01/05/1989 - Minutes MINUTES: Committee of the Whole
Thursday, January 5, 1989
5:00 - 9:00 p.m.
City Council Conference Room
Suite 300, City Hall
324 South State Street
In Attendance: Florence Bittner, Wayne Horrocks, Sydney Fonnesbeck, Alan
Hardman, Tom Godfrey, Roselyn Kirk, Willie Stoler, Linda Hamilton, Christine
Richman, Lee King, Cam Caldwell, Joe Duke-Rosati, Mike Zuhl, Emilie Charles,
Lance Bateman, Gary Mumford, Steven Allred, Marianne Cassedy, Chief Michael
Chabries, Major Ed Johnson, David Greer, Sgt. Mac Connole, Press
1. The City Council interviewed Joe Duke-Rosati prior to consideration of
his proposed appointment to the City/County Board of Health. Mr. Duke-Rosati
indicated that he is currently an employee of Community Action Program. He
stated that he is also involved community advocacy groups on his own. He
feels that his role as a low-income advocate and his experience as a
legislative lobbyist can be put to good use by the Board of Health.
2. Council Member Sydney Fonnesbeck briefed the City Council on the status
of the Olympics Bid. She indicated that earlier in the day it had been
suggested that the City Council adopt a resolution supporting the process
through which the Organizing Committee and the City will go before making a
final decision on whether or not to submit a bid to the International Olympics
Committee. She indicated that the resolution is to demonstrate to the State
Legislature that the City is behind the process and encourage them to adopt a
similar resolution. Council Member Roselyn Kirk indicated that she would feel
comfortable adopting a resolution if a public hearing were held. She stated
that she would be uncomfortable acting on anything connected with the Olympics
without first having public input. Council Member Tom Godfrey questioned the
efficacy of holding a public hearing before sufficient information has been
developed. The Council conducted a straw poll on the question of whether or
not to hold a public hearing. They voted three in favor and four against
holding the public hearing. The Council then directed staff to draft a
resolution to be placed on the Agenda as soon as possible.
3. Lance Bateman, Director of Finance, briefed the Council on the Fiscal
Year 1987-88 Year End Financial Statements. He reviewed the expenditure
levels for each department and indicated that most of the revenues came in
lower than projected except for Class B and C Road funds which were higher
than was anticipated. A copy of the report is attached.
4. Steven W. Allred and Marianne Cassedy, City Legislative Lobbyists,
briefed the City Council on the City's lobbying priorities in the upcoming
legislative session. A copy of the briefing paper is attached.
Council Member Fonnesbeck asked if there had been any legislation pre-
filed to deal with the problems caused by the "Scherbel Decision. " Mr. Allred
indicated that there is one bill proposed by Murray City which would allow
each municipality to determine for itself the most efficient method of dealing
with appeals of Planning Commission decisions. Ms. Allred stated that the
problem the lobbyists have on any legislation concerning the Scherbel
decision, and the reason the Utah League is not taking a position, is because
any legislation will place executive and legislative branches on opposite
sides of the issue. He indicated that when the Council and Mayor get together
and determine what the City's position should be, he and M. Cassedy will
lobby for that position to the best of their ability.
5. Lee King, City Council Budget Analyst/Auditor, briefed the City Council
on the conclusions and recommendations resulting from the recently completed
car per officer internal management audit. He indicated that since a number
of the objectives of the program are intangible, such as crime prevention
through the presence of cars in the neighborhood, his methodology focused on
those benefits which result from measurable activities. He indicated that
those measurable activities include number of stops while in transit and off-
duty, and any cost savings in car maintenance.
He indicated that based upon measurable activities, the program is
minimally cost effective. He stated that the Council's decision must be based
upon the policy consideration of the mobility of the force, the morale of the
employees, and the value placed on intangible benefits by the Council.
6. Chief of Police Michael Chabries responded to the car per officer
audit. He indicated that the intangible benefits cannot be underestimated.
He stated that no price tag will reflect the improvement in his officers
ability to do their jobs through increased mobility and availability. He
admitted that it is possible that the program needs better management, but
that on the whole the program is one beneficial to the entire community.
Chief Chabries also indicated that the recommendation to reinstitute
logs to track an officer's off-duty performance should not be adopted because
if the officers begin to perceive that they are "required" to perform those
off-duty activities, they may request over-time pay under the Fair Labor
Standards Act.
Council Member Tom Godfrey indicated that in reviewing the audit he was
struck by the fact that the original justification for the program included a
number of benefits to the community, which he interpreted as meaning Salt Lake
City. He stated that his major concern is that only 27% of the officers who
take a car home live within City limits and that, therefore, City residents
who are paying for the cars are not receiving the majority of the benefit.
Chief Chabries stated that a majority of the time the officers drive their
cars only in the City. If they live outside of the City limits they can use
the car only for commuting, and are expected to leave the car in the driveway
for the rest of the time.
Council Member Roselyn Kirk stated that the officers don't always
follow the policy, and that creates a public relations problem for the Members
of the Council. She asked how the Council Members should respond to
information that police officers were seen at the grocery store or mall in
other parts of the valley with their family in the car. Chief Chabries stated
that the Council Members should get as much information as possible, and call
his office to register a complaint.
