Loading...
02/08/2011 - Work Session - Minutes PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2011 The City Council met in Work Session on Tuesday, February 8, 2011, at 4 : 00 p.m. in Room 326, Committee Room, City County Building, 451 South State Street. In Attendance : Council Members Carlton Christensen, Van Turner, Jill Remington Love, JT Martin, Stan Penfold, Luke Garrott and Soren Simonsen. Also In Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Mayor Ralph Becker; Rusty Vetter, Senior City Attorney; Lehua Weaver, Council Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Rick Graham, Public Services Director; Frank Gray, Community and Economic Development Director; Wilford Sommerkorn, Planning Director; Nick Norris, Principal Planner; Sharen Hauri, Consultant-Somas; David Everitt, Mayor' s Chief of Staff; Emy Maloutas, Open Space Lands Program Manager; Nole Walkingshaw, Planning Programs Supervisor; Neil Lindberg, Council Legal Director; Jan Aramaki, Council Constituent Liaison/Research and Policy Analyst; Nick Tarbet, Council Analyst and Constituent Liaison; Margaret Plane, Senior City Attorney; and Scott Crandall, Deputy City Recorder. Councilmember Love presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5 :43 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1. 9:08:26 PM REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING A REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. View attachments See File M 11-5 for announcements. #2 . 5:43:17PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE CITY' S ONLINE FORUM "OPEN CITY HALL" . View attachments Nole Walkingshaw briefed the Council with a live web demonstration and the attached handouts . Councilmember Love said she felt there was interest on the Council to include this program as another communication tool and asked staff to generate questions regarding Council issues/priorities which could be posted for public comment . #3 . RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 16, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, BY ADDING A NEW SECTION, 16. 12 .195, TO ARTICLE I OF TITLE 16 TO CREATE AND ESTABLISH A CUSTOMER FACILITY CHARGE AT AIRPORT CAR RENTAL FACILITIES; AND AMENDING SECTION 11 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2011 16.12 .200, PERTAINING TO FUNDS; DISPOSITION AND ACCOUNTING, TO INCLUDE THE FUNDS RECEIVED FROM THE CUSTOMER FACILITY CHARGE. RELATED PROVISIONS OF CHAPTER 16 MAY ALSO BE AMENDED AS PART OF THIS PETITION. (AIRPORT RENTAL CAR FACILITY RELOCATION FUNDS) View attachments This item was not held. #4. 8:06:35PM RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING REGARDING AN ORDINANCE TO CHANGE THE INTENT STATEMENT FOR THE COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS AND THE PURPOSE STATEMENTS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, MANUFACTURING, DOWNTOWN, GATEWAY AND SPECIAL PURPOSE ZONING DISTRICTS, PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. PLNPCM2009-00173 . RELATED PROVISIONS OF TITLE 21A - ZONING - MAY ALSO BE AMENDED AS PART OF THIS PETITION. (ZONING PURPOSE STATEMENTS) View attachments Nick Norris, Wilford Sommerkorn and Nick Tarbet briefed the Council with the attached handouts. Discussion was held on two purpose statements identified on the first page of the staff report. A straw poll was taken to use the following language for M1 and M2 Manufacturing zoning districts . "Safe, convenient and inviting connections that provide access to businesses from public sidewalks, bike paths and streets are necessary and are provided in an equal way. " The language for CC Commercial Corridor and CG General Commercial zoning districts would read: "Safe, convenient and inviting connections that provide access to businesses from public sidewalks, bike paths and streets are necessary. Access should follow a hierarchy that places the pedestrian first, bicycle second and automobile third" . A majority of the Council was in favor. #5. 6:11:48 PM RECEIVE UPDATED INFORMATION FROM THE ADMINISTRATION RELATING TO PARLEY' S HISTORIC NATURE PARK. View attachments View Powerpoint Rick Graham, Emy Maloutas, Sharen Hauri, Jan Aramaki, Neil Lindberg and Mayor Becker briefed the Council with a PowerPoint presentation and the attached handouts. Discussion on the proposal included the process/authority to establish off-leash designations, installing a restroom facility and impacts on neighborhoods and park users . Ms . Gust-Jenson said legal advice was needed from the Attorney' s Office to ensure accuracy regarding off-leash designations . A straw poll was taken to support the Administration' s new plan and place it on a future agenda for formal consideration/adoption with an addition that the plan gave the Administration flexibility to address impacts on the neighborhood and dog owners relating to the south entrance. A majority of the Council was in favor. 11 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2011 Councilmember Love said staff could prepare three ordinances with a place holder to adopt the management plan at a later date. A majority of the Council was in favor. Councilmember Simonsen asked the Administration to post current environmental information on the City' s website . #6. 8:16:56 PM HOLD A DISCUSSION WITH THE ADMINISTRATION REGARDING LAND USE MASTER PLAN NEEDS AND PRIORITIES FOR THE CITY. View attachments Wilford Sommerkorn and Frank Gray briefed the Council with the attached handouts . Councilmember Love said several years ago a document was adopted showing what the Council wanted master plans to look like . She said the Planning Commission (PC) also adopted a similar document/resolution. Mr. Sommerkorn said the Administration could prepare/present the Council with some type of outline of what master plans could address . Mr. Gary said additionally, the Administration could prepare a work plan outlining what resources would be needed to follow-up on the outline and to address other relevant Council concerns/issues . Councilmember Love asked the Administration to research previous actions taken by the Council and PC and prepare an outline and work- plan. She said follow-up discussions would be scheduled for future meetings . #7 . RECEIVE A FOLLOW-UP BRIEFING REGARDING BUDGET AMENDMENT NO. 3 FOR FISCAL YEAR 2010-11. View attachments This item was not held. #8. 9:03:50PM RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AND EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATION. View attachments Margaret Plane and David Everitt briefed the Council with the attached handouts . Councilmember Love said the item would be placed on a future agenda for formal consideration. #9. (TENTATIVE) DISCUSS PRIORITIES FOR 2011 AS A FOLLOW-UP TO THEIR RETREAT. View attachment This item was not held. 11 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH WORK SESSION TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2011 #10 . 9:15:51 PM CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO CLOSED SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE § 52-4-204, FOR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES: a) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205 (1) (b) ; b) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE PURCHASE, EXCHANGE OR LEASE OF REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING ANY FORM OF WATER RIGHT OR WATER SHARES) WHEN PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE CITY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205 (1) (d) ; c) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS PENDING OR REASONABLY IMMINENT LITIGATION PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 52-4-205 (1) (c) ; d) A STRATEGY SESSION TO DISCUSS THE SALE OF REAL PROPERTY (INCLUDING ANY FORM OF WATER RIGHT OR WATER SHARES) IF (1) PUBLIC DISCUSSION OF THE TRANSACTION WOULD DISCLOSE THE APPRAISAL OR ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE PROPERTY UNDER CONSIDERATION OR PREVENT THE CITY FROM COMPLETING THE TRANSACTION ON THE BEST POSSIBLE TERMS, (2) THE CITY PREVIOUSLY GAVE NOTICE THAT THE PROPERTY WOULD BE OFFERED FOR SALE, AND (3) THE TERMS OF THE SALE ARE PUBLICLY DISCLOSED BEFORE THE CITY APPROVES THE SALE; AND e) FOR ATTORNEY-CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE § 78B-1-137 . Councilmember Christensen moved and Councilmember Garrott seconded to enter into Closed Session. A roll call vote was taken. Council Members Christensen, Turner, Penfold, Love, Garrott, Martin and Simonsen voted aye. See file M 11-2 for Sworn Statement and recording. The meeting adjourned at 9 : 25 p.m. \,_ s L/ UOU-e/ ‘je,,,w,ciT),.---., .. COUNCIL CHAIR .z fi ke> t', AtS TY R ORDER =I, a MV. a, �7?'ORATV,P This document along with the digital recording constitute the official minutes of the City Council Work Session meeting held February 8, 2011 . sc 11 - 4 SA.N ' " � GcGIT1Y __P. IOi OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Posted: February 3, 2011 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING DATE: February 8, 2011 TIME: 4:00 p.m. or immediately following the 2:00 p.m.Redevelopment Agency Meeting PLACE: City&County Building 451 South State Street,Room 326 Salt Lake City,Utah AGENDA ITEMS 1. Report of the Executive Director,including a review of Council information items and announcements. 2. The Council will receive a briefing regarding the City's online forum"Open City Hall". 3. The Council will receive regarding an ordinance amending Chapter 16, Salt Lake City Code,by adding a new Section, 16.12.195,to Article I of Title 16 to create and establish a customer facility charge at Airport car rental facilities; and amending Section 16.12.200,pertaining to funds; disposition and accounting, to include the funds received from the customer facility charge. Related provisions of Chapter 16 may also be amended as part of this petition. (Airport rental car facility Relocation Funds) 4. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing regarding an ordinance to change the intent statement for the Commercial zoning districts and the purpose statements for the residential, commercial,manufacturing,downtown, gateway and special purpose zoning districts,pursuant to Petition No. PLNPCM2009-00173.Related provisions of Title 21 A—Zoning—may also be amended as part of this petition. (Zoning Purpose Statements) 5. The Council will receive updated information from the Administration relating to Parley's Historic Nature Park. 6. The Council wilt hold a discussion with the Administration regarding land use master plan needs and priorities for the City. 7. The Council will receive a follow-up briefing regarding Budget Amendment No. 3 Fiscal Year 2010-11. 8. The Council will receive a briefing regarding collective bargaining and employee representation. 9. (TENTATIVE)The Council will discuss priorities for 2011 as a follow-up to their retreat. 10. (TENTATIVE)The Council will consider a motion to enter into Closed Session, in keeping with Utah Code § 52-4-204, for any of the following purposes: a)A strategy session to discuss collective bargaining,pursuant to Utah Code § 52-4-205 (1)(b); b)A strategy session to discuss the purchase, exchange, or lease of real property(including any form of water right or water shares)when public discussion of the transaction would disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration or prevent the City from completing the transaction on the best possible terms,pursuant to Utah Code § 52- 4-205(1)(d); CONTINUED ON NEXT PAGE 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH B41 1 1 P.O. BOX 145476, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH S41 14-5476 TELEPHONE: 801-535.7600 FAX: 801-535-7651 WWW.SLCGOV.COM/COUNCIL EMAIL: COUNCIL.COMMENTS@SLCGOV.COM y�Aecveeo vnPeR c)A strategy session to discuss pending or reasonably imminent litigation,pursuant to Utah Code § 52-4-205(1)(c); d)A strategy session to discuss the sale of real property(including any form of water right or water shares)if(1)public discussion of the transaction would disclose the appraisal or estimated value of the property under consideration or prevent the City from completing the transaction on the best possible terms, (2)the City previously gave notice that the property would be offered for sale,and(3)the terms of the sale are publicly disclosed before the City approves the sale; e)For attorney-client matters that are privileged,pursuant to Utah Code § 78B-1-137; and :)A strategy session to discuss deployment of security personnel, devices or systems pursuant to Utah Code Section 52-4205(1)(f). Access agendas at http://www.slcgov.com/counciliagendas/default.htm.People with disabilities may make requests for reasonable accommodation no later than 48 hours in advance of council meetings.We make every effort to honor these requests,and they should be made as early as possible. Accommodations may include alternate formats,interpreters, and other auxiliary aids. The City and County Building is an accessible facility. For questions or additional information,please contact the City Council Office at 535- 7600, or TDD 535-6021. Assistive listening devices are available on Channel I;upon four hours advance notice.Please allow 72 hours advance notice for sign language interpreters; large type and#2 Braille agendas. *Final action may be taken and/or adopted concerning any item on this agenda.After 5:00 p.m.,please enter the City& County Building through the east entrance. Accessible route is located on the east side of the building. In accordance with State Statute,City Ordinance and Council Policy, one or more Council Members may be connected via speakerphone. -011gTOTNT FRANK B. GRAY 1422 UNYICO M11 DERLL2 Z U R DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -9" MAYOR OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR MARY DE LA MARE-SCHAEFER B DEPUTY DIRECTOR ROBERT FARRINGTON, JR. DE SCANNED TO� DEPUTY DIRECTOR CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL SCANNED BY: DATE: /''s-r/10io _ Date Received: I 2,/ZI/Zd1D Pm 4dErifte o Staff Date Sent to City Council: I Z2/Z2/Z�/0 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 21, 2010 JT Martin, Chair FROM: Frank Gray, Community Economic Development Department irector RE: Request for a Briefing on"Open ' all". STAFF CONTACTS: Nole Walkingshaw Planning Program Supervisor, at 801-535-7128 , or nole.walkingshaw@slcgov.com RECOMMENDATION: Schedule Briefing BUDGET IMPACT: None DISCUSSION: Issue Origin: The City Council has requested a briefing introducing and discussing Salt Lake City's Online Forum"Open City Hall". The expectation is for a brief demonstration of the site followed by questions and answers from the City Council. Documents: Attached is the Salt Lake City"Open City Hall" Policy document and expectations. This Document discusses the purpose,types of issues, administration of the site, a privacy statement, an outline for developing issues and contact information. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 404 P.O. BOX 145486, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84114-5486 TELEPHONE: BO1-535-6230 FAX: 801-535-6005 WWW.BLCGOV.COM/CED 1?J.cccco n..co Salt Lake City's Open City Hall Policy Development and Expectations The Purpose of the Salt Lake City "Open City Hall" is to provide individuals with another opportunity to participate in community discussions about important topics. The ideas will be presented to the appropriate decision making bodies and are considered to be formal public input on that topic. Types of Issues: While there are no restrictions on the types of topics that might be presented on "Open City Hall", we will try to focus on issues which involve a public decision making process. This allows the comments to be prepared and treated as formal comments. Examples of these include; site specific developments, zoning text and map amendments, budget/funding issues and general policy developments. We will try to keep the number of issues to be discussed to around 3 to 4 at most times. As the forum develops we may find that there is a broad community interest in the forum and/or we can manage more. Topics for consideration will be determined by Community and Economic Development, Planning Division, Mayors Office and City Council Office, each focusing on and administrating their own priorities. As land use or other policies develop through the public process we will update the topic. This update may be based upon major changes in information as the project develops, or a closing statement discussing the resolution or decision made and how or when the comments received were presented to the decision making body. Providing feedback to the constituent that their input has been considered is very important. We need to develop and monitor successful feedback methods. For topics such as land-use decisions requiring Planning Commission and City Council decisions the topic will close following the Planning Commission hearing with a narrative of the decision. The City Council Office may prepare a new topic for discussion based upon the information presented to them from the transmittal and any other issues they feel are relevant. *Notification of a new topic will be circulated in house and directly to the Mayor's Office of Communications prior to posting. During this time the necessary media advisories and notifications can be prepared. Administration of the site: Link to Administrative Site: http://saltlakecity.peakdemocracv.com/portals/79/forum home?a=98 Two or three individuals from each work group will be trained to perform basic site administration. These functions include preparation of the fact sheet, staff reports and other materials for posting a new topic, topic visibility, conclusion/update statements. We will look to modify the home page widget so that the topics and statements alternate and the page link takes the visitor to the "Open City Hall "home page. Statement Privacy Salt Lake City respects the privacy policies of Peak Democracy. At this time we will allow "semi-anonymous"postings and "non-anonymous" postings. It is our opinion that "semi- anonymous" may encourage participation by those whom may feel intimidated by posting their identity. At this time those who have chosen to post with a"semi-anonymous" status have been respectful to others and have addressed the issues in a form that provides quality input. Topics which are site specific or personal in nature may use the "semi-anonymous" status. We may revisit this policy should a trend develop otherwise. This privacy setting is manageable per topic .404 and it may be appropriate to require full name or allow semi-anonymous. "Non-anonymous" postings are appropriate for larger issues, text amendments, master plan or other plans, bonds, policies etc. GRAMA Discussion Below is a discussion regarding GRAMA requests provided by the City Attorneys Office, the suggested policies have not been formalized or implemented. Upon further discussion an implementation strategy will be developed and this document amended to reflect those decisions. 1. How the City would respond to a GRAMA request for names, home addresses, and email addresses of people who post comments on Open City Hall depends on the nature of the City 's contract with Peak Democracy. If Peak Democracy has sole possession of and the intellectual property rights to that information, the City probably can't force Peak to disclose it to the City. However, if Peak retains that information as the contractual agent of the City, the City can't hide behind Peak's possession of the information and thereby deny a GRAMA request on the basis that the City doesn't possess the information. I note that users of the Open City Hall are asked, on a City web page, to provide their name, address, zip code, and email address. Thus it seems that the City has that information, at least temporarily. Amok 2. Assuming that the information is considered to be a City record under GRAMA, the City ' { doesn't necessarily have to disclose it upon request. We think it is likely that a person's name would have to be disclosed (especially because a person voluntarily posts it on the website), but we also would probably take the position that a home address and email address are private records under the "clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy" exception in GRAMA. 3. I would suggest the following disclosure wording: "Salt Lake City is subject to the Utah Governmental Access and Management Act ("GRAMA"). If it were determined that GRAMA required the City to disclose your personal information to other people upon request, the City would have to comply with that law. Therefore, please be aware of GRAMA's disclosure requirements before deciding to register with or use Open City Hall." Issues Basic Outline Each issue is unique and this outline should be considered to be a minimum standard. Introduction: • general summary of the issue, and process • non-leading question or statement of what we are seeking • If issue is heading towards a public hearing, note the date and time the comment period will be closed so that the comments report may be prepared and presented to the decision making body for their considerations. (should probably develop a standard for this) Fact Sheet: • Purpose • Bullets of key points • Area involved, if site or district specific Where to get more information: • Contacts • Web links Public Meetings: • Time and Place Attachments: • Attachments such as; site plans, staff reports, memos, etc. should be prepared in a pdf format for review • • • Images may be placed on the fact sheet for quick reference; the images should be reduced for web viewing. Contacts: Peak Democracy: http://www.peakdemocracy.com Info c@r,peakdemocracy.com Robert Vogel Email: robert c&peakdemocracy.com Phone: 925-788-4116 Mike Alvarez Cohen Email: mike c�peakdemocracy.com Phone: 510-225-5336 Planning: Nole Walkingshaw Amo Email: nole.walkinashaw(slcgov.com ' Phone: 801-535-7128 or 801-440-5448 Mayor's Office Lisa Harrison-Smith Email: lisa.harrison-smith cr slcg_ov.com Phone: 801-535-7177 Bianca Shreeve Email: Bianca.shreeve(c,,slcgov.com Phone: 801-535-7931 Holly Hilton Email: hollv.hiltonr .slcgov.com Phone: 801-535-6006 City Council Office -- 7 SLCC• Salt Lake City Department of Airports RECEIVED CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL JAN 0 6 2011 / Bait�ake City Mayor Date Received: OI Ito 7 Davi veritt, of of Staff Date sent to Council: p, ( 1 i ,-Leg 1 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: December 24,2010 JT Martin,Chair FROM: Maureen Riley, Director, Department of Airports (801)575-2408 SUBJECT: Proposed Revisions to City Code Chapter 16—Airport and Addition of Section 16.12.195 —Customer Facility Charge STAFF CONTACT: Jay Bingham,(801)-575-2916 DOCUMENT TYPE: Ordinances RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends that City Council approve changes to City Code Chapter 16 to provide for the assessment,collection,and disposition of Customer Facility Charges(CFC)on rental car(RAC) contracts to pay for rental car facility improvements and related transportation costs at the Airport. BUDGET IMPACT: Financial impacts are forecast to be cost and revenue neutral. The CFC is a pass-through charge that is collected from rental car agencies and used to pay for rental car facility improvements and other related costs. Page 1 of 3 Phone 801-575-2400 I Fax 801-575-2679 I P.O. Box 145550,Salt Lake City, Utah 84114 I slcairport.com BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: A preliminary phase of the Terminal Redevelopment Program(TRP)requires the relocation of existing rental car maintenance facilities to the south end of the Airport,whereas existing maintenance facilities are located adjacent to the parking garage. This will provide space for temporary roads and access to the TRP construction site. Additionally,plans for a new parking garage include a first level that is devoted to approximately 1200 ready-return spaces for rental cars. This is a 400-space increase over ready-return spaces in the existing parking garage. Plans also include a quick turn facility(QTA)adjacent to the new parking garage for fueling and washing of vehicles. Estimated costs for the parking garage and RAC facilities at Salt Lake City International Airport are between $200-300 million. The CFC is recognized by both the airport and rental car industries as a revenue source to fund the construction and improvement of RAC facilities. To date,over 85 domestic airports collect a CFC for this purpose. Most CFC programs use a transaction-day basis for assessing the fee,with a not-to-exceed amount per transaction day. CFC programs are limited to funding RAC facilities. These costs include the traditional base facilities, environmental initiatives,certain tenant finishes,and major equipment,such as busses and fueling and wash facilities. Also,the CFC can be used for a pro rata share of joint use capital costs,such as ready- return spaces in a garage,roadways,and signage. The CFC can also be used to pay common costs of a shuttle bus operation for rental car customers. However,transportation costs associated with bussing are often recognized as a separate transportation charge on the RAC contract. CFCs are expended on a pay-as-you-go basis or for the payment of debt service associated with RAC facilities. The collection authority generally is flexible,to allow for matching of the fee with the current Amok expense. For example,CFCs often are initially collected at a lower rate to pre-fund large construction projects,and then are increased as bonds are issued and debt is amortized. Later,the CFC may be decreased as debt is repaid,and thereafter adjusted for renewal and replacement costs. The CFC charge at 16 other large hub airports averages from $2.50 to$5.00 per day. An analysis prepared by LeighFisher, Inc.