Loading...
01/05/2021 - Formal Meeting - Meeting MaterialsSALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FORMAL MEETING January 5,2021 Tuesday 7:00 PM This meeting will be an electronic meeting pursuant to the Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation. SLCCouncil.com CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS: Chris Wharton,Chair District 3 Andrew Johnston,Vice Chair District 2 James Rogers District 1 Ana Valdemoros District 4 Darin Mano District 5 Dan Dugan District 6 Amy Fowler District 7 Generated:16:06:55 This meeting will be an electronic meeting pursuant to the Chair’s determination that conducting the City Council meeting at a physical location presents a substantial risk to the health and safety of those who may be present at the anchor location. The Salt Lake City Council Chair has determined that conducting a meeting at an anchor location under the current state of public health emergency constitutes a substantial risk to the health and safety of those who may attend in person.For these reasons,the Council Meeting will not have a physical location at the City and County Building and all attendees will connect remotely. Members of the public are encouraged to participate in meetings.We want to make sure everyone interested in the City Council meetings can still access the meetings how they feel most comfortable.If you are interested in watching the City Council meetings,they are available on the following platforms: •Facebook Live:www.facebook.com/slcCouncil/ •YouTube:www.youtube.com/slclivemeetings •Web Agenda:www.slc.gov/council/agendas/ •SLCtv Channel 17 Live:www.slctv.com/livestream/SLCtv-Live/2 If you are interested in participating during the Formal Meeting for the Public Hearings or general comment period,you may do so through the Webex platform.To learn how to connect through Webex,or if you need call-in phone options,please visit our website or call us at 801-535-7607 to learn more. As always,if you would like to provide feedback or comment,please call us or send us an email: •24-Hour comment line:801-535-7654 •council.comments@slcgov.com More info and resources can be found at:www.slc.gov/council/contact-us/ Upcoming meetings and meeting information can be found here:www.slc.gov/council/agendas/ Based on feedback we have received,we will be going back to our regular Formal Meeting format.Public hearings will be heard in the order on the agenda followed by a general comment session later in the meeting. Please note:Dates not identified in the FYI -Project Timeline are either not applicable or not yet determined. WELCOME AND PUBLIC MEETING RULES A.OPENING CEREMONY: 1.Council Member Chris Wharton will conduct the formal meetings. 2.Pledge of Allegiance. 3.Welcome and Public Meeting Rules. 4.The Council will approve the formal meeting minutes of Tuesday,November 10, 2020;Tuesday,November 17,2020;and Tuesday,December 1,2020. B.PUBLIC HEARINGS: 1.Ordinance:Budget Amendment No.6 for Fiscal Year 2020-21 The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City,including the employment staffing document,for Fiscal Year 2020-21.Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets,including proposed project additions and modifications.The proposal includes funding to cover cost increases to turn the historic Fisher Mansion Carriage House into a recreation hub,create a redevelopment plan for the former Glendale Waterpark,and consolidate multiple employee positions in different departments and add one new position to form a new City Innovations Team,among other changes. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,January 5,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -Tuesday,December 8,2020 Hold hearing to accept public comment -Tuesday,January 5,2021 and Tuesday, January 19,2021 at 7 p.m. TENTATIVE Council Action -TBD Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). C.POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS: NONE. D.COMMENTS: 1.Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. 2.Comments to the City Council.(Comments are taken on any item not scheduled for a public hearing,as well as on any other City business.Comments are limited to two minutes.) E.NEW BUSINESS: 1.Motion:Nomination of Council Chair and Vice Chair for Calendar Year 2021 The Council will consider a motion to ratify the election of Chair and Vice-Chair of the Salt Lake City Council for calendar year 2021. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,January 5,2021 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,January 5,2021 Staff Recommendation -Suspend the rules and adopt. 2.Motion:Meeting Remotely Without an Anchor Location The Council will consider a motion to ratify the determination that the Council will continue to meet remotely and without an anchor location under HB5002. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -n/a Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,July 7,2020;Tuesday,August 11,2020; Tuesday,September 1,2020;Tuesday,October 6,2020;Wednesday,October 28, 2020;Tuesday,November 17,2020;Tuesday,December 8,2020;and Tuesday, January 5,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). F.UNFINISHED BUSINESS: 1.Resolution:Funding Our Future:Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement with the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) The Council will consider adopting a resolution that would authorize the Mayor to enter into two proposed adjustments to an interlocal agreement (ILA)with UTA. Amendment to Addendum No.2 provides accounting adjustments and credits to the City for cost savings from COVID-19 related bus service reductions,reaching service thresholds,and actual fuel costs.Addendum No.3 is the service agreement from August 2020 to August 2021 for the Frequent Transit Service (FTN)routes on 200 South,900 South,and 2100 South streets.The ILA is a twenty-year agreement with a goal of full implementation of the Frequent Transit Network as described in the City’s Transit Master Plan. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -Tuesday,December 8,2020 Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,January 5,2021 Staff Recommendation -Refer to motion sheet(s). G.CONSENT: 1.Board Reappointment:Police Civilian Review Board –Jessica Andrew The Council will consider approving the reappointment of Jessica Andrew to the Police Civilian Review Board for a term ending November 21,2021.Jessica recently moved to District One from District Seven.The board's District One seat was recently vacated by Kevin Park who was term limited.The Administration is recommending Jessica finish her first term in the now vacant District One seat. FYI –Project Timeline:(subject to change per Chair direction or Council discussion) Briefing -n/a Set Public Hearing Date -n/a Hold hearing to accept public comment -n/a TENTATIVE Council Action -Tuesday,January 5,2021 Staff Recommendation -Approve. H.ADJOURNMENT: CERTIFICATE OF POSTING On or before 5:00 p.m.on _____________________,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. 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. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 1 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in an electronic Special Formal Session on Tuesday, November 10, 2020 pursuant to the Chair determination and Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation No. 2 of 2020 (2)(b). The following Council Members participated electronically: Chris Wharton Amy Fowler James Rogers Andrew Johnston Daniel Dugan Darin Mano The following Councilmember was absent: Analia Valdemoros Cindy Gust-Jenson, Council Executive Director; Jennifer Bruno, Council Executive Deputy Director; Erin Mendenhall, Mayor; Rachel Otto, Mayor’s Chief of Staff; Katherine Lewis, City Attorney; Sylvia Richards, Council Public Policy Analyst; Nick Tarbet, Council Senior Public Policy Analyst; Russell Weeks, Council Senior Public Policy Analyst; Benjamin Luedtke, Council Public Policy Analyst; and DeeDee Robinson, Deputy City Recorder participated electronically. The meeting was called to order at 7:15 p.m. A. OPENING CEREMONY #1. Council Member Chris Wharton will conduct the formal meetings. #2. 7:16:20 PM Pledge of Allegiance. (A moment of silence was held while the American Flag/Anthem was displayed on the screen) #3. 7:17:13 PM Welcome and Public Meeting rules. #4. 7:17:26 PM Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to approve the Work Session meeting minutes of Tuesday, September 15, 2020 as well as the Special Limited Formal meeting minutes of Wednesday, October 28, 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). View Minutes (M 20-3)(M 20-4) B. PUBLIC HEARINGS Note: 7:21:11 PM Items B1 & B2 were heard as one public hearing #1. Grant Application: Salt Lake Rotary Foundation – Furniture and Supplies for Utah State Fairground YouthCity Site. The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the Division MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 2 of Youth and Family Services to the Salt Lake Rotary Foundation. If awarded, the funding would be used for furniture and supplies to set up the new YouthCity site at the Utah State Fairgrounds. The Administration intends to open this new site in mid-November to early December 2020. View Attachment #2. Grant Application: Child and Adult Care Food Program Reimbursement for YouthCity Program Snacks. The Council will accept public comment for a grant application request from the Division of Youth and Family Services to the Utah State Office of Education. If awarded, the funding would be used to reimburse the YouthCity Program for snacks given to participants during the 2020-21 school year. View Attachment Sylvia Richards, Council Public Policy Analyst, introduced the two attached grant items. Emily Alworth expressed support for both grant items. Councilmember Dugan moved and Councilmember Mano seconded to close the public hearing and refer Items B-1 and B-2 to a future Consent Agenda, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (B 20-3) #3.7:24:59 PM Ordinance: Fleet Block Zoning Amendments (300 and 400 West and between 800 and 900 South). The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would create a new land use zone titled Form-Based Urban Neighborhood 3 (FB- UN3) and rezone the 10-acre City block known as the Fleet Block (located between 300 and 400 West and between 800 and 900 South) from Public Land (PL) and General Commercial (CG) to FB-UN3. The area was previously used by the City for a fleet maintenance facility that has since been relocated. Form-Based code focuses on the form and appearance of buildings. It also has more regulations that control those aspects of development than traditional zones. The proposal would apply regulations to future developments such as building design, height, bulk, use, and other development standards and land uses. The regulations are intended to support the block’s redevelopment. Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. Other sections of Title 21A – Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition. Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. View Attachment Nick Tarbet, Council Senior Public Policy Analyst, introduced the attached proposal. He said the Council had previously received comments expressing concern regarding future development negatively impacting the murals at this location and noted there were no immediate impacts/development plans at this time. He added there would be future opportunity for feedback regarding development of the property. He MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 3 specified this was the first of two public hearings. 7:35:25 PM Councilmember Wharton noted there was nothing in the current zoning that was preserving the murals at this location and added that his statement was not intended to influence any comments made regarding the proposal. CC Cummings, Jessy Salas, Michael Showalter, Tash, Grace Menzie, Kendee Hamilton, Shawn Wilson, Rae Duckworth, Madeline Gearheart, Beverly Hawkins, Misti Okimoto, Janet Alcala, Mike Zee, Natalie Blanton, John Ause, Marvin Oliveros, Kay M., Mitch Poen, Nancy Johnson, Karen Crow, Julie Cordell-Seamons, Lex Scott, and Alexis Athens provided comments regarding the murals located on the Fleet Block. In summary, comments included: • Community involvement needed regarding development of property (creation of a community advisory group); • Artwork (murals) being therapeutic/sacred space/important place for grieving/celebrating life for families/community and promoting unity in the community; • Rezoning the block would allow gentrification to continue; • Transparency being important (current lack of transparency); • Demanding the Council commit (despite any development) to keeping murals on-site/protect murals at all costs; • Communities needing places to congregate, organize events, etc. that include public art; • Fleet Block should not be used for high-cost housing (needing to choose people over profit;) • Destroying the murals being a monumental mistake, causing devastating damage/impact to the community; and • Suggested alternative uses for the property: community garden, affordable housing, farmers market, and public park. Nigel Swaby and Alixander Court provided comments in support of the rezoning. In summary, comments included: • Public/open space should be provided within the development • Murals important to the community and should be preserved • Current area was blighted • City/Council performing due diligence regarding the property Paul Johnson, Anne Charles, Emily Alworth, and Antonio BB provided comments in opposition to the rezoning. In summary, comments included: • Rezoning the block would allow gentrification to continue, taller buildings, and high cost development; • Proposing the block be converted to a park (area lacking green MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 4 space/trees); • Suggesting an alternative zoning designation that would provide development desired by the public; and • More important to provide a space for the community to gather. George Chapman suggested the Fleet Block become a park and recommended the murals be an anchor point for a Black Lives Matter plaza for public gatherings, shows, and protests. Ashley Cleveland offered the Council alternative options for the Fleet block: keeping the block zoned for public land/use as a public park, tabling the rezone for a more appropriate time, choosing a new block for development (not located on the 900 Street corridor), and decrease scope of code change (break up the block/rezone smaller portion). 8:10:18 PM Councilmember Wharton took a moment of personal privilege to inform the public that Councilmember Valdemoros wanted her constituents to know she would have been present at the meeting but was unable to attend because she was recovering from the recent birth of her child. Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to close the public hearing and note a second public hearing has been scheduled for November 17, 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (P 20-23) #4.8:46:25 PM Ordinance: Congregate Care Text Amendment Additional Recommendations. The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would create a land use classification to address short-term housing for the terminally ill and seriously ill (sometimes known as eleemosynary, residential support, group home, assisted living facility, or congregate care facilities). The updated proposal includes reviewing compatibility concerns for how this land use, and others like it, would impact the adjacent residential neighborhoods, particularly the Institutional Zoning District. Related provisions of Title 21A – Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition. Petition No. PLNPCM2016-00024. View Attachment Mr. Tarbet introduced the attached proposal and specified this was the first of two public hearings. Anne Charles, Emily Alworth, and Alixander Court provided comments in support of the proposal. In summary, comments included: • Additional proposed housing was needed; MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 5 • Importance of ensuring care facilities followed all guidelines; • Proposal allowing more access to housing for the disadvantaged; and • Providing ability to accommodate more diverse establishments. George Chapman spoke in opposition of the proposal and said assisted living centers did not make sense in the middle of neighborhoods, and congregate care facilities should be near commercial services (stores, restaurants, etc.) Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to close the public hearing and note a second public hearing has been scheduled for November 17, 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (P 19-1) #5.8:54:40 PM Ordinance: Shared Housing Zoning Text Amendments (formerly Single Room Occupancy or SROs). The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend various sections of Title 21A of the Salt Lake City Code pertaining to Single Room Occupancy (SRO) uses (to be called Shared Housing uses). The proposed amendments would redefine what was previously Single Room Occupancy (SRO) housing to Shared Housing, and defines it as a residential building, or part of one, that contains smaller housing units consisting of one or more sleeping rooms and contains either a private kitchen or private bathroom, but not both. In the updated proposal, units could contain multiple sleeping rooms, rather than limiting the unit to one sleeping room. Other sections of Title 21A – Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition. Petition No. PLNPCM2018-00066. View Attachment Russell Weeks, Council Senior Public Policy Analyst, introduced the attached proposal and specified this was the second public hearing. Nigel Swaby, Anne Charles, Emily Alworth, and Michael Showalter spoke in support of the proposal. In summary, comments included: • Single occupancy housing providing an important niche for low- income population of the City; • Proposal should be expanded to other areas of the City as well as beyond Salt Lake City; and • Properly managed shared housing allowing for a new start/transitioning from homelessness. Shelley Bodily, Paul Johnson, Ryan O’Mahony, Michelle Goldberg, George Chapman, and Amy Hawkins spoke in opposition of the proposal. In summary, comments included: • Proposed housing/living style bringing more crime/negatively MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 6 impacting the Ball Park area of the City; • Geographic limitations of the proposal being un-fair/equitable (targeting low-income areas west of State Street and lacking east/west geographical equity); • Shared housing should be dispersed across the State/integrated into every City; • More beneficial to integrate shared housing into existing/newly built apartment buildings (promoting more diversity/redistributing equity of housing across the community); • Proposed ordinance would discourage the building of high-density housing in Salt Lake City (implement inclusionary zoning instead); and • Shared/low-cost housing causing increased loitering and encouraging/enabling criminal behavior. Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to close the public hearing and defer action to a later date, which motion carried, all members present vote aye (roll call). (P 19-5) #6.9:13:23 PM Ordinance: Budget Amendment No. 4 for Fiscal Year 2020- 2021. The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2020-21. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. The proposal includes: • $1.5 million as part of a proposed expansion to the Accelerator program ($500 prepaid debit cards in direct aid to resident’s ineligible for CARES Act stimulus checks); • a new apprentice program pairing high school students and young adults with City employees; • additional funding for the enhanced YouthCity program; • homeless camp clean-up funding; • a downtown ambassadors program expansion into the Rio Grande neighborhood and North Temple area; • and other items. View Attachment Benjamin Luedtke, Council Public Policy Analyst, introduced the attached proposal and specified a second public hearing was scheduled for November 17, 2020. Nigel Swaby spoke regarding the downtown ambassador program expansion and said it provided expanded reach of the program to other areas of the City (assisting neighborhoods affected by crime/vagrancy). MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 7 Emily Alworth and Kay M. provided comments opposing the proposal. In summary, comments included: • Not enough funding provided for the Accelerator program; • CARES money should not be funding homeless camp clean-up and the downtown ambassador program; and • Provide City-permitted homeless camping zones. Anne Charles said she was in favor of the expansion of the Accelerator program; however, she expressed concerns regarding homeless camp clean-up funding (used to push people out/take their belongings) and the downtown Ambassadors program (language regarding panhandling stigmatizing homeless). George Chapman said he was against funding Hogle Zoo utilities and felt the proposed amendment needed more funding for additional police officers. He suggested repurposing a portion of the prison tax for more lateral police transfers to fully staff the Police Department. Tash and Rae Duckworth said they opposed funding for homeless camp clean-ups and priority should be made to provide shelters/needed resources (restrooms, healthcare, mental health resources, job placement, etc.). Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to continue the public hearing to Tuesday, November 17, 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (B 20-11) #7.9:28:20 PM Ordinance: Budget Amendment No. 5 for Fiscal Year 2020- 2021. The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2020-21. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. The proposal includes: • accepting $7.1 million in U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) CARES Act grants which will be awarded to specific community organizations through a separate, open, and competitive process; • adding temporary lighting near homeless resource centers; • repairs to City sidewalks damaged during the September 8 windstorm; • demolition of the Glendale water park; • $20.5 million from the next issuance of the $87 million voter- approved Streets Reconstruction Bond; MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 8 • and other items. View Attachment Mr. Luedtke introduced the attached proposal and specified this was the first public hearing and a second public hearing/briefing was scheduled for November 17, 2020. George Chapman spoke about the Animal Services Contract (including the Raccoon Abatement Program) needing to be better publicized, temporary lighting proposal should be made permanent/more extensive (near resource centers), and funding should be provided for more cop-cams/camera installations for adjacent businesses near resource centers. Emily Alworth said more clarity/accessibility was needed regarding materials provided for the proposed amendment (for public to understand what was proposed), budget for the Vice Presidential debate being too high (tax-payers should not be footing the bill), and the description of the Refuse Packers (Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) fueled delivery systems) was confusing/disappointing coming from the Sustainability Department. Tash said the Housing & Urban Development (HUD) funding portion of the proposal should go to legitimate community organizations (Wasatch Front, Rose Park Brown Berets, etc.) to ensure funding went directly to the community, the Glendale waterpark space should be provided to the community as a park, and requested more clarification regarding the Streets Reconstruction Bond (what it was to be used for). Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Johnston seconded to continue the public hearing to November 17, 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (B 20-12) C. POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS #1.9:36:15 PM Ordinance: Rezone and Master Plan Amendment at 833 South 800 East (Telegraph Exchange Lofts). The Council will consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the zoning map and future land use map for property located at 833 South 800 East. If approved, the property would be rezoned from R-2 (Single & Two-Family Residential) zoning designation to RMF-45 (Moderate/High-Density Multi-family Residential). The future land use map designation would change from “Low- Density Residential” to "Medium/High Density Residential”. The applicant also owns the adjacent property at 847 East 800 South (the Telegraph Exchange Building). Under the proposal, the two properties would be consolidated into one parcel for the development of 23 residential units. Consideration may be given to another zoning district with similar characteristics. Petition No. PLNPCM2019-01110 and Petition No. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 9 PLNPCM2019-01111. View Attachment 9:36:31 PM Councilmember Wharton read a statement from Councilmember Valdemoros in her absence regarding negotiation with the developer to retain three new affordable housing units for the next five years. 9:38:35 PM Councilmember Mano made a statement regarding the issue of additional residential density being appropriate for this location. Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to adopt Ordinance 50 of 2020, subject to the Administration entering into a development agreement with the applicant which includes the following conditions: 1) Provide three two-bedroom townhome rental units at 80% area median income for a period of not less than five years from the issuance of a certificate of occupancy, 2) Height of the townhome building will not exceed 30 feet. Councilmember Mano proposed an amendment to the motion to include a third condition: Limiting the total number of units to 23 on this property and the adjacent property. Council Members Rogers and Fowler accepted the amendment. Councilmember Mano proposed an additional amendment to the motion to add additional language to the second condition to include: “excluding parapets”. Council Members Rogers and Fowler accepted the additional amendment, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (P 20-22) D. COMMENTS #1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. There were no questions. #2.9:44:42 PM Comments to the City Council. Councilmember Wharton re-stated the rules of decorum and public comment rules. Rae Duckworth spoke regarding the Fleet Block murals and expressed concerns that if the block was rezoned, it would be sold to developers for the City to profit off those who were deceased at the hand of police officers. She also said the Council/police needed to stop harassing unsheltered/homeless and suggested the Council provide individual outreach to the unsheltered. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 10 Melinda McIlwaine and Nancy McHugh spoke about the Inland Port (Board). In summary, comments included: • Concern for increased air pollution; • Buildings in the Port were built unsustainably; and • Suggesting the City conduct a human health risk assessment before any further development was made (in view of global warming and the intent to make a zero-emissions City). Kelly Martensen said the United States was responsible for the killing of 62 Million un-born babies (abortion), Roe vs. Wade was being codified by the President/Vice President elect, and abortion needed to end now. Alixander Court spoke about a large/dangerous pothole on 200 South & Edison Street, and commended the Council on their solutions for the homeless population. Marvin Oliveros said he wanted to dedicate his two minutes for a moment of silence for police brutality victims and houseless residents who had died from lack of City support. Nicole Taylor said the Council needed to listen to the community, and that the Fleet Block murals were meaningful to the community/families of victims. Jeff Bair expressed concern that other speakers used the general comment period to speak on public hearing items, as well as concerns regarding speeding vehicles on 400 East (creating dangerous conditions), and suggested Councilmember Mano attend the December Liberty Wells meeting to discuss the issue. Emily Alworth suggested more transparency/clarity and comprehensive community outreach regarding agenda items addressed by the Council during Council meetings (complex language - lack of understanding from general public). George Chapman spoke about the addition of 10 additional Police Officers (Budget Amendment No. 5), Utah Transit Authority (UTA) implementing service decreases on bus routes and said UTA needed to use CARES Act funding and recent tax increases to implement one-dollar bus fares. Tash spoke regarding issues surrounding homelessness (deserving basic human rights), pothole needing to be fixed (previous speaker’s concern), speed limit sign needed on 400 East (previous speaker’s MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 11 concern), abortion being a woman’s choice (previous speakers concern), and inquired about the legalization of marijuana in Utah. Anne Charles spoke about the Telegraph Exchange Lofts (833 South 800 East) and said the three affordable units for five years was not long enough, and that three out of 23 units was not enough. Michael Showalter spoke about deaths caused by police officers (24% of all gun related deaths in 2019), homeless camp clean-ups, and suggested funding for health care/affordable housing for the homeless. Jesse Salas said more resources (social workers) should be provided for the unsheltered population, homelessness stemmed from the opioid crisis in Utah, and the legalization of marijuana would allow relief/alleviate issues of the opioid crisis. E. NEW BUSINESS NONE. F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS NONE. G. CONSENT 10:15:07 PM Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to adopt the Consent Agenda except for Item #4 (appointment of Marie Bambo to the Police Civilian Review Board), which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). #1. Ordinance: Dockless Shared Mobility. The Council will set the date of Tuesday December 1, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would regulate the use of electric scooters and other dockless, shared mobility devices in the City. The Council would also consider amending the Consolidated Fee Schedule as part of the dockless shared mobility device ordinance. Currently, dockless scooter companies operate under temporary operating agreements until an ordinance is passed. The latest version of a draft ordinance was sent to the Council in March 2020. The updated ordinance incorporates some feedback and concerns including additional requirements for safety features, insurance requirement changes, and language to better differentiate between scooters and devices – motorized or otherwise – used by individuals with reduced or specialized mobility, among other changes. View Attachment (O 20-12) MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 12 #2. Board Appointment: Police Civilian Review Board – Perry Bankhead. The Council will consider approving the appointment of Perry Bankhead to the Police Civilian Review Board for a term ending September 4, 2023. View Attachment (I 20-32) #3. Board Appointment: Police Civilian Review Board – Tonya Allred The Council will consider approving the appointment of Tonya Allred to the Police Civilian Review Board for a term ending September 4, 2023. View Attachment (I 20-32) #4. (Item Pulled) Board Appointment: Police Civilian Review Board – Marie Bambo. The Council will consider approving the appointment of Marie Bambo to the Police Civilian Review Board for a term ending September 4, 2023. View Attachment (I 20-32) #5. Board Reappointment: Police Civilian Review Board – Catalina Pilar Cardona. The Council will consider approving the reappointment of Catalina Pilar Cardona to the Police Civilian Review Board for a term ending September 5, 2022. View Attachment (I 20-32) #6. Board Reappointment: Police Civilian Review Board – Rebekah Myers. The Council will consider approving the reappointment of Rebekah Myers to the Police Civilian Review Board for a term ending September 5, 2022. View Attachment (I 20-32) #7. Board Reappointment: Human Rights Commission – Shauna Doumbia The Council will consider approving the reappointment of Shauna Doumbia to the Human Rights Commission for a term ending December 30, 2024. View Attachment (I 20-20) #8. Board Reappointment: Historic Landmark Commission - Robert Hyde. The Council will consider approving the reappointment of Robert Hyde to the Historic Landmark Commission for a term ending October 4, 2024. View Attachment (I 20-31) The meeting adjourned at 10:16 p.m. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 10, 2020 20 - 13 ______________________________ Council Chair ______________________________ City Recorder This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as additional discussion may have been held; please refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b). This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the Salt Lake City Formal Session held November 10, 2020. dr MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020 20 - 1 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in an electronic Formal Session on Tuesday, November 17, 2020 pursuant to the Chair’s determination and Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation No. 2 of 2020 (2)(b). The following Council Members were in virtual attendance: Chris Wharton James Rogers Andrew Johnston Daniel Dugan Darin Mano Amy Fowler The following Councilmember was absent: Analia Valdemoros Cindy Gust-Jenson, Council Executive Director; Jennifer Bruno, Council Executive Deputy Director; Erin Mendenhall, Mayor; Rachel Otto, Mayor’s Chief of Staff; Katherine Lewis, City Attorney; Nick Tarbet, Council Senior Policy Analyst; Robert Nutzman, Council Administrative Assistant; Amanda Lau, Council Public Engagement/Communications Specialist; Cindy Lou Trishman, City Recorder; and Scott Crandall, Deputy City Recorder were also in virtual attendance. The meeting was called to order at 7:06 p.m. A. OPENING CEREMONY #1. 7:06:31 PM Council Member Chris Wharton will conduct the formal meetings. #2. 7:06:49 PM Pledge of Allegiance. (A moment of silence was held while the American Flag/Anthem was displayed on the screen) #3. 7:08:04 PM Welcome and Public Meeting rules. #4. 7:08:21 PM The Council will approve the Work Session meeting minutes of Tuesday, July 14, 2020 and Tuesday, August 18, 2020 as well as Formal meeting minutes of Tuesday, October 6, 2020. View Minutes Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Dugan seconded to approve the minutes, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (M 20-4)(M 20-3) #5. 7:09:15 PM The Council will consider adopting a joint ceremonial resolution with Mayor Mendenhall declaring November 20th as Transgender Day of Remembrance in Salt Lake City. View Attachment MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020 20 - 2 7:12:51 PM The resolution was read by Councilmember Wharton after which it was presented to Candice Metzler, Transgender Education Advocates (TEA) of Utah; Dallas Rivas, Transgender Education Advocates (TEA) of Utah; Kevin Randall, Blackbird Communication; Samantha Taylor, Utah LGBTQ+ Chamber of Commerce; and Jonathan Foulk, Utah Pride Center. The recipients commented on the importance of remembering/honoring Rita Hester and thanked the Council for the resolution. Councilmember Mano moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to adopt Resolution 38 of 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (R 20-1) #6. 7:21:30 PM The Council will consider adopting a joint ceremonial resolution with Mayor Mendenhall recognizing December 1st as World AIDS Day in Salt Lake City. View Attachment (R 20-1) The resolution was read by Councilmember Mano after which it was presented to Jared Hafen, Utah AIDS Foundation. Mr. Hafen thanked the Council for the resolution and continued support. Councilmember Fowler moved and Councilmember Johnston seconded to adopt Resolution 39 of 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (R 20-1) B. PUBLIC HEARINGS 7:26:51 PM Note: Comments/materials submitted to the City Council have been attached as part of the official record. Click link to view. https://www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meeting-comments/ #1. 7:30:04 PM Ordinance: Congregate Care Text Amendment Additional Recommendations The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would create a land use classification to address short- term housing for the terminally ill and seriously ill (sometimes known as eleemosynary, residential support, group home, assisted living facility, or congregate care facilities). The updated proposal includes reviewing compatibility concerns for how this land use, and others like it, would impact the adjacent residential neighborhoods, particularly the Institutional Zoning District. Related provisions of Title 21A Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition. Petition No. PLNPCM2016- 00024. View Attachment Councilmember Wharton introduced the attached proposal. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020 20 - 3 Jared Arvanitas said he joined the meeting just to listen. Emily Alworth and Anne Charles said they supported the proposal and felt it would be a valuable community resource. Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Mano seconded to close the public hearing and adopt Ordinance 51 of 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (P 19-1) #2. 7:34:32 PM Ordinance: Fleet Block Zoning Amendments (300 and 400 West and between 800 and 900 South) The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would create a new land use zone titled Form-Based Urban Neighborhood 3 (FB- UN3) and rezone the 10-acre City block known as the Fleet Block (located between 300 and 400 West and between 800 and 900 South) from Public Land (PL) and General Commercial (CG) to FB-UN3. The area was previously used by the City for a fleet maintenance facility that has since been relocated. Form-Based code focuses on the form and appearance of buildings. It also has more regulations that control those aspects of development than traditional zones. The proposal would apply regulations to future developments such as building design, height, bulk, use, and other development standards and land uses. The regulations are intended to support the block’s redevelopment. Consideration may be given to rezoning the property to another zoning district with similar characteristics. Other sections of Title 21A – Zoning may also be amended as part of this petition. Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00277. View Attachment Councilmember Wharton took a moment of personal privilege to read a statement about the proposal. Comments included Council Members listening to community members comments/requests (area being a community gathering place, wanting space to be saved/secured for future, meeting with advocates/family members of people depicted in the murals and sharing those conversations with the full Council), wanting area to be more than apartments/businesses, continued interaction with Council Members, Council’s ongoing desire to ensure open space/parks as part of future block development (area continuing to be a community gathering space), and committing to work with community to ensure space was designed correctly. Jennifer Bruno introduced the attached proposal and specified this was the second public hearing. She said the Administration responded to questions raised by the Council during a prior Work Session and a follow- up briefing would be scheduled to review responses and consider potential options moving forward. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020 20 - 4 Beverly Hawkins, Mary Castellanos, Rae Duckworth, Gina Thayne, Derek Dyer, Jessy Sala, Janet Alcala, Tim Dwyer, Kain Kutz, Tash, Kristin Knippnberg, Ashley, Nora Lang, Arturo Gamboa, Antonio BB, Marvin Oliveros (Save Murals), Ethan Shaw, Maggie Kutz, and MaryAnne Rojas spoke about the proposal. Comments included: • out-of-control policing, racial equity, defunding police, police brutality, encampment issues/harassment; • murals being a path to broader healing, community resource, grass roots community center, building safer communities (vital community connection); • destruction of murals being a tremendous loss, postpone development for further analysis; • community needing to gain trust with City officials, shirking responsibility, respecting victims, recognizing ongoing need for change; • honoring lives/loved ones (murals providing lasting memories); • creating a community advisory committee; • creating green/open space around murals; community input, innovation/adaptation, downsize scope of rezone; • fear of block being developed for profit, not allowing gentrification to continue, maintaining current zoning; • condemning white supremacy, bringing back people of color; • proposal lacking transparency; and • alternative uses needed for property (community garden, affordable housing, public park/farmers market). 8:18:31 PM Councilmember Johnston moved and Councilmember Mano seconded to close the public hearing, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (P 20-23) #3. 8:19:34 PM Ordinance: Budget Amendment No. 4 for Fiscal Year 2020-21 The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2020-21. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. The proposal includes: • $1.5 million as part of a proposed expansion to the Accelerator program ($500 prepaid debit cards in direct aid to resident’s ineligible for CARES Act stimulus checks); • a new apprentice program pairing high school students and young adults with City employees; MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020 20 - 5 • additional funding for the enhanced YouthCity program; • homeless camp clean-up funding; • a downtown ambassadors program expansion into the Rio Grande neighborhood and North Temple area; • authorizing the third round of CARES Act funding the City may receive in the coming weeks to cover payroll expenses in the Fire Department and 911 Department; • and other items. View Attachment Benjamin Luedtke introduced the attached proposal and specified this was the second public hearing. Rhonda Uber, Rae Duckworth, Tash, Marvin Oliveros, and Sarah Stone spoke about the proposal. Comments included need for restrooms/washing facilities for unsheltered community, camp cleanups, prohibiting the County Health Department from raiding camps (ban police participation), providing long-term solutions, housing/job placement, increasing harassment/loitering/property damage, and funding Downtown Ambassadors (assisting downtown businesses). Councilmember Wharton talked about the rules for speakers to provide their full names and said those wishing to speak anonymously needed to use the phone line. 8:32:36 PM Councilmember Fowler moved and Councilmember Rogers seconded to close the public hearing and adopt Ordinance 52 of 2020, amending the FY 2020-21 final budget of Salt Lake City including the employment staffing document as requested by the Administration (see motion), which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (B 20-11) #4. 8:34:09 PM Ordinance: Budget Amendment No. 5 for Fiscal Year 2020-21 The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2020-21. Budget amendments happen several times each year to reflect adjustments to the City’s budgets, including proposed project additions and modifications. The proposal includes: • accepting $7.1 million in U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) CARES Act grants which will be awarded to specific community organizations through a separate, open, and competitive process; • adding temporary lighting near homeless resource centers; • repairs to City sidewalks damaged during the September 8 windstorm; • demolition of the Glendale water park; MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020 20 - 6 • $20.5 million from the next issuance of the $87 million voter-approved Streets Reconstruction Bond; • and other items. View Attachment Benjamin Luedtke introduced the attached proposal and specified this was the second public hearing. He said the Administration was preparing a revised recommendation which would be transmitted to the Council. He said action on the item was scheduled for December, 2020. Marvin Oliveros said he would defer his time. Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to close the public hearing and defer action to a future date, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (B 20-12) #5. 8:36:53 PM Ordinance: Demolition of Dangerous or Boarded Buildings The Council continue to accept public comment and consider adopting changes to the City’s Demolition ordinance. The proposed changes are intended to streamline the process for demolitions on commercial and residential properties, remove the requirement for a replacement use, landscape plan and bond, and provide clarity to the enforcement process for boarded buildings. Chapters 18.48, 18.64 and 2.21.030 of the Salt Lake City Code will be amended as part of this proposal. *Note, a previous agenda occurrence incorrectly listed Chapter 18.84 instead of 18.48. View Attachment (O 20-16) Nick Tarbet introduced the attached proposal and specified two public hearings had been held. Janet Hemming spoke about how proposed regulations could potentially destroy historic/treasured homes/neighborhoods throughout the City. Nigel Swaby spoke in support of the proposal but thought an alternative option would be to have a “nuisance demolition” ordinance. Cindy Cromer talked about requirements being over burdensome and filling the landfill with demolished structures (being wasteful). She said it was important to achieve a balance and asked the Council to reevaluate the effects/results of proposed changes in two years. 8:42:38 PM Councilmember Mano moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to close the public hearing and adopt Ordinance 53 of 2020 and further MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020 20 - 7 moved to adopt the following legislative intents as outlined in the Staff Report. Councilmember Rogers made a friendly amendment to revisit the issue in two years to assess the status of the legislative intents (pros/cons). Council Members Mano and Fowler accepted the amendment. Councilmember Wharton called for the question, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (O 20-16) C. POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS None. D. COMMENTS #1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. There were no questions. #2. 8:44:30 PM Comments to the City Council. Rae Duckworth, Tash, Michael Showalter, and Marvin Oliveros reiterated public comments made during Item B2 (Fleet Block) and Item B3 (Budget Amendment No. 4). Jessy Salas thanked the Council for adopting the Transgender Day of Remembrance resolution and talked about how much that meant to the Transgender community. MaryAnne Rojas talked about the need for additional community health centers to help underserved/vulnerable members of the community (City officials needing to listen to and address community issues). E. NEW BUSINESS #1. 8:58:59 PM Motion: Meeting Remotely Without an Anchor Location The Council will consider a motion to ratify the determination that the Council will continue to meet remotely and without an anchor location under HB5002. View Attachment Councilmember Johnston moved and Councilmember Mano seconded to adopt the motion, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (G 20-9) MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020 20 - 8 F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS None. G. CONSENT 8:59:50 PM Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Johnston seconded to approve the Consent Agenda, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). #1. Resolution: 2020 Salt Lake City Water Conservation Plan The Council will set the date of Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 7:00 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting a resolution that would adopt the Department of Public Utilities’ 2020 City Water Conservation Plan. The updated plan was developed per the State’s Conservation Plan Act, in addition to other State and regional guidelines and industry best practices. Guidelines for plan development, as well as requirements in the conservation plans, include: • Water supply; • Historical water demand; • Water conservation goals; • Conservation program information; and • Adoption or approval by each water provider's governing body. The State Conservation Plan Act requires all water providers with more than 5,000 connections to submit a water conservation plan to the State every five years for review and approval. Implementation of the Water Conservation Program is included in the Public Utilities proposed budget each year. View Attachment (T 20-5) #2. Ordinances: Creating an Appeal Hearing Officer System by Repealing Civil Service Commission and Employee Appeals Board The Council will set the date of Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 7 p.m. to accept public comment and consider adopting two ordinances: 1. One would repeal City Code Chapter 2.16 (the Civil Service Commission ordinance), amend the entirety of City Code 2.24 (the Employee Appeals Board ordinance) and replace both the Civil Service Commission and the Employee Appeals Board with an appeal hearing officer system. 2. One would enact Chapter 2.98 Competitive Merit-based Recruitment and Promotion Processes in the Fire Department and the Police Department. The numbering of City Code 2.24 would remain the same, however the entire text would be replaced with the new hearing officer system for all eligible employee appeals. View Attachment MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 2020 20 - 9 (O 20-18) #3. Board Reappointment: Planning Commission – Andres Paredes The Council will consider approving the reappointment of Andres Paredes to the Planning Commission for a term ending June 16, 2023. View Attachment (I 20-9) #4. Board Appointment: Transportation Advisory Board – Paul Schulte The Council will consider approving the reappointment of Paul Schulte to the Transportation Advisory Board as a representative of the School District for a term ending September 25, 2023. View Attachment (I 20-6) The meeting adjourned at 9:00 p.m. ______________________________ Council Chair ______________________________ City Recorder This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as additional discussion may have been held; please refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b). This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the Salt Lake City Formal Session held November 17, 2020. sc MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2020 20 - 1 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in an electronic Formal Session on Tuesday, December 1, 2020 pursuant to the Chair determination and Salt Lake City Emergency Proclamation No. 2 of 2020 (2)(b). The following Council Members participated electronically: Chris Wharton Amy Fowler James Rogers Andrew Johnston Daniel Dugan Darin Mano The following Councilmember was absent: Analia Valdemoros Cindy Gust-Jenson, Council Executive Director; Jennifer Bruno, Council Executive Deputy Director; Erin Mendenhall, Mayor; Rachel Otto, Mayor’s Chief of Staff; Katherine Lewis, City Attorney; Brian Fullmer, Council Constituent Liaison/Policy Analyst; Samuel Owen, Council Public Policy Analyst; Benjamin Luedtke, Council Public Policy Analyst; and DeeDee Robinson, Deputy City Recorder participated electronically. The meeting was called to order at 7:05 p.m. A. OPENING CEREMONY #1. 7:05:03 PM Council Member Chris Wharton will conduct the formal meetings. #2. 7:05:21 PM Pledge of Allegiance. (A moment of silence was held while the American Flag/Anthem was displayed on the screen) #3. 7:06:11 PM Welcome and Public Meeting rules. #4. 7:06:30 PM Councilmember Dugan moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to approve the formal meeting minutes of Tuesday, October 20, 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye, except Councilmember Johnston who was absent for the vote (roll call). View Minutes (M 20-3) #5. 7:07:31 PM The Council will consider adopting a joint ceremonial resolution with Mayor Mendenhall in support of creating the Fairpark Public Market in partnership with the State of Utah and Salt Lake County. View Attachment Councilmember Rogers read the resolution. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2020 20 - 2 The resolution was presented to David Lewis, Chairman of the Board of Utah State Fairpark Corporation, and Larry Mullenax, Executive Director of Utah State Fairpark Corporation. Councilmember Rogers moved and Councilmember Fowler seconded to adopt Resolution 40 of 2020, which motion carried, all members present voted aye, except Councilmember Johnston who was absent for the vote (roll call). (R 20-1) B. PUBLIC HEARINGS Note: Comments/materials submitted to the City Council have been attached as part of the official record. Click link to view. https://www.slc.gov/council/virtual-meeting-comments/ #1. 7:20:43 PM Ordinance: Street Vacation Near 800 North and Warm Springs Road. The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would close a portion of 800 North Street adjacent to I-15 and Warm Springs Road. The applicant owns the property to the north and proposes that the vacated area will be split between the owners to the north and south. The closure will not impact traffic or access. The subject right-of-way is no longer used as a roadway and is generally unoccupied. Petition No. PLNPCM2019-00824. View Attachment Brian Fullmer, Council Constituent Liaison/Policy Analyst, introduced the attached proposal. Dewey Regan, Nate Secrist, and Lynn Wall (property owner to the south) indicated they were present only to listen. Councilmember Mano moved and Councilmember Johnston seconded to close the public hearing and defer action to a future meeting, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (P 20-24) #2. 7:24:37 PM Resolution: 2020 Salt Lake City Water Conservation Plan. The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting a resolution that would adopt the Department of Public Utilities’ 2020 City Water Conservation Plan. The updated plan was developed per the State’s Conservation Plan Act, in addition to other State and regional guidelines and industry best practices. Guidelines for plan development, as well as requirements in the conservation plans, include: • Water supply; • Historical water demand; • Water conservation goals; • Conservation program information; and MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2020 20 - 3 • Adoption or approval by each water provider's governing body. The State Conservation Plan Act requires all water providers with more than 5,000 connections to submit a water conservation plan to the State every five years for review and approval. Implementation of the Water Conservation Program is included in the Public Utilities proposed budget each year. View Attachment Samuel Owen, Council Public Policy Analyst, introduced the attached proposal. Cindy Cromer spoke in support of the proposal and referenced information regarding the Water Maps Program (Page 4-35), and said she looked forward to reading the document without “draft” stamped on every page. Anne Charles spoke regarding wanting to ensure accurate reporting within the plan, high water usage in the City, and the utilization of native/low water use plants/planting. George Chapman expressed concerns regarding the plan needing more flexibility with residents who wanted to conserve water (reducing landscape/park strip planting requirements) and eliminating the need for Zoning Enforcement citations regarding lack of landscaping. Emily Alworth said rebates/cost initiatives encouraged residents to be involved and more funding/effort should go to Demonstration Garden & SLCWise; however, the information on the website was outdated, and suggested collaboration with local horticulturalists to help guide up- to-date information. Councilmember Fowler moved and Councilmember Rogers seconded to close the public hearing and defer action to a future meeting, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (T 20-5) #3. 