Council Member Godfrey asked if the costs of the program justify the
limited amount of benefit being received by City residents. He observed that
the figures included in the audit reflect an increase in response times over
the last few months from 10 minutes to 22 minutes on the average. Chief
Chabries stated that the increased response times can be a result of a number
of factors including the fact that the force was short a number of officers
during February when the survey was conducted. Council Member Godfrey asked
if it would be feasible to limit the car per officer program to those who live
within the City limits. Chief Chabries stated that in addition to losing the
service provided by officers while in transit, it would require the creation
of a pool of police cars and increased parking space at headquarters.
Council Member Willie Stoler stated that the Department seems to be
under the impression that the program is theirs forever. He indicated that it
needs to be made clear that the program's main goal should be, and is, to
benefit the taxpayers. He stated that when the benefit to the taxpayers no
longer exists, the department will no longer have the program. Council Member
Stoler also indicated that he supports the program because, according to his
experience, their is no substitute for the ability to mobilize the force
immediately and have an adequate number of vehicles for an emergency. He also
indicated that the Officers need to understand that the program will continue
to be reviewed periodically to ensure that the taxpayers are still benefiting.
David Greer, Police Union Representative, told the Council that the
officers do understand that the car per officer program is a fragile one and
will be reviewed periodically. He stated that the union does not support the
recommendation to reinstitute the logs because officers cannot generate an
opportunity for an assist or arrest. Mr. Greer stated that the officers have
a sworn-duty to respond when they are needed, but if it is required in order
to maintain their car privileges, they will resent it. Mr. Greer also
indicated that he has no problem with instituting a radius within which
officers can have a car, but objects to limiting the privilege to only the
City limits.
The City Council conducted a straw poll on the staff recommendations
included in the audit. The Council voted 7 aye and 0 nay on recommendation
number 1: to maintain the program; 7 aye and 0 nay on recommendation number
2: to direct the administration to develop a method for ensuring that the
officers are fulfilling their duty to perform off-duty activities; 7 aye and 0
nay on recommendation number 3: the department review its approval process
and criteria for officers living outside the current defined areas of Salt
Lake County, including exploring limiting the program to within City limits or
utilizing a radius; and 3 aye and 4 nay on recommendation number 4: that the
fuel reimbursement charge be reinstituted.
"Ale
W. M. "WILLIE" STOLER, CHAIR
ATTEST:
REP
PALMER DEPAULIS SAL—
AL- r A\ ( TY eo TAP RATI.�I�
MAYOR OFFICE OF THE MAYOR
324 SOUTH STATE STREET
FIFTH FLOOR, SUITE 500
SALT LAKE CITY. UTAH 84111
535-7704
December 20, 1988
Tom Godfrey, Chairperson
and Members of the City Council
324 South State Street, Suite 300
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Chairperson Godfrey and City Council Members:
Attached for your review is a list of the items comprising the City's 1989
Legislative Package. The first five items have been prioritized as being of
the greatest interest to the City.
Would you please review this list and call Marianne Cassedy of my staff (535-
6289) with any comments you feel are appropriate? I would like to present
this agenda to the City' s legislators at breakfast on January 5, 1989, at the
Little America Hotel , and would like to incorporate your comments.
I appreciate your kind attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Mayor
PAD/mc
Attachment
1. Tax Limitation & Restructure - Although the Initiatives failed on the
November ballot, we know there will be several attempts to limit both
state and local governments' ability to raise revenue. The plan getting
the most attention currently is the Governor' s tax limitation plan , which
calls for a freeze on property tax levies, circuit breaker relief and an
expedited return to local governments of the 6/64¢ sales tax. Several
legislative proposals have also been made, including repeal of the sales
tax exemption of food and repeal of all sales tax exemptions. We must be
prepared to scrutinize every proposal and educate the Legislature as to
their impact on the City.
2. Annexation - There will be two attempts to modify annexation statutes.
The first would take school issues out of the debate by making school
district annexation separate from city annexation in those five cities
with city school districts (Ogden, Salt Lake, Murray, Provo, Park City) .
The second would allow annexation by referendum as an alternative to the
current petition process.
3. Highway Funding - Attempts will continue to end the diversion of Utah
Highway Fund dollars for non-highway uses.
4. Judicial Building - The State has indicated that they will build a
Judicial Building in the City. We should support funding for planning
and/or construction.
5. Olympics - There will be an attempt to have the Legislature endorse the
Salt Lake City bid for the winter Olympics in 1998 by resolution and,
perhaps, an appropriation or funding mechanism. The City is on record as
supporting the Olympic bid and would like the State' s support. Any
funding scheme would have to be scrutinized to determine its impact on
the City.
Building Code Amendments - Two years ago, the Legislature adopted in statute
the Uniform Building Code and made local changes to the code difficult to
achieve. There continue to be incidents of State preemption of local
authority in the area of code enforcement. We should resist those attempts.
We will also endeavor to have the administrative chapters of the Uniform
Building Code repealed by the State so that localities can set fees.
Automatic Fingerprinting Identification System (AFIS) - Public safety agencies
throughout the state will be encouraging the state to appropriate between $1.5
and $3 million to purchase hardware and software for this new technology,
which enables expedited identification of fingerprints. The Police Department
joins these agencies in this attempt.
Retirement - There will be two retirement bills, one making the Public Safety
Retirement System noncontributory (local participation is optional) , and one
modifying the post-retirement-earnings-limitation statutes.
Union Bill of Rights - The Police Union will be attempting to codify an
officers' bill of rights, which could have an adverse impact on the City's
labor negotiating position. The City should oppose this attempt.
Fine Arts Facilities Funding - Last year, the State, County and City joined in
a three-way interlocal agreement to fund the operating deficit of the fine
arts facilities in the Salt Palace Complex. It is intended that this funding
be continued for four years, and we will be encouraging the State to
appropriate its share for FY 89-90 ($335,000) .
