p r o l e w i t h t h i s m u l t i -fa c e t e d , s o c i e t a l c o n c e r n . T h e c o u r t u s e s i t s r e s o u r c e s t o m o v e a r o u n d th e c o m m u n i t y a n d p r o v i d e c o u r t s e r v i c e s i n d i f f e r e n t l o c a t i o n s . T h e s e l o c a t i o n s a r e s t r a t e g i c a l l y ch o s e n , o n e s w e t h i n k w i l l s e r v e t h e m o s t i n d i v i d u a l s . W i t h F a m i l i a r F a c e s c o m i n g o n b o a r d t h i s ca l e n d a r y e a r , t h e n u m b e r o f p e o p l e w e a r e s e e i n g , a n d t h e n u m b e r o f c o u r t c a s e s h e a r d i s in c r e a s i n g . Du e t o t h e w e e k l y d e m a n d o f t h e c u r r e n t o u t r e a c h e v e n t s w i t h e m p l o y e e s a n d e q u i p m e n t , s e c o n d a r y me e t i n g s , c o n f e r e n c e s , t r a i n i n g e t c . , t h e c o u r t i s t r y i n g t o b e a s e f f i c i e n t a n d e f f e c t i v e a s p o s s i b l e w i t h ou r t r a n s p o r t a t i o n n e e d s . W e h a v e o u t g r o w n F l e e t S e r v i c e s l o a n e r p r o g r a m . Th e c o u r t i s r e q u e s t i n g a n a p p r o x i m a t e 1 0 -pa s s e n g e r v a n s o w e c a n c o n t i n u e t o s e r v e t h e u n h o u s e d in o u r c o m m u n i t y a n d a d a p t q u i c k l y t o c h a n g i n g d e m a n d s a n d i n c r e a s e d r e f e r r a l s t o t h i s s u c c e s s f u l co u r t p r o g r a m . JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r 8 Su m m a r y o f R e q u e s t e d P r o g r a m s In s i g h t De s c r i p t i o n FT E s FY 2 0 2 4 R e q u e s t S c o r e 1 Co m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h C a s e M a n a g e r 1 $8 8 , 3 6 3 12 2 Co m m u n i t y O u t r e a c h V a n 0 $6 2 , 0 0 0 12 T O T A L $1 5 0 , 3 6 3 JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r • JU D I C I A R Y – 5 F T E s • MA N A G E M E N T – 6 F T E s • CO M M U N I T Y O U T R E A C H – 1 F T E ( g r a n t -fu n d e d ) • TE C H N O L O G Y -1 F T E • DI V E R S I T Y , E Q U I T Y , A N D I N C L U S I O N –16 F T E s • (A l l J C s t a f f p a r t i c i p a t e ) • SP E C I A L T Y ( H o m e l e s s O u t r e a c h ) – 10 F T E s • CO U R T S U P P O R T ( A c c o u n t i n g & C a s h i e r s ) – 4 F T E s Ju s t i c e C o u r t s 43 JU S T I C E C O U R T S F Y 2 4 -25 B U D G E T P R O P O S A L Pr e s e n t e d b y K a t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r & V a l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r 9 TH A N K Y O U Pr e s e n t e d Ka t e F a i r c h i l d , C o u r t s D i r e c t o r Wi t h s u p p o r t f r o m : Va l e t a H i t c h c o c k , F i n a n c i a l M a n a g e r ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ______________________________ Date Received: 4/1/2024 Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Sent to Council: 4/1/2024 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE 4/1/2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Appointment Recommendation: Sister Cities Advisory Board STAFF CONTACT: April Patterson April.Patterson@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Board Appointment Recommendation: Sister Cities Advisory Board RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and appoint Rose Kjesbo member of the Sister Cities Advisory Board. ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor OFFICE OF THE MAYOR P.O. BOX 145474 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 306 SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84114-5474 WWW.SLCMAYOR.COM TEL 801-535-7704 April 1, 2024 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, UT 84114 Dear Council Member Petro, Listed below is my recommendation for the membership appointment for the Sister Cities Advisory Board. Rose Kjesbo to be appointed for a four year term starting from date of City Council advice and consent and ending on Monday, July 3, 2028. I respectfully ask for your consideration and support for this appointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor DEPARTMENT of ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ERIN MENDENHALL MAYOR Lorena Riffo-Jenson DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ___________________________________ Date Received: _________________ Jill Love, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: __________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: April 23, 2024 Victoria Petro, Chair FROM: Lorena Riffo-Jenson, Director, Department of Economic Development SUBJECT: Central Business Improvement Area -25 (CBIA-25) STAFF CONTACTS: Andie Feldman, Andie.Feldman@slcgov.com Roberta Reichgelt, Roberta.Reichgelt@slcgov.com DOCUMENT TYPE: Written Briefing RECOMMENDATION: N/A BUDGET IMPACT: None. COORDINTATION: Economic Development, Treasurer’s Office, Engineering, Recorder’s Office, City Council, Mayor’s Office, Attorney’s Office, Information Management Services (IMS), Central Business District Property Owners, Zions Public Finance, Inc. BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The Central Business Improvement Area (CBIA) serves as an essential Improvement District in Downtown Salt Lake City, aimed at enhancing vibrancy and activity within the City’s Central Business District. It operates through a special assessment on commercial properties within the designated area, funding various initiatives such as marketing, promotion, advocacy, and more. The inception of the Central Business Improvement Area dates back to 1991, with assessments spanning three years and contracts awarded through Request for Proposals (RFPs). The current jill love (Apr 25, 2024 10:04 MDT) jill love 04/25/2024 04/25/2024 contract, awarded to the Downtown Alliance in 2022, will expire in April 2025 coinciding with the conclusion of the current assessment area, CBIA-22. To ensure uninterrupted funding, the Administration proposes the initiation of a new assessment area, CBIA-25, continuing within the established downtown boundary. CBIA-25 aims to sustain vital services such as marketing, promotion, advocacy, and The Farmers Market, among other programs supported by the Downtown Alliance. Establishing a new CBIA involves a meticulous process governed by Utah State law, requiring various City Council actions, including noticing provisions, public hearings, and other regulatory requirements over the next fourteen months. This timeline aligns with the expiration of the current contract to ensure seamless transition and uninterrupted service provision within the CBIA. Close collaboration between Department of Economic Development (DED) staff and Council staff will facilitate effective communication and compliance with the outlined timeline. Additionally, a secondary assessment provides Specialty Lighting for a subsection of the CBIA, funded separately. However, recent findings have revealed that the existing lighting infrastructure in the CBIA is outdated and insufficient, particularly impacting properties along 362-375 South State Street, as well as parcel 7 on 400 South. The lighting assessment map is included below. In response, businesses not receiving adequate lighting service have been excluded from the lighting assessment map to prevent unjust charges in the upcoming Special Assessment Area (SAA) renewal. Council’s Recommended Timeline CBIA-25: 1. July 2, 2024, Resolution of Intent to Designate 2. July 9, 2024, Adoption of Resolution of Intent to Designate 3. September 3, 2024, Public Protest Hearing 4. November 12, 2024, Meeting to Announce Protest Tally 5. November 12, 2024, Adoption of Resolution to Designate & Appoint Board of Equalization 6. January 17, 2025, Board of Equalization report forwarded to City Council 7.March 4, 2025, Approve Board of Equalization Recommendations 8.March 4, 2025, Adopt Assessment Ordinance Attachments: Attachment 1: Map of CBIA-25 boundaries (same as CBIA-22) Attachment 2: Map of CBIA-25 Holiday Lighting Map Attachment 4: Estimated Timeline of CBIA-25 Implementation INTERSTATE 15 REGENT ST EDISON ST RICHARDS STVINE A L M O N D QUINCE ST ALMO N D 30 0 N CANYON ALAMEDA STANTON BELD ON GALE ST PACIF IC AVE 700 W WASHINGTON LACONIA HOYT PL QUINCE COTTAGE STRINGFELLOW GR EGORY WAYNEDELMARPOPLAR A R N O L D DUBEI CHATMAN CANYON SIDE LN OR PHEUM ROAD SPENCER CT JACK SON AV EMERIL AVE ELDER CT PIERP ON T TEM PLE PACIF IC AV PACIF IC 60 0 S MOFFATT CT NORT H TEMPLE PLUM ALLEY PIERP ON T MA RKET S T SHELMERDINE BLAIR ST IVERSON CONWAY SOCIAL H ALL WOODBINE BUTTERWORTH MARGUERITE FLORAL PLEASANT TEMPLE SOUTH EAST 200 EDMONDSARGYLE BLISS CT RENDON CT SEWARD JACK SON AV ECCLE S EXCHANGE PL GA LL IVAN AV LOMA GR AY EAST HILLSIDE AV CAPITOL ST RIO GRANDE CT OR CHARD P L MORTENSENCT WALL 50 