7:35:00 PM Ordinance: Dockless Shared Mobility. The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting an ordinance that would regulate the use of electric scooters and other dockless, shared mobility devices in the City. The Council would also consider amending the Consolidated Fee Schedule as part of the dockless shared mobility device ordinance. Currently, dockless scooter companies operate under temporary operating agreements until an ordinance is passed. The latest version of a draft ordinance was sent to the Council in March 2020. The updated ordinance incorporates some feedback and concerns including additional requirements for safety features, insurance requirement changes, and language to better differentiate between scooters and devices – motorized MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2020 20 - 4 or otherwise – used by individuals with reduced or specialized mobility, among other changes. View Attachment Mr. Owen introduced the attached proposal. Ado Milicevic, Mackenzie Viau, and Alex April provided comments in support of the proposal. Comments in summary included: • Scooters helping to fill transportation gaps; • Prioritizing safety and implementing best practices; • Commitment to ensuring scooters were properly parked and not ridden on sidewalks; and • Support for hybrid fee structure (upfront fee & .10 cent per trip) Dave Iltis expressed concerns regarding the proposal, including: parking limitations (where scooters/shared mobility could park) being more restrictive than automobiles, no bike lanes provided on ¾ of City streets (100 South, State Street, etc.), and the need for insurance limits to be codified in the ordinance. George Chapman suggested the City allow bicycle riding on downtown sidewalks and said scooters should not be allowed in the City until they were required to have speed limiting switches (reducing speed to 5 miles per hour). Mike Christensen indicated he was present only to listen. Councilmember Mano moved and Councilmember Dugan seconded to close the public hearing and defer action to a future meeting, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (O 20-12) #4. 7:49:23 PM Ordinances: Creating an Appeal Hearing Officer System by Repealing Civil Service Commission and Employee Appeals Board. The Council will accept public comment and consider adopting two ordinances: 1. One would repeal City Code Chapter 2.16 (the Civil Service Commission ordinance), amend the entirety of City Code 2.24 (the Employee Appeals Board ordinance) and replace both the Civil Service Commission and the Employee Appeals Board with an appeal hearing officer system. 2. One would enact Chapter 2.98 Competitive Merit-based Recruitment and Promotion Processes in the Fire Department and the Police Department. The numbering of City Code 2.24 would remain the same, however the entire text would be replaced with the new hearing officer system for all eligible employee appeals. View Attachment MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2020 20 - 5 Benjamin Luedtke, Council Public Policy Analyst, introduced the attached proposal and indicated the Council would vote on the item at the December 8, 2020 meeting. George Chapman spoke in opposition of the proposal and suggested the ordinance needed further analysis/buy-in from Public Safety employees. He added the proposal would encourage more employees to leave Public Safety (already down 50 employees) and expressed concern that the burden would lie with only one person (eliminating Civil Service Commission & Employee Appeals Board). Anne Charles indicated she was present only to listen. Councilmember Fowler moved and Councilmember Dugan seconded to close the public hearing and defer action to a future meeting, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (O 20-18) C. POTENTIAL ACTION ITEMS NONE. D. COMMENTS #1. Questions to the Mayor from the City Council. There were no questions. #2. 7:55:06 PM Comments to the City Council. Councilmember Wharton read the modified rules for general comments and reiterated the rules of decorum. Arthur Sandack indicated he did not have any comments at this time. Yvette Melby-Garcia requested the City consider enacting a law/ordinance to restrict open carry (firearms) in public parks/public spaces, after experiencing an uncomfortable/threatening situation at Sugar House Park with individuals carrying guns (threatening violence). Councilmember Wharton said this would be an issue regulated by State law and said Staff could provide the appropriate contact information. 8:07:19 PM Councilmember Wharton said the Mayor had suggested Ms. Melby-Garcia file a police report for a potential hate-crime and/or reported to the FBI as hate-rhetoric. MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2020 20 - 6 Anne Charles expressed support for the Fairpark Market initiative and concerns regarding information pertaining to Raise Up SLC (unable to find information on how to apply or who would qualify). Dave Iltis spoke regarding issues concerning the Council’s website for agenda/agenda materials (needing to be fixed for mobile viewing – creating technology barriers), the City’s plan for use of downed trees from windstorm (avoid sending to landfill), and 2200 West being an environmental tragedy (wet lands destroyed, too many warehouses). George Chapman suggested the City collaborate with the County (animal services) regarding re-implementation of pet licenses for seniors, additional lighting and mobile cop-cams were needed at resource centers and reducing diesel truck pollution (from idling) was needed. Emily Alworth spoke regarding City/Council website accessibility and said all citizens of Salt Lake City needed better access to the information which would lead to a more informed public. Councilmember Johnston took a moment of personal privilege and said he wanted more specific information on website access issues that the public was experiencing. Jennifer Bruno said Staff would be following up with the individuals to find out more about their difficulties accessing information on the City’s website. Lisa Hazel expressed concerns regarding City street lighting (too bright), and that her requests to Public Utilities for low-color temperature bulbs, had not been answered. She said this issue was important for wildlife and insects in general. E. NEW BUSINESS NONE. F. UNFINISHED BUSINESS #1. 8:17:39 PM Ordinance: Police Officer Body-worn Cameras. The Council will consider adopting a new ordinance for the Police Department’s use of body-worn cameras. The Police Department has policies for body-worn camera use and there have been executive orders relating to footage release. Currently, however, there is not a City ordinance that standardizes the policy direction. This is part of a multifaceted approach the City is taking to examine internal systems and identify paths toward better accountability and equity. View Attachments Councilmember Mano moved and Councilmember Dugan seconded to adopt Ordinance 54 of 2020, enacting Chapter 2.10.200 Regulating the Police MINUTES OF THE SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL FORMAL MEETING TUESDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2020 20 - 7 Department’s Use of Body-worn Cameras, further moving that the Council adopt the following legislative intent: • It is the intent of the Council that the Administration explore additional mechanisms to increase transparency and accountability as it relates to the regular auditing of body camera footage and that future modifications may be made to the ordinance to codify these mechanisms, which motion carried, all members present voted aye (roll call). (O 20-19) G. CONSENT NONE. The meeting adjourned at 8:19 p.m. ______________________________ Council Chair ______________________________ City Recorder This document is not intended to serve as a full transcript as additional discussion may have been held; please refer to the audio or video for entire content pursuant to Utah Code §52-4-203(2)(b). This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the Salt Lake City Formal Session held December 1, 2020. dr Item B1 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 PUBLIC HEARING MOTION SHEET CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke and Sylvia Richards Budget Analysts DATE:January 5, 2021 RE: Budget Amendment Number Six FY21 MOTION 1 – CONTINUE PUBLIC HEARING I move that the Council continue the public hearing to Tuesday, January 19. 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 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO:City Council Members FROM: Ben Luedtke and Sylvia Richards Budget and Policy Analysts DATE:January 5, 2021 RE: Budget Amendment Number Six FY2021 ________________________________________________________________________________ Budget Amendment Number Six includes requested changes to four funds. Total expenditures are $1,810,804 including $63,673 from Fund Balance. There are a total of seven items, five of which are new items in Section A. The sixth is a Housekeeping item in Section D. The seventh is a Council-added item in Section I. Additionally, this budget amendment includes the transfer of six employees from the General Fund to the IMS fund and the creation of one additional position within the IMS Fund. The Administration is requesting a straw poll on the Housing-related Funding Our Future Applications. (See Item I-1 Council-Added Item.) The Administration indicates that all seven of these budget items are time-sensitive. General Budget Updates The Administration anticipates updated sales tax revenues for October and Comprehensive Annual Finance Report (CAFR) confirmed Fund Balance numbers will be available to share with the Council at the January 5 briefing. The City received $150,000 from the County for a third round of CARES Act funding. The Administration plans to include in an upcoming budget amendment the $150,000 and a reconciliation of the second round of CARES Act funding. The President has not decided whether to declare a disaster for the September windstorm. The March earthquake did not qualify for FEMA reimbursements to the City. However, individual and household assistance is available up to $938,506. 279 applications have been submitted at the time of publishing this report. FEMA’s website for the earthquake disaster is available here: https://www.fema.gov/disaster/4548 The Administration provided the following status update on insurance claims and payments for earthquake damage to City buildings: “The City received a $2,000,000 advance payment from the property insurance carrier for earthquake damages. Once the City’s expenditures for repairs exceed $2,100,000 ($100,000 deductible + claim advance), we can submit those expenses for reimbursement.” Project Timeline: Set Date: December 8, 2020 1st Public Hearing: January 5, 2021 1st Briefing: January 5, 2021 2nd Briefing: January 12, 2021 (if needed) 2nd Public Hearing: January 19, 2021 Potential Action: TBD Page | 2 Revenue Update The Administration indicates that they are seeing a decrease in revenue budget due to trends for apartment units, new business license and business license renewals. Due to the administrative order for COVID, parking ticket revenue shows a decrease of nearly $500k due to only 51,000 pay station transactions through the end of August (normally well over 200k). This decrease is also having an effect on citations written. Additionally, Justice Court fines are down $37,000, while moving violations are down $151,000. In Charges and Services, field reservation fees are down $273,000 while auto parking fees are also under budget. Miscellaneous revenues are also down due to a decrease in special events and the elimination of take- home vehicle fees during the current pandemic. Page | 3 Fund Balance Update: This fund balance projection includes a line item adding in funding budgeted for use for expenses associated with COVID- 19 in the fiscal year 2020 that was not spent. Page | 4 Impact Fees Update The Administration provided a summary of impact fee tracking, details on refunding amounts and dates and lists of unfinished projects with impact fee funding. The information is current as of December 1, 2020. $88,479 of police impact fees are scheduled to expire by the end of this fiscal year. The Administration reports the impact fee consultant is finalizing the police section update and transmittal to the Council Office is anticipated in early 2021. Type Unallocated Cash “Available to Spend”Next Refund Trigger Date Amount of Expiring Impact Fees Fire $732,533 More than a year away - Parks $6,404,154 More than a year away - Police $318,626 December 2020 $9,155 Transportation $3,623,027 More than a year away - Note: Encumbrances are an administrative function when impact fees are held under a contract Section A: New Items (note: to expedite the processing of this staff report, staff has included the Administration’s descriptions from the transmittal for some of these items) A-1: Fisher Carriage House Exploration Center Construction Overage ($540,732 – CIP Impact Fees) See Attachment 1 for renderings of the Fisher Mansion Carriage House redevelopment project In FY20 CIP, the Council approved $1,098,764 of parks impact fees for this project which is in addition to $280,000 from the Chevron donation (2010 oil spill in Red Butte Creek). The total approved budget for the project was $1,378,764. The new funding request represents a 58% increase for a new total project budget of $2,172,496. If approved, then the available to spend balance of parks impact fees would be $5,610,422. Council staff asked the Administration if the impact fee consultant had confirmed using $253,000 of parks impact fees to purchase indoor furnishings and equipment. It was determined these expenses are for items with a useful life less than 10 years and ineligible for parks impact fees. As a result, this request was reduced from $793,732 to $540,732. It’s unclear how the $253,000 will be funded or if scope reductions can deliver the project within the approved budget. The Administration’s transmittal indicates the following: “As design development nears completion, SLC Engineering and the consulting architect, CRSA, have updated budget projections for the project. Unfortunately, those cost projections have increased significantly from the original budget estimate created in 2018 based on a preliminary conceptual design. This budget amendment requests the additional funding necessary to implement the project, which (if funded) would go to bid in December 2020 and be constructed in 2021. Increased costs for the project are associated with all project elements, but particularly relate to the preservation of historic windows and doors, interior finishes, necessary plumbing and electrical upgrades, unforeseen utility upgrades and increased cost for proposed furnishings associated with the public exhibit space”. This project is eligible for up to $100,000 from the CIP Cost Overrun Account. In previous discussions the Council expressed a preference to spend impact fees before General Fund dollars because impact fees must be spent within six years or refunded to the developer with interest. According to the Administration, “The project scope includes construction of an exploration center at the historic Fisher Carriage House that provides standing exhibits on the natural and cultural history of the Jordan River and surrounding area, and which showcases a beautiful restored historical structure. The exploration center will provide space for activities and education programs, places for visitors to engage with city staff and partners and get information about the Jordan River Parkway Trail and water trail. The center will also provide a home-base for outreach & education staff with the SLC Trails & Natural Lands Division, from which they can conduct programming up and down the Jordan River. Additionally, the project will compliment an adjacent boat ramp (construction planned for winter 2020) and create a recreational jumping-off point for the future Folsom Trail, the Jordan River Parkway Trail, and the Jordan River 'Paddle Trail”. The Administration would also like to let the Council know about future costs associated with the project. The two new employee positions and the ongoing costs listed below are anticipated to be needed for the FY23 annual budget based on the current project timeline. Future Ongoing Costs FTE Site Manager & Part-time Assistant $ 90,000.00 Supplies and Materials $ 20,000.00 Page | 5 Kayak Rental Fleet (One-Time) $ 10,000.00 Facility Maintenance Costs $ 18,238.00 Grounds Maintenance Costs $ - * TOTAL $ 138,238.00 * In Trails Natural Lands budget Policy Questions: $253,000 Indoor Furnishings Unfunded – The Council may wish to ask the Administration for funding recommendations and/or scope reductions to address the $253,000 of indoor furnishings that are ineligible for parks impact fees. Fisher Mansion Redevelopment – The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration if redevelopment of the Fisher Mansion should be prioritized instead of the Carriage House given the project cost increases. During FY20 CIP, the Administration had a general cost estimate of $3.7 million to redevelop the Fisher Mansion. Note this cost may have increased due to damage from the March earthquakes. The Administration anticipates detailed Fisher Mansion redevelopment scenarios to be available mid-2021 such as public-private partnerships, nongovernmental organization operated facility models and City-operated models. The scenarios could inform a new Request for Information (RFI) for the mansion. A-2: Glendale Water Park Redevelopment Plan ($225,000 – CIP Impact Fees) The Administration’s transmittal indicates the following: “Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment for $225,000 in parks impact fees to hire a consultant to create a Development Plan for Glendale Water Park, a Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) site. A recent community survey found slightly more than half of the 3,700 respondents supported new uses on the site. The Development Plan would articulate a long-term community supported vision for the site with phased implementation.” Full restoration of the water park may be cost prohibitive at over $20 million but reuse of some components may be feasible. According to the Administration, the first phase, (to be determined with the input of public feedback) would implement active recreation on site within the three-year LWCF requirement. The clock begins once the State LWCF official inspects the site which is currently on hold due to the pandemic. The City will receive a letter confirming the three-year deadline to restore public access to the site. A violation of the conservation easement could result in denial of future federal funding grants to the City and/or a court action by the National Parks Service to require active outdoor recreation access. The resulting redevelopment plan will be considered a small area plan. A draft will be presented to and reviewed by the Planning Commission in an open and public meeting. Then the Council will be briefed, review and have the opportunity to adopt, modify and adopt or decline the plan. As indicated by the Administration in their transmittal, “The 17-acre water park site located along the Jordan River is adjacent to two park sites, a golf course, the surplus canal and natural areas along the Jordan River… The benefits or goals of the project would include the following: Creating a plan that unifies these public amenities through connecting trails, unifying landscape character and the development of complementary recreation uses into a regional asset. Developing the water park site within the context of the more than 210 acres of public lands would foster positive activation and creating a dynamic community asset. Because this site was private for so long, the development will essentially create a new park, added to the City’s park inventory, with new service to residents and is impact fee eligible. In the time of a pandemic and political divisions, it is more important than ever to invest in dynamic public spaces that connect people and break down demographic and economic divides. The Glendale property is a unique opportunity to create a very special place the supports economic development, public health, a sense of community, and environmental sustainability as well as increase confidence in city government’s use of public funds.” Project Tasks may include but not limited to: • Analyze the site and surrounding context: opportunities and constraints • Facilitate community and stakeholder engagement: community support • Define the Park Vision: Community vision and goals • Develop conceptual site plan alternatives: Explore development alternatives and cost estimates. Include analysis of alternative plan operations and maintenance requirements and cost estimates • Develop Final Site Development Plan • Develop an implementation plan that includes plan phasing and funding strategies • Facilitate adoption by City Council. Page | 6 The Administration shared the following general timeline for project based on annual quarter (for example “Q1” is first quarter from January 1 – March 31): Q1 Engage a consultant Q2 Engagement Window #1: Foundation of Understanding Share background on the project site and City goals Gather information from the community about what kinds of activities they would like to see and priorities Understand how they see the park playing a role in their neighborhood, community, city and region Present engagement results to Council Q3 Engagement Window #2: Visioning Glendale Present preliminary site improvement vision for feedback Targeted engagement and city department collaboration Initial strategy recommendations development Present engagement results to Council Q4 Final Community Engagement Window #3 Sharing of the draft plan Focus on next steps of implementation Planning Commission Review Council hearings Q5 Plan adoption by Council Policy Question: Small Area Plan Early Council Input – The Council may wish to ask the Administration when the Council will be able to provide early policy input on the small area plan similar to the master plan process. A-3: Trailhead Property Acquisition ($275,000 – CIP Impact Fees) The Administration is requesting $275,000 of Impact Fees to purchase land for a trailhead. The Administration is prepared to provide additional details of the property in a closed session. A-4: City Innovations Team ($63,673 - General Fund/$453,399 – IMS Fund) See Attachment 2 for the Chief Innovation Officer job description The Administration’s transmittal indicates the following: “Salt Lake City Administration is looking to take transformational steps with regards to enterprise technologies and improved business practices. To do this the development of a team is required, this team will be known as the City Innovations Team. The team initially will be built upon existing resources from the Mayor’s Office, Public Services, IMS, and Community and Neighborhoods. This team will take on larger enterprise projects like the new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) effort.” The Administration states the team’s services will be available to all General Fund departments with a goal to increase service levels over time. The team will be located on the fifth floor of Plaza 349. No additional costs are needed to make that office space ready. One new FTE position, a second strategy & special projects manager, is requested for a total of seven FTEs on the team. The total annual cost for the new FTE is $106,348 but this request is for $63,673 or seven months of funding. One of the Public Services Department deputy director positions will be removed from the staffing document. Public Services will have two deputy director positions after this change. A new title and FTE, Chief Innovations Officer, will be created on the staffing document for IMS. The total annual cost for the Chief Innovations Officer is $220,500. See Attachment 2 for the job description. The team will also improve coordination and resources between the Civic Engagement Team and IMS Media Services. A further step to improve engagement is to combine SLC Media Services and the Civic Engagement Team into a city-wide communications/engagement team in the Information Management Services (IMS) which is an internal service department. As indicated in the transmittal, “Currently, departments work with both teams separately to develop engagement and communications strategies for projects. Both teams also co-manage SLCgov social media accounts. By combining the groups, the City can create a one stop shop for engagement & communications efforts.” The proposal also includes operational costs associated with the team. The positions include: Public Services: Chief Innovations Officer – Nole Walkingshaw transfer FTE Deputy Director position Strategy & Special Projects Manager – Alyssa Johnson transfer FTE Strategy & Special Projects Manager From Community and Neighborhoods: Civic Engagement Team – Four FTE’s transferred from Community and Neighborhoods Page | 7 o Elizabeth Buhler, Civic Engagement Manager o Kyle Strayer, Civic Engagement Program Specialist o Christianna Johnson, Civic Engagement Program Specialist o Ronnie Buttons, Special Projects Assistant New Position: Strategy & Special Projects Manager Policy Questions: In addition to the ERP effort, will there be other projects this group tackles in its first year? From a longer-term perspective, will this team be similar to an internal service for all City departments? Or will that be project or service dependent? Back when the Civic Engagement Team was initially created, it was anticipated that they would provide support and engagement work for both branches of government. As the group launched and the Council Office’s communications work evolved, there has been a different but successful way that the groups coordinate. Will the future Innovations Team, and specifically engagement staff, continue to be available to extend and collaborate on the Council engagement efforts? A-5: Police Department Hiring Class ($ -0- General Fund) See Attachment 3 for the Administration's memo about this request. The transmittal indicates the following: “The Administration and the Police Department are seeking Council support for the hiring of a police recruit class in January or February of 2021. The Police Department is not seeking additional funding but will use current budget for fully funded positions and attrition savings from the first six months of the year”. Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section (None) Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section (None) Section D: Housekeeping D-1: Airport Interim Financing ($ -0- Airport Fund) The Administration’s transmittal indicates the following: “Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA) plans to issue interim financing up to $300 million in the form of either Commercial Paper backed by a Letter of Credit or a revolving Line of Credit directly with a bank. We are currently in procurement and are negotiating the terms of the agreement which we deem to be favorable especially considering the low interest rate environment. These funds will ultimately be refunded with long term debt, but we will maintain the facility for upwards of three years to help with financial flexibility on the Airport Redevelopment Project. These funds can be used for operating and maintenance expenses or to fund construction costs as determined by the Airport Finance division”. If the Council approves this request, then the Administration will transmit a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of bonds not to exceed $300 million. A public hearing must be held after the resolution is approved and following public notice of the bonds issuance per state law. Council staff is working with the Administration to understand the time sensitivity of the resolution in January. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources (None) Section F: Donations (None) Section G: Council Consent Agenda – Grant Awards (None) Section I: Council Added Items I-1: Housing-related Funding Our Future Applications (time-sensitive) Straw Poll Request The Administration has indicated that two categories of applications received fewer funding requests than what the Council approved in the FY21 annual budget, and two categories received more funding requests. The Administration is requesting a straw poll from the Council to approve a shift of the unallocated $797,000 to unmet Incentivized Rent and Page | 8 Vulnerable Populations needs. CATEGORY TOTAL BUDGET TOTAL FUNDING REQUESTED IN APPLICATIONS Community Land Trust $500,000 $0 Landlord Assurance Program $350,000 $53,000 Incentivized Rent Assistance $900,000 $2,323,512 Service Models for the Most Vulnerable (children experiencing homelessness and individuals with mental illness) $200,000 $725,380 The $900 billion pandemic relief bill approved by Congress (pending presidential action at the time of writing this staff report) includes an extension of the national eviction moratorium through January 31, 2021 and $25 billion in rental assistance, however, it’s unclear how those funds will be distributed / accessed by landlords and renters. Utah is estimated to receive $214 million. The public facing website www.fundingourfutureslc.com provides the following program descriptions: Community Land Trust (CLT): make homes perpetually affordable. There are currently 9 properties in the CLT. The program reduces the cost of home ownership significantly, decreasing the purchase price of a home by removing the land cost from the total mortgage price. Landlord Assurance Program: works to mitigate perceived risks related to renting to low-income clients. Agency will recruit eligible landlords, provide tenant financial assistance, landlord financial assistance, and provide tenant education. Incentivized Rent Assistance: continue to fund an assistance program to stabilize low-income renters using best practices and an outcome-based approach, to help prevent homelessness. Service Models for the Most Vulnerable: support housing programs for individuals with mental illness and children experiencing homelessness. Policy questions: Outreach to Applicants – The Council may wish to ask the Administration how would potential applicants have learned about the Funding Our Future housing programs and how to apply? The Council may also wish to ask if how many applications were received in prior fiscal years for these programs. Status of Community Land Trust – The Council may wish to ask the Administration for a status update on the City’s Community Land Trust and how the model compares to others around the nation. Balance of Other Housing Budgets – The Council may wish to ask the Administration if the other Funding Our Future budgets for FY21 have been spent or if funds remain that could be recaptured for urgent housing assistance. Connecting Applicants with Other Funding Sources – The Council may wish to ask the Administration how applicants are connected with other funding sources from the City, County, State, Federal (such as HUD Grants) when Funding Our Future budgets are less than applicant’s requests. I-2: HUD-CV Emergency Services Grant for the Temporary Winter Shelter ($750,000 – ESG-CV Grant) A request was made through the City’s modified mid-year HUD Cares Act funding cycle for $750,000 to fund the operating costs at the temporary winter shelter. The shelter, which is located on North Temple, will be operated by Switchpoint. The Council may recall that in a previous budget amendment, the City received a round of Cares Act funding ($7.1 million) that would be set aside for a modified mid-year CDBG-type process. The Council appropriated the money, but it has been held while the Administration publicized the funding availability and received applications from community organizations for the grant funds for COVID-related services. The Administration has transmitted the funding log with recommendations from the Mayor and Community Development and Capital Improvement Program (CDCIP) Board. However, we are requesting that the item for Switchpoint be pulled out and considered separately in order to ensure the operating costs for the temporary shelter are in place as quickly as possible. Page | 9 Funding: Some questions may arise related to the funding partners for the temporary winter shelters. In addition to this funding request for $750,000, the Administration has shared this public funding breakdown: State ESG-CV funding, $525,000, operations, Millcreek and SLC Airport Inn. County ESG-CV funding, $234,320, operations, just Millcreek. There is also a private contribution related to security expenses at the Millcreek and Salt Lake City locations. Overall ESG Projects: The Council may also have questions about the remainder of the ESG funding availability. The log for those items is included in Attachment 4 and will be scheduled for a full briefing as soon as possible. The full briefing would include the remainder of the ESG funding requests, plus the other CDBG funding requests. As a note, based on this $750,000 request and the other applications that were received, there would be $460,828 in funding remaining for future discussion. Policy Questions: The Council may wish to ask whether additional funds will be requested for the temporary shelter. The Council may wish to ask whether there have been any conversations about the County providing funding for the Salt Lake City side operations. The Council may wish to ask about the other support costs related to shelter-resistant camping locations in the City, and whether adequate budget remains for the waste disposal and temporary restroom facilities. ATTACHMENTS 1. Fisher Carriage House Redevelopment Renderings 2. Chief Innovation Officer Job Description 3. Administration's Memo about Request for Hiring Police Officers in Budget Amendment #6 4. ESG Funding log ACRONYMS CAFR – Comprehensive Annual Financial Report CARES Act – Federal Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act CIP – Capital Improvement Program CLT – Community Land Trust COPS - Community Oriented Policing Services DAQ – Utah Division of Air Quality ERP – Enterprise Resource Planning FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency FTE – Full time employee FY – Fiscal Year HUD – United States Housing and Urban Development Department IMS – Department of Information Management Services LWCF - Land and Water Conservation Fund site RFI – Request for Information SLCDA – Salt Lake City Department of Airports Fisher Mansion Carriage House Improvements JORDAN RIVER TRAILSIDE EXPLORATION CENTER SITE PLAN W 200 S FUTURE BOAT ACCESS FOLSOM TRAIL JORDAN RIVER TRAIL PADDLE SHARE LOCKERS CARRIAGE HOUSE FISHER MANSIONJORDAN RIVERLOCATION MAP N PROPOSED BOAT ACCESS BOAT ACCESS BOAT ACCESS JORDAN RIVER TRAIL FOLSOM TRAIL NORTH TEMPLE W 200 N I - 15 I - 80 W 200 S N 800 WS 900 WN 900 WS 1000 WEMERY STS CHEYENNE STREDWOOD RDNAVAJO STCALIFORNIA AVE INDIANA AVE W 300 S W 400 S W 700 S POPLAR GROVE BLVD W 1700 S S 700 WJOR D A N R I V E R PROJECT SITE Fisher Mansion Carriage House Improvements JORDAN RIVER TRAILSIDE EXPLORATION CENTER MAIN LEVEL PLAN UPPER LEVEL PLAN N OPEN OFFICE MEETING AREA RESTROOMS WORK ROOM / FLEX SPACE UTILITY CLOSET OFFICE OFFICE EXHIBIT SPACE / FLEX SPACE EXHIBIT FOYER OFFICE Fisher Mansion Carriage House Improvements JORDAN RIVER TRAILSIDE EXPLORATION CENTER SOUTH ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION Fisher Mansion Carriage House Improvements JORDAN RIVER TRAILSIDE EXPLORATION CENTER NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION Fisher Mansion Carriage House Improvements JORDAN RIVER TRAILSIDE EXPLORATION CENTER SECTION LOOKING WEST SECTION LOOKING NORTH Fisher Mansion Carriage House Improvements JORDAN RIVER TRAILSIDE EXPLORATION CENTER PERSPECTIVE LOOKING NORTHWEST Fisher Mansion Carriage House Improvements JORDAN RIVER TRAILSIDE EXPLORATION CENTER PERSPECTIVE LOOKING NORTHEAST Fisher Mansion Carriage House Improvements JORDAN RIVER TRAILSIDE EXPLORATION CENTER PERSPECTIVE LOOKING SOUTH Salt Lake City Corporation, Human Resources Department Job Title: Chief Innovation Officer Job Code Number: xxxxxx FLSA: Exempt Pay Level: 039 EEO Code: 1 Bargaining Unit: 000 Benchmark: Executive / Administrative JOB SUMMARY: Working under the general direction of the Chief Administrative Officer (CAO), incumbent is responsible for managing the innovation process within the City and providing the necessary ecosystem that allows ideas to germinate, take root and flourish. Works closely as a management consultant to departments to develop and inspire the creation and implementation of data-driven best practices in municipal government and foster a culture of innovation, efficiency, and process improvement. Focuses on identifying and scaling creative ideas that work throughout the City’s business, operational, and administrative functions. Implements solutions in partnership with internal and external stakeholders. Acts as a strategic and forward-thinking catalyst for change throughout City Hall and identifies opportunities to improve, adapt, and implement creative, data-driven, comprehensive solutions to traditional, technological, and operational problems. Drives the organization towards innovative solutions. Assists with and coordinates the implementation of citywide administrative and policy initiatives. May direct and/or supervise staff and program functionality in the Mayor’s office. This is an appointed, at-will position without tenure and exempt from the career service system. TYPICAL DUTIES: 1. Formulates and implements effective new ideas and innovative strategies and incorporate them into the City’s plans. 2. Researches and analyzes trends in local government to forecast future changes in practices, processes, and programs; explore and import innovations from other communities for testing where they may be applicable. 3. Utilizes quantitative and research methods to identify opportunities for improvement in operations and services throughout the city. Analyzes and researches a variety of administrative and operational issues/problems/opportunities and provide sound solutions or courses of action; establishes and maintains systems for measuring, monitoring and reporting on operational and management performance citywide. 4. Formulates solutions and provides implementation alternatives to various governmental systems, processes, and service delivery models and delivers recommendations to the mayor, city council, departments, and outside agencies. 5. Evaluates the progress of innovation and adjust the pace or direction of new projects in accordance with the city’s various strategic priorities. Chief Innovation Officer - Cont. 6. Provides citywide oversight of metrics and data analytics to facilitate strategic utilization of data. 7. Forges partnerships with local community groups, companies, universities and school systems that can support the research and development of innovative solutions. 8. Works in partnership with the Chief Information Officer on identification, development, and testing of civic technologies and projects that advance the city’s Open Government mission; ensures a forward- thinking, cohesive, and strategic approach to technology in support of all municipal business units. 9. Represents the city and serves as liaison and convener with other local, state and federal agencies and related NGOs to align community innovation with broader regional and national programs. 10. Leads multi-functional, cross-departmental teams that may consist of employees from all levels of the organization. 11. Develops and equips managers in their role as change agents and leaders of innovation in their respective departments. 12. Performs highly responsible and complex administrative work related to planning and managing the activities of assigned departments and units; develops short- and long-range plans, goals, and objectives with clear objectives, outcomes, and performance measures. 13. Advises city leaders on the effective, efficient, and economical management of the areas of assignment; submitting reports; monitoring grant opportunities (i.e., local, state, federal, private) to add innovative capacity to city operations. 14. Performs other duties as assigned. KNOWLEDGE AND SKILL REQUIREMENTS: Demonstrated knowledge of: • Complexity management, organizational alignment and change management, supported by complex technology operations. • Fiscal management, including budget preparation, expenditure control, and record keeping. • Management and supervisory principles and practices. • Leadership theories and practices, work styles and teambuilding. • Principles and practices of municipal administration, functions, services and organization. • Advanced project management skills. • Organizational development principles and practices. • Innovation and continuous improvement principles and practices. • Management and supervisory principles, practices and methods. Demonstrated skill in: • Interacting with a variety of agencies and departments, community groups, elected officials, and advocates. • Developing program goals and objectives. • Developing program goals and objectives and directing, conducting and implementing planning activities. • Identifying new ideas, potential opportunities and ways of working by leveraging technologies; ability to frame problems and perspectives • Analyzing and evaluating program operations and develop and implement corrective action to resolve problems. • Establishing and maintaining effective working relationships with department management, employees, city council members, other agencies, and the general public. • Representing the city to external contacts and customers at the highest professional level. • Communicating effectively, both orally and in writing, with individuals and groups regarding complex or sensitive issues or regulations. • Facilitating group decision making and resolve complex problems at a high level of complexity. • Building and maintaining strong internal and external relationships • Influencing others toward process improvement, developing effective means to challenge assumptions and "usual" ways of doing things. • Presenting complex concepts and issues to a wide variety of audiences in an effective and understandable manner. • Communicating effectively both orally and in writing, regarding complex technical issues. • Assembling, organizing and presenting complex statistical and factual data derived from a variety of sources. • Analyzing and interpreting complex data and information; direct others involved with analysis. • Remaining current with technical developments in the field. WORKING CONDITIONS: • Light physical effort. Intermittent sitting, standing and walking. Comfortable working conditions. • Considerable exposure to stress resulting from complex problem solving, stringent project deadlines, and liaison work between City departments, Mayor’s Office, politically powerful community groups, and the City Council. A TEN YEAR PERSONAL, CRIMINAL AND EMPLOYMENT BACKGROUND CHECK IS REQUIRED FOR THIS POSITION. 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. Position Review Information Date: 3-31-2020 Departmental Approval: Lisa Shaffer, Deputy Chief of Staff HR Consultant Approval: Compensation Approval: David Salazar Notes: New job/position Request to hire Police Officer positions vacated through resignations, separations and retirements The Police Department is requesting to hire Police Officers to replace vacancies created through resignations, separations and retirements. While the Police Department understands the City Council’s resolve to increase civilian positions in community programs such as social work and relieve some of the need for police officers in the community, those positions and programs are not fully developed. The need to maintain police officer staffing to adequately respond to community needs, calls for service and emergency response is still paramount for the police department and the City. The community deserves excellence, not adequate service and we are not even at adequate. The Police Department is experiencing low staffing levels which creates difficulties in providing timely response to calls for service and other community needs. These low staffing levels have created an ever growing concern that, in the event of an emergency, the police department does not have the necessary staffing to respond to basic community safety needs or provide the level of service required to maintain safety in the city. With these low staffing levels there is very little opportunity for patrol to provide proactive policing. Contributing issues to the understaffing of police officers Resignations, Separations and retirements The Police Department is experiencing an unprecedented number of resignations, separations and retirements. From July 1, 2020 to December 20, 2020. S wo rn c ou nt by FY FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 Grand To tal 1 July 2 1 7 9 11 30 2 August 2 3 5 1 4 15 3 September 2 2 1 4 10 19 4 Octo ber 4 4 6 1 17 32 5 No vember 3 2 5 2 4 16 6 December 3 4 6 2 7 22 7 Ja nua ry 2 8 1 3 1 15 8 February 4 4 4 2 14 9 Marc h 4 2 6 1 13 10 April 2 4 3 2 11 11 May 1 4 8 4 17 12 June 3 6 6 15 Gran d Total 29 41 58 37 54 219 THIS CHART IS CALENDAR YEAR – FOR COMPARISON to Fiscal Year above THIS CHART IS CALENDAR YEAR – FOR COMPARISON to Fiscal Year above The Police Department will have 53 vacant funded (including attrition positions) sworn and 20 vacant unfunded sworn positions with the announced retirements and resignations through December 2020. There are also 3 pending vacancies for January. Departmental Leaves The number of Officers on leaves from the Police Department, including Short term disability, Workers Compensation, FMLA, ERPL, Administrative Leave, Parental Leave and Military Leave has fluctuated from 45 leaves in July to a high of 70 leaves in October. These numbers do not include accrued leave time available and taken to include Vacation, Personal Leave, Compensatory Time, Holiday and Funeral Leave. Other factors that affect officer availability include court time and training time. Quarantines The nature of police work lends itself to exposure risk of the COVID 19 virus. The Police Department has worked diligently to reduce the risk from COVID by implementing training, PPE requirements and contact tracing. Along with all other precautionary measures taken, quarantines have been necessary to reduce spread of the virus within the department and the community. COViD Quarantines This chart represents persons placed into quarantine. Quarantines last between 4 and 14 days in most cases. **The data in this chart are preliminary figures due to changing protocols throughout the time of the data collection, some data may be missing and/or incomplete. The chart above reflects the number of employees that entered quarantine per day. Quarantined employees are assigned to work telephonic but are not available for patrol response. The culmination of resignations, separations, retirements, leaves, quarantines and training creates a huge gap in staffing. The Police Department is now staffing at a level that does not provide adequate call response or timely case resolution for the community we serve. Other issues affecting staffing The city continues to see an increase year to year in calls for service Calls for Service Call time response has increased due to many factors including the increased number of calls for service and the reduced number of officers available. Protest and free speech events The City continues to experience protest and free speech events on a regular basis. For the period of March to November the city has had over 270 protests or free speech events. These events all require research and analysis. When safety concerns are identified for any event staffing for safety and investigation are also required. It also required deployment or standby of motors and public order units to mitigate potential or experienced civil unrest. Homeless Encampment cleanups The Police Department has been integral in working with the Department of Health on all encampment cleanups. This has put a strain on both on-duty and overtime resources. COVID mitigation Salt Lake County and DNR have funded overtime resources for COVID mitigation in parks and open areas of city. Working these overtime shifts have also strained the ability to staff departmental overtime patrol coverage shifts. Use of on-duty resources The Police Department continues to utilize on-duty resources for large events such as the Vice- Presidential Debate, protests, free speech events and public safety response such as homeless encampment cleanups and COVID 19 mitigation whenever possible. Use of on-duty resources is necessary to reduce the budget impacts that would occur with the use of overtime as well as the inability to fill overtime rosters with voluntary signup by officers. Inability to fill overtime shifts The police department is experiencing low rates of voluntary overtime shift signups including patrol coverage signups. This is seemingly due to many factors including morale and the increased stress that they are experiencing related to their positions. All factors mentioned above are damaging to the ability of the police department to maintain an adequate response but in totality they are detrimental to public safety, the city and the communities we serve. Budgetary Impacts of low staffing numbers The police department is experiencing multiple impacts related to the inability to retain and maintain adequate staffing. Overtime Call outs Backfill Officer mental health and wellness (workers compensation) Retirements, separations, resignations Cost of retirement, separation and resignation payouts Retention vs replacement Required attrition savings – the retirements that are providing these savings are also creating costs related to retirement payouts and overtime. Overtime needs and associated costs will continue to increase as the number of officers on staff decrease. Overtime costs will not decrease at the time officer vacancies are filled but approximately one year after the hiring process of a new officer begins. We currently have officers in the background process that could be hired in February and placed into service in January of 2022. Cyclical issues - Low staffing in an environment with increasing calls for service creates backlogs in calls for service and longer response times. The mental stress from running from call to call and never catching up creates additional stress. When officers are under additional stress that they cannot mitigate we see additional mental health and physical illness. These stress related issues have multiple costs which includes medical visits, workers compensation and leaves. When officers go out on leave, it again lowers staffing which increases the workload and stress on the other officers. Police Department efforts to improve community response times The police department has been proactive in efforts to mitigate the staffing issues presented above, but these efforts are not sustainable long term. Redeployment of resources The police department recently made a temporary reallocation of resources from investigative and special response areas of the department to patrol. This temporary redeployment will help manage calls for service in the short term but puts extreme limitations on the resources available to investigate crime, respond and investigate increasing gang related violence and criminal activity, it reduces school resource officer availability as schools return to on-site learning, reduces focused enforcement of drive by shootings, narcotics, auto theft, property crimes, reduces motor deployment availability and creates issues related to delays in solving criminal cases and taking the criminal element off the street in a timely manner. Bike squads are not currently affected, but daily needs to cover calls for service may require us to reallocate bike squad resources on a daily basis. Use of available overtime funding The police department has been utilizing available funding for overtime related to COVID from outside agencies such as Salt Lake County and the Division of Natural Resources. This funding has been temporary in nature and most of it has ended. Grant funding for overtime has been utilized when it is applicable to the grant objectives. Ongoing evaluation of community needs and the most effective ways to meet those needs Preparing to meet the long term needs of the community Hiring The police department has been working towards a hiring class to fill vacant officer positions. A hiring class can be implemented as early as February of 2021. Officers from this class will not be available to handle calls for service for 10 months which would put them in service in January of 2022. This is an extremely long time to improve staffing and calls for service response. In order to proceed with this hiring class in February of 2021, the police department would need approval to hire no later than January 12, 2021 to meet post requirements for an academy. It is paramount to maintain a consistent hiring process in order to mitigate large swings in staffing. Redeploying resources on a regular basis incurs costs in multiple areas. Consistent small academy classes are more manageable in budget and curriculum scheduling then fluctuating hiring processes. Training The police department also supports the administration, city council and the community to provide increasing training within the department. Training would need to be dynamic to meet the needs of the community and to provide training in a timely manner additional time availability for officers or overtime would be needed to accomplish additional training. 