I-15 Corridor Improvements and Light Rail Transit - Funding for both these
enhancements to the transportation system will be sought, and the City
supports this effort.
Liquor Laws - The Marriott Corporation will attempt to convince the
Legislature to make a change in the liquor laws by allowing waiters and
waitresses to bring both the liquor and the setup to patrons in airport
lounges. This change would make liquor statutes consistent for both
restaurants and airport lounges.
Mandatory Certification of Wastewater Treatment Plant Operators - Attempts
will continue to achieve certification statewide.
Jails - The City has participated in the Jail Task Force, which will ask the
Legislature to continue funding of State prisoners in County jails until the
Task Force's work is complete (in the 1990 session) . The State is currently
appropriating $500,000 annually to fund State prisoner' s in County jails.
SALT IT 6 RP0 sI01
OFFICE OF .THE CITY COUNCIL
SUITE 300, CITY HALL
324 SOUTH STATE STREET
SALT LAKE-CITY, UTAH 84111
535-7600
MEMORANDUM
To: City Council Date: January 3, 1989
From: Cam Caldwell Subject: 1988 Financial Report
The purpose of this memo is to assist the City Council as you review the 1988
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. The financial report contains many
financial schedules and is somewhat overwhelming. This memo will serve as a
resource in helping you decide what is most important to read.
In general, the financial report is set up in a format established by the
Government Accounting Standards Board which establishes generally accepted
accounting principles, or GAAP. It contains information which the Government
Finance Officers Association requires for the City to qualify for the
Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting. There are a
multitude of combined financial statements which summarize several funds at
once. These financial statments are supplemented by more detailed financial
schedules for each fund.
The Notes to Financial Statements, which begins on Page 13, may be a good
place to begin. The notes explain governmental fund accounting and provide
summary historical information. If you are not interested in this technical
background information you may prefer to skip immediately to Pages 23 through
32, which is probably the most important narrative section of the report.
The General Fund expenditures by department are shown on Pages 34 & 35.
Personal Services make up 67.4% of expenditures. These expenditure numbers
agree with the combined spreadsheet on Pages 8 & 9 (the third column from the
right is the actual on a budgetary basis). If you read Note 19 on Page 31,
you know how the adjustments were made between the actual on a GAAP basis and
actual on a budgetary basis. Some of the statements use the GAAP basis and
some use the budgetary basis. Be aware that the numbers shown on financial
statements may change depending upon the accounting method used.
-1-
The individual Enterprise Fund statements are shown on Pages 62 through. 67.
Those statements are combined and shown on Pages 58 & 59. The combined
statement of changes in financial position on Pages 60 & 61 summarize the
transactions which resulted in changes in the cash balance for the year.
The respective Internal Service Funds are shown on Pages 76 through 81. The
combined statement on Pages 72 & 73 shows all of the Internal Service Funds.
(Note that the Personal Services include Accrued Compensated Absences which
are indicated in the individual statements. This reflects an accounting
policy change which has been mandated nation-wide to require municipalities to
report the status of accrued vacation and leave time. ) The combined statement
of changes in financial position on Pages 70 & 74 summarized the changes in
cash for the year.
The two other funds that you are probably most interested in are the Community
Development Fund on Page 42-43 and the Capital Projects Fund on Pages 52-54.
The statistical section of the financial statement on Pages 92-103 shows the
historical trends for the last ten fiscal years. You may be interested in
this section as a reference source from time to time.
I would be glad to spend time with you one on one to discuss the Financial
Report, if you would like. Please give me a call if you have any questions.
-2-
t
Salt Lake City Corporation 0 Y# , � � . '
Comprehensive Annual +' ` _'' ''4"
e' { 'ma ; . � 4.- r.'
.,t
Financial Report A'ir ft
' ` 04
•
For the year endedir
,- ,, r . . ' t.: !
June 30 1988 I `"'_' , ,i •�x . ,, y;.r; f ,r „.*;+ t 'r
= V R4•� r a y r
4/., ,, - t,,,
, ... ,,,, ..... -,,,..,.., __�ie....„,., ,'.. ,,. . • ..,.. ,,..,....,
3
k .:-...„,, ...7.„......,,,AriK.r, :it.,-,,,,, -_
k , _ _, , . . ,.,,,„, ,..„ .: ...._ , ,,,,, ...,, a ,,, "4 #
Y ' '� + �rR `j'�1� i f *�;�
..Ak,,,..#.r--."-.----.-_L:-,i,.,,,
2 K " > __ =a 3 ( 'i 94
{ / '.R{' 1t '"rj iV.- f
,,';:,10,g•'1
f Y
e-,-..-.-
.1....
1
r
•1, •§F . ,.. 1. `Y.a5a: S, 4JG .., "" `r' ��{7j•.'v•J yl+r{,r
1�i = r, `` - ;ii'
t11640
�tY � � ;; 1';
vit d��
rt x
' 04,,,,,-, ,..—.... - - , i
.�.