(formerly Jacobs Consultancy)suggests SLC should charge an initial daily fee of$4.00 for a maximum of 12 days per contract. This rate could be increased or decreased as needed for construction or when debt service payments begin. Commencement of collection would begin in Spring 2011. Authorized uses would include 1)capital costs of a new RAC facility, including a pro rata share of common infrastructure such as roadways,ready return and QTA areas,as well as reserves for renewal and replacement capital costs;2)transportation costs and other direct costs associated with interim operations during construction phasing and relocation of RAC operations;and 3)base infrastructure to future leased areas for service centers,including site prep. The CFC will not be used for ongoing individual RAC operational costs or operation and maintenance expenses related to the RAC facility. The financing plan for the RAC facility will be completed after final design,and based on costs of the preferred facility alternative and construction schedule. Upon complete payment of costs related to the initial authorized uses,CFC collections can be directed to new uses related to the RAC program,or can be terminated. A meeting with representatives of the rental car companies was held on December 9,2010,where Airport staff presented a proposed plan for redevelopment of the RAC facilities. All rental car companies operating at the Airport either attended the meeting or participated by phone. Representatives from Avis, Budget,and Hertz all verbally expressed support for the CFC program and for pre-collection of CFCs, in advance of final design. Page 2 of 3 SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2010 (Amending Title 16 to include a customer facility charge (CFC) and provide for the disposition and accounting of funds collected as a result of the CFC) An ordinance amending Chapter 16, Salt Lake City Code, by adding a new section, 16.12.195, to Article I of Title 16 to create and establish a customer facility charge; and amending section 16.12.200, pertaining to funds; disposition and accounting, to include the funds received from the customer facility charge. WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation (city) owns and operates the Salt Lake City International Airport through its Department of Airports; and WHEREAS, the city enters into concession and lease contracts with on-airport rental car companies that serve airline passengers at the airport; and WHEREAS, the city has the authority to establish fees and charges for the use of services and facilities by rental car companies and customers at the airport; and WHEREAS, the CFC is to be used for the purpose of paying for the city's costs associated with all facilities used for rental car concessions or for any rental car related purpose deemed appropriate by the city, including without limitation, payment or reimbursement of city's costs associated with construction of rental car facilities, and related transportation facilities and equipment, payment of debt service on obligations of the city for the cost of such facilities and equipment, the creation of reasonable reserves, or for such other rental car related purpose as the city determines; and Page 1 of 4 WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of the city and the public to impose a CFC on transactions for the rental of a vehicle from all on-airport rental car companies; and to require such rental car companies to collect and remit CFC funds to the city for the purposes specified in the ordinance; and WHEREAS, after a hearing before the City Council, the City Council has determined that the following ordinance is in the best interest of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah as follows: SECTION 1. That Chapter 16, Salt Lake City Code, be and the same hereby is, amended to add Section 16.12.195, to read as follows: 16.12.195: CUSTOMER FACILITY CHARGE: A. There is hereby imposed a Customer Facility Charge (CFC) on each transaction day, up to and including a maximum of 12 days per contract, for the rental of a vehicle from an on-airport rental car company(Airport Rental Car Company). B. The Executive Director of the Salt Lake City Department of Airports or designee is authorized to implement and administer the CFC program on behalf of the city, through concession and/or lease contracts or other means, including without limitation, the rules and regulations of the airport. The CFC charges may be pre- collected for future use, as specified in 16.12.200. C. The CFC shall not exceed $ 5.00 per transaction day during the first year following the effective date. Thereafter, the method of calculating the CFC and the amount of such CFC shall be determined by the Executive Director of the Salt Lake City Department of Airports on behalf of the city. However, the CFC shall not exceed $10.00 per transaction day. City may at any time and for any reason, change the amount of the CFC or discontinue it upon written notice to any affected Airport Rental Car Company. D. The Airport Rental Car Company shall collect the CFC and shall hold the CFC in trust for the benefit of the city. The CFC at all times shall be property of the city and the Airport Rental Car Company shall have no ownership or property interest in the CFC. The Airport Rental Car Company shall segregate, separately account for and ,a Page 2 of 4 disclose all CFC's as trust funds in its financial statements, and shall maintain adequate records that account for all CFC's charged and collected. E. Airport Rental Car Companies shall list the CFC separately on its customer invoice, describing it as a "Customer Facility Charge." F. The Airport Rental Car Company shall remit directly to the Salt Lake City Department of Airports on a monthly basis all CFC's that were collected or should have been collected from its airport customers. The CFC's shall be received no later than the last day of the month following the month in which the CFC's were collected. G. The Airport Rental Car Company shall submit to the Salt Lake City Department of Airports on a monthly basis a transaction report, which includes transaction days, a summary of daily business transactions in connection with the airport, an accounting of all fees charged to airport customers in connection with such transactions, and such other information as required by city in form and substance satisfactory to the Salt Lake City Department of Airports. SECTION 2. That Chapter 16.12.200, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to Funds; Disposition and Accounting related to the Salt Lake City Department of Airports, be and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 16.12.200: FUNDS; DISPOSITION AND ACCOUNTING: A. All funds received from fuel, taxes, rentals, concessions, customer facility charges, or any other source by the airport shall be placed in the airport enterprise funds and kept separate and apart from all other city funds. The collection, accounting, and expenditure of all airport funds shall be in accordance with existing fiscal policy of the city. B. Funds received from customer facility charges shall be used for paying the city's capital costs for construction and improvement of rental car facilities at the airport, including costs that support environmental sustainability; paying a pro rata share of city's costs for joint-use infrastructure, such as roadways, ready-return and quick- turnaround areas allocable to rental car usage; building reserves for renewal and replacement capital costs; paying common costs of a shuttle bus operation for rental car customers; funding transportation costs and other costs associated with interim operations during construction phasing and relocation of rental car operations; paying the city's costs for infrastructure for future lease areas for service center, including site prep; funding debt service associated with rental car facilities; or funding city's costs for such other rental car related purpose as the city determines. Page 3 of 4 SECTION 3. This ordinance takes effect upon first publication. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of , 2011. CHAIRPERSON CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Salt Lake City Attorney's Office (SEAL) Date /2 ' By Bill No. of 2010 Published: Page 4 of 4 • SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: February 3, 2011 SUBJECT: Petition PLNPCM2009-00173 -Zoning Text change-Intent statement for the Commercial zoning districts and Purpose Statements for the residential, commercial,manufacturing, downtown, gateway and special purpose zoning districts. AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: If the ordinance is adopted it would affect Council Districts citywide. STAFF REPORT BY: Nick Tarbet,Janice Jardine ADMINISTRATIVE DEPT. Community Development Department,Planning Division AND CONTACT PERSON: Nick Norris, Planning Manager WORK SESSION SUMMARY & NEW INFORMATION: On January 18, 2011,the Council received a briefing from the Administration regarding this item. Issues discussed included: • The status of the comprehensive zoning text and map changes relating to neighborhood scale commercial uses. • Refocus the policy direction for commercial areas to support a balanced approach in providing access for pedestrians,bicycles and the automobile. This would assist in implementing concepts from the Council's recent pedestrian safety discussions. In response to the Council's discussion,Planning staff provided the following revised language to be added to the CC Commercial Corridor, CG General Commercial and the M1/M2 Manufacturing zoning district purpose statements. Safe,convenient and inviting connections that provide access to businesses from public sidewalks, bike paths and streets are necessary. Access should follow a hierarchy that places the pedestrian first,bicycle second and automobile third. One Council Member suggested the following revision to the proposed language: Safe,convenient and inviting connections that provide access to businesses from public sidewalks, bike paths and streets are necessary. Access should assure that each of these are provided in an equal way. • Would the Council provide direction for staff regarding the proposed language options? • Does the Council wish to have this change included in the M-1 and M-2 zones? (The Council has previously discussed the problem with lack of sidewalks in industrial areas.) C 1 • The following information was provided previously for the Council Work Session on January 18, 2011. It is provided again for background purposes. KEY ELEMENTS: A. This proposal is one of the future projects identified in the Conditional Use analysis conducted by the Council in 2008. The intent was to reevaluate the purpose statements and uses in the City's zoning districts. Planning staff has indicated that the reevaluation of permitted and conditional uses is a separate project currently underway in the Planning Division. B. An ordinance has been prepared for Council consideration that would revise the zoning regulations Intent Statement for the Commercial zoning districts and Purpose Statements for Residential, Commercial,Manufacturing,Downtown,Gateway and Special Purpose Zoning Districts. The proposed changes reference adopted land use policy documents(e.g. Community,Neighborhood, Small Area Plans) and other land use elements such as compatibility,design and general standards. (Please refer to the draft ordinance for complete details.)The Administration's transmittal notes the proposed changes are intended to achieve the following: a. Remove contradictory statements. b. Ensure that each zoning district provides direction in implementing adopted master plan policies. c. Ensure consistency with the general purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the goals of each zoning classification(e.g.residential,commercial,manufacturing,etc). d. Strengthen the role that master plans play in administration of the zoning ordinance. e. Improve decision making processes. Examples of the proposed changes are noted below: Residential—promote sustainable and compatible development patterns with the existing scale and intensity of neighborhood. Commercial—enhance economic vitality,encourage sustainable,profitable and dynamic business. • Development is oriented towards pedestrians while acknowledging some zones are primarily accessed by automobile. Manufacturing—generate economic development and support service to manufacturing and industrial uses. Uses that may be adversely impacted by manufacturing are prohibited. Downtown—provide areas that generate employment and economic development. Uses intended to foster 24 hour activity include; high density housing along with office,retail, entertainment and culture. Design standards are oriented towards pedestrian activity along with safe attractive streetscapes,sustainability elements and preserving the urban nature. Gateway-Provide development opportunities oriented toward the pedestrian with an emphasis on, safe attractive streetscape, employment and economic development opportunities. Standards are intended to achieve established objectives for urban and historic design,pedestrian amenities and land use regulation. Special Purpose—promote uses to be compatible with the existing scale of the neighborhood.This district is appropriate in areas where supported by applicable master plans. B. The Administration's paperwork and Planning staff report provide detailed information relating to the proposed changes. Key points are summarized below. (Please refer to the Administration's transmittal letter and Planning staff report for complete details.) /11114, 1. The proposed changes do not create any new development standards and do not add any new types of land uses to any of the zoning districts. 2. The proposed changes do not create any new standards that may be contradictory with any existing overlay zoning district. 3. The initial Planning staff review identified key parts of a good purpose statement. Those parts include identifying what the zoning district is intended to do,where certain zoning districts are appropriate and why the zoning district exists. 4. The Planning Division analyzed zoning districts from other communities to identify examples that included the key parts of a good purpose statement. This review included examples from Utah communities,Portland, OR; Denver,CO and Vancouver,BC. 5. A final draft of the purpose statements was produced in June 2009 and made available to the public. The draft versions took into consideration the comments received from the Zoning Amendment Project Task Force(ZAP),other City Departments and the overall intent of the project as well as best professional practices and adopted City policies. Because the scope of the project includes different goals,not all comments received from the Task Force are reflected in the draft Purpose Statements. 6. Planning staff used professional judgment to ensure a balance between competing interests in addressing the issues raised through the public process. a. An example of this issue revolved around the concept of sustainability. In drafting the purpose statements, staff made an attempt to stay away from the word"sustainability"and focus on specific aspects of sustainability. This was done by adding language to strengthen the role the foothill zoning districts play in preserving sensitive lands,referencing pedestrian orientation, identifying districts intended to promote walkability and transit use, and by promoting economic development in appropriate districts. b. The Planning Commission also questioned the lack of inclusion of"live/work"development within the purpose statements. Planning staff determined that"live/work"types of development are a type of mixed use development,which is allowed in a number of zoning districts. Furthermore, a"live/work"unit is a specific type of land use and it is more appropriate to add this type of use to the table of permitted and conditional uses in appropriate zoning districts. As part of the overall zoning ordinance review,the Planning Division is reviewing the tables of permitted and conditional uses and their definitions. "Live/work"will be addressed as part of that review. C. The Planning staff report provides analysis and findings for the Zoning Ordinance Section 21A.50.050— Standards for General Amendments.The standards were evaluated in the Planning staff report and considered by the Planning Commission. (Discussion and findings for the standards are found on pages 7-8 of the Planning staff report.) D. Public Process: 1. The Planning Division held two open houses to gather public input on the purpose statements. A preliminary open house was held on February 19, 2009; and a second was held on June 25,2009. 2. After the first open house,the Planning Division began meeting with a group of stakeholders, referred to as the Task Force. (Zoning Amendment Task Force ZAP)A total of three meetings were held. The first meeting, held on March 2,2009 was an issues identification meeting. In response to that meeting, the Planning Division began to draft proposed purpose statements that addressed the issue identified initially as part of the Conditional Use review in 2008 and the issues identified by the Task Force. On April 27, 2009 and May 2,2009 the Task Force met to review the initial proposed purpose statements. 3. In addition, Planning staff met with the Business Advisory Board on May 13, 2009 to review the proposed purpose statements. 3 4. Based on the feedback received on the initial proposal,the Planning Division amended the proposed ,1 purpose statements prior to presenting them to the Planning Commission and held a second open house on June 25,2009. E. Public Comment-a common theme that routinely came up was how the land uses located on the boundaries of different zoning districts impact each other. The primary concern was how to appropriately buffer the interfaces of different land uses from one another. Planning staff notes: a. This issue is more appropriately addressed through specific standards and not necessarily through the purpose statements. b. Strong,active,vibrant neighborhoods require a balance of land uses that are compatible and support one another. c. The approach recommended by various members of the Task Force and taken by Planning Staff was to stress compatibility versus adverse impacts. F. The proposed text amendment provides a framework for existing and future standards to create appropriate standards to allow for a variety of land uses and ensure compatibility between existing land uses and new land uses. G. The Planning Commission was briefed on the purpose statements on July 8,2009. During the briefing, the Planning Commission made a few suggestions on the proposed amendments,including sustainability, mixed use development(specifically addressing live-work style of units)and some general comments about the words used in the downtown zoning districts. H. The Planning Commission held a Public Hearing on August 12,2009. Issues raised at the Public Hearing primarily related to the overall process that the City uses in terms of land use decisions and oak being more inclusive of all stakeholders,specifically the business community and weighing more equally the concerns of the community councils and the business community. The Planning Commission passed a motion to transmit a favorable recommendation on the amendments to the commercial intent statement and the zoning district purpose statements. The vote was unanimous. I. The City's Departments and Divisions have reviewed the request. 1. Transportation Division noted the proposed changes will not change or revise the existing transportation requirements or issues for pedestrian,vehicular access,or parking requirements of each designated use.There are statements that:safe pedestrian access is needed to adjacent streets, along with a statement that,safe pedestrian and bicycle connections to adjacent streets and neighborhoods are necessary.These statements are compatible with the current"Complete Streets" directives. 2. Economic Development Division indicated that it might be helpful to look at other examples or best practices around the country,and apply some additional visualization/graphics to the proposed changes.They acknowledged this would require additional work,and suggested perhaps the University of Utah College of Architecture and Planning could assist. They also suggested a visual component could help where words are not adequate. 3. Redevelopment Agency staff noted: a. industrial uses are inappropriate in GM-U b. businesses with drive-thru windows should not be permitted in any zone c. consider phasing out the CG zone could be phased out MATTERS AT ISSUE/POTENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION: A. The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration if it may be appropriate to adjust in each purpose statement to reference`applicable Community Master Plan(s),Small Area Master Plan(s)and 4 other adopted citywide master plan policies'. The intent would be to provide consistency and clarity in the Zoning regulations. 1. Some of the purpose statements refer to the `Community Master Plan' and some statements do not refer to any type of planning policy while several refer to `applicable development plan' or `applicable master plan policies'. 2. The transmittal letter(pg. 3)and the Planning staff report(pg.4)provide a detailed discussion regarding the Community Master Plans and Small Area Master Plans noting the importance of referencing the master plans in the purpose statements to strengthen the relationship between Master Plans and the Zoning Ordinance and improving the Zoning Ordinance as a tool to implement the Master Plans of the City. B. The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration the status of the comprehensive zoning text and map changes relating to neighborhood scale commercial uses. Planning staff has noted that part of the review includes changes to the CN Neighborhood Commercial and CB Community Business zoning districts. MASTER PLAN AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS: A. The Administration's paperwork notes the following relating to City policies and Master Plans. The proposed amendments to the Zoning District purpose statements impact the entire City. Therefore, all existing city wide plans, Community Master Plans and Small Area Master Plans have some impact on the proposed purpose statements. The purposes statements were crafted with the general goals of these master plan documents in mind. 1. Salt Lake City Futures Commission Report(1998)The Salt Lake City Futures Commission Report includes multiple goals and objectives that are intended to guide policy decision on land use. This Executive Summary of this document includes statements about creating vibrant neighborhoods, implementing excellent urban design,establishing a strong economic base and creating a multimodal transportation system. o The draft purpose statements reflect this vision by including a variety of housing options,mixed use zoning districts, strong commercial and manufacturing districts, and identifying districts that support different forms of transportation. • Within the Built Environment Chapter of the Futures Commission Report,there are several assertions made that are applicable to the proposed purpose statements. Assertion B states"Urban design focuses first on the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists, second on mass transit and third on the automobile; public transit systems such as light rail are user friendly and designed with the pedestrian in mind; all citizens have access to public transit within 1,200 feet of their homes." Assertion C similarly states"The city is designed to the highest aesthetic standards and is pedestrian friendly, convenient and inviting." The other assertions found in this section refer to creating unique neighborhoods for people to live and work in,creating streets with character,preserving historic buildings and neighborhoods,preserving and providing access to both natural and manmade open spaces, a mix of housing types, etc. Assertion 0 states"all people of the city have a stake in the planning and building of the city. o The purpose statements place heavy emphasis on development being oriented towards the pedestrian. Appropriate zoning districts are identified that can take advantage of their proximity to mass transit. o Assertion 0 reflects the planning process that the purpose statement review has gone through. o Planning and building must reflect a balanced approach in the best interest of a diverse community. 5 • The Economic Subcommittee Chapter of the Futures Commission Report states that planning and zoning are important economic development tools in promoting quality economic development projects. The proposed changes to the purpose statements do not change any existing standard but do set the stage for identifying appropriate development in each zoning district. This chapter continues by stating that the City should adopt policies to encourage urban neighborhoods, promoting mixed use developments of sufficient density to foster a healthy and complementary mix of businesses and residents." o With appropriate development characteristics identified in the purpose statements,appropriate standards can be put in place(if not already in place)that makes it simpler for desired development to occur. 2. Salt Lake City Vision and Strategic Plan Final Report(1993)The Salt Lake City Vision and Strategic Plan Final Report is intended to define a vision for the City and identify how that vision can be achieved. The document was adopted in 1993 and includes major strategies,action steps and progress indicators. The key objectives include environmental stewardship,celebrating the heritage and culture of a diverse population;provide affordable housing opportunities in attractive,friendly neighborhoods that provide a safe environment for families,economic vitality and responsive government. Within each goal is a series of objectives and actions steps to implement the plan. Perhaps the strongest impact of this document on the proposed purpose statements is the economic vitality section. This section identifies key concepts,including facilitating complementary retail opportunities in city neighborhoods and commercial areas of the City. • There are several mixed use zoning districts that are intended to provide areas for a mix of housing and commercial opportunities. • The Plan also specifically discusses strengthening the role of Downtown in the region. • The proposal includes adding more language to the D-1 Zoning District purpose statement to identify that it is the center of the region. 3. Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan(2001)The purpose of the Salt Lake City Community Housing Plan is to • Create a wide variety of housing types across the City; • Preserving,rehabilitating and replacing(when necessary)the existing housing stock; • Encouraging innovation in housing design; • Encourage mixed use and mixed income housing • Create transit oriented housing developments; • Create affordable and transitional housing; • Explore innovative funding mechanisms for the creation of housing; • Alter zoning regulations to encourage the potential for innovation in housing developments;and • Supporting home ownership for a variety of income levels o While the purpose statements do not create specific zoning regulations,many of the proposed changes to the purpose statements help fulfill the purpose of this plan. For example,housing has been identified as a key component of those districts where housing is appropriate. The Housing Plan specifically identifies Industrial areas as places where housing should not be allowed. 4. Community Master Plans The City has adopted seven community master plans: Avenues,Capitol Hill, Central Community,East Bench,Northwest,Sugar House and West Salt Lake. The Community Master Plans include Future Land Use Maps that indicate where certain types of land uses should be located on a broad basis. • The proposed purpose statements include references to the Community Master Plans in order to provide guidance as to where specific types of zoning districts are appropriate. • The Community Master Plans include policies on various issues related to land use 6 • Linking the purpose statements to the applicable Community Master Plans strengthens the role the master plans play in the decision making process. The Community Master Plans are important when the City considers zoning amendments,particularly map amendments,and other land use related petitions. 