1 Utah Community Action New REQUEST:1,212,940$ Homeless Prevention CDCIP:1,212,940$ MAYOR:1,212,940$ COUNCIL:-$ Maximum Score 129 Applicant Score: 108.42 REQUEST:1,212,940$ CDCIP:1,212,940$ MAYOR:1,212,940$ COUNCIL:-$ 2 Utah Community Action New REQUEST:773,355$ Rapid Rehousing CDCIP:773,355$ MAYOR:773,355$ COUNCIL:-$ Maximum Score 129 Applicant Score: 110.81 3 The Road Home New REQUEST:50,000$ Prevention Assistance CDCIP:50,000$ MAYOR:150,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Maximum Score 129 Applicant Score: 105.89 REQUEST:823,355$ CDCIP:823,355$ MAYOR:923,355$ COUNCIL:-$ SALT LAKE CITY ESG-CV PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2020-2021 Support for households who have recently exited Rapid Re-Housing Program and are in need of an immediate intervention to retain their housing stability. ESG-CV RAPID REHOUSING TOTAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN and COVID-19 ELIGIBILITY % OF GRANT AWARD $3,986,9112020-2021 Funding Available: Emergency rental assistance for clients experiencing a COVID related crisis, and funding for case managers to provide case management services to clients. ESG-CV HOMELESS PREVENTION TOTAL Emergency rental assistance for clients experiencing a Covid related crisis, and funding for case managers to provide case management services to clients to ensure they are able to become self-reliant. ESG-CV RAPID REHOUSING APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME ESG-CV HOMELESS PREVENTION APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN and COVID-19 ELIGIBILITY % OF GRANT AWARD Aligns with Consolidated Plan and meets eligibility through the Prepare, Prevent, and Respond to COVID-19 requirement of the CARES ACT. Aligns with Consolidated Plan and meets eligibility through the Prepare, Prevent, and Respond to COVID-19 requirement of the CARES ACT. Aligns with Consolidated Plan and meets eligibility through the Prepare, Prevent, and Respond to COVID-19 requirement of the CARES ACT. ESG-CV Page 1 4 Volunteers of America New REQUEST:128,917$ Homeless Outreach Program CDCIP:128,917$ MAYOR:128,917$ COUNCIL:-$ Maximum Score 129 Applicant Score: 106.70 5 Soap to Hope New REQUEST:112,180$ Street Outreach Program CDCIP:112,180$ MAYOR:112,180$ COUNCIL:-$ Maximum Score 129 Applicant Score: 71 REQUEST:241,097$ CDCIP:241,097$ MAYOR:241,097$ COUNCIL:-$ 6 Friends of Switchpoint New REQUEST:750,000$ Salt Lake Winter Overflow Shelter CDCIP:750,000$ MAYOR:750,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Maximum Score 129 Applicant Score: 96.7 7 The Inn Between New REQUEST:114,400$ Medical Respite CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:-$ CDCIP did not score this application due to it's HUD-CV ineligibility. REQUEST:864,400$ CDCIP:750,000$ MAYOR:750,000$ COUNCIL:-$ Reach the increased number of unsheltered individuals experiencing homelessness due to COVID-19. Funding will support new positions, and to provide basic needs items. Essential care and supplies for homeless persons living on the street, including substance abuse services. Staffing costs to increase outreach. ESG-CV STREET OUTREACH TOTAL Staff costs for a medical housing, to medically frail and terminally ill homeless individuals, who need to be in a COVID-free environment due to underlying health conditions and other high-risk factors. Aligns with Consolidated Plan and meets eligibility through the Prepare, Prevent, and Respond to COVID-19 requirement of the CARES ACT. Application is HUD-CV ineligible. Application does not meet the HUD-CV definition of Emergency Temporary Shelter. ESG-CV STREET OUTREACH APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN and COVID-19 ELIGIBILITY % OF GRANT AWARD Funds will be used for staffing two 24/7 facilities that will operate as winter overflows. Shelter rental costs, staffing, food and PPE supplies will be included in the use of funds. ESG-CV EMERGENCY SHELTER TOTAL Aligns with Consolidated Plan and meets eligibility through the Prepare, Prevent, and Respond to COVID-19 requirement of the CARES ACT. Aligns with Consolidated Plan and meets eligibility through the Prepare, Prevent, and Respond to COVID-19 requirement of the CARES ACT. ESG-CV EMERGENCY SHELTER APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN and COVID-19 ELIGIBILITY % OF GRANT AWARD Emergency Shelter Housing ESG-CV Page 2 8 Salt Lake City Corporation New REQUEST:398,691$ Administration of Grant Programs * CDCIP:398,691$ MAYOR:398,691$ COUNCIL:-$ Maximum Score 129 Applicant Score: 103.9 REQUEST:398,691$ CDCIP:398,691$ MAYOR:398,691$ COUNCIL:-$ FUNDS REQUESTED FUNDS AVAILABLE Homeless Prevention 1,212,940$ 3,986,911$ Rapid Rehousing 823,355$ 3,986,911$ Street Outreach 241,097$ Emergency Shelter 864,400$ FUNDS RECOMMENDED Administration 398,691$ CDCIP:3,426,083$ TOTAL FUNDS REQUESTED:3,540,483$ MAYOR:3,526,083$ COUNCIL:-$ CDCIP Board Recommendation: AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION CDCIP:-$ MAYOR:460,828$ COUNCIL:3,986,911$ Administration Staff Analysis: APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN and COVID-19 ELIGIBILITY % OF GRANT AWARD TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: TOTALS Board Motion For Remaining ESG and CDBG Funding: To go to homeless service agencies that could help with COVID-19 vaccination, such as agencies that can help identify low income, homeless, marginalized populations, and communities of color, to obtain and receive the COVID-19 vaccine. Aligns with Consolidated Plan and meets eligibility through the Prepare, Prevent, and Respond to COVID-19 requirement of the CARES ACT. Grant administration for ESG-CV Funding. * $314,748 Has been appropriated by City Council to cover administration costs for 2020-2021. Balance will be utilized for the remainder of the grant period. ESG-CV ADMIN GRANT AWARD: (NOTE: 10% is the maximum ESG-CV amount) ESG-CV ADMIN TOTAL ESG-CV Page 3 2020-2021 Funding Available: $87,443 1 Utah Community Action REQUEST:82,196$ Housing Stability HTFAB:82,196$ MAYOR:82,196$ COUNCIL:-$ Max Score: 129 Applicant Score 119.83Applicant Score 119.83 REQUEST:82,196$ HTFAB:82,196$ MAYOR:82,196$ COUNCIL:-$ 2 Salt Lake City Corporation REQUEST:5,247$ Administration of Grant Program*HTFAB:5,247$ MAYOR:5,247$ COUNCIL:-$ Max Score: 129 Applicant Score: 109.17 REQUEST:5,247$ HTFAB 5,247$ MAYOR:5,247$ COUNCIL:-$ FUNDS REQUESTED FUNDS AVAILABLE Housing Stability $ 82,196 87,443$ Administration 5,247$ 87,443$ TOTAL FUNDS REQUESTED 87,443$ FUNDS RECOMMENDED HTF Board Recommendation:HTFAB:87,443$ MAYOR:87,443$ COUNCIL:-$ AVAILABLE FOR ALLOCATION Administration Staff Analysis:HTFAB:-$ MAYOR:-$ COUNCIL:87,443$ HOPWA-CV ADMIN APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME This funding will be utilized to provide Permanent Housing Placement (PHP) and Short-term Rent, Mortgage and Utility (STRMU) assistance for persons with HIV/AIDS, during the COVID-19 Crisis Grant administration for HOPWA-CV funding. * $314,748 Has been appropriated by City Council to cover administration costs for 2020-2021. Balance will be utilized for the remainder of the grant period. PROJECT DESCRIPTION PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN and COVID-19 ELIGIBILITY % OF GRANT AWARD Aligns with Consolidated Plan and meets eligibility through the Prepare, Prevent, and Respond to COVID-19 requirement of the CARES ACT. SALT LAKE CITY HOPWA-CV PROGRAM: FUNDING LOG 2020-2021 APPLICANT/ PROJECT NAME PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2020-2024 CONSOLIDATED PLAN and COVID-19 ELIGIBILITY HOPWA-CV HOUSING STABILITY TOTAL HOPWA-CV HOUSING STABILITY PREVIOUS GRANT AWARDS REQUEST/RECOMMENDED % OF GRANT AWARD TOTALS Aligns with Consolidated Plan and meets eligibility through the Prepare, Prevent, and Respond to COVID-19 requirement of the CARES ACT. GRANT AWARD: TOTAL FUNDS AVAILABLE: (NOTE: 6% is the HOPWA-CV admin amount.) HOPWA-CV ADMIN TOTAL HOPWA-CV Page 1 MARY BETH THOMPSON Chief Financial Officer ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE POLICY AND BUDGET DIVISION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 238 PO BOX 145467, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5455 TEL 801-535-6394 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL ___________________________________ Date Received: ________________ Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: ___________ ______________________________________________________________________________ TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 16, 2020 Chris Wharton, Chair FROM: Mary Beth Thompson, Chief Financial Officer SUBJECT: Budget Amendment #6 SPONSOR: NA STAFF CONTACT: John Vuyk, Budget Director (801) 535-6394 or Mary Beth Thompson (801) 535-6403 DOCUMENT TYPE: Budget Amendment Ordinance RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that, subsequent to a public hearing, the City Council adopt the following amendments to the FY 2020 – 21 adopted budget. BUDGET IMPACT: REVENUE EXPENSE GENERAL FUND $ 0.00 $ 63,673.00 IMS FUND 453,399.00 453,399.00 AIRPORT FUND 300,000,000.00 0.00 CIP (IMPACT FEE) FUND 0.00 1,293,732.00 TOTAL $ 300,453,399.00 $ 1,810,804.00 Lisa Shaffer (Dec 16, 2020 14:21 MST) BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Revenue for FY 2019-20 Budget Adjustments The Fiscal Year 2021 projections are coming in below budgeted revenues. The following chart shows a current projection of General Fund Revenue for fiscal year 2021. Business licensing is seeing a decrease from budget due to trends for apartment units, new business license and business license renewals. Due to the administrative order for COVID parking ticket revenue shows a decrease of nearly $500k due to only 51,000 pay station transactions through the end of August (normally well over 200k). This decrease is also having an effect on citations written. Additionally, Justice Court fines are down $37k, while moving violations are down $151k. In Charges and Services, field reservation fees are down $273k while auto parking fees are also under budget. Miscellaneous revenues are also down due to a decrease in special events and the elimination of take-home vehicle fees during the current pandemic. FY20-21 Variance Annual Revised Favorable Revenue Budget Forecast (Unfavorable) Property Taxes 111,418,455 111,418,455 - Sales and Use Tax 67,999,593 67,999,593 - Franchise Tax 26,812,125 26,812,125 - PILOT Taxes 1,508,894 1,508,894 - TOTAL TAXES 207,739,067 207,739,067 - License and Permits 28,601,482 28,225,928 (375,554) Intergovernmental 4,444,400 4,444,400 - Interest Income 1,900,682 1,900,682 - Fines & Forfeiture 3,938,848 3,202,960 (735,888) Parking Meter Collection 3,347,986 2,848,523 (499,463) Charges and Services 4,428,069 4,083,647 (344,422) Miscellaneous Revenue 4,014,037 3,435,330 (578,707) Interfund Reimbursement 20,281,706 20,281,706 - Transfers 9,750,600 9,750,600 - TOTAL W/OUT SPECIAL TAX 288,446,877 285,912,843 (2,534,034) Sales and Use Tax - 1/2 cent 32,797,506 32,797,506 - TOTAL GENERAL FUND 321,244,383 318,710,349 (2,534,034) Given the available information fund balance would be projected as follows: This projection of fund balance includes a line item adding in funding budgeted for use for expenses associated with COVID-19 in fiscal year 2020 that were not spent. 2019 Actual FOF GF Only TOTAL FOF GF Only TOTAL Beginning Fund Balance 56,104,269 10,372,054 69,441,955 79,814,009 6,625,050 36,900,813 43,525,863 Budgeted Use of Fund Balance (380,025) - (1,510,094) (1,510,094) - (4,885,620) (4,885,620) Prior Year Encumbrances (8,731,774) (3,105,004) (6,566,830) (9,671,834) - - - Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 46,992,470 7,267,050 61,365,031 68,632,081 6,625,050 32,015,193 38,640,243 Beginning Fund Balance Percent 14.57%18.52%21.06%20.76%20.20%11.38%12.30% Year End CAFR Adjustments Revenue Changes - - - - - - - Expense Changes (Prepaids, Receivable, Etc.) (3,701,982) - (4,127,838) (4,127,838) - - - Fund Balance w/ CAFR Changes 43,290,488 7,267,050 57,237,193 64,504,243 6,625,050 25,390,143 38,640,243 Final Fund Balance Percent 13.42%18.52%19.65%19.51%20.20%9.03%12.30% Budget Amendment Use of Fund Balance (1,858,647) BA#1 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - - BA#1 Expense Adjustment - (410,173) (410,173) - - - BA#2 Revenue Adjustment - 135,628 135,628 - - - BA#2 Expense Adjustment - (745,025) (745,025) - (288,488) (288,488) BA#3 Revenue Adjustment - - - - - - BA#3 Expense Adjustment - (50,000) (50,000) - (6,239,940) (6,239,940) BA#4 Expense Adjustment (2,300,000) (10,987,506) (13,287,506) - - - BA#5 Revenue Adjustment - - - - (242,788) (242,788) BA#5 Expense Adjustment - (1,350,000) (1,350,000) - (2,783,685) (2,783,685) BA#6 Revenue Adjustment - 438,980 438,980 - - - BA#6 Expense Adjustment - (3,071,042) (3,071,042) - (63,673) (63,673) FOF Revenues 3,149,980 - - - - - - Projected Revenue Shortfall 758,000 (4,297,242) (3,539,242) - (2,534,035) (2,534,035) Fund Balance Budgeted Increase 2,500,000 900,000 - 900,000 - - - Unspent COVID Funds - - - - 5,900,000 5,900,000 HAND Rent Assistance Reimbursement - 1,100,000 1,100,000 - Adjusted Fund Balance 47,081,821 6,625,050 36,900,813 43,525,863 6,625,050 20,237,534 33,487,634 Adjusted Fund Balance Percent 14.60%16.88%12.67%13.17%20.20%7.19%10.66% Projected Revenue 322,562,293 39,242,000 291,317,665 330,559,665 32,797,506 281,282,923 314,080,429 2021 Projection2020 Projection Salt Lake City General Fund TOTAL Fund Balance Projections The Administration is requesting a budget amendment totaling $300,453,399 of revenue and expense of $1,810,804.00. The amendment proposes changes in the four funds, including the General Fund, the IMS Fund, the Airport Fund and the CIP Impact Fee Fund, with $63,673 from the General Fund fund balance. The proposal includes six initiatives for Council review. Each of the initiatives are time sensitive. The proposal does include the transfer of six employees from the General Fund to the IMS fund and the creation of one additional position within the IMS Fund. A summary spreadsheet document, outlining proposed budget changes is attached. The Administration requests this document be modified based on the decisions of the Council. The budget opening is separated in eight different categories: A. New Budget Items B. Grants for Existing Staff Resources C. Grants for New Staff Resources D. Housekeeping Items E. Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources F. Donations G. Council Consent Agenda Grant Awards I. Council Added Items PUBLIC PROCESS: Public Hearing SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. ______ of 2020 (Sixth amendment to the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, for Fiscal Year 2020-2021) An Ordinance Amending Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 27 of 2020 which adopted the Final Budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2020 and Ending June 30, 2021. In June of 2020, the Salt Lake City Council adopted the final budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the employment staffing document, effective for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-118 of the Utah Code. The City’s Budget Director, acting as the City’s Budget Officer, prepared and filed with the City Recorder proposed amendments to said duly adopted budget, including the amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes specifically stated herein, copies of which are attached hereto, for consideration by the City Council and inspection by the public. All conditions precedent to amend said budget, including the employment staffing document as provided above, have been accomplished. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to amend the final budget of Salt Lake City, including the employment staffing document, as approved, ratified and finalized by Salt Lake City Ordinance No. 27 of 2020. SECTION 2. Adoption of Amendments. The budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document necessary to effectuate the staffing changes 2 specifically stated herein, attached hereto and made a part of this Ordinance shall be, and the same hereby are adopted and incorporated into the budget of Salt Lake City, Utah, including the amendments to the employment staffing document described above, for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2020 and ending June 30, 2021, in accordance with the requirements of Section 10-6-128 of the Utah Code. SECTION 3. Filing of copies of the Budget Amendments. The said Budget Officer is authorized and directed to certify and file a copy of said budget amendments, including amendments to the employment staffing document, in the office of said Budget Officer and in the office of the City Recorder which amendments shall be available for public inspection. SECTION 4. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect upon adoption. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this _____ day of __________, 2020. ________________________ CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: ______________________________ CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on __________________ Mayor’s Action: ____ Approved ____ Vetoed _________________________ MAYOR ATTEST: _______________________________ CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. _________ of 2020. Published: ___________________. Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office Approved As To Form _________________________ Jaysen Oldroyd Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Ongoing or One- time FTEs 1 Fisher Carriage House Exploration Center Construction CIP - 793,732.00 One-time - 2 Glendale Waterpark Redevelopment Plan CIP - 225,000.00 One-time - 3 Trailhead Property Acquisition CIP - 275,000.00 One-time - 4 City Innovations Team - Non Departmental GF - 453,399.00 On-going - 4 City Innovations Team - CAN GF - (166,764.00)On-going (4.00) 4 City Innovations Team - Public Services GF - (222,962.00)On-going (2.00) 4 City Innovations Team IMS 453,399.00 453,399.00 On-going 7.00 5 Police Department Hiring Class GF - - On-going - 1 Airport Interim Financing Airport 300,000,000.00 - One-time - - Total of Budget Amendment Items 300,453,399.00 1,810,804.00 - - 1.00 Total by Fund Class, Budget Amendment #1: General Fund GF - 63,673.00 - - (6.00) IMS Fund IMS 453,399.00 453,399.00 - - 7.00 Airport Fund Airport 300,000,000.00 - - - - Capital Improvement Program Fund CIP - 1,293,732.00 - - - Total of Budget Amendment Items 300,453,399.00 1,810,804.00 - - 1.00 - - Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget Amendment #6 Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed Section I: Council Added Items Section A: New Items Section D: Housekeeping Section F: Donations Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources Section G: Council Consent Agenda -- Grant Awards Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources 1 Initiative Number/Name Fund Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Revenue Amount Expenditure Amount Ongoing or One- time FTEs Fiscal Year 2020-21 Budget Amendment #6 Council ApprovedAdministration Proposed Current Year Budget Summary, provided for information only FY 2020-21 Budget, Including Budget Amendments FY 2020-21 Adopted Budget BA #1 Total BA #2 Total BA #3 Total BA #4 Total BA #5 Total BA #6 Total Total To-Date General Fund (FC 10)326,130,003 288,487.58 6,184,940.00 2,783,685.00 63,673.00 335,450,789 Curb and Gutter (FC 20)3,000 3,000 DEA Task Force Fund (FC 41)1,763,746 1,763,746 Misc Special Service Districts (FC 46)1,550,000 1,550,000 Street Lighting Enterprise (FC 48)5,379,697 1,500.00 5,381,197 Water Fund (FC 51)126,333,193 296,750.00 126,629,943 Sewer Fund (FC 52)212,638,399 108,500.00 212,746,899 Storm Water Fund (FC 53)17,961,860 32,650.00 17,994,510 Airport Fund (FC 54,55,56)302,311,600 - 520,000.00 38,956,452.00 341,788,052 Refuse Fund (FC 57)16,515,438 53,200.00 2,742,500.00 19,311,138 Golf Fund (FC 59)8,484,897 8,484,897 E-911 Fund (FC 60)3,789,270 3,789,270 Fleet Fund (FC 61)19,209,271 93,000.00 19,302,271 IMS Fund (FC 65)18,289,687 237,000.00 453,399.00 18,980,086 County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for Transportation (FC 69)7,571,945 7,571,945 CDBG Operating Fund (FC 71)3,509,164 3,063,849.00 6,573,013 Miscellaneous Grants (FC 72)8,261,044 716,764.00 5,925,738.42 5,925,738.00 7,818,505.00 28,647,789 Other Special Revenue (FC 73)- - Donation Fund (FC 77)2,380,172 2,380,172 Housing Loans & Trust (FC 78)23,248,016 23,248,016 Debt Service Fund (FC 81)37,519,401 (3,858,955.00) 33,660,446 CIP Fund (FC 83, 84 & 86)24,420,242 36,435,000.00 1,293,732.00 62,148,974 Governmental Immunity (FC 85)2,855,203 2,855,203 Risk Fund (FC 87)51,409,025 14,350.00 51,423,375 Total of Budget Amendment Items 1,221,534,273 716,764.00 7,463,826.00 45,141,392.00 5,925,738.00 49,091,934.00 1,810,804.00 1,331,684,731 Budget Manager Analyst, City Council Contingent Appropriation 2 Salt Lake City FY 2020-21 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 1 Section A: New Items A-1: Fisher Carriage House Exploration Center Construction Overage CIP Impact Fees $793,732.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente/Lorna Vogt The Carriage House Exploration Center project was initially funded through the CIP process, using Park Impact Fees, in FY2019. The project scope includes construction of an exploration center at the historic Fisher Carriage House that provides standing exhibits on the natural and cultural history of the Jordan River and surrounding area, and which showcases a beautiful restored historical structure. The exploration center will provide space for activities and education programs, places for visitors to engage with city staff and partners and get information about the Jordan River Parkway Trail and water trail. The center will also provide a home-base for outreach & education staff with the SLC Trails & Natural Lands Division, from which they can conduct programming up and down the Jordan River. Additionally, the project will compliment an adjacent boat ramp (construction planned for winter 2020) and create a recreational jumping -off point for the future Folsom Trail, the Jordan River Parkway Trail, and the Jordan River 'Paddle Trail.' As design development nears completion, SLC Engineering and the consulting architect, CRSA, have updated budget projections for the project. Unfortunately, those cost projections have increased significantly from the original b udget estimate created in 2018 based on a preliminary conceptual design. This budget amendment requests the additional funding necessary to implement the project, which (if funded) would go to bid in December 2020 and be constructed in 2021. Increased costs for the project are associated with all project elements, but particularly relate to the preservation of historic windows and doors, interior finishes, necessary plumbing and electrical upgrades, unforeseen utility upgrades and increased cost for proposed furnishings associated with the public exhibit space. The Administration would also like to let the Council know about future costs associated with the project. Future Ongoing Costs Personnel FT Site Manager and PT Assistant $ 90,000.00 Supplies and Materials $ 20,000.00 Kayak Rental Fleet (One-Time) $ 10,000.00 Facility Maintenance Costs $ 18,238.00 Grounds Maintenance Costs $ - * TOTAL $ 138,238.00 * In Trails Natural Lands budget A-2: Glendale Waterpark Redevelopment Plan CIP Impact Fees $225,000.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente/Lorna Vogt Public Lands is requesting a budget amendment for $225,000 in Impact Fees to hire a consultant to create a Development Plan for Glendale Water Park, a Land and Water Conservation Fund (LWCF) site. A recent community survey found slightly more than half of the 3700 respondents supported new uses on the site. The Development Plan would articulate a long-term community supported vision for the site with phased implementation. The first phase, (to be determined with the input of public feedback) would implement active recreation on site within the three-year LWCF requirement. The 17-acre water park site located along the Jordan River is adjacent to two park sites, a golf course, the surplus canal and natural areas along the Jordan river. This is an opportunit y to create a plan that unifies these public amenities through connecting trails, unifying landscape character and the development of complementary recreation uses into a regional asset. Developing the water park site within the context of the more than 210 acres of public lands would foster positive activation and create a dynamic community asset. Because this site was private for so long, the development will essentially create a new park, added to SLC's park inventory, with new service to residents and is impact fee eligible. In the time of a pandemic and political divisions, it is more important than ever to invest in dynamic public spaces that connect Salt Lake City FY 2020-21 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 2 people and break down demographic and economic divides. The Glendale property is a unique opportunity to create a very special place the supports economic development, public health, a sense of community, and environmental sustainability as well as increase confidence in city government’s use of public funds. Project Tasks may include but not limited to: • Analyze the site and surrounding context: opportunities and constraints • Facilitate community and stakeholder engagement: community support • Define the Park Vision: Community vision and goals • Develop conceptual site plan alternatives: Explore development alternatives and cost estimates. Include analysis of alternative plan operations and maintenance requirements and cost estimates • Develop Final Site Development Plan • Develop an implementation plan that includes plan phasing and funding strategies • Facilitate adoption by City Council. A-3: Trailhead Property Acquisition CIP Impact Fees $275,000.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Dawn Valente/Lorna Vogt The Administration is requesting $275,000 of Impact Fees to purchase land for a trailhead. The Administration can provide additional details of the property in a closed session. A-4: City Innovations Team GF $63,673.00 IMS $453,399.00 Department: Public Services Prepared By: Lisa Shaffer/John Vuyk Salt Lake City Administration is looking to take transformational steps with regards to enterprise technologies and improved business practices. To do this the development of a team is required, this team will be known as the City Innovations Team. The team initially will be built upon existing resources from the Mayor’s Office, Public Services, IMS and Community and Neighborhoods. This team will take on larger enterprise projects like the new Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) effort. The team will also improve coordination and resources between the Civic Engagement Team and IMS Media Services. A further step to improve engagement is to combine SLC Media Services and the Civic Engagement Team into a city -wide communications/engagement team outside of the Mayor’s Office. Currently, departments work with both teams separately to develop engagement and communications strategies for projects. Both teams also co-manage SLCgov social media accounts. By combining the groups, the City can create a one stop shop for engagement/communications efforts. Positions: From Public Services Chief Innovations Officer – Nole Walkingshaw transfer FTE Deputy Director position Strategy & Special Projects Manager – Alyssa Johnson transfer FTE Strategy & Special Projects Manager position From Community and Neighborhoods Civic Engagement Team – Four FTE’s transferred from Community and Neighborhoods Elizabeth Buhler, Civic Engagement Manager Kyle Strayer, Civic Engagement Program Specialist Christianna Johnson, Civic Engagement Program Specialist Ronnie Buttons, Special Projects Assistant New Position Strategy & Special Projects Manager The proposal also includes operational costs associated with the team. Salt Lake City FY 2020-21 Budget Amendment #6 Initiative Number/Name Fund Amount 3 A-5: Police Department Hiring Class GF $0.00 Department: Police Department Prepared By: Shellie Dietrich The Administration and the Police Department are seeking Council support for the hiring of a police recruit class in January or February of 2021. The Police Department is not seeking additional funding but will use current budget for fully funded positions and attrition savings from the first six months of the year . Section B: Grants for Existing Staff Resources Section C: Grants for New Staff Resources Section D: Housekeeping D-1: Airport Interim Financing Airport $0.00 Department: Airport Prepared By: Brian Butler Salt Lake City Department of Airports (SLCDA) plans to issue interim financing up to $300 million in the form of either Commercial Paper backed by a Letter of Credit or a Line of Credit directly with a bank. We are currently in procur ement and are negotiating the terms of the agreement which we deem to be favorable especially considering the low interest rate environment. These funds will ultimately be refunded with long term debt, but we will maintain the facility for upwards of three years to help with financial flexibility on the Airport Redevelopment Project. These funds can be used for operating and maintenance expenses or to fund construction costs as determined by the Airport Finance division. Section E: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources Section F: Donations Section G: Consent Agenda Section I: Council Added Items Impact Fees ‐ Quick Summary Confidential Data pulled 12/01/2020 Unallocated Budget Amounts: by Major Area Area Cost Center UnAllocated Cash Notes: Impact fee - Police 8484001 318,626$ A Impact fee - Fire 8484002 732,533$ B Impact fee - Parks 8484003 6,404,154$ C Impact fee - Streets 8484005 3,623,027$ D 11,078,339$ Expiring Amounts: by Major Area, by Month 202007 (Jul2020)2021Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202008 (Aug2020)2021Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202009 (Sep2020)2021Q1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202010 (Oct2020)2021Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202011 (Nov2020)2021Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202012 (Dec2020)2021Q2 9,155$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 9,155$ Current Month 202101 (Jan2021)2021Q3 669$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 669$ 202102 (Feb2021)2021Q3 16,273$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 16,273$ 202103 (Mar2021)2021Q3 16,105$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 16,105$ 202104 (Apr2021)2021Q4 1,718$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 1,718$ 202105 (May2021)2021Q4 14,542$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 14,542$ 202106 (Jun2021)2021Q4 30,017$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 30,017$ 202107 (Jul2021)2022Q1 10,107$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 10,107$ 202108 (Aug2021)2022Q1 6,804$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 6,804$ 202109 (Sep2021)2022Q1 5,554$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 5,554$ 202110 (Oct2021)2022Q2 3,106$ ^ 1 -$ -$ -$ 3,106$ 202111 (Nov2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 202112 (Dec2021)2022Q2 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ Total, Currently Expiring through June 2021 88,481$ -$ -$ -$ 88,481$ Notes ^1 Fiscal Year 2021Fiscal Quarter E = A + B + C + D Police Fire Parks Streets Total FY 2022Calendar Month 12/01/20: We are currently in a refund situation. We will refund $88k in the next 11 months without offsetting expenditures Impact Fees Confidential Data pulled 12/01/2020 AAA BBB CCC DDD = AAA - BBB - CCC Police Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining Appropriation Values Crime lab rent 8417001 -$ 118$ -$ (118)$ Impact fee - Police 8484001 -$ -$ -$ -$ Eastside Precint 8419201 21,639$ 21,639$ -$ -$ Sugarhouse Police Precinct 8417016 10,331$ 10,331$ -$ -$ Public Safety Building Replcmn 8405005 14,068$ 14,068$ -$ 0$ Police'sConsultant'sContract 8419205 5,520$ 5,462$ -$ 58$ Police impact fee refunds 8417006 510,828$ -$ -$ 510,828$ Police Refunds 8418013 539,687$ -$ 2,883$ 536,804$ A PolicePrecinctLandAquisition 8419011 1,410,243$ 239,836$ -$ 1,170,407$ Grand Total 2,512,316$ 291,454$ 2,883$ 2,217,979$ Fire Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining Appropriation Values Fire refunds 8416007 82,831$ -$ -$ 82,831$ Fire Station #14 8415001 6,650$ 6,650$ -$ -$ Fire Station #14 8416006 52,040$ -$ -$ 52,040$ Fire Station #3 8415002 1,568$ -$ -$ 1,568$ Fire Station #3 8416009 1,050$ 96$ 485$ 469$ Impact fee - Fire 8484002 -$ -$ -$ -$ Study for Fire House #3 8413001 15,700$ -$ -$ 15,700$ FireTrainingCenter 8419012 46,550$ -$ 46,550$ -$ B Fire'sConsultant'sContract 8419202 10,965$ 10,907$ -$ 58$ FY20 FireTrainingFac. 