° ,teEf
_.! '� ... r ` `•'
,3 a�,q� @ f a . 1, t # R d W �j' - �r I Y
y jw� .JFt � � a, . 'ifi { j 1�. s T� 't P . F ! f ab f11 F" _
1.
lig-
`f sy t
r Ar r r, —4 i.,x a?� f 4t ,ti
' N, ._ •.; •:y_..„.. fi ,f' ` y4 .•,i-s •. � p r i f�R Sro r Y
ve
` 211s �„•• -,..
i � ' Historic Cityand Co In Building (arca 1920)
�, �- Salt Lake City, Utah
II
II
II
II
II
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
I
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1988
I
with
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I
II
Prepared by
I
Department of Finance
Lance R. Bateman, Director
II
I i
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION '
COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT
Year ended June 30, 1988
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Pam_
INTRODUCTORY SECTION:
Title Page i
Table of Contents
Transmittal Letter iv-x
Organizational Chart xi
Certificate of Achievement xii
FINANCIAL SECTION: '
Report of Independent Certified Public Accountants 1
General Purpose Financial Statements (Combined Statements - Overview):
Combined Balance Sheet - All Fund Types and Account Groups 4-5
Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - '
All Governmental Fund Types and Expendable Trust Fund 7
Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - Budget and Actual -
General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Funds 8-9
Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Retained Earnings -
All Proprietary Fund Types 10 '
Combined Statement of Changes in Financial Position - All Proprietary Fund Types 11
Notes to Financial Statements 12-32
Note 1 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Note 2 - Cash and Investments '
Note 3 - Loans Receivable
Note 4 - Restricted Assets
Note 5 - General Fixed Assets
Note 6 - Long-term Obligations '
Note 7 - Reserved Fund Equity
Note 8 - Deficit Fund Balances/Retained Earnings and Excess of Expenditures
and Other Uses Over Appropriations in Individual Funds
Note 9 - General Fund Interfund Service Charges
Note 10 - Operating Transfers '
Note 11 - Risk Management
Note 12 - Pension Plans
Note 13 - Post-Employment Benefits
Note 14 - Deferred Compensation Plans '
Note 15 - Commitments and Contingencies
Note 16 - Segments of Enterprise Fund Activities
Note 17 - Related Party Transactions
Note 18 - Contributed Capital '
Note 19 - Budgetary - GAAP Reporting Reconciliation
Note 20 - Statement of Changes in Financial Position
Note 21 - Subsequent Events
Combining and Individual Financial Statements and Schedules - By Fund Type:
General Fund - Schedule of Expenditures - Budget and Actual 34-35
Special Revenue Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet 38
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 39
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances -
Budget and Actual - Certain Special Revenue Funds 40-41
Schedule of Project Expenditures:
Community Development Operating Fund 42-43
Grants Operating Fund 44 '
Debt Service Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet 46
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances 47
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances - '
Budget and Actual 48-49
Capital Projects Fund - Schedule of Project Expenditures 52-54
I
I
(Continued)
ii
II
II
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
II Pea
FINANCIAL SECTION (Continued):
Combining and Individual Financial Statements and Schedules - By Fund Type (Continued):
II Enterprise Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet 56-57
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings 58-59
Combining Statement of Changes in Financial Position 60-61
II Schedule of Budget and Actual:
Water Utility Fund 62
Sewer Utility Fund 63
Airport Authority Fund 64
Refuse Collection Fund 65
II
Golf Course Fund 66
Redevelopment Agency Fund 67
Internal Service Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet 70-71
I
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Retained Earnings 72-73
Combining Statement of Changes in Financial Position 74-75
Schedule of Budget and Actual:
Fleet Management Fund 76
II Data Processing Fund 77
Employee Benefit Self-Insurance Fund 78
Central Fire Dispatch Fund 79
Governmental Immunity Fund 80
Municipal Building Authority Fund 81
II Trust and Agency Funds:
Combining Balance Sheet 84
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance - Expendable Trust Fund . . 85
Statement of Changes in Assets and Liabilities - Agency Fund 86
II General Fixed Assets Account Group:
Schedule of General Fixed Assets - By Source 88
Schedule of General Fixed Assets - By Function and Activity 89
Schedule of Changes in General Fixed Assets - By Function and Activity 90
II STATISTICAL SECTION:
General Fund Expenditures by Function - Last Ten Fiscal Years 92-93
General Fund Revenues by Source - Last Ten Fiscal Years 94-95
General Fund Tax Revenues by Source - Last Ten Fiscal Years 96
II General Fund Property Tax Levies and Collections - Last Ten Fiscal Years 97
Assessed and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property - Last Ten Fiscal Years 98
Property Tax Rates - All Overlapping Governments - Last Ten Fiscal Years 99
Property Value and Construction - Last Ten Fiscal Years 100
II Principal Property Taxpayers and Principal Employers 101
Ratio of Net General Obligation Bonded Debt to Assessed Value
and Net Bonded Debt Per Capita - Last Ten Fiscal Years 102-103
Computation of Legal Debt Margin 104
II Computation of Direct and Overlapping Bonded Debt 105
Ratio of Annual Debt Service for General Obligation Bonded Debt
to Total General Fund Expenditures - Last Ten Fiscal Years 106
Revenue and General Obligation Bond Coverage - Enterprise Funds - Last Ten Fiscal Years 107
Special Improvement Billings and Collections - Last Ten Fiscal Years 108
II Demographic Statistics - Last Ten Fiscal Years 109
Miscellaneous Statistics 110
II
II
II
II iii
I
I
I
SALE'EAKEi I GSIRS IOW
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
324 SOUTH STATE STREET, 5TH FLOOR
LANCE AN, CPA SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 64111 PALMER DEPAULIS
DIRECTOR OF OF FINANCE MAYOR
(601) 535-7676
November 23, 1988
1
The Honorable Mayor and
Members of the City Council
Salt Lake City Corporation
The Comprehensive Annual Financial Report of Salt Lake City Corporation for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 1988, is submitted herewith. This annual report consists of three parts. The Introductory
Section includes an organizational chart and this transmittal letter which highlights significant aspects
of financial operations during the year and particular financial issues faced by the City. The Financial
Section includes the independent accountants' report, combined financial statements and related notes,
combining and individual fund statements, and schedules. The Statistical Section includes several tables
of unaudited data depicting the financial history of the City as well as miscellaneous statistics.