5. Small Area Master Plans The City has adopted several small area master plans. Small area master plans generally apply to a small area(typically one or two blocks)and provide more specific policies than Community Master Plans. The land use policies and future land use maps found in the small area master plans are used to determine which zoning districts are appropriate in a similar fashion as the Community Master Plans. • Referencing the master plans in the purpose statements strengthens the relationship between master plans and the zoning ordinance and improves the zoning ordinance as a tool to implement the master plans of the City. • Additional citywide Master Plan and Policy considerations are provided below. B. The City's Strategic Plan and the Futures Commission Report express concepts such as maintaining a prominent sustainable city,ensuring the City is designed to the highest aesthetic standards and is pedestrian friendly,convenient,and inviting,but not at the expense of minimizing environmental stewardship or neighborhood vitality. The Plans emphasize placing a high priority on maintaining and developing new affordable residential housing in attractive,friendly,safe environments and creating attractive conditions for business expansion including retention and attraction of large and small businesses. C. The Council's growth policy notes that growth in Salt Lake City will be deemed the most desirable if it meets the following criteria: 1. Is aesthetically pleasing; 2. Contributes to a livable community environment; 3. Yields no negative net fiscal impact unless an overriding public purpose is served;and 4. Forestalls negative impacts associated with inactivity. D. The City's 1990 Urban Design Element includes statements that emphasize preserving the City's image, neighborhood character and maintaining livability while being sensitive to social and economic realities. Policy concepts include: I. Allow individual districts to develop in response to their unique characteristics within the overall urban design scheme for the city. 2. Ensure that land uses make a positive contribution to neighborhood improvement and stability. 3. Ensure that building restoration and new construction enhance district character. 4. Require private development efforts to be compatible with urban design policies of the city regardless of whether city financial assistance is provided. 5. Treat building height,scale and character as significant features of a district's image. 6. Ensure that features of building design such as color,detail,materials and scale are responsive to district character,neighboring buildings,and the pedestrian. CHRONOLOGY: The Administration's transmittal provides a chronology of events relating to the proposed rezoning and master plan amendments. Key dates are listed below. Please refer to the Administration's chronology for details. 7 February 17,2009 City initiated a petition to review the zoning district purpose statements. February 17,2009 Petition assigned to Nick Norris. February 19,2009 Issue identification Open House. March 2,2009 First Task Force Meeting,the purpose of which was to explain the purpose behind the project and to identify issues. April 27,2009 Second Task Force Meeting,the purpose of which was to get feedback from initial draft of proposed purpose statements. May 11,2009 Third Task Force Meeting,the purpose of which was to get feedback from initial draft of proposed purpose statements. May 13,2009 Presented to the Business Advisory Board June 24,2009 Planning staff provides Planning Commission with an overview of the project prior to the Planning Commission meeting. Agenda is posted advertising the Planning Commission briefing on July 8,2009. June 25,2009 Second Open House is held to gather public input on proposed purpose statements. July 8,2009 Planning Commission holds a briefing session to provide direction to staff on proposed purpose statements. August 12,2009 Planning Commission Public Hearing. The Planning Commission votes unanimously to transmit a positive recommendation to the City Council regarding the Intent Statement for Commercial Districts and the purpose statements for the residential,commercial,manufacturing,downtown,gateway and special purpose zoning districts. August 26,2009 Minutes from the August 12,2009 Planning Commission meeting are approved. September 9,2009 Transmittal submitted to Community and Economic Development. October 2,2009 Received in the Mayor's Office October 14,2009 Received in the Council Office cc: David Everitt,,Bianca Shreeve,Karen Hale,Lisa Harrison-Smith,Art Raymond,Holly Hilton,Ed Rutan, Lynn Pace,Paul Nielson,Jeff Niermeyer,Tom Ward,Rick Graham,Vicki Bennett,Emy Maloutas,Frank Gray,Mary De La Mare-Schafer,Orion Goff,Les Koch,Larry Butcher,Craig Spangenberg,Wilf Sommerkorn,Cheri Coffey,Joel Paterson,Casey Stewart,City Council Liaisons,Mayors Liaisons File Location: Community and Economic Development Dept.,Planning Division,Zoning Text change—purpose statements. 8 • IThmi A.4 o TtiA7 Tvwif .f&ffAgdw r .mow- . ,tg+A"" � . F. • ' ; r.. A 004r - Natural • le • `•,MO 1\` eaee Amw titan.• aw- .iA! M to K i u • id eM 1, USE AREAS g w P "n Olt leash Dog Area 13 mret `" \ a ._ lr BMX Area Ig[n .L �. 7r.V /" \ _. .. TRAITS AND ACCESS a -":` ArM s 1. ON leash Troll 1.1 miles '1 aal ay ..R`rrG ���l.i`, 4 On bast'hml 0.1 miles 'iXA la • ViWWR eNt e Parley's hall(Omlaosh) 1.3 miles Y f~ A No Dog Troll 06 miler t :( r, M O MojorEaron[e A �". T _ 1 . 1 J p. .s^ .I r r. �� J. �w Ij.. 1� \fie 0 Minor Enlron[e a A r J _,v a . A- a 4 e r a 1 e* W`' t'�•�. " ` ✓sl MANAGEMENT ARIAS it I JI N 1 (IC O. r Ai" 4 .1 to ! y. .1 N..aiJ r' 4 Natural Am 6 acres 1 I .t el, Y. • �. Porcine Area 39 acres _ a. -ReslmatonArea Hares 1-�t '1 'Ir:A11.11 a r+ s 1' J ,i »^ + IA!a( . e"_� •:Vtt. ''t DeBnfIo gr Ce.La4 EDAW I AECOM MGB+A OM-I...h Troll open to all users and allows la dogs tale ollkrh an the gill Neeael Mee modwardymnrtMrod to uirimlie reureae degrad.00. The Grassi.Crrrulr +'r er ns 0,lain.Troll open to all mess and requites dog.be on akash an the lull Protection Area Malrualro.I to erisansertatural Wstmns Including habitat Nopog Tell open to user other mar those with doge a.dnamtalhydrolayk rtnc don Off leash Dog An..-doggrratad a.a la oft-leash play A.stotatlan Mea aanvdyrestored.maintained and nravro go edro lrrove ...... BMX Arta-designated area for BM%use iienided 11.rwr4i moor e,a estrum(Noires /r! a,�`1 le Interim Use Plan DRAFT 02.01.11 `4�1_;-� i 1111r A' i JTTT 41, Area . Rabat v a.n. 4 .rf; Prated..Area ' R,palimt UM ARCS 4-�, Io•,p+et " > ., hale O v- Of1 Leash Dog Ateo IS ales V �eu Dan Aomi BMA Area Itare .'_• ',TTna°""A'n° - 011 Leash TRAILS AND AC CBS y , .. •� ,'i.Wu InM R Dog Area u�..l Oflleosh boil 1.1 miles J. .i ve'' ae Reeve,O4 — OaLeash hail 0.1 miles y eel ~ _1 7A J a Ae. , laday's boil(On-leash) 13 miles . - -PadeTY Qeals f toleGuan Area --hail Use sables to mandating 0A miles u7 4 R#70, 7 n u and management Boehm di y t 't — Na Dop hail 0l miles r , A` ''tq5 3:L ys OMolm(enema . •, , y G.•a'�k-_• s F` Ij - . \l 1}. 4 r b., Q Minot Limon.. i . i^e ht L. ,e,1:. Y T 1 s ,t ,yam♦J `' 1eI , e A .,....t MANAGEMENT Ne AelAl • t �. 3 • Normal Aleo ISems ll''• �'^� i j� <' l-1� r �r 6 s' • Pi ot.ttian Area 56 tares �.+ ' e A, _ - _ rTiiTJ! I 'I i l.a`1p --I • .1 i 1 •I . d A ' `• {t,. e Doflnitions: �_EDAW I AECOM MGB+A oft-Leash Tra11 yryi to el uses anal allows la dogs tole of leas as Ihesal Navel Mae u,al..el.ly11.hltbso$loniNnweranaeaedsgodelios The CresoliCnSul, v,nnss On-L...11 Trail ono,to alltnas and.o.taresdogs bean a leash on the mall Probelon Are. M.anr.aool to enharceousoral sysemslndlNNy habitat NO Dog Tree We rouse:odre that thos<wlds dog, and Hawselryd,olulh 1,ir0on a 0X-l6aah1log Ar..-desleased rya for el-leash play R.osos.dnn A...I eauees resseed.nsanlaned and motelaed toinas,aee �� /�� derlrakdneho l,.v,u,n a sullu,d leestnes BM%Area-designated area lOrBM%use '',I+ t,�\ \�fi I I ,1 Comprehensive Use Plan DRAFT 02.01.11 \4','"i' yr,1 U Co co VI 0 co a tin CO N c) +J C U E a C cu o -_ cup E a) b Q 4-1 —C E CD CD = CD CT n sn � a) C 'CD °) : 0 = C6 C }' C O CZ Ln t�,o Z CO a Q o -C N F -- a s= U U L ca C ._ _ U I . t1A aU M O — °' •-- o C aJ OD a) 0 �p C N .— E CD 0 - N _ cz C F c c 0- C cD v c3 o (/) .-c (D -0 C co F ) 4--J 4--) N -� -0 — c/) O0 4— rt3 4U a) a) 0 C +� 0 E Ti +-) a-+ +) _ C _c s_ fB > L 0 0 v co v Q O N a) co a. a_ cc 2 -o D u w 0 0 Salt Lake County E.coli Testing Sites in Parley's Historic Nature Park . i Legend Ecoli Testing Site SALT LA COUNTY Park,Open Space,etc. ,---r-' Road f C., \\\,, .. . _ _,... - . , , ,. . 4 1 :A- 'F.17/n -',-- may. *- �• ;� • `:R'jF(re, �' * f r t r.*,t— r-'7:7Y rr�',1•� ,err ..yy�� �sf ..._ ,M,�1. �• .t.n• :,�R .I' .'o • •`44. _ •. .', y. - 4� �_ '''!.r 44 .1 • `tr� •, i ,.'t7 it. � i- : •'1.Y '{. ; 9 -"''" L •Li F ' CJ•(.��_ 1t- ,. .�. y}i :._ yy l G `l7 , k. 7 '!� .�.1 " '•ion ! `' • ,,. } 1v` i. i�p w ; Y .4 • 4i ,A,:i1,1f:::tozz-:$4...,:‘,,44;: iciPltr, Plie. 7..i.';„,..LA4.:4 t 1..ige.,_0:4i''''1,'C 1 ;. ,,,,,e:1P,, .1'7 ,:i"I t.',I, ,,, '"ii,, •'I. : I,..,. i,I: :;-.4;.„.%Frt. IF-1,.4__.`„I --,......,1.4 It, ,),.._.it •)- ii, 0 wirl..--1,,, -4\.-1._; 4. ' r. - ' .. - 0, ,.. ;,.. ., , 4 -44, ."3.) ►mit, i kw Upda:edjanuary 2011 SALT f.41iC 0 G00 1,000 2,000 R•epaitx by:Salt Lake County flood Control&Wats'Qualty Divnia, Feet (..C) I.I Data Sources:Salt Lake Comity.tkah's State Geographic Iriormation Database • _•- 1 - Parley's Creek E.coil Counts,June 2010 2500 ------ 2000 -- II E 0 0 1500 a N E ■Series I t ° 1000 0 w 500 I t_PC4 PC4 PC4 PC5 PC5 PC5 PC6 PC6 PC6 IAi' -KF,6t of '�}{N? J i_ Site Number i _1 `- l f"A v CNC'o �}NP tNt"..T l:N� C-tkNv Deco collected by: SALT LAKE Sall Lake County COUNTY Flood Control&Water Qttality nivival \,t t i Parley's Creek E.coil Counts,July2010 700--...---- ------ 600 500 E n 400 N E IE Soriesl e 300 - - 0 Si 200-- I 100 - . M ®_ ,�_ _l PC4 PC4 PC4 PC5 PC5 PC5 PC5 PC6 PC6 �'s(12ry�,L l Sn.. , t `'� 016,1- �4ltil� lr+E�T pk1tJ� Data collected by: SALT LAKE Salt Lake County COUNTY Flood Control&Water Quality u..nwn 0 fl Parleys Creek E.coll Counts,August 2010 400 - 350 - . 300 ---- -- -F ■ F E - 0 250- I `u a o 200 -_ _, - , [IllSeriesl s I 150 _ - -- --yC I_.__ -- W 100 - PC4 PC4 PC4 PC4 PC4 PC4 PC 5 PC 5 PC5 PCB PC6 PC6 PC6 PC6 PC6 IA? stl z--/\,L� J L Site 4 _LL __ 0. Data collected trp SALT LAKE Sail Lake County C0UNTY rkod Control&Water ENEMY 0MKAn PIN e September E. coil Counts, September 2010 200 180 160 - 140 — E 120 0 0 E 100 - - (o saFi©51 I 0 80 60 _ 40 20 0 pc4_1 pc4_2 pc4_3 pc5_1 pc5_2 pc5_3 pc6_1 pc6_2 pc6_3 SRe I \ L sn2 E —— _ 1 Al Data collected byh1�1R�j� �' � SALT 1.A Kli Salt Lake County COUNTY Flood Control&Watcr Quality Division n 2. Adaptive Management Strategies • Management StrategyPolicy and Management g Standards Monitoring Adaptive Management Action Goal 1: Protect and restore the riparian corridor. A.Limit development of Riparian Corridor.(see sidebar) 1.At minimum,meet Riparian • No disturbance(trails or development)within Corridor Ordinance,but expand 1.Collaborate on all proposals for 1.If not successful,set up fines and 25'of creek Average High Water Line(AWHL). buffers as needed to protect the Existing bridges and boardwalks may remain. creek,vegetation and wildlife. new development,management and formal permitting process for the h • Limited structures between 25-50'of AWHL, 2.Support intent of Open Space maintenance practices within the park. park. including trails,boardwalks,benches,where Lands Master Plan. impacts can be limited or mitigated. B.Limit streamside activity to designated trails and 1.Staff observation of vegetation 1.Redesi n trails and access points access points: conditions and user-created trails with g • Reduce compaction and bank erosion by weekly spot checks. and use fencing,signage,education eliminatin user-created access and trails, 1.Meet the Best Managementand soft patrol to guide behavior g g 2.Staff maintenance monthly to address towards compliance. except atdesignated points.Move designated Practices recommended in the F problem spots. trail out of corridor as needed and do not Riparian Corridor Study. 2.If not successful,ticket violators permit oft-leash use until corridor isprotected. 3.Monitoring report by trained and increase enforcement. 2.Encourage in stream fishing access volunteers 4 times a year in different • Create shared access points capable of only if fishery achieves a sustainable 3.If not successful,redesign trail, supporting hi high-intensity use for recreation population. conditions. b Y F F fencing or access points. and flood debris cleanout Close and restore all 4.Use data to indicate target areas for 4 If not successful,consider closing other access points. education,signage,or enforcement trails or access points. operations. C.Restore andprotect riparian corridor: 1.Use 2009 Riparian Corridor Study as F baseline conditions. 1.Meet the Best Management • Close sections or the entire corridor for Practices recommended in the 2•Staff observation of corridor 1.Allow access on designated trails restoration with fencing and warning/ Riparian Corridor Study and the conditions with weekly spot checks. and fence restoration closures. education signs. Salt Lake County Water Quality 2.Staff maintenance monthly to address 2.If successful,consider permeable • Replant understory and overstory riparian Stewardship Plan. problem spots. fence(such as split rail)or remove vegetation. 2.Support intent of Open Space fence but reinstate restoration fence • Improve habitat to increase diversityof PF P } 3.Monitoring report of bank conditions PLands Ordinance. by trained volunteers 4 times a year in if conditions deteriorate. permanent and seasonal wildlife(see section 3.Wherepossible,support sustainable 3A). FP different seasons. 3.If not successful,close access to recreation during restoration 4.Use data to indicate target areas for adjacent areas. • Open trails adjacent to riparian corridor only projects. b after resources are adequately protected. education,signage,or enforcement operations. tout tnuert 20 Parley's Historic Nature Park Comprehensive Use and Management Plan Plan A.Introduction Baseline Conditions Report B. Existing Conditions I.History of Par ley's Historic Nature Park 1. Establishment C.Guiding Principles 2. Changing Uses 1. Park Significance 2. Park Purpose J. Planning and Policy Framework 3. Planning Constraints 1. Planning and Stakeholders 4. Park Goals 2. Decision-Making and Enforcing Agencies 3. Users,Neighboring Properties,and Interest Croups D.Comprehensive Use Planning .1. Applicable Policies 1. Parks and Open Space Management K.Natural Resources 2. Visitor Experience and Resource Protection framework Spectrum of Alternatives 1. Vegetation 3. 2 Wildlife 4. Prescriptive Management Areas 3, Wetlands 5. Comparison of Comprehensive Use Plan Alternatives Hyd6. Decision Making 4. Water lu al 7. Comprehensive Use Plan and Interim Use Plan 5. Water quality 6. Soils E. Management Strategies 7. Riparian Corridor 1. Adaptive Management L. Cultural Resources 2. Summary of Adaptive Management Strategies I. Pre-history 2. I listory F. Costs,Funding and Phasing 3. historic sites 1. Cost Summary 4. Interpretation 2. Annual Budget 3. Phasing M.Visitor Experience 4. Funding 1. Access and Trails 2. Amenities G.Improvements Plan 3. Multiple-use recreation 1. Capital Improvements 'I. Nature Appreciation and Education 2. Cost Estimate 5. I listoric Preservation 6. Dog walking H.Park Management 7. BMX 1. Planning and Policies 8. Parley's Trail 2. Enforcement 9. Trail System 3. Maintenance 4. Stewardship 5. Monitoring 6. Cost Estimate ronhnred RFCE!VVFn sic ,/'�, SLG COUNCIL OFFICE RICHARD GRAHAM "� 1 �`aJ�ITl��VJ� I,© j C/ �P� EED PUBLIC SERVICE■DIRECTOR !! MAYOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES FEB 03 2011 cis /� i DIRECTORS OFFICE \ Salt Lake City Mayor CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 2 0 Davi veritt, ief of Staff Date sent to Council: TO: Jill Remington-Love, Chair DATE: February 3, 2011 Salt Lake City Council FROM: Public Services, Parks and Public Lands Division SUBJECT: Parley's Historic Nature Park Process STAFF CONTACT: Emy Maloutas 972-7804 Open Space Lands Program Manager Rick Graham 535-7774 Public Services Director RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a new and revised Parley's Historic Nature Park (PHNP) Comprehensive Use and Management Plan with accompanying Interim and Comprehensive maps, and confirm by ordinance. BUDGET IMPACT: TBD DISCUSSION: Following the Mayor's veto of the City Council ordinance to dedicate the PHNP as an off-leash park the Mayor met with six Council members in PHNP to discuss areas of agreement and to explore solutions to the differences between the Mayor's recommended plan and the Council plan. Based on those discussions the Administration proposes the following new and revised Interim and Comprehensive Maps (see attached). The key revisions pertain to the south loop trail. 1. Implement the plan for restoration of riparian, wetland and spring ecosystems on north and south sides of Parley's Creek. 2. Establish the riparian buffer, including land adjacent to BMX course that will require modification of course alignment on west end. 3. Establish wetland and spring buffers and construct elevated trail sections for the south loop trail and connection between off-leash areas north of Parley's Creek. LOCATION: 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 138, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 941 1 1.3104 MAILING ADDRESS: PO BOX 145469, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 14.5469 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7775 FAX: B01-535.7963 W W W.BLCDO V.COM 4. Remove all culverts and diversion structures that channelize the hillside springs to return the north facing slope to its historically wet and unconstrained state allowing springs to sheet flow and meander naturally. 5. Once restoration is complete,assess the established management standards identified in the plan,including but not limited to the list below: a. water quality standards b. riparian corridor health and habitat conditions c. vegetation health and coverage in restoration and protection areas d. compliance with park rules e. needs of the multiple users to determine the feasibility of reopening the trail to on- leash dogs 6. If the assessment and monitoring of areas adjacent to the south loop trail determine that the established management standards have been met,the south loop trail will be available for on-leash dog use. 7. Given that this is an adaptive management approach,we will clearly assert that if water quality degrades or is below establish standards,vegetation or sensitive areas are impacted,or rules pertaining to dogs are not being substantially adhered to,then the south loop trail would become closed to dogs. Following the approval of the PHNP Comprehensive Use and Management Plan and Interim and Comprehensive Maps,an implementation plan will be finalized.This will include best management practices for key areas in the park,cost estimates and proposed phasing.Timeline for implementation of any portion of this plan is subject to funding. , - ._ ' ` ,-` ^ - ' t` Access to Creek Parley's Trail • `"\,- c. Natural Area Liy e 1 Sang Historic . h Buffer Protection Area •%• .1 '1 ri Protection Area • Soong' g1► USE AREAS ^ �., k. springMelarea� ":�'" /Buffer �� ' Buller �� Oft-Leash Dog Area 15 acres s ` , , �� Off-Leash wetland BMX Area 1 acre R' \ — Off- TRAILS AND ACCESS '• - sprnghrersres `Me • " ^ Dog Areash Access - ' ' _- - Dog Area e � — to Creek ear_n.. Oft-leash Trail 1.1 miles d butler ' _ wim �� `' _ Z On-leash Trail 0.1 miles - me _: z •l� T �'`! 's Woodland-Springs _''arley's Creek �Q Parley's Trail(On-Leash) 1.3 miles s IP �r ..••_l. #. Protection Area Protection Area -`` • ----Trail Use 0.4 miles subject to monitoring -t I and management standards _s l c_ �y ! ` V. ONo Dog Trail 0.2 miles 77.:6If.'.o..''.'*itrT4o4l '". .M-':Hla.'•. ..,.l*-il* '.,-..,,ii-.�r , Major Entrance t' + -'y T�� "t r h �1� ,`',-- •:, -.+ - 7 ,,,- • cr. .tb `; Minor Entrance _ s. V' a - 14 Cam' • t .. MANAGEMENT AREAS Ae l ' i. 1. 0, Natural Area 15 acres '• �/('' 0;^0 .. slip +t'r .1,:,;4+, ,`Ar `Z ,,t_ I i Y• I `1 f op Protection Area 56 acres , ` 'e e, �..�f r. r' '. r -r L. Jy ' s t 7 4 i• i Ale4. api. ,0' t v,.n-• i''i f b '4� -i. Definitions: it— EDAW AECOM MGB+A Off-Leash Trail-open to all users and allows for dogs to be off leash on the trail Natural Area-moderately maintained to minimize resource degradation The Grassli Group I' s '" A S On-Leash Trail-open to all users and requires dogs be on a leash on the trail Protection Area-Maintained to enhance natural systems including habitat No Dog Trail-open to users other than those with dogs and natural hydrologic function Off-leash Dog Area-designated area for off-leash play Restoration Area-actively restored,maintained and monitored to improve off - `'" BMX Area-designated area for BMX use degraded natural resources or cultural features "St, /r IN 1 iv-,: 1� , li =mil Comprehensive Use Plan DRAFT 02.01 .11 Is.,, "�l1T' ,1 "+rrn.w+ , _ riPmenir .. ,, ` , . , , .k..,, cue+. _ __ _ _ . . .., .. . „... , i l� , ��` b Creek - • •Eotrla l _•.A r ..... `` Natural Area Q • 4...., �~...a. -'; - ' _ T • Spring INN._ _ ts's..-1 f - \ But* Move existing tail al.- -, '1 ♦` of restoration areas USE AREAS r- - ter. ..`_,—, a yn� y Off-Leash Dog Area 13 acres r' •' j y 4,-,.. ♦ ` Dog Area 1 BMX Area 1 acre a �w -• ,h Vi- S t ♦ --�'�� Off-Leas ��- ♦ i" • a s.Do Areakess•` v. TRAILS AND ACCESS ,' , —�_ �� ;b s ii Off-Leash Trail 1.1 miles • r•,*.,II ,, t j On-Leash Trail 0.1 miles ..- -E,-----1 • - '�� 0 Parley's Trail(On-leash) 1.3 milesI. 4'- <-�� - • • No Dog Trail 0.6 miles ! ' Major Entrance r / Z. 4114 Q Minor Entrance ! `' ' — r ,,... • MANAGEMENT AREAS ♦ 4f' �,,•.,9,� . ,,,,, 'r' _ t s • r, Natural •Area 6 acres 1, c , "' f a' `,tom• • •„-t • _ • �• 't, • Protection Area 39 acres t - P. " v ` • -'.."'' .R - 4.- 3rr`'t - 8 x ^+w h v.Restoration Area 28 acres 1 y - -" - 1 , 'l 't 'I],?.M 9'`i) .. <..�,r., t ( t '�; A• r • WI,-r-Y.'•�.a-� .. i..1fr7 Definitions: � EDAW I AECOM MGB+A Off-Leash Trail-open to all users and allows for dogs to be off leash on the trail Natural Area-moderately maintained to minimize resource degradation �� The Grassli Group PSOMAS On-Leash Trail-open to all users and requires dogs be on a leash on the trail Protection Area-Maintained to enhance natural systems including habitat No Dog Trail-open to users other than those with dogs and natural hydrologic function Restoration Area-activelyrestored,maintained and monitored to improve "'"'—"'" Off-leash Dog Area-designated area for off-leash play "' % BMX Area-designated area for BMX use degraded natural resources or cultural features /L A (y , Interim Use Plan DRAFT 02.01 .11 e con 1 :kit RECEIVED RICHARD GRAHAM aJ IY, CiD lO i C VC�]a�r1P'T 11/{1DI/f ruwl,c•envic Fw oiweeTow DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICES FEB 03 Y 2O11n DIRECTORS OFFICE Salt Lake City Mayor CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL Date Received: 2 Davi veritt, ief of Staff Date sent to Council: TO: Jill Remington-Love,Chair DATE:February 3,2011 Salt Lake City Council FROM: Public Services,Parks and Public Lands Division (lb---1 SUBJECT: Parley's Historic Nature Park Process STAFF CONTACT: Emy Maloutas 972-7804 Open Space Lands Program Manager Rick Graham 535-7774 Public Services Director RECOMMENDATION: Adopt a new and revised Parley's Historic Nature Park(PHNP) Comprehensive Use and Management Plan with accompanying Interim and Comprehensive maps,and confirm by ordinance. BUDGET IMPACT: TBD DISCUSSION: Following the Mayor's veto of the City Council ordinance to dedicate the PHNP as an off-leash park the Mayor met with six Council members in PHNP to discuss areas of agreement and to explore solutions to the differences between the Mayor's recommended plan and the Council plan. Based on those discussions the Administration proposes the following new and revised Interim and Comprehensive Maps(see attached).The key revisions pertain to the south loop trail. 1. Implement the plan for restoration of riparian,wetland and spring ecosystems on north and south sides of Parley's Creek. 2. Establish the riparian buffer,including land adjacent to BMX course that will require modification of course alignment on west end. 3. Establish wetland and spring buffers and construct elevated trail sections for the south loop trail and connection between off-leash areas north of Parley's Creek. LOCATION: 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 130,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH 041 I 1.3104 MAILING ADDRESS: PO BOX 145469,SALT LAKE CITY,UTAH B41 14 5469 TELEPHONE:C01-535-7775 FAX:801-535.7963 4. Remove all culverts and diversion structures that channelize the hillside springs to return the north facing slope to its historically wet and unconstrained state allowing springs to sheet flow and meander naturally. 5. Once restoration is complete,assess the established management standards identified in the plan,including but not limited to the list below: a. water quality standards b. riparian corridor health and habitat conditions c. vegetation health and coverage in restoration and protection areas d. compliance with park rules e. needs of the multiple users to determine the feasibility of reopening the trail to on- leash dogs 6. If the assessment and monitoring of areas adjacent to the south loop trail determine that the established management standards have been met,the south loop trail will be available for on-leash dog use. 7. Given that this is an adaptive management approach,we will clearly assert that if water quality degrades or is below establish standards,vegetation or sensitive areas are impacted,or rules pertaining to dogs are not being substantially adhered to,then the south loop trail would become closed to dogs. Following the approval of the PHNP Comprehensive Use and Management Plan and Interim and Comprehensive Maps,an implementation plan will be finalized.This will include best management practices for key areas in the park,cost estimates and proposed phasing.Timeline for implementation of any portion of this plan is subject to funding. s.. • ;4'' ` ‘ Access a Creek Parley's Tray♦ '," 4 -.t • fi fit. =- may; 'r. Natural Area Spring Historic .� -' ` - 1 -_ ♦ : my Protection Area c Protection Area �` Spina ` a ` h . d.♦ 4 ` Bolter -,<• - • • USE AREAS - ` spun ` \_���� / ' F 2 Off-Leash Dog Area 15 acres ��� Oft-Le• W BMX Area 1 acre TRAILS AND ACCESS \ �__ __/ '� Off Leash 1 , s r Aaess' r -.. _ - _ b Creek -- Off-Leash Trail 1.1 miles .1'L , _ ��t I J w On-Leash Trail 0.1 miles . >�jW •> Woodland-Springst -gal Parley's Trail(On-Leash) Sr a. j, ` Protection Are • \��� k - 0 Y 1.3 miles ..- r , i� Protection Area `� Trail Use subject to monitoring 0.4 miles +-+. / t 1taii . -.1,. it - -- and management standards ! ` '. 'i`�'-e.. , r • ._ .No Dog Trail 0.2 miles z;. O Major Entranceholellh. �' .`' y� ,.4,r n 'I ad i d°7i� ; _ �` i a '+►�1 e - r Minor Entrance �. *. 1141,t. • ( AIM . ;rt.. .n�1 L MANAGEMENT AREAS Natural Area 15 acres �1'•i! c''� r,� aid q, , "-' " . R k.,111. +,� trr ,1' I , i s 3L_- .� ,` t r``'.6 ` , . . I' •' ♦ .s '� .. + I ems* w , �.. -�.,., Y r:.. ..;*�,,,a.. inProtection Area 56 acres 'a ., ..- ��'i ltila" 'j+. > ti :: 't t:,� „. t F i.;. t Definitions: ' EDAW AECOM MGB+A Off-Leash Trail-open to all users and allows for dogs to be off leash on the trail Natural Area-moderately maintained to minimize resource degradation � The Grassli Group PSOMAS On-Leash Trail-open to all users and requires dogs be on a leash on the trail Protection Area-Maintained to enhance natural systems including habitat No Dog Trail-open to users other than those with dogs and natural hydrologic function Off-leash Dog Area-designated area for off-leash play Restoration Area-actively restored,maintained and monitored to improve + a�a BMX Area-designated area for BMX use degraded natural resources or cultural features \ // 9 s ice',-1 a.--W3 Comprehensive Use Plan DRAFT 02.01 .11 ♦mac`,, �lils,-%.1 • __ '• � .:. _ }t!• _ 1 \` aCreelr 7 ' : _ ; Natural Area `„ \ Spnog Move existing trail ou.•• 414!'„ "r. : t uB.r - _ i . • \ Sul, of restoration areas • '�* ... -__ - USE AREAS r w s \\_�"'\ - �« Off-Leash Dog Area 13 acres ,L \^,\ Off-Leash ° ;� \ Dog Area iiik BMX Area 1 acre ' \ Curren', Off-Leas _ .,� \\ ` i,Re>�ri 1p. Dog Area TRAILS AND ACCESS r �� ' , s-N . , Off-Leash Trail 1.1 miles " . fj 1 o.tl On-Leash Trail 0.1 milesfr-• • rs \\— .. -- n ,;, OParley's Trail(On-Leash) 1.3 miles tif1.4.