8420431 66,546$ 2,000$ 8,576$ 55,971$ Fire Station #3 Debt Service 8421200 541,106$ -$ -$ 541,106$ Fire Station #14 Debt Service 8421201 339,172$ -$ -$ 339,172$ Grand Total 1,164,177$ 19,653$ 55,610$ 1,088,913$ Parks Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining Appropriation Values Impact fee - Parks 8484003 -$ -$ -$ -$ Three Creeks Confluence 8419101 173,017$ 159,062$ 13,955$ -$ Park'sConsultant'sContract 8419204 7,643$ 7,601$ -$ 42$ 337 Community Garden, 337 S 40 8416002 277$ -$ -$ 277$ Folsom Trail/City Creek Daylig 8417010 766$ -$ 353$ 414$ Cwide Dog Lease Imp 8418002 24,056$ 23,000$ -$ 1,056$ Jordan R 3 Creeks Confluence 8417018 11,856$ 50$ 10,237$ 1,570$ Rosewood Dog Park 8417013 16,087$ -$ 14,155$ 1,932$ C Jordan R Trail Land Acquisitn 8417017 2,946$ -$ -$ 2,946$ Fairmont Park Lighting Impr 8418004 50,356$ 43,597$ 605$ 6,155$ Parks and Public Lands Compreh 8417008 7,500$ -$ -$ 7,500$ Rich Prk Comm Garden 8420138 27,478$ 7,561$ 11,210$ 8,707$ Redwood Meadows Park Dev 8417014 15,939$ 760$ 4,851$ 10,329$ ImperialParkShadeAcct'g 8419103 10,830$ -$ -$ 10,830$ Park refunds 8416008 11,796$ -$ -$ 11,796$ 9line park 8416005 86,322$ 38,566$ 34,689$ 13,067$ Warm Springs Off Leash 8420132 27,000$ -$ -$ 27,000$ JR Boat Ram 8420144 125,605$ 57,482$ 1,226$ 66,897$ IF Prop Acquisition 3 Creeks 8420406 350,000$ -$ 257,265$ 92,736$ Parks Impact Fees 8418015 102,256$ -$ -$ 102,256$ UTGov Ph2 Foothill Trails 8420420 200,000$ 70,340$ 17,100$ 112,560$ 9Line Orchard 8420136 195,045$ -$ -$ 195,045$ Cnty #2 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420426 515,245$ 319,862$ (7,517)$ 202,900$ Bridge to Backman 8418005 350,250$ 323$ 24,045$ 325,881$ Parley's Trail Design & Constr 8417012 327,678$ 979$ -$ 326,699$ Cnty #1 Match 3 Creek Confluen 8420424 400,000$ -$ -$ 400,000$ Jordan Prk Event Grounds 8420134 431,000$ -$ -$ 431,000$ Wasatch Hollow Improvements 8420142 490,830$ -$ -$ 490,830$ FY20 Bridge to Backman 8420430 727,000$ 63,456$ -$ 663,544$ Marmalade Park Block Phase II 8417011 1,145,394$ 64,287$ 15,756$ 1,065,351$ Fisher Carriage House 8420130 1,098,764$ -$ -$ 1,098,764$ Pioneer Park 8419150 3,442,199$ 94,100$ 14,400$ 3,333,699$ Grand Total 10,375,136$ 951,025$ 412,329$ 9,011,782$ Streets Allocation Budget Amended Allocation Encumbrances YTD Expenditures Allocation Remaining Appropriation Values 700 South Reconstruction 8414001 310,032$ -$ 310,032$ -$ 700 South Reconstruction 8415004 1,157,506$ 258,285$ 899,221$ -$ IF Roundabout 2000 E Parleys 8420122 455,000$ -$ 455,000$ -$ Impact fee - Streets Westside 8484005 -$ -$ -$ -$ 500 to 700 S 8418016 575,000$ 575,000$ -$ -$ LifeOnState Imp Fee 8419009 124,605$ 3,120$ 121,485$ -$ Transportation Safety Improvem 8417007 22,360$ 20,000$ 821$ 1,539$ Gladiola Street 8406001 16,544$ 13,953$ 347$ 2,244$ D Street'sConsultant'sContract 8419203 39,176$ 17,442$ 9,360$ 12,374$ Trans Master Plan 8419006 13,000$ -$ -$ 13,000$ Transp Safety Improvements 8420110 250,000$ 211,917$ -$ 38,083$ 500/700 S Street Reconstructio 8412001 41,027$ 118$ -$ 40,909$ 1300 S Bicycle Bypass (pedestr 8416004 42,833$ -$ -$ 42,833$ Complete Street Enhancements 8420120 125,000$ 60,848$ -$ 64,152$ Trans Safety Improvements 8419007 210,752$ 118,878$ 6,134$ 85,740$ Indiana Ave/900 S Rehab Design 8412002 124,593$ -$ -$ 124,593$ Transportation Safety Imp 8418007 147,912$ 2,162$ 7,506$ 138,244$ 9 Line Central Ninth 8418011 152,500$ -$ -$ 152,500$ Bikeway Urban Trails 8418003 200,000$ -$ -$ 200,000$ TransportationSafetyImprov IF 8421500 375,000$ 72,947$ -$ 302,053$ IF Complete Street Enhancement 8421502 625,000$ -$ -$ 625,000$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8419008 251,316$ 9,969$ 5,719$ 235,628$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8420105 300,000$ -$ -$ 300,000$ Traffic Signal Upgrades 8421501 875,000$ -$ -$ 875,000$ Street Improve Reconstruc 20 8420125 2,858,090$ 452,870$ -$ 2,405,220$ Grand Total 9,292,247$ 1,817,510$ 1,815,625$ 5,659,112$ Total 23,343,877$ 3,079,643$ 2,286,446$ 17,977,787$ E = A + B + C + D TRUE TRUE TRUE TRUE 318,626$ $732,533 8484001 UnAllocated Budget Amount 6,404,154$ 3,623,027$ 11,078,339$ 8484002 8484003 8484005 OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL WWW.SLCCOUNCIL.COM 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304 TEL 801-535-7600 FAX 801-535-7651 PO BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY UT 84114-5476 EMAIL: COUNCIL.COMMENTS@SLCGOV .COM January 5, 2021 As Salt Lake City Council Chair, we hereby determine that conducting the Salt Lake City Council meeting at an anchor location presents a substantial risk to the health and safety of those who may be present at the anchor location. The World Health Organization, the President of the United States, the Governor of Utah, the Salt Lake County Health Department, Salt Lake County Mayor, and the Mayor of Salt Lake City have all recognized a global pandemic exists related to the new strain of the coronavirus, SARS- CoV-2. Due to the state of emergency caused by the global pandemic, I find that conducting a meeting at an anchor location under the current state of public health emergency constitutes a substantial risk to the health and safety of those who may be present at the location. Sincerely, Chris Wharton Chair, Salt Lake City Council Item F1 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: Kira Luke Policy Analyst DATE:January 5, 2021 RE: MOTION SHEET: Resolution: Funding Our Future: Interlocal Agreement with Utah Transit Authority Amendment No. 1 to Addendum No. 2 and Addendum No. 3 MOTION 1 – ADOPT I move that the Council adopt the resolution entering into Amendment Number 1 to Addendum Number 2, and Addendum Number 3 to the Interlocal Agreement with the Utah Transit Authority, and that the remaining $979,545.19 be placed into a holding account reserved for future Funding Our Future transit expenses. Staff note: this motion records the Council’s intention to hold a discussion about potential uses for the remaining funding once Transportation’s formal recommendations are available. Staff will track this in an upcoming budget opening to ensure that funds are legally allocated as intended. MOTION 2 – NOT ADOPT I move that the Council not adopt the proposed resolution and proceed to the next agenda item. COUNCIL STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL of SALT LAKE CITY TO: City Council Members FROM: Kira Luke, Ben Luedtke Budget & Policy Analysts DATE: December 8, 2020 RE: FUNDING OUR FUTURE Transit Update: Interlocal Agreement with Utah Transit Authority ISSUE AT-A-GLANCE Funding Our Future: In 2018, the City implemented a 0.5% increase to the sales tax rate in Salt Lake City. Following significant public engagement, the increase was approved to address unfunded critical needs for projects and services, including improved transit service. To this end, the Council set four priorities to improve transit: Increasing coverage for under-served areas, particularly the West side but not excluding other underserved areas of the City; Increasing ridership, particularly in the City’s downtown core; Building out infrastructure on Transit Master Plan routes; The budget and timeline are based on 1000 North, 600 North, 200 South, 900 South, 2100 South. 400 South will be the last route implemented. The Council prioritized 200 South, 900 South, and 2100 South for the first phase of transit improvements, with later improvements planned for 600 North and 1000 North. i NEW INFORMATION There are outstanding questions about financing, true-ups and previously-encumbered funds which were not addressed in the original transmittal. At the time of publishing, staff is waiting for clarification on some of those issues and will update the report and Council Members once received. The resolution included for the Council’s consideration would approve an amendment to the second addendum (2.1) to the Interlocal Agreement (ILA) governing the City and Utah Transit Authority (UTA)’s collaboration. The second addendum governed the first year of services from August 2019 to August 23, 2020, the latter half of which has been impacted by COVID-19 since adoption. The resolution also approves the third addendum to the Interlocal agreement, governing the next year of service from August 2020 through the August change day of 2021. Addendum 2, Amendment 1 (2.1) The change to the second addendum addresses impacts on services from COVID-19. During the peak of the “Stay Safe, Stay Home” phase, UTA sharply reduced services, including those governed by the ILA. The resolution takes this reduction into account, along with decreased costs for fuel, and a slight increase in actual miles funded and amends the addendum to reflect a net reduction of $511,472. The amendment proposes to credit this amount to the City for the next service period governed by Addendum 3 (August 2020-August 2021). Addendum 3 (3) The third addendum currently under consideration authorizes funding for frequent transit network (FTN) service from August 2020 to August 2021, including operator wages, benefits, service administration, vehicles and maintenance, fuel, paratransit, and customer service for Routes 2, 9, and 21. As of August 23, 2020, UTA restored services system wide to 91% of pre-pandemic levels, which includes frequent service on Routes 2, 9, and 21. Page | 2 BUDGET IMPACT There are outstanding questions about the financing, true-ups, and previously-encumbered funds which were not addressed in the original transmittal. As of the posting of the agenda packets, staff is waiting for clarification on some of those issues and will update the report and Council Members once received. Fiscal Year 2020 (Addendum 2)Fiscal Year 2021 (Addendum 3) Items Budgeted Amendment 2.1 Budgeted Addendum 3 200 South, 900 South, 2100 South/2100 East FTN $5,307,845 $5,307,845 $ 4,700,000 $4,446,267.79 Fuel cost and gas true up -$107,404 Actual mileage difference $58,165 Pandemic reduction - $462,233 Service threshold adjustment*-$156,175.35 TOTAL $ 5,307,845 $4,796,373 (-$511,472 proposed credit) $4,700,000 $4,290,092.44 (-$409,907.56 below amount budgeted) *Once service reaches a specific threshold in terms of riders served, UTA assumes sponsorship and funding of that service, and City-funded sponsorship is no longer required. More information on this can be found on pages 56 and 70 of the Administrative Transmittal. The $511,472 from 2.1 will be credited to the City for Addendum 3 service, pending the Council’s approval of the amendment, but this does not appear to be reflected in Addendum 3. Staff is working with the City’s Finance Department to confirm. The Administration had three recommendations for the excess $409,907.56 budgeted for Addendum 3: 1. A transit-specific rainy day fund separate from Fund Balance to maintain service levels if future sales tax revenues become insufficient 2.A renewed attempt for a Trips to Transit program focusing on Westside service. This funding level is likely insufficient to fully fund the program. 3.Partial funding for 1000 North mobilization In Budget Amendment #1 of FY2020 the Council placed $999,824 of remaining funding into a holding account which was originally appropriated but ultimately not needed for frequent transit services under Addendum 2. Council Staff is confirming the status of those funds with the Finance Department. The Council could consider adding these funds (once confirmed) to any of the above initiative, or consider for other transit/transportation uses. POLICY QUESTIONS 1. Excess allocation: The Council may wish to discuss the Administration’s recommendation or other potential uses for the available $409.907.56. 2.Contract timing: Due to delays in paperwork transmission, the Council allocated funding in the FY22 annual budget but has not had the opportunity to review the addendum prior to the service implementation in August. Staff understands that this may impact the City’s ability to deliver timely payments for current services. The Council may wish to ask the Administration, are additional resources needed to enable Council review prior to the next addendum’s effective date? 3.Additional routes: During the Fiscal Year 2020-21 discussions, the Council received an update that UTA plans to sponsor (cover costs for) 600 North, and the City is planning on 1000 North mobilization next. However, staff understands that there are significant delays or increased costs to implement those routes as planned in addition to going uncertainty related to the pandemic. The Council may wish to request a formal update detailing implementation of those two routes. BACKGROUND OF THE INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (ILA) Routes Page | 3 The ILA categorizes the City’s service improvements as Frequent Transit Network (FTN) routes and refers to the City’s Transit Master Plan (TMP) for the controlling definition. The minimum service for routes serving 200 South, 900 South, and 2100 South is as outlined below. UTA may choose to provide additional service with no cost to the City; any City-requested service expansions are subject to additional negotiation and funding. Figure 1 – Administrative Transmittal, Page 5 The map on page 55 of the Administrative transmittal currently reflects a modified Route 9 from the original plans, currently ending at 400 South instead of continuing to North Temple. This was due to multiple factors involving pending plans for a Westside Transit Hub, the location of which is anticipated to affect multiple westside bus routes, and changes at the eastern end of the line, where 2019 realignment to all routes on the University of Utah campus resulted in changes to several routes, including Route 9. Responsibilities in the Interlocal Agreement City UTA Provide funding to support route operation; appropriate funding and notify UTA of available funding annually Manage and operate routes, equipment, personnel, insurance and accounting May construct new bus stops, in compliance with UTA’s standards; enhanced* maintenance to be negotiated prior to construction and funded by the City Produce/install branded bus stop signs Send designee (City Transportation Director) to technical working group Send designee (UTA Planning Director) to technical working group Regularly exchange information to assess performance and report to the parties** Share fuel costs via a semiannual “true-up” *The Addendum template provides a section to define baseline (non-enhanced) services. **Performance metrics could be added to the Funding Our Future website The interlocal agreement between Salt Lake City and the Utah Transit Authority has two parts – a 20-year master agreement, and specific addenda, which are negotiated each year. The master agreement is scheduled to end June 30, 2039. The master agreement is intended to form the framework of how transit improvements in the City’s Transit Master Plan will be implemented. Transit Master Plan Implementation The agreement contemplates following the Frequent Transit Network as identified in the Transit Master Plan. The Transit Master Plan used a formula based on transit industry standards to develop the Frequent Transit Network recommendations. According to the plan, the formula can be used in the future to help determine when the plan’s recommendations can be revised to reflect population or job growth within the City. Here is the formula: o Operate light rail in areas where there are 12 to 24 or more households per acre and/or 16 to 32 or more jobs per acre. o Operate Bus Rapid Transit in areas where there are 10 to 15 households per acre and/or 12 to 20 jobs per acre. o Operate buses every 15 minutes in areas where there are 10 to 12 households per acre and/or 12 to 16 jobs per acre. o Operate buses every 30 minutes in areas where there are 6 to 10 households per acre and/or 8 to 12 jobs per acre. o Operate buses every hour in areas where there are 3 to 6 households per acre and/or less than 4 jobs per acre.ii According to the Administration, the thresholds are best practices based on current industry research and should be used as guidelines rather than standards. Transit planning would take a variety of local conditions into consideration about appropriate densities, as would UTA in establishing service levels. The guidelines also can be helpful to communicate the relationship between density and successful transit. Glossary Frequent Transit Network – FTN Page | 4 Fiscal Year - FY Interlocal Agreement – ILA Transit Master Plan - TMP Utah Transit Authority - UTA i Videotape, Council work session, Russell Weeks, October 9, 2018, 1:09. ii Transit Master Plan, Page 6-4, 6-5. (Attachment 1) 8/31/2020 1 ERIN MENDENHALL Mayor DEPARTMENT of COMMUNITY and NEIGHBORHOODS BLAKE THOMAS Director SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 WWW.SLC.GOV P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TEL 801.535.6230 FAX 801.535.6005 CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: Lisa Shaffer, Chief Administrative Officer Date sent to Council: TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: Chris Wharton, Chair FROM: Blake Thomas, Director, Department of Community & Neighborhoods SUBJECT: Amended Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with Utah Transit Authority (UTA), Amendment No. 1 to Addendum No. 2 and Addendum No. 3 – FTN Routes on 200 S, 900 S, and 2100 S STAFF CONTACT: Julianne Sabula, Transit Program Manager, julianne.sabula@slcgov.com or 801-535-6678 DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution RECOMMENDATION: That City Council adopt a resolution (Exhibit 1) authorizing the Mayor to enter into the proposed amendment to Addendum 2 (Exhibit 3), which would make adjustments for cost savings on the basis of COVID-19 related bus service reductions and actual fuel costs, as well as the proposed Addendum No. 3 (Exhibit 4) to the Interlocal Agreement with UTA (Exhibit 2) to implement 2020-21 FTN service. BUDGET IMPACT: The budget impacts are twofold. The first budget impact reflects three adjustments to the cost of 2019-20 FTN service that yield an overall reduction of $569,637.63 in the cost of FTN service provided during FY19-20. The first adjustment is an annual fuel “true- up” based on the actual per gallon fuel cost and gas mileage as compared with UTA’s budgeted fuel cost that informed the total budget of Addendum No. 2. This adjustment results in a credit to the City of $107,404. The second adjustment is to the actual mileage of the FTN routes as compared with what was anticipated and used to calculate the total budget of Addendum No. 2. This adjustment results in a debit to the City of $58,165. The third adjustment is a reduction in the cost for the FTN service provided during FY 19-20 in the amount of $462,233 for decreased frequency due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This credit will be credited to the City in UTA’s August and September invoices to the City for 2020-21 FTN service. The second budget impact is for FY2020-21, and after adjusting to UTA’s new baseline, is expected to be $4,290,092.44, subject to adjustment based on actual fuel costs and potential COVID-19 related discounts. $4,700,000 was approved for this service by City Council in the FY2020-21 budget. November 2, 2020 Lisa Shaffer (Nov 9, 2020 07:36 MST) 11/09/2020 11/09/2020 BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: The ILA is a twenty-year agreement that has a goal of full implementation of the Frequent Transit Network as described in Salt Lake City’s Transit Master Plan. Last year City Council approved Addendum No. 2, along with a corresponding budget appropriation, to begin frequent transit service on the Routes 2, 9 and 21, which began operations in August 2019. Addendum No. 3 extends that service from August 2020 to August 2021. A discount may be applied if overall transit system levels are reduced in response to the impacts of COVID-19, and that discount will be proportional to the percentage of service decrease, e.g., if system-wide service is reduced 56% across all routes, including FTN routes, invoices to the City will reflect a 56% discount. Per the ILA, UTA has evaluated existing service on the 2, 9 and 21, and has determined that weekday service on the 2 now meet UTA’s threshold for “productivity” (riders per service hour) and “propensity” (surrounding population and land use characteristics support frequent service) as defined in their April 2020 Service Design Guidelines (Exhibit 5). This reduces the overall number of miles that the City will sponsor from 2019-20 levels of service on these routes during 2020-21. The reduced mileage costs based on meeting UTA thresholds is reflected in the cost calculator included as an exhibit to Addendum 3. This represents a savings of $156,175.35, and the refined cost for 2020-21 service is $409,907.56 below Council’s $4,700,000 appropriation. Potential uses for these funds recommended by staff for Council consideration include the following, all of which support economic recovery for residents who need it most. • Contribution to a “rainy day” fund so that transit service levels can be maintained if sales tax revenues are lower than projections, • Partial funding for a “Trips to Transit” pilot focused on the City’s West Side, • Partial funding for mobilization of transit service on the 1000 North Corridor. It should be noted that Trips to Transit should either precede or be implemented concurrently with service on 10th North because they are operationally connected, and further noted that UTA plans to implement service on 600 North concurrently with both of these services. Because COVID-19 related service reductions occurred during 2019-20, and because fuel costs were lower than anticipated, UTA is also providing a discount to reflect those savings. UTA has also adjusted 2019-20 mileage, which was slightly higher than was anticipated. Together these adjustments yield a savings to the City of $569,637.63, and they are detailed in Exhibit 3, which, if approved, will be reflected through reduced invoicing for 2020-21 FTN service. In anticipation of implementing the Council’s next priority routes, and to support decision making about whether this should occur in 2021 or 2022, staff is also including information about mobilization and operation of the 1000 North route. Addendum No. 4 to the ILA (Exhibit 6) would supply mobilization funding to UTA to create the route, which would be followed by Addendum No. 5 to fund service on that route (Exhibit 7) the following year for provision of the service itself. If Council desires 2021 implementation of 1000 North, Addendum No. 4 and a corresponding budget amendment would need to be approved by the end of this calendar year. 8/31/2020 2 During this first annual evaluation of true-ups, baseline service, and other factors described in the ILA, staff had an eye to potential future refinements to the agreement. This was anticipated in the initial negotiations, given the complexity of the agreement and relatively few precedents across the country. A variety of issues arose that will be considered, and Council can anticipate reconfirmation or recommended changes to the agreement’s methodologies. For example, we will explore whether additional specificity is needed in how we calculate the annual escalator (inflation) rate, how we evaluate baseline service, and how we transfer responsibilities when the baseline thresholds are met. Staff also learned that as both agencies work toward improving transit, we occasionally encounter win-win situations, and these are worth mentioning as a natural outcome of working together toward shared goals. Last year, UTA was able to provide seven-minute headways on the Route 2 that had both operational and customer benefits. This year, UTA is extending the span of service on Routes 2, 9, 21, 519, 520, and 6 as part of their Five-Year Service Plan update to provide better shifts for their operators and extended access for customers, especially in the very early morning hours. The value of this service is nearly $4.4 million without any increase in the level of City sponsorship. PUBLIC PROCESS: The public process included City-hosted public hearings on both the ILA and Addendum No. 2, which initiated the service to be continued by Addendum No. 3, as well as on the budget process that appropriated funding to increase service on those routes. This year’s budget process, including public hearings, provided for additional public comment on the transit service line item. In addition, UTA holds a public hearing process for each “change day”, of which there are three per year for the purpose of making service changes. That process will occur in advance of the August 2020 change day during which continuation of service levels would be confirmed. EXHIBITS: 1) Resolution 2)Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement 3) Amendment No. 1 to Addendum No. 2 a) Attachment A Service True-Up b)Attachment B Fuel True-Up 4) Addendum No. 3 a)Attachment A1 FTN Definition b) Attachment A2 FTN Corridors c)Attachment B 2020-21 Baseline d)Attachment C1 NTD Profile e)Attachment C2 Cost per Mile f)Attachment C3 Paratransit g) Attachment C4 Funding for 2020-21 Transit Service Cost Calculator Worksheet 5) UTA Service Design Guidelines (April 2020) 8/31/2020 3 6) Draft Addendum 4 1000 North Mobilization (information only) 7) Draft Addendum 5 2021-22 Sponsored Service Funding Cost Calculator Worksheet (information only) 8/31/2020 4 EXHIBIT 1 RESOLUTION 8/31/2020 5 8/31/2020 6 8/31/2020 7 EXHIBIT 2 Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement 8/31/2020 8 8/31/2020 9 8/31/2020 10 8/31/2020 11 8/31/2020 12 most recently reported in the NTD to determine an "Adjusted Per Mile BOE Rate." (d)The Adjusted Per Mile BOE Rate includes administrative and overhead costs. The Adjusted Per Mile BOE Rate shall be discounted by twenty percent (20%) to reflect the administrative and overhead expenses that would be incurred by UTA regardless of the sponsored service. For the purposes of this Agreement, administrative and overhead expenses for bus operational support are listed in the table attached as Exhibit "B." Because the Parties are estimating the administrative and overhead expenses that are attributable to the City­ sponsored service, the Parties agree to review the actual costs incurred by UTA every two years, and adjust the administrative discount based on any actual increases or decreases directly attributable to the City-sponsored service relative to the transit system as a whole. To facilitate the Parties' review, UTA agrees to provide a breakdown of bus administration, bus operational support, and administration for all modes agency-wide (and supporting information showing, how the cost information is calculated into the reported NTD data) every year by September 30 of the year after the service is provided, in a reporting format substantially similar to the format attached as Exhibit "D." UTA further agrees to cooperate with the City in the review and provide further information in a timely manner if requested by the City. (e)After application of the administrative and overhead discount set forth in Section S(d), the Adjusted Per Mile BOE Rate shall be multiplied by the total sponsored revenue miles to arrive at the "Service Mileage Cost, Without Fuel or Paratransit Costs." (J)A charge for paratransit service shall then be added. The charge for paratransit services shall be a sum equal to a fixed percentage of the Service Mileage Cost, Without Fuel or Paratransit Costs. The percentage factor applied to determine the paratransit service charge shall be determined by dividing the most recently reported NTD Annual Vehicle Revenue Service Hours for Demand Response services by the most recently reported NTD Annual Vehicle Revenue Service Hours for Bus, Commuter Bus and Light Rail transportation modes. (g)The estimated fuel costs for the total sponsored revenue miles shall then be added to determine the "Annual Service Mileage Cost." (h)The methodology for calculating the Annual Service Mileage Cost is set forth in Exhibit "C." 6.CITY OBLIGATIONS WITH RESPECT TO FTN ROUTES. (a)The City shall contribute funding (the "City Funding") to UTA to support the sal SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND UTAH 11/ANSJT A UTJJORITY TRANSIT MASTER PLAN IMP LEMENTA 110N AGREEMENT Page 5 of 11 8/31/2020 13 8/31/2020 14 8/31/2020 15 8/31/2020 16 8/31/2020 17 8/31/2020 18 8/31/2020 19 8/31/2020 20 8/31/2020 21 8/31/2020 22 8/31/2020 23 8/31/2020 24 8/31/2020 25 8/31/2020 26 8/31/2020 27 8/31/2020 28 8/31/2020 29 8/31/2020 30 8/31/2020 31 8/31/2020 32 8/31/2020 33 8/31/2020 34 8/31/2020 35 8/31/2020 36 8/31/2020 37 8/31/2020 38 8/31/2020 39 8/31/2020 40 8/31/2020 41 8/31/2020 42 EXHIBIT 3 AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO ADDENDUM NO. 2 Attachment A Service True-Up Attachment B Fuel True-Up 8/31/2020 43 Amendment No. 1 to Addendum No. 2 To Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Interlocal Agreement This Amendment No. 1 (Amendment) to that certain Addendum No. 2 to the Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement (“ILA”) is made this ____ day of August 2020, by and between Utah Transit Authority, a public transit district organized under the laws of the State of Utah (“UTA”) and Salt Lake City Corporation, a Utah municipal corporation (“City”). UTA and City are hereinafter collectively referred to as “Parties” and each may be referred to individually as “Party”. Whereas on March 6, 2019 the Parties entered into an ILA for joint participation in planning and funding transportation improvements in and around the City; and Whereas on August 6, 2019 the Parties entered into an Addendum No. 2 to the ILA which identified City-sponsored frequent transit network routes (“FTN Routes”) to be provided by UTA for a period of one-year from the August 2019 change date until the next succeeding August change day; and Whereas Addendum No. 2 also provided, along with a description of FTN Routes, a description of baseline services and charges associated with those FTN Routes; and Whereas the COVID-19 Pandemic has caused as significant disruption of the services required by the City and provided by UTA; and Whereas the Parties desire to amend Addendum No. 2 to reflect those changes; NOW THERFORE THE PARTIES AGREE TO AMEND ADDENDUM NO. 2 AS FOLLOWS: 1. The description of FTN Routes set forth in Addendum 2 Attachment 1 are unchanged. 