This report was prepared by the Salt Lake City Department of Finance. The combined financial
statements and related notes have been audited by Grant Thornton, an independent firm of Certified Public
Accountants, whose report is included herein. Additionally, the compliance features of the City's federal
and state grant programs for the year ended June 30, 1988 were examined by the firm of Grant Thornton.
Their report is available under separate cover.
These financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles for local governments as prescribed by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASH). The
accuracy of the presented data and the completeness and fairness of the presentations, including all
disclosures, are the responsibility of the management of the City. We believe the data, as presented, is
accurate in all material respects and is presented in a manner which fairly sets forth the financial
position and results of operations of the City. Furthermore, we believe that all disclosures necessary to
enable the reader to gain an understanding of the City's financial activity have been included.
This report includes the financial statements of the funds and account groups required to account for
those activities, organizations and functions which are related to the City and are controlled by or
dependent upon the City's governing body, the City Council. Control or dependence on the City was deter-
mined on the basis of budget adoption, taxing ability, authority to establish rates, outstanding debt
secured by revenues or general obligations of the City, the City's obligation to finance any deficits that
may occur, funding and selection of governing authority and other evidence of financial interdependence and
the ability to exercise oversight responsibility. This report includes the financial statements of the
Salt Lake City Library, the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City, the Housing Authority of Salt Lake
City, and the Municipal Building Authority since the City exercises oversight responsibility over these
entities. This report does not include the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City since the City
does not designate management, the City does not significantly influence operations, and there is no
accountability for fiscal matters to or by the City. The Salt Lake City School District, Salt Lake
County, Salt Lake City Suburban Sanitary District #1, and Granger-Hunter Improvement District have
overlapping debt with the City, but have no other relationship with the City and are not included in this
report. The Salt Lake Community College is owned and operated by the State of Utah.
Salt Lake City lies between the Wasatch Mountains and the Great Salt Lake at an altitude of 4,200
feet. Permanent settlement of the City began on July 24, 1847, when Brigham Young with a party of 148
Mormon pioneers entered the Salt Lake Valley after a 1,500 mile trek westward. Salt Lake City soon became
a major center for trade and commerce, with wagon trains carrying settlers and miners westward. Within a
few years of the pioneers' arrival, other communities were settled throughout the Salt Lake Valley. Due to
continuous economic and population growth, most of these cities in the valley survived and prospered and
have grown into a single large metropolis of over 690,000 people. Salt Lake City is the commercial center
of this metropolis.
iv I
1
I
Salt Lake City is also the center of the scenic intermountain west. Within a day's drive of the
City, one can visit 70% of the officially designated national parks and monuments of America. The Wasatch
Mountains, east of the City, are well-known for their ski resorts, which are within a forty-five minute
drive from downtown Salt Lake City. Approximately 200,000 out-of-state skiers come to these resorts each
year.
IIThe University of Utah is located on the east bench of the City. This university was founded in 1850
and is the oldest mainland university west of the Missouri River. Approximately 25,000 full and part-time
students are enrolled. The Fine Arts Museum and the Utah Museum of Natural History are located on the
I
University of Utah campus. Utah State University, Weber State College and Brigham Young University are all
located within a two-hour drive from Salt Lake City. The City also has Westminster College of Salt Lake
City (a fully-accredited interdenominational college), Salt Lake Community College, and a business col-
lege.
I
Salt Lake City is the international headquarters of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
or "Mormon" Church. At Temple Square in downtown Salt Lake City 2-1/2 million visitors see the famous Salt
Lake Temple, Tabernacle and visitor centers each year. The Salt Palace Convention Center and Sports Arena
(located in downtown Salt Lake City) plays host to many different activities. This facility is composed
II
of a 12,700 seat arena, 2,600 seat assembly hall, and numerous meeting and exhibit spaces. It is the home
of the Salt Lake Golden Eagles of the International Hockey League and the Utah Jazz of the National Basket-
ball Association. The City is also the home of the Salt Lake Trappers of the Pioneer baseball league.
Directly north of the Salt Palace is Symphony Hall, home of the Utah Symphony Orchestra. The Salt Lake Art
I
Center has its gallery and art school facilities in a building adjacent to Symphony Hall. Salt Lake's
historic Capitol Theater serves as the home of Ballet West, Repertory Dance Theater, Ririe-Woodbury, and
the Utah Opera Company. The City also hosts Theater 138, Pioneer Memorial Theater, Utah Civic Opera
Company, Hansen Planetarium and the Utah Heritage Foundation.
I
Salt Lake City is a major transportation crossroads in the intermountain west. Three major rail-
roads, ten major airlines, two bus lines and many truck lines serve the area. The City is located at the
convergence of four major highways and two interstate highway systems. The Salt Lake International Air-
port is the air transportation hub of the intermountain west and a principal hub and reservation center
I
for Delta Airlines. The Utah Transit Authority operates an outstanding commuter bus system in Salt Lake
City and throughout neighboring counties. The Utah Transit Authority has been selected as one of the top
transit operations in the country by the American Public Transit Association.