„.tiVi ✓ � r t ,t -:•: a - s.. . , ��Na DogTrail 0.6 miles • s A JIB' i' Z .."- . 4. •• O Major Entrance • +x' Minor Entrance a Olt t 1 �SS —b:r ,4`� 'a - ,� a 4 MANAGEMENT AREAS • s..* 1J. ;'.J. .er •��f t Natural Area banes �� 1 • - r ',< '`' �: ' �w T. :' - _ i L _ & tilf • : . - _ Als1 _ Protection Area 39 acres , '.'� t Yt `r • r. . .: ., x' ► 6?I r T• r �'�{ ` N. _ A» 01). 1,g s iiiRestoration Area 28 acres1141q' , 4<�} iv :- - 'it+ I • 1 �= �"v 11� Definitions: it= EDAW AECOM MGB+A Off-Leash Trail-open to all users and allows for dogs to be off leash on the trail Natural Area-moderately maintained to minimize resource degradation c The Grassli Grc P S O M A s On-Leash Trail-open to all users and requires dogs be on a leash on the trail Protection Area-Maintained to enhance natural systems including habitat No Dog Trail-open to users other than those with dogs and natural hydrologic function n Off-leash Dog Area-designated area for off-leash play Restoration Area-actively restored,maintained and monitored to improve •,�,5---t% BMX Area-designated area for BMX use degraded natural resources or cultural features 'Sr \\ // N. 't ?N ,, , , :.i 527g Interim Use Plan DRAFT 02.01 .11 ��M ��, ' 0 0 -0/4 1 PROJECT PRIORITIES Planning Division n Adopted Transmitted n Commission Action taken (l Commissions Working On Type Project Team/ Tentative Timelines/Status Planner _ ORD Allow parks in the PL Zoning Everett Joyce Adopted District ORD Noticing and Appeals (ZAP) Bill Peperone Adopted 2009 ORD Zoning Text Amendment Bill Peperone Adopted 2009 Standards (ZAP) ORD Condominium Conversions Nole Adopted _ Amendments Walkingshaw it ORD Fine Tuning PLNPCM2008-00640 Everett Joyce Adopted ORD Fine Tuning PLNPCM2008-00538 Everett Joyce Adopted ORD , Fine Tuning PLNPCM2009-00106 Everett Joyce Adopted ORD Fine Tuning PLNPCM2008-00643 Everett Joyce Adopted Planning Division Working Document 1 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 ORD Fine Tuning PLNPCM2009-00509 Ray Milliner Adopted 2010 OTHER Bus Shelter Location Criteria Doug Dansie Complete PLAN Streetcar Analysis in South Nick Norris, Planning Division work Complete Downtown Doug Dansie and Nick Britton ORD Planned Development Regulation Lex Traughber Adopted 2010 Amendments Part I ORD Redesignate Odd Fellows Building Janice Lew Adopted 2010 to the Salt Lake City Register of Cultural Resources ORD Boundary Adjustment for Historic Nick Norris. Adopted 2010 Districts(South Temple,etc) ORD Revisions to Utility Box Ray Milliner Adopted 2010 Transformers regulations. ORD Create definition of Non-Profit Everett Joyce Adopted 2010 Charitable Institutions . (Eleemosynary Uses)and determine the appropriate zoning districts. PLAN North Temple Corridor Plan Pat Comarell/ Adopted August 11,2010 Develop zone Nick Norris Map zone along corridor Euclid Small Area Plan Nick Britton Adopted Ana Valdemoros Capitol Hill Community Master— Zone area between 550 West to 400 West between Mixed use railroad yards zoning. North Temple to 600 North for mixed use type of development consistent with Capitol Hill Master Plan. Planning Division Working Document 2 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 0 0 • I ORD Soccer Complex Plan Zoning and Everett Joyce City Council adopted August 17, 2010 Master Plan Amendment H-OTHER Prepare National Register Janice Lew HLC voted support. State History Board and National designation for the existing Public Park Service to review for adoption. Safety Building ORD Boundary line between Extractive Wayne Mills This petition is related to a proposed land trade between Industries and Open Space(In Staker&Parsons and the City. It is no longer active. Capitol Hill Community) ORD Prepare an ordinance to limit Wayne Mills City Council withdrew request after receiving negative demolition in the Yalecrest Michael Maloy recommendations from the HLC and PC. neighborhood and limit changes to the front yard setback ORD Designate Westmoreland Janice Lew Adopted August 2010. Neighborhood as a local historic district PLAN Public Safety Building Casey Stewart Adopted November 16, 2010 ORD Standards of Accepting Private Wayne Mills Transmitted to Administration in August Streets ORD Purpose Statements (ZAP) Nick Norris Transmitted to City Council ORD Conditional Use Standards Ray Milliner Transmitted to City Council ORD Alcohol Regulation Changes Lex Traughber Transnitted to City Council PLAN Preservation Plan Pat Comarell City Council has held public hearing. PLAN Northwest Quadrant Plan Everett Joyce Transmitted to City Council. City Council allocated money in 2010 to conduct further public butreach and input/study on the proposed plan. Working on Website Will bllief City Council on proposed approach for use of money: PlanningDivision WorkingDocument 3 1 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 ORD Accessory Structures- Casey Stewart Planning Commission recommended approval on Sustainability Bundle 1 Octobdr 27, 2010. ORD Use Issues- Ray Milliner Planning Commission recommended approval on July Sustainability Bundle 1 28, 2010. Transmitted at same time as Accessory Structures because interrelated. ORD Sustainability Bundle 2- Doug Dansie Transmitted to City Council Landscaping Ordinance Amendments (Tree Protection; Water Efficient Landscaping) ORD Fine Tuning- Ana Transmitted to CED 1st week of December 2010 1. Freeway Landscaping, Valdemoros 2. Planning Director is the Zoning Administrator; 3. Eliminate verbiage of accessory uses on accessory lots; 4. Clarify variance noticing requirements; 5. Clarify the prohibition of pennant flags; 6. Remove stories relating to building height. ORD Non-Conforming/Non- Kevin 1.13.10. PC recommended approval. Complying Regulations) including LoPiccolo / Working with Attorney's Office to finalize Transmittal unit legalizations) (ZAP) Cheri Coffey Ordinance. ORD Rezone properties between Ray Milliner Planning Commission recommending a portion of the approximately 1800 South and properties at its meeting in August 2010. Waiting on 2100 South between Main and ordinance before transmitting. State Street to comply with Central Community Master Plan FLUM Planning Division Working Document 4 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 ORD Allow the Historic Landmark Janice Lew Waiting for ordinance from Attorney's Office. Commission to initiate Petitions relating to Historic Preservation H-PLAN Prepare Historic Designation Joel Paterson HLC passed the designation criteria and priorities on Criteria and Prioritize the next March 17, 2010. district. H-PLAN Commercial Historic Design Janice Lew Received revised draft from consultants the first week Guidelines of December 2010. H-ORD Economic Hardship/Demolition Janice Lew/ Have had meetings with the HLC on the topic. Provisions Carl Leigh H-POLICY Update Historic Preservation Ray Milliner Working on draft document. Will schedule with Policy Document relating to Historic Landmark Commission in January, 2011. Sustainability, Alternative Materials and general update of document ORD Update of the Billboard regulations Doug Dansie Open House held in November. Planning Commission briefing on December 8, 2010. ORD Regulations relating to electronic Doug Dansie Open House held in November. Planning Commission billboards briefing on December 8, 2010. ORD Bus Bench Advertising Doug Dansie Open House held in November. Planning Commission briefing on December 8, 2010. ORD Accessory Dwelling Units Mike Maloy Met with Focus Group in July 2010. Planning -Sustainability Bundle 1 Commission briefing November 10, 2010. Working through issues and coordinating with Good Landlord/ Tennant licensing program. ORD Amendments to regulations Lex Traughber Open House scheduled for December 9, 2010 relating to Cellular Antennas. Planni g Commission public hearing in January 2011. ORD Amendments to Clarify Ray Milliner Open House proposed for December 9, 2010. measurement of Grade Changes Planning Commission tentatively scheduled for January 2011. Planning Division Working Document 5 • I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 ORD Regulations to prevent noise Elizabeth Proposed ordinance has been reviewed and we are impacts on residential land uses. Reining waiting on the Health Department to finish This petition would clarify in modifications to their noise regulations. chapter 21A.36 that the Health Department has the authority to review projects and require. ORD Small neighborhood business Nole Dan Jones Survey complete. Project Walkingshaw Draft ordinance complete and Ray Research and Analysis near complete. Waiting for final Milliner information on Central Community data. Draft report nearly complete. ORD Sustainability Bundle 3-TDM Nick Britton Working with consultant to finalize first public draft. BAB December 8, 2010 ORD Sustainability Bundle 2-Recycling Ana Working with consultant to finalize first public draft. and Construction Waste Valdemoros BAB December 8, 2010 ORD Sustainability Bundle 3- Outdoor Michaela Oktay Working with consultant to finalize first public draft. Lighting BAB December 8, 2010 ORD Amendments to Subdivision and Casey Stewart Working on draft document. Will work toward public Site Development ordinances to input and Planning Commission review in early 2011. comply with state law, clarify process and regulations and incorporate sustainability concepts. ORD Sustainability Bundle 2 Everett Joyce Received revised draft from consultants in August. Open Space Dedication Questions on how dedication requirements relate to Requirements State Impact fee regulations. Working through issues with Clarion,Attorney's Office and other City Staff. ORD Open Space Definitions Everett Joyce Created draft ordinance. Working with Engineering on Mapping where City Owned open space types of properties exist for each planning community. PLAN Library site selection for proposed Katia Pace Working with the Library subcommittees on these West Capitol Hill branch. (Capitol Hill) locations. Planning Division Working Document 6 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 © 0 0 C) 0 ORD PLNPCM2010-00064 Fine Tuning Lex Traughber November 18, 2010 Open House 1. Clarify which decision making Planning Commission public hearing January, 2011. bodies hear appeals of administrative decisions, 2. Appeals of administrative decisions is 10 days 3. Fraternities and Sororities must have a national affiliation 4. Pitched roof definition 5. Make the Baseball and Basketball stadium signage standards more generic than the Franklin Quest Field or Delta Center 6. Eliminate the summary tables 7. Clarify that an accessory structure is allowed in the side yard setback behind the principal structure Hist Policy Nominate Westmoreland Janice Lew Consultant has finished the survey work and is now Neighborhood to the National • working on the National Register Nomination Register of Historic Places application. . H-PLAN Boundary Adjustment to include Lex Traughber Boundary of the district and parcels to include in the Memory Grove into the local district is in question. Need clarification. Open House district. completed in June. Working on project as time permits. Planning Division Working Document 7 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 ORD Use Tables and Definitions Lex Traughber Organizing plan to divide the various components of Katia Pace this petition into manageable work assignments to be worked on by various members of staff. Working through all of the definitions and use charts t make them consistent. Not likely to start public process until 1st Quarter 2011. ORD Remove zoning district citations Katia Pace Relates with the Use Table Project. Will be processed from chapter in the zoning concurrently with that project. ordinance and instead just rely on the Use Tables to identify which zones uses are allowed in. PLAN Library site selection for proposed Lex Traughber Continue working with the Library subcommittees on Glendale branch (Glendale) potential locations and will work towards making a recommendation to the Library Board. PLAN Westminster College- Sugar House Michael Maloy Continue to work with Westminster College to identify Community Plan Amendment and Wayne vision for an Urban Campus. Monitoring the school's Mills own planning process. College was encouraged to request the City amend the Sugar House Master Plan to incorporate the College's plan once the college finalizes its plan. PLAN West Salt Lake Community Plan Nick Britton WSL team is beginning to review existing plan and Update (1995) draft plan from a few years ago to see what direction they need to go. Leg work and review should be complete in Jan and future direction will be determined at that time. PLAN 900 South Railroad corridor Nick Britton To be part of the West Salt Lake Plan update. This will planning. be first focus as Engineering/Transportation has received CIP funding to plan and design. Planning Division Working Document 8 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 O © 0 0 0 0 PLAN 400 South/900 East TSA area Maryann Waiting on HUD Grant funding and City Budget Pickering amendment to be completed before proceeding. Should be ready to start in Jan. ORD Conditional Building and Site Doug Dansie Assigned 12.2.2010 Design Review Revise Chapter 59 to remove conflicts and ensure design guidelines for various zoning districts does not conflict with other parts of zoning ordinance and is formatted in the most appropriate way. ORD Revamp the noticing chapter Michaela Oktay Assigned 12.2.2010 (21 A.10) so that all public hearings are noticed in the same way rather than based on the type of project it is. Include a noticing process to replace the Routine and Uncontested signature gathering requirement and replace instead with an official City notice. ORD Transfer the Authority for granting Maryann Assigned 12.2.2010 special exceptions from the BOA Pickering to the Planning Commission ORD Remove 5 foot maximum setback John Anderson Assigned 12.2.2010 regulation for accessory structures ORD Yalecrest Local Historic District Carl Leith November 3, 2010. Historic Landmark Commission Designation created application and recommended the City Council adopt the National Register boundaries for the local historic district. Planning Division Working Document 9 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 ORD Sustainability Bundle 3 Elizabeth Received first draft of ordinance from consultant mid Housing Diversity Reining November 2010. ORD Proposed Changes to YCI Overlay Mike Maloy (as proposed by the Yalecrest Preservationist for Property Rights ORD Fine Tune Mapping II Thomas Irvin. Reassigned to try and move project forward. ORD Residential Compatible Infill Wayne Mills Staff is currently working on a briefing/discussion Standards Amendments document for the City Council. The background and discussion sections of the draft briefing transmittal are nearly complete. I still need to develop a next steps strategy for the City Council to consider. Will develop a proposal for direction for Planning Management. PROJECTS WHICH NEED TO BE ASSIGNED. Type Project Team/ Tentative Timelines/Status Planner ORD Sustainability Bundle 2- Some of these issues relate to a Legislative Intent and Planned Development Petition by Planning Commission: Also, some relate to Amendments Phase II topics identified by Sustainability Consultants. Met with Clarion and various City Staff in March to identify scope and issues relating to topic. *- denotes items that may be postponed due to reduction in staff ours with proposed 2010 city budget. Planning Division Working Document 10 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 41111 • O • © C� O "On Deck" Projects Type Project Team/ Tentative Timelines/Status Planner ORD Sustainability Bundle 3 Determining whether there is sufficient vacant Wildfire/Urban interface developable land in the foothills to warrant the regulations. regulation Fire Marshall has stated they educate people in the Urban Interface every spring about how to protect their homes from Wildfire. ORD Unit legalization- Amendments Casey Stewart On Hold- Waiting to see what outcome of Accessory Dwelling Units is and how this may relate. Have worked with the Board of Adjustment to identify issues. H-POLICY Update Residential Design Carl Leith Anticipated to follow once the adoption of the Guidelines for Preservation preservation plan and fine tuning of historic overlay including incorporating the"Policy zoning ordinance issues are processed. Document,"where appropriate, into the guidelines. H- Educational Program/Information Carl Leith Includes various tools such as website, preservation in for Preservation brief, applications, etc. H-OTHER Develop criteria related to historic Janice Lew surveys and their prioritization H- ORD Historic Preservation Overlay Fine Janice Lew Anticipated to follow after historic designation Tuning prioritizing process discussion with HLC is complete. H-OTHER Historic Parks; Janice Lew/ Carl Leith 1. Finalize research of history Anticipated completion of research as part of CLG and design element of City Grant. Much work completed. Anticipated early 2011. parks and landscapes. The rest of the project to follow once the research component is complete. Planning Division Working Document 11 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 1 1 2. Interpretive component relating to historic parks and landscapes. 3. Prepare design guidelines for historic parks ORD University local historic district Waiting for neighborhood to submit information. extension. ORD Remove CU Option in Landmark Michael Maloy On-hold. Waiting for other projects (Yalecrest Overlay Site from the geographic area of changes and ADU regulations) to move further through the Westmoreland Historic District the approval process before beginning work on this petition. ORD Public Safety Building Zoning Waiting for more finalized design plans to determine the appropriate zoning classification for property. PLAN Downtown Plan Update (1995) PLAN Midblock walkway study/policy and ordinance changes. PLAN Review Central Community Plan and zoning relating to area south of 1300 South between approximately State Street and 200 West. PLAN Review Central Community Plan and zoning relating to area between State Street and Main Street area south of approximately 500 South?? H-ORD Develop a new conservation Carl Leith After other preservation projects completed. district ordinance and program H- OTHER Analyze the City-owned historic Cheri Coffey properties. Planning Division Working Document 12 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 U 0 0 0 • Complete listing of City properties on National & Local Registers • Designation of local register of historically significant buildings • Development of maintenance program • Easement management Hist. Policy Create guidelines for the Carl Leith Westmoreland Neighborhood Local Historic District PLAN Avenues Community Plan Update No timeframe set (1987) PLAN Northwest Community Plan No timeframe set. However,North Temple Grand Update (1990) Boulevard planning process will lead to proposed amendments to this plan. PLAN Capitol Hill Community Plan No timeframe set Update (2001) PLAN Central Community Plan Update WS/CC Team No timeframe set (2005) PLAN East Bench Community Plan EB/ SH Team No timeframe set (1987) including findings from the Foothill Corridor Land Use Plan PLAN Sugar House Community Plan EB/SH Team No timeframe set Update (2005) ORD North Redwood Road rezoning WS/CC Team- When this petition was initiated(to implement the Rose Wayne Mills Park Small Area Plan, it was quickly put on hold. The (has petition) property owners on the west side of Redwood Road objected(Thom Ellison was their attorney). They convinced Carlton that the time was not ripe for this. Planning Division Working Document 13 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 We may want to speak with Carlton to see if he would like us to start this up again. ORD Conditional Building& Site As community plans are updated, specific design Design Review(ZAP) criteria will be developed that will be implemented through Chapter 59. ORD Mapping (ZAP) Everett Joyce Work through the small neighborhood business analysis project and sustainability projects will influence and may address this issue. ORD Parking (ZAP) Mike Maloy Work through the sustainability project will influence and may address this issue. Also City Council action relating to whether they believe there is a need to reevaluate standards (from the 13th St. Marketplace project- Renaldo Hunt- may influence this work timeframe.) ORD Homeless Facilities Nick Norris When direction is given, will work on. ORD Gateway Zoning Nick N., Doug On hold until priority 1 issues are addressed. Dansie ORD Central Community Master Plan WS/CC team On hold until priority 1 issues are addressed. Implementation HPORD Revisions to Preservation Code as No timeframe set recommended by Preservation Plan ORD Airport regulations: WS/CC team No timeframe set Signage General Regulations ORD Country Club Rezone (New Sugar House/ No timeframe set zoning district between 12,000 and East Bench 7,000 square feet) Team Planning Division Working Document 14 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 ® 0 O 0 0 o PLAN U Edge Plan Wilf On Hold Sommerkorn ORD Impacts of Manufacturing & Commercial Adjacent to residential zones. Legislative intent from City Council associated with passage of • Recycling Zone ordinance amendment PLAN Landfill Consolidation Planning Division Working Document 15 I drive:Planning Project Tracking:Priority Matrix Revised 12.02.2010 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT BUDGET AMENDMENT#3-FISCAL YEAR 2010-11 DATE: January 18,2011 SUBJECT: Budget Amendment#3 STAFF REPORT BY: Sylvia Richards,Lehua Weaver,Karen Holladay and Jennifer Bruno CC: David Everitt,Gina Chamness,Gordon Hoskins,Frank Gray,LuAnn Clark,Chief Chris Burbank,Chief Kurt Cook,Rick Graham,Kay Christensen,Shannon Ashby,and Sherrie Collins Follow-up Information A-4-Streetcar Manager Position-At the Council's Work Session the Council discussed the option for the RDA to fund part of this position. Council Staff has requested that the RDA Chair and Vice Chair schedule this for a discussion among RDA Board members. A-10-Impact Fee waivers-At the Council's Work Session some Council Members were interested to know the recent history of impact fee waivers. It is likely that the reason FY 2011 is so high is because no units were processed in time for the FY 2010 budget year. The following chart details the last few years(and number of affordable housing units built): _ Year Amount #of housing units FY 2006 $ 115,700 130 FY 2007 $ 152,190 171 FY 2008 $ 22,100 17 FY 2009 $ 7,340 5 FY 2010 $ 0 0 FY 2011 $429,809 349 Council Staff is also following up with the Administration on other Council questions, and will have additional information for Tuesday. The following report was provided for the Council's Work Session discussion on January 18, 2011. It is provided again for reference. Budget Amendment Number Three contains 33 proposed adjustments, as suggested by the Administration. The amendment recommends using fund balance for ten initiatives for a decrease to fund balance of$1,015,031. Of this amount,the Administration anticipates that$254,260 will be reimbursed back to the City. Page 1 The Council requests a current-year revenue forecast with each budget amendment. The Administration's forecast shows a deficit of approximately $1 million due to property tax judgments settled last year and a decrease in parking ticket issuance and revenue. Sales tax revenue is stable. The decline is due to a decrease in municipal energy taxes. Franchise taxes are lower than anticipated due to a decrease in revenue received from telecommunication companies. The number of commercial and residential permits is higher as compared to last year; however, the value of the permits is significantly lower. Parking meter revenue is higher than anticipated based on the bagging of meters for the downtown area, including the City Creek project. This budget amendment includes the addition of 4 general fund positions, and 1.5 grant-funded positions. From a policy perspective the Council generally avoids adding positions mid-year. The need for these positions may be an indicator that the budget cuts made over the past two years are not allowing the City to continue operating at the desired level. In an effort to make the review of the budget openings more expedient, the Administration has attempted to categorize budget opening items as follows: A. "New" - those items that are new issues. B. "Grant requiring existing staff resources" -- those grants that will require the City's existing staff to complete a specific project. (Employees involved with these projects may have less time to focus on other projects within the scope of their work.) C. "Grant requiring additional staff resources" - those grants that provide additional staff positions and require a City match. These generally have policy implications because they may add a new service or create an expectation that the City will fund the position after the grant has expired. D. "Housekeeping" -- those items classified by the Administration as strictly accounting actions that do not have policy implications. E. "Grants requiring No New Staff Resources" - those grants that provide funding for costs that are not associated with positions. F. "Donation" -- those items that are donations that require Council appropriation to be used, are consistent with previous Council discussions, or do not have policy implications. G. "Council Consent Agenda- Grant Awards" - These items have been previously approved on the Council's Consent Agenda. H. "Follow-up on Previously Approved Items" - those items that were approved in a previous budget amendment but require some additional adjustments. I. "Council Added" - items which have been added by the City Council. MATTERS AT ISSUE The Administration classified the following as: Page New Items: A-1: Request to expand driving range at Rose Park Golf Course ($425,000 - Source: Golf Enterprise Fund) In September of 2010, the Salt Lake City Golf Fund sold 3.01 acres of Rose Park Golf Course land for the Guadalupe Center Education program. The sales proceeds less associated sales costs were $422,782. The Golf Fund plans to use the sales proceeds to expand the driving range. With the addition of the recent property purchase mentioned above, the Rose Park Course would be able to expand the course's driving range. The proposed expansion would extend the driving range to 350 yards and provide a practice tee approximately 125 yards wide by 50 yards deep. This budget amendment would establish the revenue budget of$425,000 for the Guadalupe Center Education Program sales proceeds. In addition, this amendment also establishes the expenditure budget of$425,000 to be used for the Rose Park Golf Course improvements of$422,782 and to cover sales costs of$2,218. ►Does the Council wish to ask the Administration about the status of the property re-zone -from R-1- 7000 (Single Family Residential) to Open Space? Related Information In the Fall of 2009, the Council approved a budget amendment for $800,000. This is a subsidy of the Golf Fund with the General Fund's Surplus Land Account. With the funds the Golf Fund was able to purchase 2.64 acres adjacent to the Rose Park Golf Course driving range. The property purchases of$695,380 were finalized during the summer of 2010. The final purchase price, including associated costs, was k $104,620 less than anticipated. According to the