2. The frequency of the Baseline Services set forth in Addendum 2 Attachment 2 has been decreased due to diminished demand occasioned by COVID-19. Frequency will increased or decreased in UTA’s discretion according to demand. 3. The Funding for Transit Services described in Addendum 2 Attachment 3 shall be subject to the forgoing: a. The City shall be provided with an annualized service discount of $462,233 calculated as shown in this Amendment 1 Attachment A. The discount shall be reflected in monthly invoices beginning with the June 2020 invoice. Any remaining refund for overpayment owed to the City at the end of the service year (August 2020 change day) shall be carried over and reflected in billing discounts for the succeeding service year. 8/31/2020 44 b. The City shall be provided with an annualized fuel charge refund of $107,404 calculated as shown in this Amendment 1 Attachment B. The discount shall be reflected in monthly invoices beginning with the June 2020 invoice. Any remaining refund for overpayment owed to the City at the end of the service year (August 2020 change day) shall be carried over and reflected in billing discounts for the succeeding service year. 4. Any other provision of Addendum No. 2 not affected by paragraphs 2 or 3 above shall remain in full force and effect. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have entered into this Amendment as of the Effective Date. UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION ____________________________________ ________________________________ By: By: Title: Title: ___________________________________ _______________________________ By: AATF: Title: Salt Lake Attorney’s Office ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN: Salt Lake City Recorder’s Office ____________________________________ ________________________________ AATF: By: UTA Legal Counsel City Recorder 8/31/2020 45 Addendum 2, Amendment 1 Attachment A 2019‐2020 Sponsored Service:  200 South, 900 South, 2100 South Service True‐Up Addendum  2 Annual mileage  true‐up COVID‐19  Reduction Addendum 2,  Amendment  1 Cost per mile 7.62$              7.62$                  7.62$                 Annual escalator 2.2% 2.2% 2.2% number years since NDT 2 2 2 Administrative Discount 20% 20% 20% Miles 503,359         511,664             288,760          Total mileage cost 3,204,975$    3,257,852$        1,838,584$      Paratransit rate 10% 10% 10% Total Paratransit Cost 320,497$       325,785$           183,858$         Number Vehicles 10 10 10 Lease Cost 41,088$         41,088$              41,088$           Total Vehicle cost 410,885$       410,885             410,885          Total annual cost w/o fuel 3,936,357$    3,994,521$        2,433,327$      Total monthly cost w/o fuel 328,030$       332,877$           202,777$         8 months (August ‐ March 2,663,014.22$  2,663,014$    4 months (April ‐ July) 811,109$         811,109$       Total Cost to City without Fuel 3,474,123$    Original Annual Cost 3,936,357$   Reduced Annual Cost 3,474,123$   Discount Amount 462,233$       8/31/2020 46 Addendum 2, Amendment 1 Attachment B 2019‐2020 Sponsored Service:  200 South, 900 South, 2100 South Fuel True‐Up Addendum  2 Annual Fuel  true‐up COVID‐19  Reduction Addendum 2,  Amendment  1 Cost per gallon $2.50 $1.59 $1.59 Fuel efficiency (mpg)5 4.82 4.82 Miles 503,359 511,664 288,760 Total Annual Cost $251,679.50 $168,785.43 $95,254.85 Total Monthly  Cost $20,973.29 $14,065.45 $7,937.90 8 months (August‐March) $167,786.33 $112,523.62 $112,523.62 4 months (April‐July)$31,751.62 $31,751.62 Total Cost to City $144,275.24 Original Annual Cost 251,680$           Reduced Annual Cost 144,275$           Discount Amount 107,404$           8/31/2020 47 EXHIBIT 4 ADDENDUM NO. 3 Attachment A1 FTN Definition Attachment A2 FTN Corridors Attachment B 2020-21 Baseline Attachment C1 NTD Profile Attachment C2 Cost per Mile Attachment C3 Paratransit Attachment C4 Funding for 2020-21 Transit Service Cost Calculator Worksheet 8/31/2020 48 1 ADDENDUM NO. 3 TO SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSIT MASTER PLAN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (2020-21 FTN Routes) This Addendum No. 3 (“Addendum”) to that certain Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement (“ILA”) is made this ____ day of August, 2020, by and between Utah Transit Authority, a public transit district organized under the laws of the State of Utah (“UTA”), and Salt Lake City Corporation, a Utah municipal corporation (“City”). UTA and City are hereinafter collectively referred to as “Parties” and each may be referred to individually as “Party,” all as governed by the context in which such words are used. RECITALS A. On the 6th day of March, 2019, the Parties entered into the ILA, whereby the parties agreed to participate jointly in planning and funding for public transportation improvements in and around the City; and B. Pursuant to the terms of the ILA, the Parties desire to specifically identify certain components of the Salt Lake City Transit Master Plan to be governed by this Addendum. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Pursuant to Section 3 of the ILA, the City, in cooperation with UTA, identified the City-sponsored frequent transit network routes for the 2020-21 (“FTN Routes”) to be provided by UTA for a one-year period from the August 2020 change day until the next succeeding August change day. 2. The description of those 2020-21 FTN Routes is set forth in Attachment 1. 3. The description of the 2020-21 Baseline Services is set forth in Attachment 2. 4. The calculation of the Annual Service Mile Charge for the City-sponsored 2020- 21 FTN Routes is set forth in in Attachment 3. 5. The final routing and implementation of the FTN Routes shall be determined in accordance with all applicable laws, regulations and policies regarding transit service planning (including, without limitation, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act) and operational considerations shall be addressed in consultation with the City. 6. Invoicing for implementation of the FTN Routes will be according to Section 7 of the ILA. 7. UTA will maintain the span of service on the FTN routes during the term of this Addendum. Due to the current COVID-19 pandemic, however, UTA may change the frequency of the FTN Routes as necessary based upon official guidance from the CDC, the State of Utah, the Salt Lake County Health Department, and/or Salt Lake City emergency proclamations, as well as significant changes in ridership. If the frequency of service of the FTN Routes is reduced below the levels set forth in Attachment 1, UTA shall provide written notice to the City of UTA’s intention to reduce the frequency of the FTN Routes. If the City agrees with such reductions in service, then UTA will reduce the monthly invoice amounts (as calculated under Section 7 of the 8/31/2020 49 2 ILA) immediately in proportion to the reduction in services until full service, including frequency and span, of the FTN Routes is restored. The City and UTA shall agree in writing on the levels of service reductions and the amount of the discount of the monthly invoices prior to any reduction of frequency of the FTN Routes. 8. This Addendum may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures were upon the same instrument. 9. This Addendum is limited to the terms expressly provided herein and except as set forth herein, the ILA shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with its terms. If there is a conflict between this Addendum and the ILA, the terms of this Addendum shall prevail and control. 10. Any capitalized terms that are not specifically defined in this Addendum shall have the meanings set forth in the ILA. 11. This Addendum will become effective upon Salt Lake City Council’s adoption of a resolution authorizing the Mayor or her designee to enter into this Addendum; and appropriation of funding to meet the City’s financial obligations under this Addendum (the “Effective Date”). [THE BALANCE OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.] 8/31/2020 50 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have entered into this Addendum as of the Effective Date. [Signature pages to Addendum No. 3 to Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement] UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY By______________________________________ Its______________________________________ By______________________________________ Its______________________________________ Approved as to Form ____________________________________ UTA Legal Counsel 8/31/2020 51 4 [Signature pages to Addendum No. 3 to Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement] SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By______________________________________ Its______________________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office By: ____________________________ Senior City Attorney Date: ___________________________ ATTEST & COUNTERSIGN: Salt Lake City Recorder’s Office By: ____________________________ City Recorder [Attach Salt Lake City Council Resolution Approving Addendum] 8/31/2020 52 5 ATTACHMENT A Description of the 2020-21 FTN Routes For This Addendum No. 3 8/31/2020 53 14| SALT LAKE CITY TRANSIT MASTER PLAN | EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe Transit Master Plan provides a vision for an expanded Frequent Transit Network (FTN); it is a long-term, 20-year vision that identifies the corridors where high-frequency service should be provided in Salt Lake City. Building off the existing grid network, the FTN is a set of designated transit corridors that offers frequent and reliable service connecting major destinations and neighborhood centers seven days a week throughout the day and evening. The lines on the FTN map (following page) do not represent individual routes, but are corridors where frequent service would be provided by a combination of bus or rail technologies. Defining an FTN vision allows Salt Lake City to work closely with Utah Transit Authority (UTA) to set priorities for service provision now and in the future. SALT LAKE CITY'S Radial(Hub and Spoke)HybridGrid Why a Grid Network? Salt Lake City’s existing, centralized hub model is effective for regional connections but is inefficient for some local trips. Currently, many of UTA’s routes terminate at Central Station, which provides good connectivity to commuter rail service, but creates challenges for people who need to travel to other destinations throughout the city, necessitating multiple transfers and/or indirect trips. The FTN builds on Salt Lake City’s strong street network grid. Frequent Transit Network Sunday Monday - Friday 4 AM 6 8 10 12 PM 2 4 6 8 10 12 AM Hours of Service Saturday 15 minutes (or better) 30 minutes Frequency Sunday Monday - Friday 4 AM 6 8 10 12 PM 2 4 6 8 10 12 AM Hours of Service Saturday 15 minutes (or better) 30 minutes Frequency FTN Frequency and Span Radial vs. Grid Network 8/31/2020 54 Salt Lake City Transit Master Plan Phase I Service Improvements Legend UTA Rail Funded I 0 10.5 Mile Redwood Road2100 E2100 S 1700 S 1300 S 600 N California Ave Indiana Ave West Temple900 S South Temple 300 WPoplar Grove Blvd University Blvd State St700 E900 E1300 E200 S North Temple 1000 N Foothill Dr S Campus Dr N Campus Dr Mario Capecchi Dr900 WNavajo StUnfunded 8/31/2020 55 6 ATTACHMENT B 2020-21 Baseline Services For This Addendum No. 3 8/31/2020 56 2020 Sponsored Service Baseline Calculation Assessment of Sponsored Routes  Route Weekday Saturday Sunday 2 yes no yes City sponsorship of additional Saturday miles above April 2019 baseline 9 no no no City sponsorship of all additional service above April 2019 baseline 21 yes no yes City sponsorship of additional Saturday miles above April 2019 baseline Weekday Miles Route April 2019 August 2019 Delta *252 WKD 2 525.23 603.81 78.58 19,802.16    21 928.47 1123.52 195.05 49,152.60    68,954.76    Sunday Miles Route April 2019 August 2019 Delta *52 SUN 2 255.8 255.8 13,301.60    21 216.75 450.69 233.94 12,164.88    25,466.48    94,421.24   Total delta ‐ miles to be covered by UTA 8/31/2020 57 2020 Comprehensive System Analysis LEGEND Quantity % of Total exceeds standards (under served)16 14% meets standards 86 75% partially meets standards 9 8% does not meet standards (over served)3 3% All‐Day Service Route Current Tier People‐  Based TPI WKD  Pass/Hr SAT Pass/Hr SUN  Pass/Hr 2 1 689 34.8 16.2 15.4 3 2 447 30.9 11 4 2 325 16.1 11 8.6 6 2 598 19.3 11.7 9.1 9 1 346 12 6.9 7.5 11 3 472 16.9 17 3 303 16.7 21 1 307 29.4 13.3 15.8 33 1 136 25.9 29.2 26.3 35M 1 89 19.2 20.5 35 2 172 22.1 19.9 23.2 39 1 209 28.2 24 20.7 41 1 225 22.1 17.1 16.9 45 1 148 21.6 22.3 16.8 47 1 206 22.1 17.7 15.6 54 1 175 22 25.3 23.3 62 3 124 13.8 10.1 72 3 148 24.6 17 F94 3 117 16.4 10.4 200 1 383 30 22.9 24.1 201 3 168 23 16.6 205 1 406 26.9 25.2 22.6 209 1 319 26.1 25.6 23.5 213 2 263 20.6 9.8 217 1 227 26.2 25.9 23.7 218 2 92 20.9 15.7 220 1 295 18.4 13.9 12.7 223 3 199 10.3 227 3 133 12.1 232 3 168 12.4 240 2 208 16.6 14.8 15 248 3 206 11.8 F400 3 45 7.2 F402 3 63 6.6 F453 3 8 7.3 455 3 144 12.7 470 2 136 16.7 14.1 12.2 F504 3 65 8 6.3 509 2 128 20.6 10.6 8/31/2020 58 F514 3 57 11.3 6.2 F518 3 48 8.3 519 2 239 14.2 16.2 12.5 520 3 244 14.3 525 2 159 30.8 14.7 F546 3 67 4.8 F547 3 52 7 F556 3 126 10.4 7.3 F570 3 119 8.3 F578 3 136 9.3 9.3 F590 3 92 12.6 601 2 203 11 13.9 603 1 239 29.5 21.4 18.9 604 2 70 13.4 9.7 F605 3 87 5.8 612 1 145 18.1 14.1 16 613 3 70 13.3 F618 3 64 11 4.7 F620 3 48 6.4 625 2 147 12.4 7.8 626 2 51 13.8 10 627 2 106 13.8 8.1 628 2 73 20.1 19.6 630 3 48 12.4 13.1 F638 3 79 9.1 640 2 114 11.8 6.8 645 2 214 11.4 8 667 2 30 28.4 52.8 701 1 372 136.7 162.3 75.7 703 1 356 162.3 172.8 63.4 704 1 463 142.2 127 68.1 720 1 860 56.6 65.8 46.4 750 2 1341 163.5 109.8 821 3 69 16.1 13.6 830X 1 581 60.2 51.8 831 2 373 25 13 833 3 72 12.2 10.5 834 3 188 18.6 12.5 841 2 185 80.6 22.8 850 1 157 19.1 19.3 10 862 2 155 24.7 10 864 3 13 13.5 871 3 18 7.6 6.6 7.6 Targeted Service Route Current Tier Job‐ Based  TPI WKD  PassMi/ Mi SAT PassMi/  Mi SUN  PassMi/ Mi 2X 4 429 9.7 307 4 863 7.4 313 4 323 6 320 4 896 9.8 354 4 318 7.3 8/31/2020 59 451 4 198 27.1 454 4 170 6.1 456 4 64 11.8 460 4 611 5.2 461 4 469 5.5 462 4 630 8.2 463 4 514 6 471 4 613 7.9 472 4 177 21.7 473 4 289 14.9 513 4 337 5.2 F522 4 109 0.7 526 4 98 16.6 F534 4 140 1.8 551 4 75 13.8 10.7 7.7 606 4 123 19.8 608 4 192 14.7 616 4 40 1.5 650 4 139 7.6 805 4 51 8.3 806 4 52 9.7 807 4 115 8.2 809 4 267 1.1 822 4 284 8.3 902 4 403 3 919 4 1016 26.5 920 4 930 26.1 953 4 132 7.6 10.7 5.2 8/31/2020 60 7 ATTACHMENT C Funding for 2020-21 Transit Service For This Addendum No. 3 8/31/2020 61 http://www.rideuta.com/Utah Transit Authority 669 West 200 South 2018 Annual Agency Profile Salt Lake City, UT 84101 General Information Financial Information Urbanized Area Statistics - 2010 Census Service Consumption Database Information Sources of Operating Funds Expended Operating Funding Sources Salt Lake City-West Valley City, UT 358,146,681 Annual Passenger Miles (PMT)NTDID:80001 Fares and Directly Generated $84,206,427 19.6% 278 Square Miles 44,176,331 Annual Unlinked Trips (UPT)Reporter Type:Full Reporter Local Funds $283,418,933 66.0% 1,021,243 Population 151,901 Average Weekday Unlinked Trips State Funds $0 0.0% 42 Pop. Rank out of 498 UZAs 75,207 Average Saturday Unlinked Trips Federal Assistance $61,759,422 14.4% Other UZAs Served 29,911 Average Sunday Unlinked Trips 77 Ogden-Layton, UT, 82 Provo-Orem, UT, 0 Utah Non-UZA Total Operating Funds Expended $429,384,782 100.0% Service Area Statistics Service Supplied Sources of Capital Funds Expended 737 Square Miles 39,149,927 Annual Vehicle Revenue Miles (VRM)Fares and Directly Generated $0 0.0% 1,883,504 Population 2,160,581 Annual Vehicle Revenue Hours (VRH)Local Funds $46,753,477 54.3% 1,113 Vehicles Operated in Maximum Service (VOMS)State Funds $7,479,676 8.7% 1,388 Vehicles Available for Maximum Service (VAMS)Federal Assistance $31,806,236 37.0% Capital Funding Sources Modal Characteristics Total Capital Funds Expended $86,039,389 100.0% Modal Overview Summary of Operating Expenses (OE) Mode Directly Operated Purchased Transportation Revenue Vehicles Systems and Guideways Facilities and Stations Other Total Labor $210,617,778 70.0% Commuter Bus 43 - $0 $14,777 $13,468 $19,269 $47,514 Materials and Supplies $49,475,245 16.4% Commuter Rail 50 - $0 $9,023,656 $84,673 $99,256 $9,207,585 Purchased Transportation $4,725,168 1.6% Demand Response 67 45 $3,534,540 $37,536 $68,374 $49,876 $3,690,326 Other Operating Expenses $36,135,860 12.0% Light Rail 92 - $0 $12,002,130 $626,659 $163,734 $12,792,523 Total Operating Expenses $300,954,051 100.0% Bus 412 6 $19,675,338 $2,157,049 $6,063,861 $326,885 $28,223,133 Reconciling OE Cash Expenditures $128,430,731 Vanpool 398 - $1,149,248 $85,204 $30,099 $113,214 $1,377,765 Purchased Transportation Total 1,062 51 $24,359,126 $23,320,352 $6,887,134 $772,234 $55,338,846 (Reported Separately)$0 Fare Revenues: 19.6%Local Funds: 66.%Federal Assistance: 14.4%Local Funds: 54.3% State Funds: 8.7% Federal Assistance: 37.% Operation Characteristics Mode Operating Expenses Fare Revenues Uses of Capital Funds Annual Passenger Miles Annual Vehicle Revenue Miles Annual Vehicle Revenue Hours Commuter Bus $8,635,671 $521,819 $47,514 12,395,920 563,563 1,066,181 41,128 0.0 47 43 8.5%12.6 Commuter Rail $43,421,951 $7,375,985 $9,207,585 129,673,508 5,082,168 5,429,232 164,930 174.5 69 50 27.5%17.2 Demand Response $18,695,571 $400,466 $3,690,326 4,567,676 394,816 2,798,928 180,342 0.0 142 112 21.1%4.3 Light Rail $71,414,293 $18,089,935 $12,792,523 89,112,550 17,899,716 6,655,535 362,257 93.9 114 92 19.3%11.3 Bus $140,001,661 $17,788,256 $28,223,133 79,344,438 19,061,372 16,845,223 1,243,058 0.0 531 418 21.3%7.9 Vanpool $18,784,904 $3,946,125 $1,377,765 43,052,589 1,174,696 6,354,828 168,866 0.0 485 398 17.9%5.4 Total $300,954,051 $48,122,586 $55,338,846 358,146,681 44,176,331 39,149,927 2,160,581 268.4 1,388 1,113 19.8% Performance Measures Mode Mode Commuter Bus $8.10 $209.97 Commuter Bus $0.70 $15.32 0.5 13.7 Commuter Rail $8.00 $263.28 Commuter Rail $0.33 $8.54 0.9 30.8 Demand Response $6.68 $103.67 Demand Response $4.09 $47.35 0.1 2.2 Light Rail $10.73 $197.14 Light Rail $0.80 $3.99 2.7 49.4 Bus $8.31 $112.63 Bus $1.76 $7.34 1.1 15.3 Vanpool $2.96 $111.24 Vanpool $0.44 $15.99 0.2 7.0 Total $7.69 $139.29 Total $0.84 $6.81 1.1 20.4 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Bus OE/VRM $6.51 $6.46 #$7.68 #$7.37 #$8.21 #$8.31 Light Rail 2006: 6.51 2007: 6.46 2008: 6.79 2009: 7.68 2010: 7.28 2011: 7.37 2012: 7.63 2013: 8.21 2014: 7.88 2015: 8.31 OE/PMT $1.04 $0.83 #$1.98 #$1.20 #$1.45 #$1.76 2006: 1.04 2007: .83 2008: .87 2009: 1.98 2010: 1.44 2011: 1.2 2012: 1.19 2013: 1.45 2014: 1.5 2015: 1.76 UPT/VRM 1.23 1.32 #1.45 #1.33 #1.24 #1.13 2006: 1.23 2007: 1.32 2008: 1.36 2009: 1.45 2010: 1.28 2011: 1.33 2012: 1.4 2013: 1.24 2014: 1.17 2015: 1.13 OE/VRM $8.74 $8.62 #$7.11 #$8.03 #$10.08 #$10.73 2006: 8.74 2007: 8.62 2008: 9.06 2009: 7.11 2010: 6.87 2011: 8.03 2012: 8.22 2013: 10.08 2014: 9.61 2015: 10.73 OE/PMT $0.48 $0.49 #$0.53 #$0.54 #$0.72 #$0.80 2006: .48 2007: .49 2008: .49 2009: .53 2010: .53 2011: .54 2012: .55 2013: .72 2014: .7 2015: .8 UPT/VRM 4.03 4.12 #2.93 #3.09 #2.88 #2.69 2006: 4.03 2007: 4.12 2008: 3.99 2009: 2.93 2010: 2.87 2011: 3.09 2012: 2.98 2013: 2.88 2014: 2.8 2015: 2.69 Notes: ªDemand Response - Taxi (DT) and non-dedicated fleets do not report fleet age data. Average Fleet Age in Yearsª Annual Unlinked Trips Percent Spare Vehicles Vehicles Operated in Maximum Service Uses of Capital Funds Fixed Guideway Directional Route Miles Vehicles Available for Maximum Service Vehicles Operated in Maximum Service Service Efficiency Service Effectiveness Operating Expenses per Vehicle Revenue Mile Operating Expenses per Vehicle Revenue Hour Operating Expenses per Passenger Mile Operating Expenses per Unlinked Passenger Trip Unlinked Trips per Vehicle Revenue Mile Unlinked Trips per Vehicle Revenue Hour 19.6% 66.0% 14.4% 54.3% 8.7% 37.0% $0.00 $2.00 $4.00 $6.00 $8.00 $10.00 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Operating Expense per Vehicle Revenue Mile: Bus $0.00 $0.50 $1.00 $1.50 $2.00 $2.50 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Operating Expense per Passenger Mile: Bus 0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Unlinked Passenger Trip per Vehicle Revenue Mile: Bus $0.00 $5.00 $10.00 $15.00 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Operating Expense per Vehicle Revenue Mile: Light Rail $0.00 $0.20 $0.40 $0.60 $0.80 $1.00 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Operating Expense per Passenger Mile: Light Rail 0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Unlinked Passenger Trip per Vehicle Revenue Mile: Light Rail 8/31/2020 62 2018 NTD Operating Expenses by ModeLess Fuel Costs (Diesel, CNG and Gasoline) Add Capital Maintenance Debt Service Depreciation Total CostsAnnual Vehicle Revenue MilesCost Per Vehicle Revenue Mile Without Fuel excluding Vehicle DepreciationBus Service 140,001,661$   (10,183,098)$   5,973,050$         17,144,993$         152,936,606$   16,845,223            8.06$ Bus ServiceCommuter Bus 8,635,671$       (635,588)$         382,833$             8,382,916$       1,066,181               7.86$ Commuter BusCommuter Rail 43,421,951$     (7,002,733)$      1,287,135$         45,500,194$       28,412,725$         111,619,272$   5,429,232               15.33$ Commuter RailLight Rail71,414,293$     11,146,472$       45,500,194$       28,412,725$         156,473,684$   6,655,535               19.24$ Light RailParatransit Service18,695,571$     (1,367,502)$      672,761$             4,290,318$            22,291,148$     2,798,928               6.43$ Paratransit ServiceOther Service 18,784,904$     (963,770)$         180,162$             2,304,317$            20,305,613$     6,354,828               2.83$ Other Service NTD Totals 300,954,051$   (20,152,691)$   19,642,413$       91,000,388$       80,565,077$         472,009,238$   39,149,927            10.00$ Fuel Costs20,152,691$     NTD Plus Fuel492,161,929$   CAFR plus $38,654,1(capital maintenance)492,161,929$   Difference‐$ Utah Transit AuthorityOperating Cost per Mile by Mode 2018Sources: 2018 Federal Transit Administration's National Transit Database (NTD), Agency Profile,https://www.transit.dot.gov/ntd/transit‐agency‐profiles2018 Utah Transit Authority Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), http://www.rideuta.com/About‐UTA/UTA‐Reports‐and‐Documents8/31/2020 63 SPONSORED SERVICE PARATRANSIT COST ‐ Addendum 341,128 Commuter Bus Vehicle Revenue Hours (2018 NTD)362,257 Light Rail Vehicle Revenue Hours (2018 NTD)1,243,058 Bus Vehicle Revenue Hours (2018 NTD)1,646,443 Total Vehicle Revenue Hours for Bus, Commuter Bus, and LRT180,342 Total Demand Response Vehicle Revenue Hours (2018 NTD)11% Demand Response Percentage of Total Vehicle Revenue Hours for Bus, Commuter Bus, and Light Rail8/31/2020 64 Addendum 32020‐2021 Sponsored Service:  200 South, 900 South, 2100 SouthVARIABLE VALUESSPONSORED SERVICE COST 8.06$                           Most recent NTD Cost per Revenue Mile, Bus Service  (1)8.06$                              Most recent NTD Cost Per Mile ‐ Bus Service2.2% Annual escalator rate (2)2                                   Number of Years since NTD report8.42$                              NDT rate Adjusted to Service Year Costs20% Administrative Discount (3)6.73$                              Discounted NTD Adjusted to Service Year Costs491,862 Sponsored Revenue Miles: 200 South, 900 South and 2100 South491,862 Sponsored Revenue Miles3,311,538.42$              Total Mileage Cost, Without Fuel, Annual 11% Sponsored Paratransit Service rate (4)362,727.08$                 Add Paratransit Service3,674,265.50$              Total Annual Operating Costs without fuel2.00$                           Fuel Cost per Gallon (Service Year Budgeted Cost)2.00$                              Fuel Cost per Gallon4.8 Fuel Efficiency, Miles per Gallon (adjust per vehicle type)4.8 Bus Miles per Gallon491,862 Sponsored Revenue Miles204,942.43$                 Total Fuel Cost41,088$                       Sponsored Vehicle Lease Costs41,088.45$                     Per Vehicle Principal + 4% Interest Rate,  Annual10 Sponsored Vehicles10 Vehicles needed for sponsored service410,884.50$                 Total Annual Vehicle Cost for Sponsored Service4,290,092.44$              TOTAL4,446,267.79$              original cost of sponsored service4,290,092.44$              new cost after baseline adjustment156,175.35$                 value of service being added to UTA baseline(1) NTD Cost per Revenue Mile has been adjusted to exclude fuel expense but does include approximately 2% for capital maintenance (e.g. engine replacement, etc).