I
The City provides a full range of municipal services including police, fire, parks, six municipal
golf courses, libraries, water, sewer, airports, public improvements, highways and streets, planning and
zoning, and general administrative services.
I
Economic Condition and Outlook
Summary of Local Economy
I
Salt Lake City is the capital and largest city in the State of Utah. The City is the business and
financial center for most of the major businesses and industries in the State. The Salt Lake valley area
is the largest metropolitan area between Phoenix and the Canadian border, and between Denver and Califor-
nia. It offers a diversified and stable economy whose rate of unemployment has been below the national
I
average.
Major Industries Affecting the Local Economy
The City has a diverse and stable local economy. Major industries and employers include airlines,
II
electronic computing, communications, hospitals, electrical and natural gas utilities, railroad, banking,
hotels, department stores, jewelry, newspapers, government, university, and religious.
Future Economic Outlook
I
Growth in economic activity has remained moderate during the past several years. The number of jobs
located in Salt Lake City has remained constant even though there have been some decreases in government
jobs. Substantial commercial building activities have taken place over the past several years in the City.
II
Based on current projections, economic growth is expected to continue.
II
I
v
Major Initiatives
Current Year Projects
The Salt Lake City and County Building has functioned as the seat of City government since its
completion in 1894. In April. 1987, citizens of Salt Lake City approved a $34,500,000 general obligation
bond issue to pay for a three-year restoration end seismic base isolation project of the City and County
Building. These bonds were sold in June, 1987. Seismic base isolation is a system being used on the
building to lessen potential damage in an earthquake. The rigid foundation of the building is being
replaced with hundreds of large laminated rubber block isolators.
In November 1987, the City Council created the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake City under
the authority of the Utah Municipal Building Authority Act for the purpose of acquiring, improving or
extending one or more projects on behalf of the City. In February 1988, the Municipal Building Authority
issued $19,640,000 of lease revenue bonds for the purpose of (1) acquiring and renovating a nine-story
building and parking facilities to serve as a new public safety building for the Police and Fire Depart-
ments of the City, (2) acquiring, improving and extending of street lighting facilities, (3) acquiring of
mechanized garbage trucks and related garbage cans for the purpose of converting the city's manual refuse
collection system to a mechanized system, and (4) acquiring telephone communications equipment by prepay-
ment
of an existing lease-purchase agreement.
Future Projects
During September 1988 the City acquired a nine-story building with 98,625 square feet of office space
and parking facilities for 188 vehicles for use as a Public Safety Building. Prior to the purchase, the
building was renovated and remodeled including asbestos removal and seismic retrofitting along with office
design, furnishings, equipment and other improvements. This project will save future costs by
consolidating police administration and by combining fire administration into the same facility.
The City has acquired approximately 8,700 street light fixtures formally owned by an electrical
utility company. Most of these fixtures are the efficient sodium vapor type. The City is converting the
remaining incandescent, mercury vapor and fluorescent street lights to the more economical sodium vapor
lamps. A significant savings will be realized from the more efficient lamps and from the lower customer-
owned power rates.
Department Activity Service Efforts and Accomplishments
In July 1987, the Department of Public Works initiated a new mechanized refuse collection system.
Mechanized refuse collection utilizes a standardized can which is lifted and dumped by hydraulic arms
extending from the truck. Each mechanized truck is operated by one collector who does not need to leave
the cab. Collectors using a mechanized refuse truck can serve more homes than under the previous manual
system. There is also a savings from the cost of injuries associated with the old manual system.
Financial Information
Internal Control Structure and Budgetary Controls
The City utilizes a computerized financial accounting system which includes a system of internal
accounting controls. These controls are designed to provide reasonable, but not absolute assurance regard-
ing: (1) the safeguarding of assets against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and (2) the reli-
ability of financial records for preparing financial statements and maintaining accountability for assets.
The concept of reasonable assurance recognizes that: (1) the cost of a control should not exceed the
benefits likely to be derived, and (2) the evaluation of costs and benefits requires estimates and judg-
ments by management. The City adheres to the above framework for internal controls. We believe that the
city's internal accounting controls adequately safeguard assets and provide reasonable assurance of proper
recording of financial transactions.
Accounting records for governmental fund types are maintained on a modified accrual basis, with
revenues being recorded when available and measurable, and expenditures being recorded when services or
goods are received and the liabilities are incurred. Accounting records for proprietary fund types are
maintained on the accrual basis.
Budgetary control is maintained at the department level. The City Council may amend the budget by
motion during the fiscal year. The Mayor may transfer funds from one object or purpose to another within
the same department. Expenditures may not legally exceed appropriations at the department level.
Budgetary control is also maintained at the General Fund departmental level by the encumbrance of
estimated purchase and contract amounts prior to the release of purchase orders or contracts to vendors.
Purchase orders which result in an overrun of department appropriations cannot be released until additional
appropriations are made available. Open encumbrances are reported as reservations of fund balance at year
end.
vi '
II
II
General Governmental Functions
General governmental functions are contained in the General Fund, special revenue funds, debt service
funds, Capital Projects Fund, and Expendable Trust Fund. The following table illustrates by category the
II sources of revenue and the changes from the prior year.