N SQUARE SQUARE LIBRARY WASHINGTON PIONEER PARK GATEWAY THE DANSIE DR 40 0 S 40 0 S 500 S 50 0 S 200 W 400 W 500 W 300 W 200 W 600 S 60 0 S 600 W MAIN ST 300 E 400 E 400 S 10 0 S 30 0 S 300 S 300 S 200 S MAIN ST 300 N 20 0 N 200 E 300 E 400 E 700 W 600 W 500 W 400 W (HWY 89) 3RD AVE B ST C ST D ST A ST 1ST AVE 600 W 500 W 200 N 300 N (HWY 186 ) 30 0 S 200 S 10 0 S 700 W INTERSTATE 15 WEST TEMPLE STATE STSTATE ST WEST TEMPLE 300 W 200 W 400 W WEST TEMPLE Sal t La ke City CBI A Bou nd ary Ma p 4 50 51 29 9 37 5 80 25 5 13 1 22 2 20 6 32 4 21 5 38 0 22 0 60 61 12 8 17 5 11 1 7 31 0 8 13 6 15 9 13 2 20 1 31 6 77 18 5 36 12 0 36 0 10 2 75 16 1 17 0 15 37 5 15 30 7 0 10 24 8 30 6 12 2 31 1 10 10 11 0 69 23 9 33 5 10 0 11 1 17 5 26 25 0 31 1 14 3 48 33 4 32 2 34 1 34 2 36 0 79 36 0 51 18 5 10 16 3 15 0 14 4 33 4 32 0 14 9 32 1 32 6 13 5 16 0 16 5 75 26 2 14 9 33 0 35 7 31 9 15 5 32 8 26 0 16 3 15 1 14 5 15 8 15 6 15 9 32 3 15 5 26 8 15 9 33 8 32 7 33 1 22 5 18 14 9 12 4 16 0 32 5 12 2 11 8 27 0 12 0 11 6 31 5 37 0 31 7 30 50 55 50 55 55 30 55 50 50 30 99 50 50 55 5550 5550 50 45 55 50 44 44 4499 99 45 55 45 50 9944 50 65 50 5 0 65 5151 51 51 50 50 51 50 50 50 51 6550 50 51 50 51 50 51 5021 51 51 50 50 65 5051 2 0 0 S 2 0 0 S 4 0 0 S 4 0 0 S 3 0 0 S 3 0 0 S 200 E 200 E 400 W 400 W 300 W 300 W 200 W 200 W 1 0 0 S 1 0 0 S Main St Main St State St State St S o u t h T e m p l e S t S o u t h T e m p l e S t West Temple St West Temple St Rio Grande St Rio Grande St Edison St Edison St Regent St Regent St E x c h a n g e P l E x c h a n g e P l P i e r p o n t A v e P i e r p o n t A v e Plum Aly Plum Aly Floral St Floral St So c i a l H a l l A v e So c i a l H a l l A v e G a l l i v a n A v e G a l l i v a n A v e Poplar Ct Poplar Ct Wayne Ct Wayne Ct Moffatt Ct Moffatt Ct Marguerite Ct Marguerite Ct Shelmerdine Ct Shelmerdine Ct 1 0 0 S 1 0 0 S P i e r p o n t A v e P i e r p o n t A v e CB I A 1 6 : H o l i d a y L i g h t i n g P a r c e l s ( P r e l i m i n a r y ) Ju l y 2 9 , 2 0 1 5 Sa l t L a k e C i t y G e o g r a p h i c I n f o r m a t i o n S y s t e m s O In c l u d e d P a r c e l s Ho l i d a y L i g h t i n g S t r e e t s No n - f u n c t i o n i n g l i g h t s Step Action Description Group/Lead Deadlines 1 Consultant Contract Contract with a consultant to provide guidance throughout process. DED 2/1/24 - 4/30/2024 2 Technical Description of the CBIA Technical Description of the CBIA provided to Engineering. Engineering prepares tax roll based on this data.Consultant 3/12/2024 3 Develop assessment methodology that conforms to Assessment Area Act. Develop assessment methodology concerning Economic Promotion & Lighting Assessment.DED 3/24/2024 4 Overview Transmittal. (Mayor) High level document explaning the process transmitted to Mayor’s Office. DED 3/12/2024 5 Overview transmittal. (Council Office)High level document explaning the process transmitted to Council Office. Mayor’s Office 3/19/2024 6 City Council Meeting DED will provide a written briefing to the City Council on the upcoming on the CBIA- 25 process. DED 4/2/2024 7 Salt Lake County Property Tax Information. Numbers should be available by May 22, 2024. Consultant 5/31/2024 8 Bond Counsel Description & Improvement Review Bond Counsel reviews the description of Improvements and Areas to be Improved. DED 6/5/2024 9 Resolution of intent to designate. Bond Counsel drafts resolution of Intent to Designate. Bond Counsel 6/11/2024 10 Resolution of Intent to Designate and Justification transmittal. (Mayor) Resolution of Intent to Designate and justification documentation transmitted to Mayor’s Office. DED 6/18/2024 11 Resolution of Intent to Designate and Justification transmittal. (Council Office) Resolution of Intent to Designate and justification documentation transmitted to Council Office. Mayor’s Office 6/21/2024 12 City Council Meeting DED will brief the City Council on CBIA-25 Information. DED 7/2/2024 13 Property Owner Letter Prep Property Owner letter includes verbiage of preliminary estimate, rate, notice of intent to designate, common question and map finalized.DED 7/8/2024 14 Tax roll prepared for DED approval.Assess County Data. Engineering 7/8/2024 15 DED approval of tax roll. DED approves county data. DED 7/8/2024 16 City Council Meeting City Council adopts the resolution of Intent to Designate the assessment area. City Council 7/9/2024 