Administration, the excess budget will be returned to the Surplus Land Account. A-2: Request to establish budgets for cost of utilities at Sorenson Center ($104,260 - Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund -- to be reimbursed by Salt Lake County) The Council will recall that Salt Lake County took over the operation and management of the Sorenson Center last year, and that the City still owns the property. The Administration indicates that the Sorenson Center site is included in the City's energy performance contract. As a result, the City tracks the utility costs (including water, electricity and gas) and bills Salt Lake County for the cost of utilities and the associated debt service the City incurs during the energy performance contract lease. The County benefits from the lower utility costs while the City benefits from new equipment on its property. This request will create expense and revenue budgets to cover initial payment of utility costs and reimbursement from the County. A-3: Request for dog park fence at Rotary Glen Park ($14,000 - Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration has requested that this item be held open for a later date and not be addressed at this time. The Administration will come back with additional information. A-4: Request for New FTE - Street Cars Project Manager position - to manage Streetcar projects ($52,500 for 6 months; $126,500 annually - Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration is requesting to add a Street Cars Project Manager position in Community and Economic Development, to manage the Sugar House Streetcar project, including coordinating with various City departments and outside entities, and to manage potential future street car projects. Salt Lake City received a $26 million federal grant for the Sugar House line. Design and construction for the line is expected to be on a rapid schedule (18 months) and current staffing levels do not allow for a full-time streetcar project manager, nor have they allowed for a full-time staff person to identify and finalize gap funding for the line. The Administration is proposing to add this position to the overall staffing document, because the City will be pursuing additional streetcar lines Downtown. Note: Funding is not yet secure for additional streetcar lines, although the Administration indicates that it will continue to pursue federal funds. The Council may wish to ask the Administration to further define the responsibilities of this position - will the position handle planning/zoning issues adjacent to the line, design and engineering of the line only, or will it have an instrumental role in funding and partnership opportunities. A-5: Request to fund costs of outside counsel associated with Regional Athletic Complex/Jordan River litigation ($25,000 - Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration is requesting additional funds to secure outside assistance in handling the various lawsuits that the Jordan River Restoration Network (JRRN) has pending against the City. There are various lawsuits that are currently in progress, and the JRRN has indicated publicly it will pursue additional lawsuits. The lawsuits have been handled so far by the Attorney's Office, but the slow progress of the current lawsuits, and potential for future lawsuits has made it necessary for the Attorney's Office to secure supplemental resources. A-6: Request to fund Bike Share Pilot Program ($25,000 - Source:fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration has requested $25,000 towards the creation of an approximately $100,000 bike sharing pilot program which will make 40-50 bikes available to rent in the downtown area. If approved these funds would be used to match private sponsor donations. According to Transportation, the bikes will have multiple gears and the capacity to carry an additional fifty pounds of weight in the front basket. Users would pay with a key card or credit card at a solar-powered kiosk and return the bike after use to the same, or a different kiosk. Kiosks and bikes would be leased by the City from a bike sharing vendor during the pilot program. Kiosk locations would be determined by the vendor, the Transportation Division and the Downtown Alliance. The Administration indicates the cost to rent a bike will depend on usage. Some bike sharing programs offer a thirty minute to one hour grace period in which the users are not charged. After the grace period, rental costs are determined by a sliding scale based on the amount of time the bike is rented. An annual rental fee might range from $75 to $100, with monthly and daily rental rates also available. As indicated in the transmittal, user fees typically fund a portion of operating costs, while the investment of bikes and kiosks is typically made using public dollars. The Council may wish to note that some public funding may be necessary to support operation costs. Depending on demand and use of the pilot program, the Administration indicates that expanded sponsorships, advertising and grants may be pursued to fund the future Page 4 purchase of bikes. The transmittal indicates a tentative`build-out'for bike sharing in the• future of approximately 500 bikes at$3,500 to$4,500 per bike for a total cost of$2 million. Assuming user fees defray a portion of costs,annual operating costs are approximately$1,000 per bike,with a total cost of$500,000 for the program. Questions for Consideration: o The Council may wish to ask about other sponsorship contacts or grants the Administration may be pursuing. o The Council may wish to ask about the day-to-day management of the program, asset maintenance,and budget tracking. o The Council may wish to ask about the timeline for the program-if the initial funding is approved,what is the projected timeframe to have bikes ready to rent, and what is the anticipated length of the pilot program? A-7: Request for New FTE-Civil Enforcement Secretary-to assist with new duties of Civil Enforcement (1.0 FTE; $27,000 for 6 months; $54,000 annually- Source: fund balance of the City's General Fund) The Administration is requesting a new FTE for a secretary position to support the Civil Enforcement Unit (CE, formerly known as Zoning Enforcement). The new position would replace a secretary position eliminated during the retirement incentive a few years ago, to support the increasing workload in Civil Enforcement. The Administration indicates that in addition to the continuing zoning enforcement duties, additional responsibilities have been assigned to CE, including enforcement of sidewalk artists, the Farmer's Market 86 entertainers, and sidewalk snow removal. This group will also be responsible for enforcement of the Good Landlord program. According to the Administration, to support CE, the secretary performs letter drafting; preparation of notices, certificates, liens, deficiency lists; HAAB minutes and notices; hearings;as well as assisting with Planning and HAND support as needed. (Although under Building Services organizationally, the staff is still physically located next to Planning and HAND staff.) The number of support staff has been reduced over the past few years from three secretary positions to one. When CE (then HAZE) was organizationally under the Planning Division, there were three secretaries for HAZE,that shared some support for Planning needs.When HAZE was transferred to the Building Services Division, one of the secretary positions was transferred to stay in Planning. Of the remaining two HAZE secretaries,one opted to retire when the City offered the retirement incentive during the 2009-10 fiscal year.This left one secretary to support the CE functions. Typically,the Council has questioned adding new positions mid-year rather than evaluating additions in the context of the annual budget.The Administration has indicated that over the past two years they have employed a temporary secretary to meet the support needs of CE. The Council may wish to ask whether the temporary position could continue to meet the needs until annual budget discussions. Page 5 The Council might also inquire about whether some incoming complaint phone calls could be handled by an automated system. The Administration may have considered this option and have a recommendation on whether it would provide necessary assistance. A-8: Request for additional funds for Expedited Plan Review Outsourcing Services ($150,000 - Source:fund balance of the General Fund) This budget item would allocate an additional $150,000 to the Building Services budget for the cost of the outsourcing expedited plan review. When the Council and Administration decided to move forward with providing an option for expedited plan review services, it was determined that those expedited plans would be sent to an outside firm for review. The Council may recall that it was difficult to formulate an estimate of the cost associated with the outside service, because the number of applicants was unknown. According to the Administration, approximately three percent of the plans submitted for review are expedited. The Administration reports that up to October 22, 2010, there have been 14 plan reviews this fiscal year. For those expedited reviews, the City paid fees of$36,196 to the outside firm. In addition to those 14 already processed, there are another 10 pending. (Update: through December, $70,000 has been spent on outsourcing expedited plan review.) For each expedited review sent to an outside firm, the City charges double the standard in- house fee. The Administration has estimated that for the expedited reviews submitted through December, $110,000 has been received in double fee revenue from the petitioner. However, with the general fund structure, those revenues are not received directly into the Business Services budget. For the Council's reference, the current Turn Around Time (TAT) for plan review is between three and four weeks. Also, as a reminder, plans for LEED certified projects are also expedited without a double-fee as an incentive for seeking LEED certification. If the Council elects to allow expedited plans for other policy reasons it is likely that the funding need will increase. A-9: Request to allocate CDBG funds for construction of Community Learning Center adjacent to Mtn. View Elementary School ($233,732 - Source: CDBG Fund) In the FY2010 budget process, the Council approved a $233,732 request by the Salt Lake City School District to fund a Community Learning Center adjacent to Mountain View Elementary school. At the time there were a number of questions relating to total cost of the project, location of the project, and fundraising ability, so the Council elected to place the funds in a holding account, subject to future appropriation, pending the School District's response to the Council's various questions. The School District has met with various Council Members over the last few months to answer these questions. This budget amendment request would release these funds. The School District indicates that these funds will be used for project pre-design. The School District has submitted an application for the FY 2012 CDBG process for $500,000. The project is estimated to cost $3.1 million, and the School District would like to begin construction in the Summer of 2011. The funding sources are as follows: Salt Lake City CDBG - FY 2011 $ 233,732 Salt Lake City CDBG - FY 2012 $ 500,000 Page 6 (request pending) Salt Lake City School District $ 200,000 Salt Lake Education Foundation $2,200,000 (state and national grants) Total Sources $3,133,732 If the Council approves the FY 2012 CDBG request,the City's total contribution will be$733,732. Because these funds are from the federal CDBG program,there are various requirements that the project must follow. The project must follow the Davis Bacon wage schedule(for design as well). The Administration is confirming with the school district if the current estimates includes this wage assumption. Also,HUD states that the City cannot have more than 50%of the total CDBG grant award for that year listed as`pending" in the financial system. Because the total request from the school district would make up a larger portion of the City's total grant award than other projects,the City would need to require the school district to spend these funds in one year. A-10: Request for Impact Fee Waivers($429,809-Source:fund balance of the General Fund) The City's Impact Fee ordinance states that a 100 percent waiver shall be granted for low- income housing(rental or non rental). Low-income is defined in the ordinance as housing for which the payment does not exceed 30%of the annual income of a family that is at 80% of Area Median Income(AMI),as determined by HUD. State Impact Fee statute requires that any"waived"Impact Fees must still be paid by the municipality into the appropriate Impact Fee fund. Therefore the City general fund must reimburse the Impact Fee fund for these waivers. The following projects received waivers: Salt Lake City Housing and Neighborhood Development-5 single family $ 7,575 homes(1019 North Colorado St.,1259 West Gillespie Ave,1011 South 1400 West,553 South 1000 West,1019 South 1400 West). Housing Authority of Salt Lake City-Taylor Springs Apartments(1s12 s. $ 143,925 West Temple). Young Women's Christian Association(YWCA)Crisis Shelter(325 South 300 $ 72,750 East) Road Home-Palmer Court(999 South Main St) $205,589 Total Exemptions (to be reimbursed by general fund) $429,809 A-I l: Request for reallocate funds for Small Neighborhood Business Petition ($55,000-Source:fund balance of the General Fund) The Administration has performed foundation work to set up the Small Business Resource Guide including: inventory of businesses located within neighborhood districts,conducted a survey,and document preparation for public input. Of the$75,000 initially budgeted for the project,$10,000 has been used.The$65,000 dropped to fund balance at the end of 2009-10. In order to complete the remainder of the project,the Administration estimates that $55,000 will be needed and is requesting that be reallocated to the CED budget. The next steps include noticing affected property owners,two public processes,and publication of the Salt Lake City Small Business Guide. a" Page 7 A-12: Request for three New FTE's associated with the Public Services Department Reorganization ($132,462 for 6 months; $317,910 annually- Source:fund balance ll of the General Fund) The Administration is proposing organizational changes to the Public Services Department, which includes ten (10) divisions, two (2) Enterprise Funds - the Refuse and Golf Funds, and one (1) Internal Service Fund - Fleet. The reorganization involves 1) elimination of the Deputy Director position, 2) creating four divisions, and 3) adding two new positions in the department. In addition to flattening the organizational structure, the departmental changes will distribute administrative and day-to-day duties, program oversight, and management to four (4) newly created Division Directors. Three existing department employees will become Division Directors. The fourth one, the Operations Division, is a newly created division that will require recruiting and hiring of an employee to fill this position. rage The following table presents additional detail about the proposed reorganization: Division Employee Grade FY 2011 Future Additional Information Impact -Partial Year Year Annual Cost Cost (Note:This assumes a Feb 1 hire date.) 1 FTE- 31 $41,562 $99,750 This position,as proposed, Special will work for the Director. Projects Duties include,but are not Analyst limited to managing and coordinating:large scale projects;new initiatives, public policy issues,inter- governmental relations, and public relations. In addition,this position will serve as a liaison with other City departments. This position will also work on several projects currently in the development and implementation stage. Administrative Services Existing 35 $0 $0 This division would include Division:Policy department some functions currently development,Strategic employee performed in the Office of Planning,Program will become the Director. In addition, Performance,Contracts, the this Division would be Technology,Safety, Division responsible for the Emergency Management Director. Gallivan Center operations and Event Planning. and other event planning functions. According to the Administration,the personnel services budget from the elimination of the Deputy Director position will be used for the Administrative Services Division Director. Finance and Accounting Existing 35 $0 $0 Division: Budget, department accounting,fiscal employee analysis,revenue will become projections,purchasing, the payroll,auditing,fund Division allocation,risk Director. management,grants,and forecasting. Page 9 1 FTE- 26 $29,015 $69,632 This position,as proposed, Financial would support the daily Reporting demands of managing Accountant financial records and systems within the Public Services Department, which has an annual budget of$75 million. Operations Division: 1 FTE- 37 $61,885 $148,528 The Operations Division is Facilities,Compliance, Operations a new division. An YouthCity,Golf,Park and Division employee will have to be Public Lands, Director recruited and hired. Streets/Concrete and Fleet. Sustainabilitp- Existing 35 $0 $0 Sanitation is a new Environment Services department responsibility for this Division:Sustainability, employee division. energy,environment will become management and the compliance,recycling, Division outreach and sanitation. Director. This budget amendment would establish an expenditure budget of$132,462 for FY 2011 for the partial year cost of adding three(3)FTEs in the Public Services Department. According to information provided by the Administration,the future annual cost for the reorganization is$317,910. The funding for this budget amendment would come from the City's General Fund-Fund Balance. ►Does the Council wish to ask the Administration if additional technology could assist the Department in their service,organizational,management,and oversight roles?This is suggested in addition to any staffing changes approved,rather than in lieu of. A-13: Requested Changes to City's Appointed Positions(fiscal impact is discussed in more detail in Item A-12) Pending the Council's action on item A-12,the chart for appointed positions will change. The following positions will be deleted-Public Services Deputy Director(Grade 39),Capital Asset Management Director(Grade 39),Sustainability Environment Division Director (Grade 35),Fleet Division Manager(Grade 33). The following positions will be added- Labor Relations Director/Senior City Attorney(Grade 39),Operations Division Director, Public Services(Grade 37),Finance and Accounting Division Director,Public Services (Grade 35),Sustainability/Environment Division Director,Public Services(Grade 35), Administrative Service Division Director,Public Services(Grade 35),Fleet Management Program Director,Public Services(Grade 33),Parks and Public Lands Program Director (Grade 33),Special Projects Analyst(Grade 31). Costs associated with these changes are detailed in item A-12. Additional Changes-Due to the Council Staff equity/compensations issues that have previously been recognized by the Council and were funded in the FY 2011 budget process,a reorganization of certain positions on the pay grade chart is also part of this budget amendment(see attached chart). Some changes within the office have been made,and some Page 10 4 will need to be addressed over a two year period as funds are available. Staff will present further options as a part of the FY 2012 budget. Attachment A is the rationale used by the 2010 Council Chair,Vice Chair and Director. A-14: Request to establish cost centers for North Temple Boulevard Improvements ($8,017,200-Source:CIP Fund) The Administration is requesting the Council approve this budget item to recognize various revenue and expenditure sources relating to the North Temple Boulevard project. The chart below summarizes sources and uses,based on the most current cost estimates. Note that the current cost estimate of$22.5 million is significantly lower than the original cost estimate of approximately$30 million. The net effect is that the City can complete the project with a lower sales tax bond than originally expected($3 million instead of the originally anticipated$10 million). Cost reductions came from a favorable bidding climate, as well as a slight reduction in scope for some elements. Scope reduction includes not funding certain improvements west of Redwood Road,such as street lights,pedestrian lights,and landscaping. Other scope reductions are in the process of being confirmed by Council staff and will be made available on Tuesday. The budget authorization includes a final sales tax bond amount of$3 million. Staff estimates the debt service on this amount is approximately$250,000 per year(assuming a 20 year bond). Final debt service payments will be determined at the time of sale. Page 11 Finding Sources Alliance Fund $ 10,000,000 FY 2010 CIP Budget $ 2,884,000 FY 2010 Non-Departmental Budget $ 150,000 FY 2010 Class C $ 375,000 Property Owner Assessment(East of Redwood Rdod) $ 1,181,800 State contribution in lieu of property assessment $ 386,200 Alliance Fund increase as a result of decision to only partially embed track on Airport $ 781,496 State Contribution per IiB XXX $ 3,503,000 12.5%UTA portion of new street light system $ 261,000 oty Saks Tax Bond-Pending Counct Approval $ 3,000,000 Total!boding as of 2/9/2010 22,519,496 Costs Final Cost Original Estimate UTA Conceptual Urban Design Process $ 300,000 Conceptual and final boulevard contract design cost $ 2,280,384 Saving in conceptual and final design $ (261,238) Design Consultant(Ron Straka&Marilee Utter) $ 224,000 $ 150,000 Business Impact Mitigation budget $ 120,000 $ 150,000. Concrete paved track,600 W.to 2200 W. $ 4,040,759 $ 6,400,000 Coloring of concrete for the embedded track and all other colored concrete elements on the boulevard and viaduct $ 1,006,913 $ 820,000 Betterment of Jordan River Bridge(enhancements and deck) $ 297,684 $ 375,000 Painted take path ___ $ 100,000 $ 200,000 Raised medians curbs $ 40,501 $ 225,000 Enhanced bus shelters $ 300,000 $ _ 300,000 Enhanced station platforms-includes patterned concrete $ 335,238 $ 305,000 Patterned concrete at station platforms $ - $ 95,000 Enhanced OCS poles $ 310,024 $ 195,000 OCS poles reflective element $ 52,845 $ 250,000 Multi-modal Pathway-includes following four items $ 4,205,428 $ 1,960,000 Corner Treatments $ - $ 317,000 I-215 Underpass Enhancement $ - $ 265,000 I-IS Underpass Enhancement $ - $ 265,000 Redwood Road crosswalks and corner treatments $ - $ 13� Enhanced parkstrip landscaping-includes following two items $ 3,315,685 $ 3,958,000 Enhanced North Temple medians $ - $ 445,000 1-80 Corridor landscaping $ - $ 45,000 Credit for eliminating landscaping and boulevard elements between Redwood Road and 1 215 $ (750,387), Street furnishings $ 50,000 $ 185,000 Neighborhood identification place markers $ 118,224 $ 160,000 Street and pedestrian scale lighting for the boulevard and viaduct $ 1,842,800 $ 4,873,499 Station bollard lighting $ - $ 75,000 Enhanced crosswalks(other than Redwood Road) $ 891,486 $ 136,000 Public Art at Stations $ 250,000 $ 300,000 Bicycle signals $ 38,645 $ 100 Q Right of Way/Acquisition Issues $ 2,775,541 $ 1,960,000 Power Line burial $ 2,490,307 $ 3,500,000 Solar Panels $ 500,000 $ 500,000 Jordan River Parkway enhancements $ 283,037 $ 400,000 Modification to overhaul power system for high load vehicle clearani $ 135,500 $ 200,000 Cost savings per interlocal agreement in allowing LTA to mill and structurally overlay instead of a complete reconstruction of the North Temple pavements. $ (3,088,529) $ (107,000) Earned Contractor design completion incentive $ (42,750) UTA Program Management Fee $ 457,399 City Engineering Construction Management Costs $ 200,000 Total Revised Costs $ 22,519,496 $ 29,432,499 Page 12 A-15: Request for Barnes Bank Bond Budget Adjustment(54,737,391 -Source: Barnes Bank Bond Funds) Several years ago when the Council and Administration decided to purchase the Barnes Bank Building at the corner of 400 South and 300 East,a bond was issued to cover the purchase of the building and the estimated necessary upgrades for occupancy.The City will no longer pursue use of the Barnes Bank Building due to a higher cost for renovations, and to current designs and vision for the Public Safety Building. Use of the bond money is allowed toward other needed City-owned building improvements and remodeling.The amount available is$4.7 million in bond money,plus$37,381 in interest earned since the bond issuance. The Council may wish to schedule this topic for a separate and more thorough briefing due to the number of options to consider.The only step that is currently necessary is that the bond funds be allocated toward improvement and remodeling of a building for use as City offices.The Council could allocate the funds in a general account for that purpose and then hold the conversation for specific project review and approval at a later date. Having said that,the Administration provided some information about possible uses of the money.Facilities Services and the Engineering Division compiled a list of potential projects and estimated costs totaling$13,561,816.The Mayor has provided a recommendation on projects,totaling$5,621,682,as follows: • $3,473,000 To be spent at Plaza 349 on: o spatial reconfigurations of floors 1,4,and 6 o upgrades to the mechanical,electrical and plumbing systems throughout the entire Plaza 349 building • $2,148,682 To be spent at the City&County Building on: o remodeling of the north end of the 5th floor, o new office space would accommodate approximately 44 additional employees. • TOTAL of $5,621,682 o This is$884,301 over the available bond and interest money. o The Administration intends to include the rest in a CIP application. One of the items on the list is to repair and maintain the stone on the outside of the City& County building,which a few Council Members have inquired about.The estimate for this project would be$1.6 million. There are other systems maintenance,upgrades,and structural projects to existing building space on the list as well. Questions for Consideration: o The Council may wish to review the complete list of proposed projects with the Administration to discuss more of the details and reasoning for the Mayor's recommendations. Page 13 o The Council may wish to weigh the options between building out additional office space or maintaining existing office and building needs. o The Council may wish to ask about the need for additional office space, and how the recommended improvements will address the needs of the City. o The Council may wish to ask whether a comprehensive space needs audit has been completed. o The Council may also wish to ask how the recommended projects will facilitate the One Stop shop, customer access, and the parking issues previously identified as a problem for customers. o The Council may wish to ask whether funding these recommended projects with the bond money would free up money in the CIP account for 2011-12 or 10-year CIP Plan projects. o The Council may also wish to ask whether there are other projects on the CIP 10- year plan that could be considered. o The Council may wish to have the Administration return with a full briefing on the potential future uses of the Barnes Bank Building site. A-16: Request for revenue and expenditure budget authority to implement electronic booting program($257,250 - revenue neutral) The Administration is requesting both a revenue