(2) The annual escalator is a calculated average of the CPI‐U over a twenty year period.(3) UTA will discount the administrative charges in proportion to the scale of the service increase in revenue miles.(4) Paratransit Service rate is equal to the percentage of the most recent NTD reported total demand response vehicle revenue hours as compared to total vehicle revenue hours for Bus, Commuter Bus and Light Rail.8/31/2020 65 EXHIBIT 5 UTA Service Design Guidelines (April 2020) 8/31/2020 66 April 2020 8/31/2020 67 1 Service Design Guidelines April 2020 8/31/2020 68 2 Contents Levels of Service ............................................................................................................................................ 3 Tier 1: 15-minute peak service .................................................................................................................. 3 Tier 2: 30-minute peak service .................................................................................................................. 4 Tier 3: 60-minute service .......................................................................................................................... 5 Tier 4: Peak-Only Service .......................................................................................................................... 6 Other Service............................................................................................................................................. 7 Service Standards .......................................................................................................................................... 7 Vehicle Loads ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Vehicle Headways ..................................................................................................................................... 7 Operational Performance ......................................................................................................................... 8 On-Time Performance ........................................................................................................................... 8 Other Operational Performance Metrics .................................................................................................. 8 Service Availability & Stop Spacing ........................................................................................................... 9 Stop Amenities Distribution ...................................................................................................................... 9 Vehicle Assignment ................................................................................................................................. 12 8/31/2020 69 3 Levels of Service Tier 1: 15-minute peak service Minimum Level of Service: Sun Mon - Fri Sat 5 AM – 6 AM 30-min service 5 AM – 6 AM 30-min service 7 AM – 7 PM 30-min service 6 AM – 7 PM 15-min service 6 AM – 7 PM 15-min service 7 PM – 12 AM 30-min service 7 PM – 12 AM 30-min service To qualify for Tier 1 service, one of the following conditions must be met: - Route is designated as a Core Route - Route has a people-based Transit Propensity Index (TPI) per mile greater than 300 - Route carries at least 20 Passengers per Hour (PPH) on weekdays and Saturdays - Route carries at least 10 Passengers per Hour (PPH) on Sundays - Route is sponsored by a third party to sustain the level of service Routes may run above the minimum level of service if system considerations require and productivity levels are met. Tier 1 routes with sufficient propensity but not productivity will run the minimum level of service and are subject to analysis to determine ways to improve ridership performance. Changes in TPI due to significant land use, demographic, or other changes in the service area will also be analyzed to determine if changes to minimum level of service are necessary. Sponsored routes will run irrespective of TPI and PPH, but UTA may work with sponsors to make adjustments to routes to improve performance. 8/31/2020 70 4 Tier 2: 30-minute peak service Minimum Level of Service: Sun Mon - Fri Sat 6 AM – 9 PM 30-min service 6 AM – 9 PM 60-min service To qualify for Tier 2 service, one of the following conditions must be met: - Route has a people-based TPI per mile greater than 200 - Route carries at least 10 PPH - Route is sponsored by a third party to maintain the level of service Routes may run above the minimum level of service, including on Sunday, if system considerations require and productivity levels are met. Routes with sufficient propensity but not productivity will run the minimum level of service and are subject to analysis to determine ways to improve ridership performance. Tier 2 routes that consistently perform at Tier 1 levels of productivity will be analyzed to determine the feasibility of increasing minimum level of service. Changes in TPI due to significant land use, demographic, or other changes in the service area will also be analyzed to determine if changes to minimum level of service are necessary. Sponsored routes will run irrespective of TPI and PPH, but UTA may work with sponsors to make adjustments to routes to improve performance. 8/31/2020 71 5 Tier 3: 60-minute service Minimum Level of Service: Sun Mon - Fri Sat 6 AM – 9 PM 60-min service To qualify for Tier 3 service, one of the following conditions must be met: - Route has a people-based TPI per mile greater than 100 - Route carries a PPH of 5 or greater: o PPH > 5: Flex Route o PPH > 10: Flex Route or Fixed Route - Route is sponsored by a third party to maintain the level of service Routes may run above the minimum level of service, including on weekends, if system considerations require and productivity levels are met. Routes with sufficient propensity but not productivity will run the minimum level of service and are subject to analysis to determine ways to improve ridership performance. Tier 3 routes that consistently perform at Tier 2 levels of productivity will be analyzed to determine the feasibility of increasing minimum level of service. Changes in TPI due to significant land use, demographic, or other changes in the service area will also be analyzed to determine if changes to minimum level of service are necessary. Sponsored routes will run irrespective of TPI and PPH, but UTA may work with sponsors to make adjustments to routes to improve performance. 8/31/2020 72 6 Tier 4: Peak-Only Service Minimum Level of Service: Sun Mon - Fri Sat 6 AM – 9 AM 60-min service 3 PM – 6 PM 60-min service To qualify for Tier 4 service, one of the following conditions must be met: - Route has a job-based TPI per mile of greater than 100 - Route has a Passenger Miles Traveled (PMT) per mile of 7 or greater - Route is sponsored by a third party to maintain the level of service Routes may run above the minimum level of service if system considerations require and productivity levels are met. Routes with sufficient propensity but not productivity will run the minimum level of service and are subject to analysis to determine ways to improve ridership performance. Tier 4 minimum level of service is determined independently from other tiers; Tier 4 routes are not subject to be upgraded to other tiers unless changes in people-based TPI show that analysis is necessary. Changes in job-based TPI due to significant land use, demographic, or other changes in the service area will also be analyzed to determine if changes to minimum level of service are necessary. Sponsored routes will run irrespective of TPI and PMT/mi, but UTA may work with sponsors to make adjustments to routes to improve performance. 8/31/2020 73 7 Other Service Areas that do not have sufficient TPI, productivity, or sponsorship to qualify for any of the above tiers of service will not be served by fixed-route or flex-route transit. UTA will work with local communities and stakeholders to implement other mobility solutions. Other mobility solutions include (but are not limited to): • UTA-operated demand-responsive transit (DRT) • Contractor-operated DRT • UTA Vanpool and/or Ride Van Plus • Partnership with Transportation Network Company (TNC) • Employer-sponsored shuttles • Transportation Management Associations Service Standards Vehicle Loads UTA has set the following standard for vehicle loads: For Bus Rapid Transit and peak only service, the median maximum load on a trip should be no greater than the vehicle seating capacity. For other fixed-route bus services and commuter rail, the median maximum load on a trip is no greater than 150% of seating capacity. Light rail has determined that average weekly loads on regularly scheduled trips should not exceed 100% of the seating capacity. If the loads regularly exceed capacity, then vehicles will be added to the consist until the maximum consist size is reached. Thereafter loads should not exceed 150% of seating capacity. Vehicle Headways The average number of minutes between regional commuter trains should not exceed 60 minutes. The average number of minutes between light rail trains should not exceed 20 minutes. UTA’s Service Design Guidelines identify four tiers or minimum levels of bus service. Route alignments and level of service are based on current or modeled productivity, the propensity of the alignment for transit use, as well as service design guidelines for route and stop spacing. The transit propensity index is calculated based on a combination of factors – minority population density, transit supportive population density, job density, intersection density, higher-education student density, intersection density, and zero-car household density. 8/31/2020 74 8 Operational Performance On-Time Performance UTA tracks on-time reliability for all routes. A variety of root causes affect reliability, including traffic and weather conditions, operator driving styles, vehicle types, and scheduled running times. UTA will evaluate whether adjustments to routing/stops are necessary when: • The on-time performance for the whole route is consistently below 88% • Running time adjustments to individual trips are so large that they disrupt the cycle time of the whole route For commuter rail service, on-time is defined as departing stations 0 seconds early and less than 5 minutes late. The on-time standard is 88% on-time for all departures. UTA continuously monitors on- time performance and conducts analysis to determine root causes of non-standard performance then makes adjustments where feasible. For light rail service, on-time is defined as departing stations 0 seconds early and less than 5 minutes late. The on-time standard is 88% on-time for all departures. Light rail service is continually monitored and schedule adjustments or other corrective action taken annually at a minimum. For fixed-route bus, on-time is defined as departing time point crossings 0 seconds early and less than 5 minutes late for regular fixed-route and 0 seconds early and less than 15 minutes late for flex routes. UTA will evaluate whether adjustments are necessary when: • The on-time performance for the whole route is consistently below 88% • Running time adjustments to individual trips are so large that they disrupt the cycle time of the whole route For paratransit, on-time is defined as at least 90% of customers picked up within 10 minutes before to 20 minutes after the stated pick-up time and 90% of customers dropped off within 30 minutes of any stated appointment time. Other Operational Performance Metrics In addition to on-time reliability, UTA tracks other operational performance metrics such as Miles per Service Interruption and Avoidable Accidents. Performance in these metrics is not typically affected by the design of the service; however, in special cases UTA may evaluate whether changes to the service plan are necessary to improve operational performance without negatively impacting the riding customer. 8/31/2020 75 9 Service Availability & Stop Spacing Recommended route spacing for fixed and flex routes in the UTA system is as follows: Environment Stop Spacing (in feet) Central Business District 1/8 mile to 1/4 mile Urban 1/4 mile to 1/2 mile Suburban 1/2 mile to 1 mile Rural (as needed based on surrounding development and activities) Exceptions to route spacing guidelines may be justified to accommodate street grid patterns and/or preserve access to major destinations. Where routes converge on a major destination, a small amount of duplication may be necessary. Stop Amenities Distribution UTA is responsible for establishing a policy for how transit amenities are added to the system and ensuring the equitable distribution of amenities throughout the service area. “Transit amenities” refer to items of comfort, convenience, and safety that are available to the general riding public. They include, but are not limited to items such as seating, shelters, canopies, provisional information, escalators, elevators, and waste receptacles. Additionally, UTA is making efforts to upgrade existing stops to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) standards. In accordance with this requirement, UTA has developed a master plan outlining all of the criteria involved in prioritizing which stops will receive improvements, what improvements are warranted based on use, and outlines construction specs for improvements. The Bus Stop Master Plan outlines and encourages partnerships with local government and property owners to improve the accessibility, comfort, and convenience of the riding public. The creation of this document required an extensive inventory of all of UTA’s 6,055 bus stops, standardizing the specifications by which all stops would be improved and updating UTA’s decision making matrix for prioritizing what amenities will be added to a stop. 8/31/2020 76 10 Category 1 Point 2 Points 3 Points 4 Points 5 Points Non-ADA Compliant* - - - - Yes Total Stop Activity (TSA) – Average Daily Weekday** 1 to 19 20 to 39 40 to 59 60 to 79 80 + Total Annual Bus Ramp Deployments 1 to 49 50 to 99 100 – 149 150 – 199 200+ Transfer Point*** Equal to or Greater than 30 min. freq. 1 Route 2 Routes 3 Routes 4 Routes 5+ Routes Less than 29 the min. freq. 1 Route 2 Routes 3 Routes 4 Routes 5+ Routes Serves Title VI Community Title VI Route/Area Safety Intersection 1 of 5 Elements 2 of 5 Elements 3 of 5 Elements 4 of 5 Elements 5 of 5 Elements Parking Allowed Obstacle(s) Present No lighting Present Sidewalk Not Level Social Education Adjacent Yes Library Adjacent Yes * Non-ADA compliant bus stop locations automatically receive five (5) points ** TSA Data is average weekday ridership taken from the last eight change day periods ***One (1) additional point is assessed each route at a transfer point with 30 minute or less frequency 8/31/2020 77 11 UTA bases the recommended level of amenities at bus stops on the headway of the route(s) serving the stop and the weekday Total Stop Activity (TSA), defined as the sum of boardings and alightings at the stop: Stop Level Headway TSA (Avg. Daily) Amenities Level I - A 15 Min or Less 0 to 9 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad Level I - B Greater than 15 Min 0 to 4 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad Level II - A 15 Min or Less 10 to 39 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Bench • Trash Can Level II - B Greater than 15 Min 5 to 9 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Bench Level III - A 15 Min or Less 40 to 59 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Bench • Trash Can • 4’x8’ Shelter Level III - B Greater than 15 Min 10 to 19 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Bench • Trash Can • 4’ x 8’ Shelter Level IV - A 15 Min or Less 60 to 79 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Bench • Trash Can • 6’ x 12’ Shelter Level IV - B Greater than 15 Min 20 - 29 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Bench • Trash Can • 6’ x 12’ Shelter Level V - A 15 Min or Less 80 to 99 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Trash Can • Two (2) Benches • 6’ x 12’ Shelter Level V - B Greater than 15 Min NA • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Trash Can • 6’ x 12’ Shelter Level VI - A 15 Min or Less 100 to 49 • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Trash Can • 6’ x 16’ Shelter • Two (2) Benches • Light Fixture 8/31/2020 78 12 Level VI - B Greater than 15 Min NA • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Trash Can • Two (2) Benches • 6’ x 12’ Shelter** Level VII - A 15 Min or Less 150 + • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Trash Can • Two (2) Benches • Custom Shelter • Light Fixture • Digital Sign Level VII - B Greater than 15 Min NA • Pole • Sign • ADA Pad • Trash Can • Two (2) Benches • 6’ x 16’ Shelter For more information on stop amenities, please refer to the Bus Stop Master Plan. Vehicle Assignment The guidelines that UTA uses in assigning vehicles to routes are as follows. The quantity of buses in each Business Unit is determined by the demand, which is the peak pull-out for the calendar year. The Planning Department from each Business Unit generates information regarding routes and schedules that is cut into runs and blocks for Operators to work. This information is shared with the respective Business Units’ Maintenance Departments. Buses are assigned within a service area according to the characteristics of the service, such as canyon, commuter express, shuttle or regular transit bus service, passenger loads, and topography of the service area. Specially equipped canyon buses have different specifications than buses that operate in regular transit service in the valley. Each Maintenance Department determines vehicle assignment based on criteria stipulated by the planners and operational characteristics as to what type of equipment is required for each route or schedule. The vehicle type that can accommodate the runs and blocks is entered into the Fleet Control Sign-out database software program. Also, the status of buses that are out for repair, body work, or temporarily out of service is updated in the database. Vehicles are assigned on a daily basis through a Sign-out Sheet. All-day blocks (runs that are out around 16 hours or more) are typically assigned the same type of bus each day. Any remaining buses are assigned to tripped blocks (buses sent out during overloads or blocks that are less than 8 hours in duration). Once the sign-out sheet is generated, the sign-out is sent to Operations Dispatch for Operator assignment. 8/31/2020 79 EXHIBIT 6 DRAFT ADDENDUM 4 1000 North Mobilization (information only) 8/31/2020 80 1 ADDENDUM NO. 4 TO SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION AND UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY TRANSIT MASTER PLAN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (Mobilization Funding for 1000 North) This Addendum No. 4 (“Addendum”) to that certain Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement (“ILA”) is made this ____ day of June, 2020, by and between Utah Transit Authority, a public transit district organized under the laws of the State of Utah (“UTA”), and Salt Lake City Corporation, a Utah municipal corporation (“City”) is made and entered into as of the date the Addendum is stamped by the Salt Lake City Recorder’s Office (“Effective Date”). UTA and City are hereinafter collectively referred to as “Parties” and each may be referred to individually as “Party,” all as governed by the context in which such words are used. RECITALS A. On the 6th day of March, 2019, the Parties entered into the ILA, whereby the parties agreed to participate jointly in planning and funding for public transportation improvements in and around the City; and B. Pursuant to the terms of the ILA, the Parties desire to specifically identify certain components of the Salt Lake City Transit Master Plan public transportation improvements to be governed by this Addendum. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties hereby agree as follows: 1. As contemplated in Section 3 of the ILA, the City, in cooperation with UTA, has identified and funded a total of four corridors for City-sponsored frequent transit network routes (“FTN Routes”) to be provided by UTA for a one-year period from the August 2020 change day until the next succeeding August change day. The corridors are depicted in Attachment A to this Addendum. Three of the corridors began service in August of 2019, and are subject to other addenda. These are 200 South, 900 South, and 2100 South. One additional corridor, 1000 North, is proposed for mobilization in 2020, and is the subject of this Addendum. The service characteristics of the FTN Routes, the additional vehicles necessary to support the FTN Routes, and the Annual Service Mile Charge (as such term is defined in the ILA) applicable to the FTN Routes shall all be memorialized pursuant to an additional addendum to be subsequently executed by the parties. 2. The term of this Agreement is from the Effective Date until August __, 2021 (“Term”). 3. Pursuant to Section 6 of the ILA, UTA has identified a mobilization charge reflecting the costs to be incurred by UTA to prepare for the sponsored FTN Routes (the “Mobilization Funding”). The Mobilization Funding shall be utilized solely for implementation of the FTN Routes according to the itemized description in Attachment B to this Addendum. 4. UTA shall submit detailed invoices for the Mobilization Funding in accordance with the milestone payment schedule included as Attachment B. To the extent that the hiring of additional headcount contemplated in Attachment B does not match the proposed schedule identified in Attachment B, then UTA shall adjust the invoices for milestone payments to reflect 8/31/2020 81 2 actual hiring of additional headcount during the Term; provided, however, that any adjustment of amounts invoiced shall not exceed $x during the Term of this Agreement. The City shall pay all approved invoices within thirty (30) days of receipt. If the City does not approve an invoice, a written explanation of disputed items will be sent within ten (10) business days of the City’s receipt of the invoice. 5. This Addendum may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be an original, with the same effect as if the signatures were upon the same instrument. 6. This Addendum is limited to the terms expressly provided herein and except as set forth herein, the ILA shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with its terms. If there is a conflict between this Addendum and the ILA, the terms of this Addendum shall prevail and control. [THE BALANCE OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.] 8/31/2020 82 3 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have entered into this Addendum effective the date first set forth herein. [Signature pages to Addendum No. 4 to Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement] UTAH TRANSIT AUTHORITY By______________________________________ Executive Director By______________________________________ Acting Chief Service Development Officer Approved as to Form ____________________________________ UTA Legal Counsel 8/31/2020 83 4 [Signature pages to Addendum No. 4 to Salt Lake City Corporation and Utah Transit Authority Transit Master Plan Implementation Interlocal Agreement] SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By______________________________________ Its______________________________________ APPROVED AS TO FORM: Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office By: ____________________________ Senior City Attorney Date: ___________________________ ATTEST & COUNTERSIGN: Salt Lake City Recorder’s Office By: ____________________________ City Recorder [Attach Salt Lake City Council Resolution Approving Addendum] 8/31/2020 84 5 ATTACHMENT A Description of FTN Routes For This Addendum No. 4 8/31/2020 85 6 ATTACHMENT B Funding for Mobilization For This Addendum No. 4 8/31/2020 86 DRAFT Addendum 4 1000 North Mobilization (122,274 miles, 22,918 hours) FTE/Unit Position/Item Monthly Cost per FTE/unit January February March April May June July Mobilization Total 2 Mechanics 6,423$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 89,922$ 1 Fixed Supervisors 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 50,400$ 1 TCC Dispatch 5,100$ -$ -$ -$ 5,100$ 5,100$ 5,100$ 5,100$ 20,400$ 0 Para Supervisors 7,200$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 15 Operator Recruitment one time 30,000$ 30,000$ 20,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 88,000$ 15 Operator Training one time 48,000$ 48,000$ 48,000$ 48,000$ 48,000$ 48,000$ 288,000$ 15 Operator Service 5,703$ 28,515$ 28,515$ 57,030$ 57,030$ 85,545$ 85,545$ 342,180$ 4 Vehicle Procurement 4,858$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 19,432$ 19,432$ 38,864$ Sub Total 50,046$ 126,561$ 116,561$ 132,176$ 132,176$ 180,123$ 180,123$ 917,766$ 20%Administration 10,009$ 25,312$ 23,312$ 26,435$ 26,435$ 36,025$ 36,025$ 183,553$ TOTAL 60,055$ 151,873$ 139,873$ 158,611$ 158,611$ 216,148$ 216,148$ 1,101,319$ 1/1/2021 60,055$ 2/1/2021 151,873$ 3/1/2021 139,873$ 4/1/2021 158,611$ 5/1/2021 158,611$ 6/1/2021 216,148$ 7/1/2021 216,148$ TOTAL 1,101,319$ Mobilization Milestone Payments The above is a not-to-exceed amount, invoices will be based on actual FTE hires. 8/31/2020 87 EXHIBIT 7 DRAFT ADDENDUM 5 2021-22 Sponsored Service (information only) 8/31/2020 88 DRAFT Addendum 4 1000 North Mobilization (122,274 miles, 22,918 hours) FTE/Unit Position/Item Monthly Cost per FTE/unit January February March April May June July Mobilization Total 2 Mechanics 6,423$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 12,846$ 89,922$ 1 Fixed Supervisors 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 7,200$ 50,400$ 1 TCC Dispatch 5,100$ -$ -$ -$ 5,100$ 5,100$ 5,100$ 5,100$ 20,400$ 0 Para Supervisors 7,200$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 15 Operator Recruitment one time 30,000$ 30,000$ 20,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 2,000$ 88,000$ 15 Operator Training one time 48,000$ 48,000$ 48,000$ 48,000$ 48,000$ 48,000$ 288,000$ 15 Operator Service 5,703$ 28,515$ 28,515$ 57,030$ 57,030$ 85,545$ 85,545$ 342,180$ 4 Vehicle Procurement 4,858$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 19,432$ 19,432$ 38,864$ Sub Total 50,046$ 126,561$ 116,561$ 132,176$ 132,176$ 180,123$ 180,123$ 917,766$ 20%Administration 10,009$ 25,312$ 23,312$ 26,435$ 26,435$ 36,025$ 36,025$ 183,553$ TOTAL 60,055$ 151,873$ 139,873$ 158,611$ 158,611$ 216,148$ 216,148$ 1,101,319$ 1/1/2021 60,055$ 2/1/2021 151,873$ 3/1/2021 139,873$ 4/1/2021 158,611$ 5/1/2021 158,611$ 6/1/2021 216,148$ 7/1/2021 216,148$ TOTAL 1,101,319$ Mobilization Milestone Payments The above is a not-to-exceed amount, invoices will be based on actual FTE hires. 8/31/2020 89 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 ______________________________ Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date Received: 12/10/2020 Date Sent to Council: 12/10/2020 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 12/10/2020 Chris Wharton, Chair FROM: Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Office of the Mayor SUBJECT: Board Reappointment Recommendation: Police Civilian Review Board STAFF CONTACT: Sandy Casement sandy.casement@slcgov.com Board Reappointment Recommendation: Police Civilian Review Board DOCUMENT TYPE: RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the Council consider the recommendation in the attached letter from the Mayor and reappoint Jessica Andrew as a member of the Police Civilian Review 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 December 10, 2020 Salt Lake City Council 451 S State Street Room 304 PO Box 145476 Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 Dear Councilmember Wharton, Listed below is my recommendation for membership reappointment to the Police Civilian Review Board: Jessica Andrew – to be reappointed for a term ending November 21, 2021. Jessica recently moved to D1 from D7. The board's D1 seat was recently vacated by Kevin Park who was term limited. We are recommending Jessica finish her first time in the now vacant D1 seat. I respectfully ask your consideration and support for this reappointment. Respectfully, Erin Mendenhall, Mayor Cc: File