17 Draft/Create Notice of Intent to Designate Letter Engineering 7/11/2024 18 Post Notice of Intent to Designate Post notice of intent to designate in at least three public places within boundaries of jurisdiction DED 8/9/2024 19 Mail out Notice of Intent to Designate Mail out Notice of Intent to Designate to go out within 10 days of notice posting.DED sends via State Mail 8/12/2024 20 Minutes prepared for use at protest hearing Distribute to team SAA. Bond Counsel 8/23/2024 21 City Council Meeting City Council Protest Hearing City Council 9/3/2024 22 Draft Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and appoint the Board of Equalization (BOE). Bond Counsel 9/10/2024 23 Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and appoint the Board of Equalization Transmittal (Mayor’s Office) Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and appoint the Board of Equalization Transmitted to Mayor’s Office.DED 9/17/2024 24 Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and appoint the Board of Equalization (City Council). Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and appoint the Board of Equalization Transmitted to the Council Office.Mayor’s Office 9/24/2024 25 Publish Notice of Intent to Designate Publish Notice of Intent to Designate on the Utah Public Notice Website DED 10/3/2024 26 Property Owners Written Protests Filing Deadline Property owners who are protesting the assessment area. Also, the end of 60-day written protest period.Recorder's Office 11/3/2024 27 Compile Written Protests.Recorder's Office 11/4/2024 29 Delivery of Compilation of Protests Compilation of protests sent to City Council. Recorder's Office 11/5/2024 30 Publishing of Written Protests Publishing of Written Protests on City & State public notice website. Recorder's Office 11/5/2024 31 City Council Meeting City Council announces the protest tally and if it exceeds 40% threshold. City Council 11/12/2024 32 City Council Meeting City Council adopts the Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and appoints the Board of Equalization.City Council 11/12/2024 33 Recording of the Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area & Notice of Proposed Assessment Record Resolution to Designate the Assessment Area and Notice of Proposed Assessment with Salt Lake County Recorder, within 15 days of adoption. Salt Lake City Recorders 11/12/2024 - 11/27/2024 34 BOE Notice and Dates of BOE Meetings.Finalize Verbiage for BOE notice and dates of BOE meetings. Bond Counsel 11/22/2024 35 Mailing process for the BOE notice.Begins 2 weeks before mailing date. Engineering 12/6/2024 36 Publication of the BOE hearings. Publication and posting of time and location of the 3 consecutive meetings. Posted in at least 3 public places at least 20 days, but not more than 35 days from the first BOE hearings dates. Published on the Utah Public Notice Website. Recorder's & DED 12/10/2024 CBIA ‐ 25 Tentative Timeline 37 Mailing due to Recorder’s Office for review.Due 1 week before mailing date. Engineering 12/13/2024 38 Mailing of preliminary assessment & notice of BOE hearings Mailing sent to each property owner and each street address. DED 12/20/2024 39 BOE hearings 9:00 am to 10:00 am (public meeting). Held on consecutive days by statute.Salt Lake City Recorders 1/7/2025 40 BOE hearings 10:00 am to 11:00 am (public meeting). Held on consecutive days by statute.Salt Lake City Recorders 1/8/2025 41 BOE hearings 1:00 pm to 2:00 pm (public meeting). Held on consecutive days by statute.Salt Lake City Recorders 1/9/2025 42 Finalization of BOE Hearings Finalize the report DED 1/14/202543RFP: Center Business Selection is made from the proposals submitted DED NA 43 BOE Report Completion BOE report completed, signed, and forwarded to City Council and Bond Counsel. DED 1/17/2025 44 Mailing of BOE Final Report BOE report mailed to objecting property owners. Begins 15 day appeal period. Engineering 1/23/2025 45 Assessment Ordinance Bond Counsel Draft Assessment Ordinance Bond Counsel 1/28/2025 46 Assessment Ordinance Transmittal (Mayor’s Office).Assessment Ordinance transmitted to the Mayor's Office. DED 2/4/2025 47 Assessment Ordinance Transmittal (Council Office).Assessment Ordinance transmitted to the Council Office. Mayor’s Office 2/7/2025 48 Budget submission for CBIA Submit budget to SLC Finance Department in anticipation of approval. DED 