and expenditure budget be established to implement the recently-approved electronic booting program with Paylock. Paylock and Salt Lake City entered into a contract in December 2010, whereby the City will collect the fee established by ordinance ($147.00) and pass the payment along to Paylock. The Administration classified the following as: Grants Requiring Existing Staff Resources B-1: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs - Cold Cases Grant($389,200 - Source: Grant Fund) According to paperwork submitted by the Administration, there are 100 violent crime/homicide cold cases that remain unsolved by the Salt Lake City Police Department. In an effort to solve and adjudicate these older cases, the Police Department will use grant funds received from the US Department of Justice, Solving Cold Cases with DNA program. These funds have the potential to return DNA test results within sixteen (16) days. With the current backlog of cases it can take up to 180 days, depending on the nature of the case. Grant funds will be used as follows during the 10/1/2010 to 3/31/2012 grant period: Page 14 Purpose Amount Additional Information Sorenson Forensics LLC- $147,200 •Cold case biological evidence will be analyzed by Case Consultation Contract Sorenson Forensics,a private entity,to determine which cold cases are suitable for further DNA testing. Sorenson Forensics will advise on whether cases needing further analysis and testing should be assigned to the State Crime Lab (SCL)or to themselves. According to the Administration's paperwork,Sorenson Forensics can provide a wide range of DNA testing. In addition,their turn-around time for testing is 16 days. •Sorenson Forensics will provide training and workshops for SLCPD personnel,including sworn law enforcement,civilian crime lab technicians, and analysts from the SCL. Utah Bureau of Forensic $103,000 •DNA test kits(1000)will be purchased for 24 Services(State Crime Lab)- cold cases that have been screened and assigned DNA test kits and Professional to the SCL. Services •According to the Police Department,the SCL workload queue for cold cases can be over six months. In order to mediate some of the backlog • currently being experienced,the Police Department proposes to use grant funds to pay SCL analysts for DNA testing during off hours. Travel $60,000 Travel budget for detectives needing to travel outside the state to interview witnesses. Training $9,000 Homicide/Cold Case Training for 4 detectives. Overtime $70,000 Overtime paid for 6 detectives and 1 Sergeant when the regular workload does not allow time to work on cold cases durin_their re: lar shift work. This budget request establishes the revenue and expenditure budgets for this grant. B-2:State of Utah,Dept. of Public Safety,Division of Homeland Security 2010 Urban Area Security Initiative Grant(UASI)Program Grant($730,000-Source:Grant Fund) The 2010 Homeland Security Grant under the Urban Area Security Initiative(UASI)is intended to continue local law enforcement efforts in planning and preparing for events, such as,natural disasters or terrorist attacks. Details of how the$730,000 grant funds are proposed to be used are included along with related item C-2. Page 15 This budget amendment establishes the revenue and expenditure budgets of$730,000 for the UASI grant. The Administration classified the following as: Grants Requiring Additional Staff Resources C-1:Request for part-time employee-U.S. Dept.of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women-Community Defined Solutions to Violence Against Women Program Grant($399,077-Source:Grant Fund) The Police Department received a$399,077 continuation grant from the U.S.Department of Justice,Office on Violence Against Women. This grant falls under their FY 2010 Community Defined Solutions to Violence Against Women Program. This grant project addresses working with partners from the community to improve the quality and quantity of services available to victims of domestic violence at the Salt Lake Area Family Justice Center(SLAFJC). Partners/Stakeholders include the SLC Prosecutors Office,SLC Police Department,Young Women's Christian Association(YWCA)of SLC,Legal Aid Society of SLC,Utah Department of Workforce Services,Utah Third District Court,SL Legal Defenders Office,SL County Criminal Justice Services,SL County Sheriffs Office,Utah Division of Child and Family Services,and Gonzalez B&Tran-Layton,LLC,a SLC law firm. The SLAFJC,currently located at the Lolie Eccles Center,coordinates the community's response to domestic violence in the Salt Lake area. The following information is how the grant funds will be used: Purpose Amount Additional Information YWCA-Management Contract, $269,587 The contract includes office space for the including office location,grant program,grant program management, program management,meals, meals,utilities,and telephone. utilities,and telephone. YWCA-National Family Justice $25,000 The contract is for the up-coming Center Alliance-Strategic transition and expansion of the SLAFJC. Planning YWCA-Foreign and Sign $10,920 Language Interpreters for clients SLCPD-Detective Overtime $35,000 The labor cost is to pay detectives who serve warrants on violations of protective orders. SLCPD-Part-time Victim $42,000 This request is for a part-time employee. Advocate(co-located at the The paperwork submitted by the SLAFJC) Administration,indicates that the position would be eliminated at the end of the grant. The paperwork also indicates this grant has the potential to be continued. Travel $15,570 This travel budget allows SLAFJC stakeholders to attend technical assistance and grant management training. Office Su''lies $1,000 Page 16 • libr This budget amendment reimbursements the grant holding account for$150,000,which had been approved earlier in FY 2011 on the Council's consent agenda. In addition,the remaining budget of$249,077 will be established. C-2:Request for one FTE-State of Utah,Dept. of Public Safety,Division of Homeland Security, Urban Area Security Initiative Grant(UASI)Program Grant ($2,170,078-Source:Grant Fund) The 2010 Homeland Security Grant under the Urban Area Security Initiative(UASI)was awarded to allow for the purchase of equipment and materials needed in planning and preparing for events,such as,natural disasters or terrorist attacks. The following table presents how the UASI grant funds for both UASI budget amendment items,B-2 and B-3, will be used. (Note: Although item C-2 includes a new position,it is for a Training and Exercise Coordinator,and not the Infrastructure Protection Specialist which was discussed during the last budget opening. According to the Administration,the Training and Exercise Coordinator position will be funded by this grant for three years,unless other grant funding is secured. The addition of this position may be of less concern to the Council,since funding for a full three years has been identified and no grant amendment will be needed to accomplish this proposal.) The acronym ACIP is not commonly used,but it is listed below. The Asynchronous Critical Infrastructure Program is a program developed in Utah that is designed to facilitate the evaluation of risk. It helps standardize the evaluation of risks. It is particularly specific and increases the likelihood that various users are able to come to the same types of conclusions when evaluating risk. Grant- Agency or Item Amount Additional Information Budget Department Amendmen Receiving t Item Funding B-2 Salt Lake City- Data Fusion/Synthesis, $480,000 System allows collection of data Emergency Crime Database Software from various intelligence sources. Management This data can then be accessed System-Urban and used for further analysis and Area Security study. Initiative (SLC-EMS-UASI) B-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Asynchronous Critical $250,000 This tool facilitates gathering of Infrastructure Program data,including critical (ACIP) infrastructure from various sources. Local police,fire,and communities provide data to be included in a centralized database. Subtotal of Item B-2 $730,000 C-2 State of Utah $30,000 The State of Utah will use their funds to purchase a trailer that could be used to care for the needs of animals during a natural disaster or other event. The • Community Animal Response trailer will be the responsibility of the State. Page 17 C-2 Valley Emergency $122,000 The Valley Emergency Communication Communication Center will use Center(VECC) their funds for a Voice Over Internet Protocol system. C-2 Salt Lake County $167,360 Salt Lake County will use their funds to acquire interoperable communication tools,including a go kit,which allows the communication tools to be transferred from one location to another. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) New Position-1 FTE-Full- $286,448 This position would be responsible time Training and Exercise to coordinate trainings and Coordinator includes salary exercise development for UASI. In and benefits for 3 years. addition,the Coordinator would (Note: This position is not ensure that all Salt Lake Urban related to the Area(SLUA)jurisdictions Infrastructure Protection participate in on-going training Specialist FTE that had and exercises provided by federal been requested during the and state agencies. The grant previous budget funds this position for the three amendment.) year grant period. According to the Administration,the position would be eliminated if this grant funding does not continue. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Training,Travel,and $13,552 Supplies C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Contract with BDR $309,977 Develop a SLUA training and exercise program that includes and ensures that all jurisdictions in the SLUA meet a minimum standard of training and exercise. , C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Public Outreach $20,000 Develop and produce DVD's for distribution to the community. Individuals,families,businesses and community organizations would be encouraged to: 1) participate in available training,2) learn about available training opportunities,and 3)support on- going community preparedness activities and opportunities. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Contract-Capacity $151,382 The funds would be used to Development develop program protocols, including identifying and assessing various risks,such as, economic,hazard,and the potential of disasters. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UA81) 10 Channel Intelligence $750,000 Backup system to the City's Repeater Truck existing fixed repeater sites. C-2 (SLC-EMS-UASI) Training for Mayors and $319,359 Councils and Purchase of Remaining Equipment for two MITS trucks Subtotal-Item C-2 $2,170,078 Total-Items B-2 and C-2 $2,900,078 Page 18 • OThis budget amendment establishes the revenue budget of$2,170,078,the expenditure budget of$2,024,541 and reimburses the grant holding account for$145,537,which had been previously approved on the Council's consent agenda. The Administration classified the following as: Housekeeping D-1: Public Utilities Storm Water Carryover ($168,000) and Two New Projects ($1.035,000)for a Total of$1,203,000(Source:Storm Water Fund) This amount represents the amount requested to be carried over for storm water fund capital projects, specifically the storm water line on 4000 West and 700 South, and two new projects related to the City's other street improvement projects: 500 South to 700 South from the Surplus Canal to Gladiola(current SAA before the Council on January 11) in the amount of$650,000,and 1700 East Yalecrest Avenue in the amount of$385,000. Since the fiscal year ends on June 30th of each year in the middle of a normal summer construction period, it is common for funding to be split between budget years. This is a normal practice of carrying over funding for construction projects which are in progress. On June 30, 2010, unexpended appropriations lapsed in accordance with State law. The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward, or `carryover" the appropriations for existing construction projects in progress of$168,000. The Council already processed one carryover for the Storm Water Fund in Budget Amendment No.2 for some of the larger carryover projects. D-2: Public Utilities Water Carryover($1,755,900) and One New Project ($650,000) IS for a Total of$2,405,900(Source:Water Fund) This amount represents the amount requested to be carried over for water fund capital projects, specifically water line projects that were under construction since last fiscal year, plus a new project related to the City's other street improvement projects:500 South to 700 South from the Surplus Canal to Gladiola(current SAA before the Council on January 11) in the amount of$650,000. Since the fiscal year ends on June 30th of each year in the middle of a normal summer construction period, it is common for funding to be split between budget years. This is a normal practice of carrying over funding for construction projects which are in progress. On June 30, 2010, unexpended appropriations lapsed in accordance with State law. The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward, or "carryover" the appropriations for existing construction projects in progress of$1,755,900. D-3:Public Utilities Sewer Carryover($4,127,200) This amount represents the amount requested to be carried over for sewer fund capital projects and for sewer line and sewer treatment projects that have been under construction since last fiscal year. Since the fiscal year ends on June 30th of each year in the middle of a normal summer construction period, it is common for funding to be split between budget years. This is a normal practice of carrying over funding for construction projects which are in progress. On June 30, 2010, unexpended appropriations lapsed in accordance with State law. The Administration is requesting that the Council bring forward, or `carryover" the appropriations for existing construction projects in progress of$4,127,200. Page 19 The Council already processed one carryover for the Sewer Fund in Budget Amendment No. 2 for two of the major carryover projects such as the 1800 North Sewer Trunk Line and the Sewer Treatment Plant Digester Roof Replacement projects. D-4: Request for increase to Grant Holding Account($1,000,000) The Administration is requesting the Council increase the grant holding account(currently $1 million),by another million,bringing it to$2 million. This would allow the Administration greater flexibility to spend grant funds more immediately once awarded. In the past 6 months the City has received over$6 million in grant funds. Sometimes the award is made at a time not around a regularly-scheduled budget amendment. The Council may wish to discuss only increasing the grand holding account for grants with no staffing impact and/or no match required. D-5:Request for increase to Donations Fund Holding Account($58,899.16) The Administration utilizes a"master budget"for donation receipts and related interest earned. This allows the Administration to have the necessary appropriation so that as donations or interest income are received,they can have quick access to the funds.The budget is generally kept at$100,000 and restored as donations come in and the appropriation is spent down. In Budget Amendment#2 for FY 2010,the Council replenished the$100,000 allocation for interest on existing and new donations. The appropriation has already been allocated to individual funds. The Administration requests an appropriation of$58,899.16 to replace donations already used. Attached to item D-5 in the transmittal is a list of the current donation amounts and projects. D-6:Grants Carryover Adjustments(-$78,411) The Administration normally requests a carryover for grants that have been started but were not completed by the end of the fiscal year.This step was processed in Budget Amendment No.2,however the Administration reports that since then some adjustments were made to grant expenditures for the 2009-10 fiscal year.The adjustments require that grant account funds be corrected and reduced.This is a decrease to the budget. The Administration classified the following as: Grants Requiring No New Staff Resources E-1: U.S.Dept.of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,Paul Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement Grant($106,000—Source:Grant Fund) The Salt Lake City Police Department received a grant under the FY 2010 Paul Coverdell Forensic Science Improvement Program. Funds awarded are to be used to improve the quality and timeliness of forensic science and medical examiner services and/or to eliminate the backlogs experienced in forensic labs. Forensic evidence analysis includes testing related to controlled substances,firearms,pathology,latent prints,toxicology,and trace evidence. The Police Department proposes to use the grant funds as follows: Page 20 • Purpose Amount Additional Information Equipment/Training $23,200 Crime-lite - Portable equipment used primarily by forensic investigators to detect evidence from crime scenes. Equipment/Training $62,000 DCS 4 - Workstation for recording and enhancement of latent fingerprints. Equipment/Training $20,800 SICAR 6 -A system that uses a coding technique to characterize shoe prints and tire treads. This forms the basis for the database search and match operations. The process, which takes no longer than a minute or two, enables the operator to create a coded description of a pattern. This budget request establishes the revenue and expenditure budgets for this grant. E-2: U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development, Community Challenge Planning and Dept. of Transportation TIGER H Planning Grants - TRAX Line Area Plans and Sustainable Zoning ($22,620 - Source: Grant Fund) The City received a $22,620 Grant from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) under the TIGER II Planning Grants program, to develop station area plans and specific zoning codes for the three existing light rail stations along the 400 South portion of the University TRAX line (Library Station, Trolley Square Station, 900 East Station). The goal of the plans would be to identify redevelopment opportunities, promote construction of affordable housing, and re-write the zoning to accomplish these goals. The plans will be developed through a public outreach and community visioning process. The grant requires a 20% match, which the City will provide with the dedication of existing staff resources. The expected timeline for the project is 24 months. The Council may wish to ask the Administration for more detail about the Community Visioning process. E-3: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office on Violence Against Women - Salt Lake Elder Abuse Project Grant($400,000 - Source: Grant Fund) The Police Department has received a grant to fund programs for victims of elder abuse, in collaboration with other local and state agencies. The funds provide training, response systems, and enhanced delivery of services to older adult female victims of abuse. The grant will be divided into the following: o $164,739 Utah Adult Protective Services to hire a caseworker to investigate reported incidents, and provide services and support o 129,890 Support outreach and services o 86,841 Salt Lake County DA Office for a part-time victim advocate and counselor o 18,530 Travel and training costs for various agency employees, judges, police III) department personnel Page 21 The majority of this grant was previously approved on the Council's consent agenda. This budget item would receive the balance of the grant funds, and replenish the City's grant holding account. The Administration classified the following as: Donations F-1: Rio Tinto Donation-City's Climate Showcase Communities($10,000-Grant Fund) In Budget Amendment No.2 of 2009-10,the City set the budget for a grant program to implement a Sustainable Transportation for a Sustainable Future program.The STSF program is a partnership with the County,Salt Lake Solutions,UDOT,Utah Clean Cities Coalition and Rio Tinto. This budget item accepts the$10,000 donation from Rio Tinto as their portion to meet the grant match requirement. The program,as a reminder,is a social messaging outreach/education program that will encourage behavioral changes throughout the County to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution through fewer driven miles. In addition to funding travel,grant monitoring,conferences,surveys,and other contracts,$214,055 of the grant is funding a program manager position over three-years. The Administration classified the following as: Council Consent Agenda-Grant Awards already approved by Council action G-1: Utah Dept.of Health,Bureau of Emergency Medical Services and Preparedness Grant($30,109- Source:Grant Fund) G-2: Office of National Drug Control,Rocky Mountain High Intensity Drug Trafficking Agency Grant ($65,354-Source: Grant Fund) G-3: U.S.Dept.of Health&Human Services,Drug Free Communities Support Grant($125,000-Source: Grant Fund) G-4: Utah Quality Growth Commission,Jordan River Riverview Open Space Land Acquisition($167,000 -Source: Grant Fund) "This item was previously funded by the grant holding account. This request will reimburse the grant holding account. The Administration classified the following as: Follow-up on Previously Approved Items NONE Council Added Items Approving CDBG funds for Council Budget- In the FY 2011 CDBG Budget process the Council conditionally approved$91,709 in CDBG funds to use in the Council Office budget,similar to administrative funds approved for the Attomey's Office, Mayor's Office,Housing and Neighborhood Development,and Finance. The Council at the time wanted to wait for a Budget Amendment to finalize the approval of these funds. This action would allow these funds to be used for staff as it relates to community outreach and the CDBG process,in CDBG-eligible census tracks. Staff will work with the Administration to ensure that these funds will be used for eligible expenses only. Page 22 • NAkti A.7 Rum n 1A4 'rf .fg .ffAdw MEMORANDUM DATE: February 8, 2011 TO: Council Members FROM: Sylvia Richards SUBJECT: Collective Bargaining & Employee Representation Joint Resolution CC: David Everitt, Ed Rutan, Margaret Plane and Brian Roberts BACKGROUND: On January 13, 2009, the City Council and Mayor Becker adopted a Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution allowing employee organizations to represent certain groups of City employees. The City has also entered into a series of Memoranda of Understanding with each of the employee groups. The Administration has held a series of meetings with the unions to discuss potential revisions to the Joint Resolution to more accurately reflect the relationship between the City, the employees and union groups. Administrative staff indicates that all • employee groups are now recommending that the Administration and Council enter into the attached updated Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution. Please refer to the Administration's legislative draft (Exhibit "A") which shows the recommended changes in legislative format PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE JOINT RESOLUTION: 1. Bargaining Process Modification: The proposed language more accurately describes the actions the Council may take in the event the union group and the Mayor are unable to reach consensus on a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) prior to the end of a fiscal year. The revisions state that "the Mayor shall recommend the City Council adopt a one-year compensation plan for the affected work group and/or approve a one-year extension of the existing Memorandum of Understanding." In addition, if agreement is not reached on a wage schedule, "the Mayor shall recommend the City Council implement a wage schedule for that union's eligible employees." 2. Petition Process for Representation: The joint resolution now includes a window of time (September 1, 2013 to November 30, 2013) by which a group of employees seeking to be eligible for representation by one of the unions can petition the Mayor. 3. Employee Classification References: All references to employee classifications such as "100, 400, 500" series employees have been deleted from the joint resolution to reflect the Ochanges made to the City's pay structure last year. Page 1 4. 2009 Voting Process: References to the 2009 voting process were removed from the joint resolution as this was a one-time process. O 5. Decertification Petition Process Clarification: A petition for decertification now requires the name of the group(s) of employees whom the petition seeks to remove from representation by a union. Specific filing requirements are also outlined. Page 2 RECEIVEDRECEIVED <i <aur ,� `� �t► JAN 2 4 2011 EDWIN P.RUTAN,II LAW DEPARTMENT Salt LakkaL it ►c ayor CITY ATTORNEY MAY CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL SCANNED TO: SCANNED BY: DATE: Date Received: i 0 Davi• veritt, hief of Staff Date sent to Council: Ol 1 SS 12.610 TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: January 24, 2011 J.T. Martin, Chair FROM: Ed Rutan, City Attorney(x7628) SUBJECT: Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution STAFF CONTACT: Margaret Plane/Senior City Attorney(x7610) DOCUMENT TYPE: Joint Resolution RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends the City Council enter into the attached Joint Resolution. BUDGET IMPACT: None BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: On January 13, 2009, the City Council and the Mayor adopted a Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution ("Joint Resolution")which replaced the Third Amended Labor Bargaining Resolution, Resolution 41 of 1984. The Joint Resolution recognized the City's collective bargaining relationship with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004, AFL-CIO ("AFSCME") on behalf of non-management employees; the International Association of Firefighters Local 1645, AFL-CIO ("IAFF") on behalf of Salt Lake City firefighters; and the Salt Lake Police Association, International Union of Police Associations, Local 75, AFL-CIO ("SLPA") on behalf of Salt Lake City police 451 SOUTH STATE STREET,ROOM 505, P.O.Box 145478,SALT LAKE CITY,UT 84114-5478 TELEPHONE: 801-535-7788 FAX: 801-535-7640 ✓RECYCLED PAPER officers (collectively "unions"). The Joint Resolution required City employees to reaffirm their desire to have the applicable union continue to represent them for the purpose of collective bargaining. The Joint Resolution also allowed certain groups who had been historically associated with each union to become eligible for representation. In January 2009, the City held elections for each of the groups. Approximately Ninety-One Percent (91%) of the employees eligible to be represented by AFSCME voted to be represented by AFSCME. Approximately Ninety-Five Percent (95%) of the Firefighters and Fire Captains voted to be represented by the IAFF. Ninety-Nine Percent (99%) of the Police Officers voted to continue to be represented by the SLPA. The Police Sergeants narrowly voted (27-24) to have the SLPA represent them. In January 2010, a group of Police Sergeants filed a petition to decertify the SLPA as their representative. After holding a decertification hearing, the Mayor decided to hold another vote to determine the Police Sergeants' collective will. That vote was 27 in favor of decertification, 13 in favor of continued representation, 1 abstention, and 9 Police Sergeants failing to vote. Given this result, the Mayor determined that the SLPA would no longer represent the Police Sergeants for the purposes of collective bargaining. Subsequently, the City and SLPA entered into a Memorandum of Understanding related to the terms and conditions of employment for Police Officers and the Council approved the MOU as part of last year's budget process. The Joint Resolution required "the Mayor or designee and the unions" to "meet and confer to discuss any modifications to the Resolution's terms and jointly report the results of such meeting to the City Council no later than April 1, 2011." The Mayor's designee (Ralph Chamness), AFSCME, IAFF and SLPA have engaged in several 2 meetings to discuss proposed changes to the Joint Resolution. The attached changes to the Joint Resolution reflect those meetings; the Mayor and the three unions all recommend the City Council agree to these suggested changes. The proposed Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution revises several provisions of the current Joint Resolution in order to reflect the current reality of the City's relationship with its unions and to address several lessons learned during the Police Sergeants' decertification petition. The following are highlights of the proposed changes: 1) definitions which have created some confusion among City employees have been clarified; • 2) all references to the 2009 voting process have been deleted; 3) the Joint Resolution's language related to the bargaining process has been slightly modified. The modified language better reflects the possible actions the City Council may take in the event the Mayor and a union are unable to reach agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding before the end of a fiscal year. a. Specifically, if the Mayor and a union are unable to reach agreement, the resolution states that "the Mayor shall recommend the City Council adopt a one-year compensation plan for the affected work group and/or approve a one-year extension of the existing Memorandum of Understanding." 