Increase/(decrease)
Revenues 1988 Amount Percent of Total from 1987
I
General property taxes $29,789,803 30.8% $1,178,428
Sales and use taxes 19,233,930 19.9 (248,475)
Franchise taxes 14,909,149 15.4 76,415
Licenses 2,624,930 2.7 557,792
I
Permits 1,554,803 1.6 (205,237)
Pines and forfeitures 749.782 .8 (127,467)
Assessments 1,454,660 1.5 (825,952)
Interest 4,948,088 5.1 (566,037)
Intergovernmental 11,690,123 12.1 (4,303,884)
I
Interfund services 3,606,993 3.7 200,874
Parking meter 1,281,631 1.3 265,706
Parking ticket 2,487,393 2.6 564,755
Charges for services 1,688,965 1.7 578,840
I
Proceeds from sale of property 467,560 .5 (322,970)
Expendable trust 85,113 .1 23,511
Miscellaneous 148,978 .2 (853,968)
Total revenues $96,721,901 100.0% $(4,007,669)
II
The larger fluctuations in revenues are attributable to the following reasons: Property tax revenues
increased because of increased delinquent collections and because of an increase in property values. The
decrease in intergovernmental revenue was because less Housing Development Action Grant and Urban Develop-
' ment Action Grant monies passed through the City to private developers. The decrease in miscellaneous
revenue was because rental revenue of the circuit court building was recorded as miscellaneous revenue in
the prior year but classified as charges for services in the 1988 fiscal year.
I
Expenditures for general government functions totaled $117,013,565 representing an increase of 9.6%
as compared to the fiscal year 1987 amount of $106,774,284. Expenditures including the change from the
prior year are indicated below:
Increase/(decrease)
Expenditures 1988 Amount Percent of Total from 1987
IICurrent:
City Council $ 460,603 .4% $ (81,932)
Mayor 1,745.285 1.5 128,328
I
City Attorney 1,106,236 .9 125,899
Finance 5,090,176 4.4 138,816
Administrative Services 3,398,925 2.9 104,807
Fire 16,599,917 14.2 1,663,036
II Police 22,398,519 19.1 1,617,109
Development Services 3,408,213 2.9 560,393
Parks 5,525,474 4.7 276,346
Public Works 15,914,342 13.6 (1.296,801)
Library services 4,633,130 4.0 291,197
I Community development 2,913,318 2.5 (5,219,102)
Nondepartmental 639,038 .5 (29,877)
Expendable trust 181,327 .2 163,336
Capital outlay 27,719,634 23.7 11.585,697
I Debt service:
Principal 2,131,567 1.8 328,567
Interest 3,147,861 2.7 (116,538)
I
Total expenditures $117,013,565 100.0% $10,239,281
The larger fluctuations in expenditures are primarily attributable to the following reasons: A large
number of early retirement incentive payments were made for the Police and Fire departments. A decrease in
Public Works was primarily because of the first full year of operations of the Refuse Collection Fund (an
II enterprise fund). The decrease in community development is the result of less Housing Development Action
Grant and Urban Development Action Grant monies that passed through the City to private developers. The
increase in capital outlay is the result of the restoration work on the City and County Building.
I During the year the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) completed an audit of claims submitted
by the City to FEMA relating to the 1983 flood. As a result of the audit, $232,000 of claims were declared
ineligible for reimbursement. Therefore, the receivable was decreased to the amount agreed upon with FEMA.
I
vii
1
The City's General Fund is used to account for expenditures of traditional governmental services and IIall financial resources other than those required to be accounted for in other funds. General Fund reve-
nues totaled $81,100,088 including transfers from other City funds and capital lease proceeds. This
represents an increase of 2.9% over the previous year. General Fund expenditures totaled $82,362,479 for I
the year ended June 30, 1988 including transfers to other funds. This represents an increase of 5.4% over
the previous year.
The Library Fund, the Community Development Operating Fund, the Central Business Improvement Fund,
the Grants Operating Fund, and the Street Lighting Fund are accounted for as special revenue funds. These I
funds account for certain property taxes, grant funds, special business license fees, lighting assess-
ments, and other special revenues legally restricted for specific purposes. Revenue, lease proceeds and
transfers totaling $9,980,390 were received during the year ended June 30, 1988 in the special revenue
funds, while expenditures and transfers out totaling $9,659,463 were incurred. IIThe debt service funds are used to accumulate monies for principal and interest payments for the
special improvement bonds and for the public building bonds. Under the terms of the bond resolutions and
state law, the City reserves a specified amount to guarantee the special improvement bond payments in the
Special Improvement Debt Service Fund. This reserve account is to receive a tax levy of .0002, unless the IIreserve is equal to or greater than forty percent of the amount of all outstanding special improvement
bonds issued prior to March 30, 1981, and twenty-five percent of the amount of all outstanding special
improvement bonds issued on or after March 30, 1981. This reserve at June 30, 1988 was $1,186,239. A
portion of the building bond proceeds was also deposited in the Building Restoration Debt Service Fund to '
be used to pay interest on the bonds for the three years during which the restoration of the City and
County Building will take place. Following the restoration, property taxes will be sufficient to pay both
principal and interest.
The fund balance of the Capital Projects Fund of $12,474,773 represents appropriations for projects II
that are not yet completed. Completed projects and construction in progress at year end are capitalized in
the General Fixed Assets Account Group except for infrastructure items which are not capitalized. A
detailed schedule of project budgets and expenditures is included in the Financial Section of this report.