2/7/2025 49 City Council Meeting City Council accepts or modifies BOE recommendations and adopts or rejects Assessment Ordinance.City Council 3/4/2025 50 Center Business Improvement Assessment Area Management Contract drafting and Execution Execute Agreement between Salt Lake City and the vendor to manage the assessment area. DED 51 Transfer properties into billing status.Engineering 3/20/2025 52 Assessment Invoices and Billing Mail assessment notices and invoices to Property Owners by April 5, 2022 the latest.Treasurer 3/21/2025 53 Publication & Posting of the Assessment Ordinance 1. Publication of the Assessment Ordinance on the Utah Public Notice Website. 2. Post a copy of the Assessment Ordinance in at least three public places within the jurisdiction boundaries. For at least 21 days DED/Recorder's 3/24/2025 54 Record Notice of Assessment Interest with Salt Lake County Recorder. I note that Utah Code 11-42-404(4)(b)(iii) requires the notice of assessment interest to “describe the property assessed by legal description and tax identification number.” Metes and Bounds legal description provided by Recorder’s Office. Salt Lake City Recorders 4/21/2025 55 Effective start date of the Assessment Ordinance Must be specified in the Assessment Ordinance DED 4/21/2025 56 Assessment Payments Due Invoice Payments due from property owners [15 days after effective date of Assessment Ordinance]Treasurer 5/6/2025 SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION SWORN STATEMENT SUPPORTING CLOSURE OF MEETING I, Victoria Petro, acted as the presiding member of the Salt Lake Council, which met on May 21, 2024 in an hybrid meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Proclamation. Appropriate notice was given of the Council's meeting as required by §52-4-202. §52 -4-205(1)(b) strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; §52-4-205(l)(c) strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; §52-4-205(l)(d) strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; §52-4-205(l)(e) strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) if the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; §52-4-205(1)(f) discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and §52-4-205(1)(g) investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A Closed Meeting may also be held for Attorney-Client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code §78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open andPublic Meetings Act. Other, described as follows: _____________________________________________________________ The content of the closed portion of the Council meeting was restricted to a discussion of the matter(s) for which the meeting was closed. With regard to the closed meeting, the following was publicly announced and recorded, and entered on the minutes of the open meeting at which the closed meeting was approved: (a)the reason or reasons for holding the closed meeting; (b)the location where the closed meeting will be held; and (c)the vote of each member of the public body either for or against the motion to hold the closed meeting. The recording and any minutes of the closed meeting will include: (a)the date, time, and place of the meeting; (b)the names of members Present and Absent; and (c)the names of all others present except where such disclosure would infringe on the confidentiality necessary to fulfill the original purpose of closing the meeting. Pursuant to §52-4-206(6), a sworn statement is required to close a meeting under §52-4-205(1)(a) or (f), but a record by electronic recording or detailed minutes is not required; and Pursuant to §52-4-206(1), a record by electronic recording and/or detailed written minutes is required for a meeting closed under §52-4-205(1)(b),(c),(d),(e),and (g): A record was not made. A record was made by: : Electronic recording Detailed written minutes I hereby swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Presiding Member Date of Signature A quorum of the Council was present at the meeting and voted by at least a two-thirds vote, as detailed in the minutes of the open meeting, to close a portion of the meeting to discuss the following: §52-4-205(l)(a) discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of an individual; X X X Victoria Petro (May 21, 2024 19:06 MDT)May 21, 2024 SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION SWORN STATEMENT SUPPORTING CLOSURE OF MEETING I, Victoria Petro, acted as the presiding member of the Salt Lake Council, which met on May 21, 2024 in an hybrid meeting pursuant to Salt Lake City Proclamation. Appropriate notice was given of the Council's meeting as required by §52-4-202. §52 -4-205(1)(b) strategy sessions to discuss collective bargaining; §52-4-205(l)(c) strategy sessions to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation; §52-4-205(l)(d) strategy sessions to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares, if public discussion of the transaction would: (i) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (ii) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; §52-4-205(l)(e) strategy sessions to discuss the sale of real property, including any form of a water right or water shares if: (i) public discussion of the transaction would: (A) disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration; or (B) prevent the public body from completing the transaction on the best possible terms; (ii) if the public body previously gave public notice that the property would be offered for sale; and (iii) the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the public body approves the sale; §52-4-205(1)(f) discussion regarding deployment of security personnel, devices, or systems; and §52-4-205(1)(g) investigative proceedings regarding allegations of criminal misconduct. A Closed Meeting may also be held for Attorney-Client matters that are privileged pursuant to Utah Code §78B-1-137, and for other lawful purposes that satisfy the pertinent requirements of the Utah Open andPublic Meetings Act. Other, described as follows: _____________________________________________________________ The content of the closed portion of the Council meeting was restricted to a discussion of the matter(s) for which the meeting was closed. With regard to the closed meeting, the following was publicly announced and recorded, and entered on the minutes of the open meeting at which the closed meeting was approved: (a)the reason or reasons for holding the closed meeting; (b)the location where the closed meeting will be held; and (c)the vote of each member of the public body either for or against the motion to hold the closed meeting. The recording and any minutes of the closed meeting will include: (a)the date, time, and place of the meeting; (b)the names of members Present and Absent; and (c)the names of all others present except where such disclosure would infringe on the confidentiality necessary to fulfill the original purpose of closing the meeting. Pursuant to §52-4-206(6), a sworn statement is required to close a meeting under §52-4-205(1)(a) or (f), but a record by electronic recording or detailed minutes is not required; and Pursuant to §52-4-206(1), a record by electronic recording and/or detailed written minutes is required for a meeting closed under §52-4-205(1)(b),(c),(d),(e),and (g): A record was not made. A record was made by: : Electronic recording Detailed written minutes I hereby swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Presiding Member Date of Signature A quorum of the Council was present at the meeting and voted by at least a two-thirds vote, as detailed in the minutes of the open meeting, to close a portion of the meeting to discuss the following: §52-4-205(l)(a) discussion of the character, professional competence, or physical or mental health of anindividual; X X X X Victoria Petro (May 21, 2024 19:06 MDT) May 21, 2024 May 21, 2024 Closed Meeting Sworn Statements (001 & 002) Final Audit Report 2024-05-22 Created:2024-05-21 By:DeeDee Robinson (deedee.robinson@slcgov.com) Status:Signed Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAAwcCj0AIYszZf59nj08YZwBuPDBkSCxqt "May 21, 2024 Closed Meeting Sworn Statements (001 & 002)" History Document created by DeeDee Robinson (deedee.robinson@slcgov.com) 2024-05-21 - 11:56:26 PM GMT Document emailed to victoria.petro@slcgov.com for signature 2024-05-21 - 11:58:26 PM GMT Email viewed by victoria.petro@slcgov.com 2024-05-22 - 1:05:57 AM GMT Signer victoria.petro@slcgov.com entered name at signing as Victoria Petro 2024-05-22 - 1:06:34 AM GMT Document e-signed by Victoria Petro (victoria.petro@slcgov.com) Signature Date: 2024-05-22 - 1:06:36 AM GMT - Time Source: server Agreement completed. 2024-05-22 - 1:06:36 AM GMT