3 b. Similarly, if agreement is not reached on a wage schedule, "the Mayor shall recommend the City Council implement a wage schedule for that union's eligible empoloyees." 4) the Petition process now includes a window of time (September 1, 2013 to November 30, 2013) during which a group of employees can petition the Mayor seeking to be eligible for representation by one of the unions; 5) the Petition process related to decertification of a union has been clarified. It now requires a petition to include the name of the group(s) of employees whom the petition seeks to remove from representation by a union. Filing requirements are also specified; and 6) the proposed Resolution requires the Mayor or designee to meet with the unions and recommend any changes to the Resolution's terms to the City Council by April 1, 2014. The changes are reflected in a legislative version of the Joint Resolution attached as Exhibit "A." A clean version is attached as Exhibit"B." Statements from each of the unions outlining their support for the changes are attached as Exhibit "C." PUBLIC PROCESS: See above. 4 Resolution of 20092011 Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution Adopting a joint resolution recognizing Salt Lake City's existing relationship with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004, AFL-CIO ("AFSCME"); the International Association of Firefighters Local 1645, AFL-CIO ("IAFF"); and the Salt Lake Police Association, International Union of Police Associations, Local 75, AFL-CIO ("SLPA"), authorizing the continuation of those relationships, recognizing the role collective bargaining plays in those relationships and establishing the guidelines for collective bargaining. WHEREAS, Utah law allows Salt Lake City to establish rules and regulations which are not inconsistent with Utah law; and WHEREAS, the residents of Salt Lake City are entitled to the orderly and uninterrupted operations of their government; and WHERAS, the City has committedstrives to: engage employees in training and career development; engage employees in organizational improvements; provide a fair, respectful, cooperative, and safe work environment; ensure accountability of employees, supervisors, and managers; celebrate success and achievement with City employees; and support employees' work/life balance; and WHEREAS, discussions with employees related to the terms and conditions of their employment will enable City management to increase productivity, fiscal stability and ensure a high level of employee morale; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council and the Salt Lake City Mayor agree that it is in the best interest of Salt Lake City and its employees to allow certain groups of employees to collectively bargain; and WHEREAS, collective bargaining allows Salt Lake City and its employees to jointly promote harmonious and cooperative relationships between City government and its employees, both collectively and individually; and WHEREAS, the City has a history of successfully negotiating agreements relating to the terms and conditions of employment with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004, AFL-CIO; the International Association of Firefighters Local 1 1645, AFL-CIO; and the Salt Lake Police Association, International Union of Police Associations, Local 75, AFL-CIO; anti WHEREAS, in February 2009, employees eligible for union representation reaffirmed their desire to be represented through collective bargaining; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council and the Mayor agree that this Resolution replaces the Third Amended LaborCollective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution, Resolution 11 of 1984 dated January 13, 2009, and will establish the outline of how to achieve these goals. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby jointly declared by the Salt Lake City Council and the Salt Lake City Mayor as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Resolution: (a) "AFSCME" means the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004, AFL-CIO. (b) "CITY" means Salt Lake City, a Utah municipal corporation. (c) "CONFIDENTIAL EMPLOYEE"means an employee identified by the City who has access to information relating to the City's formation, execution, administration or review of the City's bargaining positions. ( (c) "ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEE" means any person who is employed on a full time basis by the City except for: (1) Elected officials; (2) An employee in the probationary period of his/her original appointment as defined by City policy; (3) Any"at-will" employee; (4) Any administrator, manager or supervisor who may have direct charge of an employee or any group of employees..-; (5) Any employee assigned towho regularly performs the Mayor's Officeduty of a manager or supervisor in direct charge of an employee or any group of employees; (6) Any employee assigned to the Mayor's Office, City Council's Office, City Attorney's Office, or Human Resources; and 2 (7) Any employee designated by the City. (e(7) Any employee designated by the City because the employee has access to information relating to the City's formation, execution, administration or review of the City's bargaining positions, the administration of any Memorandum of Understanding, management functions or whose position is not properly part of a bargaining unit. (d) "EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION"means AFSCME, IAFF or SLPA. (fe) "EMPLOYER" means Salt Lake City Corporation. (gf) "EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE" or"EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATIVE UNIT" or "CERTIFIED EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION"means AFSCME, IAFF or SLPA (individually "union" and collectively"unions"). (hg) "IAFF" means the International Association of Firefighters, Local 1645, AFL-CIO. (ill) "IMPASSE"means a deadlock in negotiation between a union and the City over any matters required to be negotiated in this Resolution, or over the scope of the subject matter of negotiations. (}i) "LEGISLATIVE BODY"means the Salt Lake City Council. (lei) "NEGOTIATION"means the good faith process by which the City and the unions meeta union meet to confer regarding wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment, and includes the obligation to sign a document outlining the parties' agreement. (Ik) "SLPA" means the Salt Lake Police Association, International Union of Police Associations, Local 75, AFL-CIO. (ml) "STRIKE" means: (1) The concerted failure to report for duty; (2) The concerted absence of employees from their positions; (3) The concerted stoppage of work; (4) The concerted submission of resignations; 3 (5) The concerted abstinence, in whole or in part, by any group of employees from the full, faithful and proper performance of the duties of employment for the City for the purpose of inducing, influencing, condoning or coercing a change in the terms and conditions of employment, including sick calls, sick-outs, slow- downs or any other concerted interference with services provided by the City; or (6) The collective concerted withholding of services or the performance of duties by any person or persons pending the signing of contracts, including those persons who are customarily employed on a yearly contract basis. (nm) "TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT"means wages, salaries, working conditions, hours and benefits except as specifically modified in this Resolution. 2. CITY RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS. (a) The City has the exclusive right to determine the mission of each of its departments, divisions, boards and commissions, consistent with Utah statutes, City ordinances and the provisions of this Resolution, and to set standards of service to be offered to the public, and to exercise control and discretion over its organization and operation. (b) It is the exclusive right of the City to: (1) Hire and direct its employees; (2) Classify its employees for compensation purposes; (3) Take disciplinary action for proper cause; (4) Relieve its employees from duty because of lack of work, lack of funds, as a result of a reorganization or any other legitimate reason; (5) Maintain the efficiency of its governmental operation; (6) Determine the method, means and personnel by which the City's operations are to be conducted; and (7) Take whatever actions the City deems necessary to carry out its responsibilities in emergency situations of an emergency. (c) The City intends to: 4 (1) Negotiate in good faith with the unions; (2) Compensate its employees in a fiscally responsible manner; (3) Provide, subject to the availability of funds: (i) appropriate training to union officers, board members and stewards; (ii) appropriate labor management committees and processes; and (iii) paid time for each union's officers, board members and stewards to conduct appropriate unienLabor/Management related business. (4) Meet and confer with a union prior to making a decision to privatize any City function which would impact any employee represented by a unionresult in an eligible employee losing her or his current position with the City; (5) Meet and confer with a union prior to designating an employee as ineligible for union representation; and (6) Notify the appropriate union prior to reclassifying an employee's position in a manner which makes the employee ineligible for further union representation. 3. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS. (a) Eligible employees have the right to form,join and participate in union activities for the purpose of representation on all matters of employee relations described in this Resolution. (b) City employees have the right to refuse to join or participate in any union activity and have the right to represent themselves individually in their employment relations with the City. (c) An eligible employee has the right to not participate in any and all union activities. No union shall coerce an eligible employee into joining, participating, assisting, supporting or in any other way contributing to the success or operation of a union. No eligible employee shall be interfered with, intimidated, restrained, coerced or discriminated against because of the exercise, or refusal to exercise, any of the rights contained in this Resolution. 5 (d) This Resolution shall not prevent any employee: (1) From bringing personal concerns to City officials' attention; (2) From acting in his/her own behalf or choosing her/his own representative in a grievance or judicial action; or (3) From enjoying without discrimination, all employment rights and benefits granted by the City. 4. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING REPRESENTATION BY AFSCMELIST OF ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES. (a) Employees currently classified as "100 series" employees may choose to a r n�SCME ,•the„u pose of collectively bargaining on their b decertification. (b) The City will designate employees who arc not currently classified in the of collectively barg • • •r cn°i r n > > to c a representation. No supervisory employee or employee otherwise ineligible for union membc 5. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING REPF ESEN r n r ION BY I n FF o; ELIGIB E EMPLOYEES. (a) Employees currently classified as "400 series" employees may choose to • of all eligible employees casting votes vote for decertification. (b) Employees currently classified as "Fire Captains" may choose to be b 50% of all such employees vote for such representation. 6. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING REPRESENTATION BY SLPA OF ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES. b if over 66% of all el' ' b • • (b) Employees currently classified as "Police Sergeants"may choose to be represents 50% of all such employees vote 6 7. REPRESENTATION OF EMPLOYEE GROUPS WHO CHOOSE NOT TO BE REPRESENTED BY AFSCME, IAFF OR SLPA. If employees in any group outlined in paragraphs 4 6 vote not to be represented by AFSCME, IAFF or SLPA for the purpose of collectively bargaining, they shall not be represented by the applicable union for the purpose of collectively bargaining. The City will meet and confer with any such group to discuss their 8. REPRESENTATION OF OTHER EMPLOYEE GROUPS. Each City department head shall represent their department's employees who are not eligible to be represented by one of the recognized unions during the City's annual compensation plan development process. 9. EXCLUDED EMPLOYEES. The City shall annually provide each union a list of supervisory, confidential and elected employees,- eligible to be represented by that union. The City will not enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with any union which represents or bargains for an individual who is not on the list. 10. ELECTION AND BALLOTING PROCEDURE. (a) The City, in a form approved by the City Attorney, will issue ballots to employees eligible to vote in any election under this Resolution. (b) The City will provide to each eligible employee a blank envelope into which the employee shall place a sealed ballot envelope and concise b b blank envelope, signing the blank envc envelope and the ballot envelope to the City Recorder or designee. (c) Ballots must be received by the Recorder within fourteen (11) calendar days from the date the ballots--kre-made-availa'blehe- -Recorder wi-Il be responsible for: i) verifying the name appearing on the blank envelope way to ensure the anonymity of each voter; and, iii) tabulating the ballot returns and reporting the election results to the Mayor and City Council. Each group shall be allowed to designate a representative to observe the ballot tabulation. 7 -1-1-5. CITY BARGAINING TEAM; DISCUSSIONS THROUGH NEGOTIATIONS. The Mayor will provide the unions the name of the City's chief negotiator at least five (5) months prior to the expiration of any agreement with the union. The chief negotiator will represent the City in all bargaining and labor negotiations pursuant to the terms of this Resolution. All proposals and negotiations with and by the unions shall be handled by the chief negotiator who shall report and be directly responsible to the Mayor. -126. GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATIONS; MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. (a) The City's chief negotiator and union representatives will meet to negotiate in good faith issues related to wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment. The City's chief negotiator and the unions will fully consider any proposals presented during negotiations. The City's chief negotiator and the unions will: (1) Submit proposals related to attempt to reach an agreement on eligible employees' wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment no later than two (2) weeks prior to the agreed upon date for negotiations to begin; (2) Attempt to reach agreement prior to the submission of a budget by the Mayor to the City Council;. The City and (3) Jointly the unions will jointly discuss employees' compensation issues prior to negotiations in an effort to foster better communication concerning the City's budget process, the impact that process has on employee'semployees' compensation, and the methods of determining employees' compensation. The City's chief negotiator and the unions will not use this process to avoid their obligation to negotiate. Provided, however, theThe scope of bargaining shall be restricted and shall not include those subjects which the City has no authority to change and shall not infringe on the City's Rights outlined in Paragraph 2 of this Resolution. Negotiations will not include any issues already provided for by Utah law and/or1 City Ordinance or related to the Civil Service or Merit Systems. (b) If the City's chief negotiator and a union reach an agreement, they will jointly prepare a written Memorandum of Understanding containing the terms of their agreement. A Memorandum of Understanding is a joint recommendation which the City's chief negotiator and the union will provide to the Mayor no later than May 15, or at a later date in the event negotiations are reopened. If the City's chief negotiator and a union are unable to reach agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding, the City-Mayor shall implementrecommend the City Council adopt a one-year compensation plan for the affected work group 8 and/or approve a one-year extension of the existing Memorandum of Understanding. (c) If the City and a union are unable to agree on a wage schedule for a Fiscal Year during the term of a Memorandum of Understanding, the Mayor shall recommend the City Council implement a wage schedule for that union's eligible employees. The Memorandum of Understanding will not be binding upon the parties, either in whole or in part, until a majority of the members of the applicable union have ratified the Memorandum of Understanding by a majority vote, and until the City Council: el-a) Acts by majority vote to approve the Memorandum of Understanding; (2b) Enacts ordinances or makes other changes required to implement the Memorandum of Understanding; (3c) Appropriates the funds required to implement the Memorandum of Understanding which requires funding for each year of its existence. (d) After the execution of the(d) If the City Council fails to appropriate the funds required to implement a proposed Memorandum of Understanding or wage schedule, the City Council shall adopt a one-year compensation plan, or wage schedule for the affected work group and/or approve a one- year extension of the existing Memorandum of Understanding. (e) After the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding and while the Memorandum of Understanding is pending before the City Council for action, neither the Recognized Employee Organization or their individual members, nor the Mayor shall appear before the City Council or its members, to advocate for any amendment, addition or deletion to the terms and conditions of the Memorandum of Understanding's agreed upon language. (c) Allf) Each Memorandum of Understanding must contain a provision prohibiting strikes or lock-outs. Each Memorandum of Understanding shall have a term of at least one year. It is expressly understood that no Memoranda of Understanding may or can bind succeeding Mayors or Councils. (fg) A Memorandum of Understanding will be enforceable when entered into in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. No publication of it shall be required to make it effective. 9 (gh) Nothing in a Memorandum of Understanding shall prevent the City and a union from identifying and discussing issues related to the tenns and conditions of employees' employment during the term of an existing Memorandum of Understanding. 13.7. CLOSED DOOR NEGOTIATIONS. Collective bargaining meetings and negotiations between the City and unions and any deliberations of mediators shall be considered private and may be conducted in closed door or executive sessions, without the right of the public to be present, if the parties to the negotiations so decide. -1-48. RESOLUTION OF IMPASSES. (a) If the City's chief negotiator and the unions area union is unable to reach an agreement by May 15, either party may declare that an impasse exists and the matter shall be submitted to the Mayor and the City Council for resolution. (b) Nothing in this Resolution will preclude theThe City's chief negotiator er-and a union fremmay jointly requestingrequest the services of an outside mediator. The costs associated with any outside mediator shall be equally borne by the City and the union making the request. (c) If the City's chief negotiator and a union reach impasse on any issue related to compensation, the City and/or the applicable union may discuss the issue directly with the Mayor and/or City Council. 15.9. PROCEDURAL RIGHTS. The City shall have the right to promulgate rules and regulations governing union activity, including procedures for meeting with management, use of bulletin boards and other publicly owned facilities, and the solicitation of membership during business hours. 1 61 0. COURT DECLARATION. Should any court declare any provision of this Resolution void, invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, the whole Resolution shall be deemed rescinded, repealed and of no effect. 17.11. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES. (a) Utah law prohibits the City, its representatives or agents from: 10 (1) Restraining or coercing or interfering with any employee in the exercise of rights guaranteed under this Resolution; (2) Discriminating against one employee organization in favor of another employee organization; (3) Discharging or otherwise discriminating against any employee with reference to terms and conditions of employment for the purpose of encouraging or discouraging membership, support or participation in any labor organization or because the employee has signed or filed an affidavit, petition or complaint, or given any information or testimony under this Resolution; (4) Refusing to negotiate in good faith with an Employee Organization designated as the exclusive representative of employees in an appropriate unit; or (5) Locking out employees. (b) Utah law prohibits the unions, their agents or employees, and where appropriate, City employees from: (1) Restraining or coercing or interfering with employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed under this Resolution, including but not limited to, attempting to cause the City to discriminate against an employee in violation of such employee's rights under this Resolution or other applicable law; (2) Restraining or coercing the City in the selection of a representative for purposes of collective bargaining or the adjustment of grievances; (3) Refusing to negotiate in good faith with the City, if the organization has been designated the exclusive representative of a group of employees; or (4) Engaging in a strike, or encouraging, aiding or abetting any City employee to engage in any strike, which are in addition to being prohibited, are declared to be illegal. (c) Every union and its officers and agents shall have an affirmative duty to take immediate, appropriate and effective affirmative action to end an employee strike or work stoppage. 18. PETITION FOR DECEDTIFICAT ION. 11 12. PETITIONS. (a) The City Council, the Mayor, or any employee, or group of employees, represented by AFSCME, IAFF or SLPA may file a petition alleging that the applicable union no longer represents the interests of a majority of the employees eligible for representation by the applicable union. The petition must contain: i) a statement outlining the basis for the petition; ii) a declaration by the person signing it that its contents are true and correct; and, nun) the name of the group or groups of employees the petition seeks to remove from representation by a union; and, iv) the signature of the person or persons filing the petition. The original and two (2) copies of the petition shall be filed with the City Recorder. (b) AFSCME, IAFF or SLPA may file a petition asking the Mayor to include a group of employees as eligible for representation by the applicable union. The petition must contain: i) a statement outlining the basis for the petition; ii) a declaration by the president of the union signing it that its contents are true and correct; iii) the name of the group or groups of employees the petition seeks to include as represented by a union; and, iv) the signature of the president of the union filing the petition. The original and two (2) copies of the petition shall be filed with the City Recorder. (c) 19A petition under this section will only be considered if it is filed between September 1, 2013 and November 30, 2013. 13. NOTICE AND HEARING ON PETITIONPETITIONS. (a) No later than ten calendar days after the City Recorder receives a petition for decertification, the City shall provide a copy to the union named in the petition. (b) If the City determines that the petition meets the requirements of this Resolution, it will require a public hearing be held to discuss the petition. The City will provide the petitioner and the affected union at least fourteen (14) calendar days written notice of the time and place of the hearing. (c) If the decertification petition was filed by the Mayor, the City Council, or designated representative, may conduct a prehearing conference with the petitioner and the affected union prior to a hearing in order to clarify any issues to be addressed at the hearing and to set a date for the public hearing on the petition. (d) If the decertification petition was filed by the City Council, the Mayor, or designated representative, may conduct a prehearing conference with the petitioner and the affected union prior to a hearing in order to clarify any 12 issues to be addressed at the hearing and to set a date for the public hearing on the petition. (e) If the decertification petition was filed by an employee or group of employees, the Mayor, or designated representative, may conduct a prehearing conference with the petitioner(s) and the affected union prior to a hearing in order to clarify any issues to be addressed at the hearing and to set a date for the public hearing on the petition. (0 Any hearing held pursuant to this Resolution will be limited to the issues outlined in the petition. (g) The City Council or the Mayor shall have the discretion to determine the public hearing. (h) The City Council or the Mayor may determine majority representation status by holding a vote of the employees eligible to be represented by the applicable union or the group of employees impacted by the petition. (+h) The City Council or the Mayor shall issue a written decision addressing each issue raised in the petition and the basis for the decision no later than 30 calendar days after the public hearing on the petition. 20. 14. TERM. Prior to March 31, 2-.0142014, the Mayor or designee and the unions shall meet and confer to discuss any modifications to the Resolution's terms and jointly report the results of such meeting to the City Council no later than April 1, 2-0 42014. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 204 92011. Carlton Christensen.IT Martin CHAIR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER 13 Resolution of 2011 Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution Adopting a joint resolution recognizing Salt Lake City's existing relationship with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004, AFL-CIO ("AFSCME"); the International Association of Firefighters Local 1645, AFL-CIO ("IAFF"); and the Salt Lake Police Association, International Union of Police Associations, Local 75, AFL-CIO ("SLPA"), authorizing the continuation of those relationships, recognizing the role collective bargaining plays in those relationships and establishing the guidelines for collective bargaining. WHEREAS, Utah law allows Salt Lake City to establish rules and regulations which are not inconsistent with Utah law; and WHEREAS, the residents of Salt Lake City are entitled to the orderly and uninterrupted operations of their government; and WHERAS, the City strives to: engage employees in training and career development; engage employees in organizational improvements; provide a fair, respectful, cooperative, and safe work environment; ensure accountability of employees, supervisors, and managers; celebrate success and achievement with City employees; and support employees' work/life balance; and WHEREAS, discussions with employees related to the terms and conditions of their employment will enable City management to increase productivity, fiscal stability and ensure a high level of employee morale; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council and the Salt Lake City Mayor agree that it is in the best interest of Salt Lake City and its employees to allow certain groups of employees to collectively bargain; and WHEREAS, collective bargaining allows Salt Lake City and its employees to jointly promote harmonious and cooperative relationships between City government and its employees, both collectively and individually; and WHEREAS, the City has a history of successfully negotiating agreements relating to the terms and conditions of employment with the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004, AFL-CIO; the International Association of Firefighters Local 1 1645, AFL-CIO; and the Salt Lake Police Association, International Union of Police Associations, Local 75, AFL-CIO; WHEREAS, in February 2009, employees eligible for union representation reaffirmed their desire to be represented through collective bargaining; and WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council and the Mayor agree that this Resolution replaces the Collective Bargaining and Employee Representation Joint Resolution dated January 13, 2009, and will establish the outline of how to achieve these goals. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby jointly declared by the Salt Lake City Council and the Salt Lake City Mayor as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS. As used in this Resolution: (a) "AFSCME"means the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, Local 1004, AFL-CIO. (b) "CITY"means Salt Lake City, a Utah municipal corporation. (c) "ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEE"means any person who is employed on a full time basis by the City except for: (1) Elected officials; (2) An employee in the probationary period of his/her original appointment as defined by City policy; (3) Any"at-will" employee; (4) Any administrator, manager or supervisor who may have direct charge of an employee or any group of employees; (5) Any employee who regularly performs the duty of a manager or supervisor in direct charge of an employee or any group of employees; (6) Any employee assigned to the Mayor's Office, City Council's Office, City Attorney's Office, or Human Resources; and (7) Any employee designated by the City because the employee has access to information relating to the City's formation, execution, administration or review of the City's bargaining positions, the administration of any Memorandum of Understanding, management functions or whose position is not properly part of a bargaining unit. 2 (d) "EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION"means AFSCME, IAFF or SLPA. (e) "EMPLOYER" means Salt Lake City Corporation. (f) "EXCLUSIVE REPRESENTATIVE" or"EMPLOYEE REPRESENTATIVE UNIT" or"CERTIFIED EMPLOYEE ORGANIZATION" means AFSCME, IAFF or SLPA (individually "union" and collectively "unions"). (g) "IAFF" means the International Association of Firefighters, Local 1645, AFL-CIO. (h) "IMPASSE"means a deadlock in negotiation between a union and the City over any matters required to be negotiated in this Resolution, or over the scope of the subject matter of negotiations. (i) "LEGISLATIVE BODY"means the Salt Lake City Council. 0) "NEGOTIATION"means the good faith process by which the City and a union meet to confer regarding wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment, and includes the obligation to sign a document outlining the parties' agreement. (k) "SLPA" means the Salt Lake Police Association, International Union of Police Associations, Local 75, AFL-CIO. (1) "STRIKE" means: (1) The concerted failure to report for duty; (2) The concerted absence of employees from their positions; (3) The concerted stoppage of work; (4) The concerted submission of resignations; (5) The concerted abstinence, in whole or in part, by any group of employees from the full, faithful and proper performance of the duties of employment for the City for the purpose of inducing, influencing, condoning or coercing a change in the terns and conditions of employment, including sick calls, sick-outs, slow- downs or any other concerted interference with services provided by the City; or 3 (6) The collective concerted withholding of services or the performance of duties by any person or persons pending the signing of contracts, including those persons who are customarily employed on a yearly contract basis. (m) "TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT" means wages, salaries, working conditions, hours and benefits except as specifically modified in this Resolution. 2. CITY RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS. (a) The City has the exclusive right to determine the mission of each of its departments, divisions, boards and commissions, consistent with Utah statutes, City ordinances and the provisions of this Resolution, and to set standards of service to be offered to the public, and to exercise control and discretion over its organization and operation. (b) It is the exclusive right of the City to: (1) Hire and direct its employees; (2) Classify its employees for compensation purposes; (3) Take disciplinary action for proper cause; (4) Relieve its employees from duty because of lack of work, lack of funds, as a result of a reorganization or any other legitimate reason; (5) Maintain the efficiency of its governmental operation; (6) Determine the method, means and personnel by which the City's operations are to be conducted; and (7) Take whatever actions the City deems necessary to carry out its responsibilities in emergency situations. (c) The City intends to: (1) Negotiate in good faith with the unions; (2) Compensate its employees in a fiscally responsible manner; (3) Provide, subject to the availability of funds: (i) appropriate training to union officers, board members and stewards; 4 (ii) appropriate labor management committees and processes; and (iii) paid time for each union's officers, board members and stewards to conduct appropriate Labor/Management related business. (4) Meet and confer with a union prior to making a decision to privatize any City function which would result in an eligible employee losing her or his current position with the City; (5) Meet and confer with a union prior to designating an employee as ineligible for union representation; and (6) Notify the appropriate union prior to reclassifying an employee's position in a manner which makes the employee ineligible for further union representation. 3. EMPLOYEE RIGHTS. (a) Eligible employees have the right to form,join and participate in union activities for the purpose of representation on all matters of employee relations described in this Resolution. (b) City employees have the right to refuse to join or participate in any union activity and have the right to represent themselves individually in their employment relations with the City. (c) An eligible employee has the right to not participate in any and all union activities. No union shall coerce an eligible employee into joining, participating, assisting, supporting or in any other way contributing to the success or operation of a union. No eligible employee shall be interfered with, intimidated, restrained, coerced or discriminated against because of the exercise, or refusal to exercise, any of the rights contained in this Resolution. (d) This Resolution shall not prevent any employee: (1) From bringing personal concerns to City officials' attention; (2) From acting in his/her own behalf or choosing her/his own representative in a grievance or judicial action; or (3) From enjoying without discrimination, all employment rights and benefits granted by the City. 5 4. LIST OF ELIGIBLE EMPLOYEES. • The City shall annually provide each union a list of employees eligible to be represented by that union. The City will not enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with any union which represents or bargains for an individual who is not on the list. 5. CITY BARGAINING TEAM; DISCUSSIONS THROUGH NEGOTIATIONS. The Mayor will provide the unions the name of the City's chief negotiator at least five (5) months prior to the expiration of any agreement with the union. The chief negotiator will represent the City in all bargaining and labor negotiations pursuant to the terms of this Resolution. All proposals and negotiations with and by the unions shall be handled by the chief negotiator who shall report and be directly responsible to the Mayor. 6. GOOD FAITH NEGOTIATIONS; MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING. The City's chief negotiator and union representatives will meet to negotiate in good faith issues related to wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment. The City's chief negotiator and the unions will fully consider any proposals presented during negotiations. The City's chief negotiator and the unions will attempt to reach an agreement on eligible employees' wages, hours and other terms and conditions of employment prior to the submission of a budget by the Mayor to the City Council. The City and the unions will jointly discuss employees' compensation issues prior to negotiations in an effort to foster better communication concerning the City's budget process, the impact that process has on employees' compensation, and the methods of determining employees' compensation. The City's chief negotiator and the unions will not use this process to avoid their obligation to negotiate. The scope of bargaining shall be restricted and shall not include those subjects which the City has no authority to change and shall not infringe on the City's Rights outlined in Paragraph 2 of this Resolution. Negotiations will not include any issues already provided for by Utah law, City Ordinance, or related to the Civil Service or Merit Systems. If the City's chief negotiator and a union reach an agreement, they will jointly prepare a written Memorandum of Understanding containing the terms of their agreement. A Memorandum of Understanding is a joint recommendation which the City's chief negotiator and the union will provide to the Mayor no later than May 15, or at a later date in the event negotiations are reopened. If the City's chief negotiator and a union are unable to reach agreement on a Memorandum of Understanding, the Mayor shall recommend the City Council 6 adopt a one-year compensation plan for the affected work group and/or approve a one-year extension of the existing Memorandum of Understanding. If the City and a union are unable to agree on a wage schedule for a Fiscal Year during the term of a Memorandum of Understanding, the Mayor shall recommend the City Council implement a wage schedule for that union's eligible employees. The Memorandum of Understanding will not be binding upon the parties, either in whole or in part, until a majority of the members of the applicable union have ratified the Memorandum of Understanding by a majority vote, and until the City Council: (a) Acts by majority vote to approve the Memorandum of Understanding; (b) Enacts ordinances or makes other changes required to implement the Memorandum of Understanding; (c) Appropriates the funds required to implement the Memorandum of Understanding which requires funding for each year of its existence. (d) If the City Council fails to appropriate the funds required to implement a proposed Memorandum of Understanding or wage schedule, the City Council shall adopt a one-year compensation plan, or wage schedule for the affected work group and/or approve a one-year extension of the existing Memorandum of Understanding. (e) After the execution of a Memorandum of Understanding and while the Memorandum of Understanding is pending before the City Council for action, neither the Recognized Employee Organization or their individual members, nor the Mayor shall appear before the City Council or its members, to advocate for any amendment, addition or deletion to the terms and conditions of the Memorandum of Understanding's agreed upon language. (f) Each Memorandum of Understanding must contain a provision prohibiting strikes or lock-outs. Each Memorandum of Understanding shall have a term of at least one year. It is expressly understood that no Memoranda of Understanding may or can bind succeeding Mayors or Councils. (g) A Memorandum of Understanding will be enforceable when entered into in accordance with the provisions of this Resolution. No publication of it shall be required to make it effective. (h) Nothing in a Memorandum of Understanding shall prevent the City and a union from identifying and discussing issues related to the terns and 7 conditions of employees' employment during the term of an existing Memorandum of Understanding. 7. CLOSED DOOR NEGOTIATIONS. Collective bargaining meetings and negotiations between the City and unions and any deliberations of mediators shall be considered private and may be conducted in closed door or executive sessions, without the right of the public to be present, if the parties to the negotiations so decide. 8. RESOLUTION OF IMPASSES. (a) If the City's chief negotiator and a union is unable to reach an agreement by May 15, either party may declare that an impasse exists and the matter shall be submitted to the Mayor and the City Council for resolution. (b) The City's chief negotiator and a union may jointly request the services of an outside mediator. The costs associated with any outside mediator shall be equally borne by the City and the union making the request. (c) If the City's chief negotiator and a union reach impasse on any issue related to compensation, the City and/or the applicable union may discuss the issue directly with the Mayor and/or City Council. 9. PROCEDURAL RIGHTS. The City shall have the right to promulgate rules and regulations governing union activity, including procedures for meeting with management, use of bulletin boards and other publicly owned facilities, and the solicitation of membership during business hours. 10. COURT DECLARATION. Should any court declare any provision of this Resolution void, invalid, illegal or unconstitutional, the whole Resolution shall be deemed rescinded, repealed and of no effect. 11. UNFAIR LABOR PRACTICES. (a) Utah law prohibits the City, its representatives or agents from: (1) Restraining or coercing or interfering with any employee in the exercise of rights guaranteed under this Resolution; (2) Discriminating against one employee organization in favor of another employee organization; 8 (3) Discharging or otherwise discriminating against any employee with reference to terms and conditions of employment for the purpose of encouraging or discouraging membership, support or participation in any labor organization or because the employee has signed or filed an affidavit, petition or complaint, or given any information or testimony under this Resolution; (4) Refusing to negotiate in good faith with an Employee Organization designated as the exclusive representative of employees in an appropriate unit; or (5) Locking out employees. (b) Utah law prohibits the unions, their agents or employees, and where appropriate, City employees from: (I) Restraining or coercing or interfering with employees in the exercise of the rights guaranteed under this Resolution, including but not limited to, attempting to cause the City to discriminate against an employee in violation of such employee's rights under this Resolution or other applicable law; (2) Restraining or coercing the City in the selection of a representative for purposes of collective bargaining or the adjustment of grievances; (3) Refusing to negotiate in good faith with the City, if the organization has been designated the exclusive representative of a group of employees; or (4) Engaging in a strike, or encouraging, aiding or abetting any City employee to engage in any strike, which are in addition to being prohibited, are declared to be illegal. (c) Every union and its officers and agents shall have an affirmative duty to take immediate, appropriate and effective affirmative action to end an employee strike or work stoppage. 12. PETITIONS. (a) The City Council, the Mayor, or any employee, or group of employees, represented by AFSCME, IAFF or SLPA may file a petition alleging that the applicable union no longer represents the interests of the employees eligible for representation by the applicable union. The petition must contain: i) a statement outlining the basis for the petition; ii) a declaration 9 by the person signing it that its contents are true and correct; iii) the name of the group or groups of employees the petition seeks to remove from representation by a union; and, iv) the signature of the person or persons filing the petition. The original and two (2) copies of the petition shall be filed with the City Recorder. (b) AFSCME, IAFF or SLPA may file a petition asking the Mayor to include a group of employees as eligible for representation by the applicable union. The petition must contain: i) a statement outlining the basis for the petition; ii) a declaration by the president of the union signing it that its contents are true and correct; iii) the name of the group or groups of employees the petition seeks to include as represented by a union; and, iv) the signature of the president of the union filing the petition. The original and two (2) copies of the petition shall be filed with the City Recorder. (c) A petition under this section will only be considered if it is filed between September 1, 2013 and November 30, 2013. 13. NOTICE AND HEARING ON PETITIONS. (a) No later than ten calendar days after the City Recorder receives a petition, the City shall provide a copy to the union named in the petition. (b) If the City determines that the petition meets the requirements of this Resolution, it will require a public hearing be held to discuss the petition. The City will provide the petitioner and the affected union at least fourteen (14) calendar days written notice of the time and place of the hearing. (c) If the petition was filed by the Mayor, the City Council, or designated representative, may conduct a prehearing conference with the petitioner and the affected union prior to a hearing in order to clarify any issues to be addressed at the hearing and to set a date for the public hearing on the petition. (d) If the petition was filed by the City Council, the Mayor, or designated representative, may conduct a prehearing conference with the petitioner and the affected union prior to a hearing in order to clarify any issues to be addressed at the hearing and to set a date for the public hearing on the petition. (e) If the petition was filed by an employee or group of employees, the Mayor, or designated representative, may conduct a prehearing conference with the petitioner(s) and the affected union prior to a hearing in order to clarify any issues to be addressed at the hearing and to set a date for the public hearing on the petition. 10 (f) Any hearing held pursuant to this Resolution will be limited to the issues outlined in the petition. (g) The City Council or the Mayor may determine majority representation status by holding a vote of the employees eligible to be represented by the applicable union or the group of employees impacted by the petition. (h) The City Council or the Mayor shall issue a written decision addressing each issue raised in the petition and the basis for the decision no later than 30 calendar days after the public hearing on the petition. 14. TERM. Prior to March 31, 2014, the Mayor or designee and the unions shall meet and confer to discuss any modifications to the Resolution's terms and jointly report the results of such meeting to the City Council no later than April 1, 2014. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2011. JT Martin CHAIR ATTEST: CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on the day of , 2011. Ralph Becker Mayor ATTEST: CITY RECORDER 11 SALT LAKE POLICE ASSOCIATION OLIO %j/�iii1\ Pociario International Union of Police Associations, Local 75, AFL-CIO • December 20, 2010 Members of the Salt Lake City Council: , The Salt Lake Police Association, Local 75, International Union of Police Associations, AFL-CIO wishes to extend our support for the proposed changes to the Collective Bargaining Resolution. The SLPA and City Administration have worked diligently to write mutually agreeable language that will ensure a consistent working environment. Please feel free to contact me if you have any concerns or questions. Respectfully, Tom Galleg President Salt Lake Police Association Local 75, I.U.P.A: AFL-CIO 801-799-3211 _. • • • 868 S. McClelland Street,Suite#3 • Salt Lake City, Utah 84102•(801)596-0354• Fax (801) 596-0354 On the Internet• www.slpa.com A I F Apy_ t0 CLC ® ,,. 7 December, 2010 Salt Lake City Corporation Salt Lake City's City Council Office Professional ATTN: Council and Staff members Fire Fighters 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 RE: Collective Bargaining Resolution Dear City Council's Staff, On behalf of the members of the Salt Lake City Fire Fighters, IAFF Local 1645, I would like to extend our support of the proposed changes to the Collective Bargaining Resolution of 2011, as presented by Ralph Chamness as an agent of the City Attorney's office. C Whereas the current version of the resolution has met our needs, the proposed changes will assist in exercising a more effective method of Aconducting labor relations between the City and the Salt Lake City Fire Fighters, IAFF Local 1645. We greatly appreciate your consideration on this matter. Feel free to contact the undersigned at (801) 718-4392. Respectfully, :9_ - K____---4—_ Jack Tidrow, President F1 Salt Lake City Fire Fighters, IAFF Local 1645 6 4 F 5 P.O. Box 316 Salt Lake City, Utah 84 1 1 0-03 1 6 'The shift may be over, but the caring never stops... ' 868 South McClelland Street AFSCME Salt Lake City, Utah 84102 801-532-1009 In State Toll Free 1-800-352-2001 UTAH LOCAL#1004 Fax 801-532-1064 Patty Rich Executive Director Executive Board StuartLawrence President December 16, 2010 Rick Nuesmeyer Vice President Jennifer Moreno Secretary/Treasurer Shahara Clark Salt Lake City Corporation Recording Secretary Michelle Behl City Council Office Executive Board At-Large 451 South State Street Paul i Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Executive ve Board At-Large y Curtis Tadehara Executive Board Ai Large Re: Collective Bargaining Resolution Dear Members of the City Council: On behalf of AFSCME Local 1004, I wish to extend our support of the proposed changes to the Collective Bargaining Resolution. It is our understanding Ralph Chamness will be presenting this to you for consideration. We feel the proposed changes reflect our desire to continue the relationship we have enjoyed with Salt Lake City for so many years. We appreciate your anticipated cooperation in passing this legislation. Should you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me at (801) 694-0192. Respectfully, AFSC L CAL 1004 li . Patty Rich Executive Director We Make Utah Happen t • 0 Council Priority Items ("Umbrellas") Items confirmed at the Jan.2011 r"Ctreat. V X) 0 • Council Communication Efforts: Council Website in progress;Council interviews for Channel 17;Weeklies; a01 6 weekly Council meeting reports; w y O cn mi • Public Engagement: Increased contact with community and stakeholders through mailing lists and listsery emails ril y to provide notifications/updates on topics,requests for comment,notification of meeting 8 & times,etc. rt IV al • Small Neighborhood business zones, location of alcohol establishments: waiting for transmittal 0 , ' • Parley's Historic Nature Park: Walking tours scheduled for end of January with the Mayor 0 f..+7 : Council staff putting recommended edits into document in revision format for 4 44 Council review 0 0 • New Libraries: Library progress,and Council involvement,needs additional community input po t.•-i , • Conditional Use text amendments: Council staff to revise the Administration's proposal r1 • Pan-handling: Council closed hearing and direction needed for further work ^� • Demolition Ordinance: Needs Council review of changes to the ordinance,then community input needed 9� • Resident donations for Quality of Life projects: Council staff prepared to draft ordinance,further Z V_ discussion from Council needed. • Street Lighting'- Paitt iridfrig •1-0 • 10-year CIP Plan: Administration working with consultant to do updates .1.4 Impact Fee Study: Administration working with consultant to do updates 1 • North Temple: Construction moving forward,budget steps in progress U '8 • Regional Sports Complex: Pending litigation _M • Public Safety Building: Planning/design moving forward,budget steps in progress • Open Space Policy: Pending information from the Administration on Golf projects v �n1 • Emergency Preparation - Budget ordinances / practices, Work Plan: Council staff preparing work plan, k discussions with Administration on budget pieces • City's Benefits Plan deficit Z • Council Oversight & Internal Controls 4 O • Street Cars / Trolleys: Planning,budgeting,staffing in progress .r/ • Bicycle & Transportation projects: iH • Traffic Calming - including speed limits, stop signs, pedestrian safety: policy discussion held with pi Administration,further discussion needed on next steps and action items A Q • Sidewalk snow removal: COMPLETE 1 • Electric vehicles: Council staff prepared to draft revisions to the Administration's proposal in order to complete A % the intent of the Council's Legislative Action • Ground Transportation: NEARLY COMPLETE (11 t • Concrete / Sidewalk standards:Council staff working with Administration on audit scope Printed Feb.3,2011 Project updates as of January 20,2011