Proprietary Operations I
Enterprise funds are used to account for operations that are financed and operated in a manner
similar to private business enterprise where the intent is that the costs of providing goods or services to II
the general public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges. Enter-
prise funds can also be used to provide better management control and accountability, and to enable the
reader to more fully understand the financial position and operations of a fund. The Water Utility Fund
had a net income of $2,904,709 during the year ended June 30, 1988. Net income for the Sewer Utility Fund I
amounted to $5,829,4B9 for the year. The Airport Authority Fund's net income was $6,775,370. The Refuse
Collection Fund had a net loss during its first year of operations of $102,468. Revenues will be suffi-
cient during the 1989 fiscal year to offset the deficit. Net income for the Golf Course Fund amounted to
$472,992. The Housing Authority Fund had revenue and grants of $6,516,611, and expenses and write-downs of
land and buildings held for resale of $9,883,894, resulting in a net loss of $3,367,283. The Redevelop- '
ment Agency Fund had revenues, grants and transfers of $11,505,316, and expenses and transfers out of
$2,609,787, resulting in net income of $8,895,529.
Internal service funds are used to account for the financing of services provided by one department I
or agency to other departments or agencies of the City. Internal service funds should break even over the
long term and therefore will have net losses from time to time to offset net income. Internal service
funds may also provide services to other government agencies. The City's Fleet Management Fund had a net
loss of $36,181 for the year ended June 30, 1988. A net loss in the Data Processing Fund amounted to II$265,874. The Employee Benefit Self-Insurance Fund's net income for the year was $370,370. The Central
Fire Dispatch Fund had net income of $75,614. The Governmental Immunity Fund had a net loss of $387,608.
The Municipal Building Authority had a net loss of $811,911 during its first year of existence. Lease
revenue in future years will be sufficient to cover debt service requirements.
Fiduciary Operations I
The Salt Lake City trust fund accounts for individual, private and intergovernmental contributions
held in trust by the City for the Tracy Aviary, Bicycle Advisory Committee. Freedom Trail, for indigent II
services and for other trust purposes. The trust fund balance at June 30, 1988 was $159,260. The De-
ferred Compensation Agency Fund is used to account for amounts deferred under the City's Employee deferred
compensation plan. The Fund's assets as of June 30, 1988 were $7,039,734.
I/
I
viii I
II
Debt Administration
II
In February 1988, the City's Municipal Building Authority sold $19,640,000 of lease revenue bonds.
Proceeds of the bonds are being used to purchase street lights, garbage trucks and cans, telephone equip-
, went, and to purchase and renovate a building and parking structures. In June 1987, the City sold
$34,500,000 of general obligation public building bonds. Proceeds of the bonds are being used for renova-
tion and restoration of the existing City and County Building. A portion of the proceeds will be used to
pay interest on the bonds until the restoration is completed. Outstanding general obligation bonds issued
for airport improvements, totaling $14,825,000 at June 30, 1988, are to be paid from Airport revenues.
I
outstanding Water and Sewer Utility revenue bonds of $30,240,000 at June 30, 1988, are obligations of
future net revenues of both the Water Utility and Sewer Utility. Outstanding airport revenue bonds at June
30, 1988, totaled $57,095,000. The City irrevocably pledged the net revenues of the City airports to the
payment of the bonds. The limited obligation special facility revenue bonds totaling $22,000,000 were
I issued in July 1987 to finance the acquisition and construction of the Delta Air Lines hangar, marketing,
reservations, and training center at the Airport. The bonds are special and limited obligations of the
City and do not constitute a debt of or a pledge of revenues of the City other than the rental revenues for
the facilities from Delta Air Lines. In addition $4,401,000 of special improvement bonds are outstanding.
Redevelopment Agency tax allocation bonds outstanding in the amount of $2,400,000 are secured by a first
II
pledge of taxes levied upon taxable property in the redevelopment project area, as well as all revenues of
the Redevelopment Agency. The Redevelopment Agency also has $600,000 of home improvement and rehabilita-
tion bonds outstanding. These bonds are a special obligation of the Redevelopment Agency, and are secured
by and payable from payments on loans issued from the bond proceeds. Housing Authority bonds in the amount
I of $14,900,000 are secured by a first pledge of rental revenues from housing projects for the elderly which
are currently under construction. In 1985 the City issued $2,800,000 of certificates of participation to
fund replacement of heavy equipment vehicles which had excess demand placed on them during snow storm and
flood emergencies, thereby reducing their useful life. The certificates are being repaid over a three-
' year period. The certificates of participation balance as of June 30, 1988 was $750,000. Tax anticipation
notes totaling $23,000,000 were issued and repaid during the fiscal year.
Cash Management
II The City's investment of its temporarily idle funds has as its major objectives, safety of princi-
pal, need for liquidity and maximization of the City's investment income opportunities. Investment earn-
ings strengthen the City's overall financial standing and add annually to its revenues. Cash of the
various funds is pooled in order to obtain the best interest rates and insure that all temporarily idle
I cash is invested. City funds are deposited with a "qualified depository" as defined by the Utah Money
Management Act. "Qualified depository" includes any depository institution which has been certified by
the Utah State Commissioner of Financial Institutions as having met certain requirements as defined in the
Utah Money Management Act. In order to minimize risk of loss, the Act establishes the formula for deter-
I mining the amount of public funds which a qualified depository may hold and defines capital requirements
which an institution must maintain to be eligible to accept public funds.
City policy provides that not more than 25% of total City funds or 25% of the qualified depository's
allotment, whichever is less, can be invested in any one qualified depository. Not more than 20% of total
I
City funds may be invested in any one certified out-of-state financial institution. The City Treasurer
takes delivery of all investments purchased. This may be accomplished by taking physical delivery of the
security or delivering the security to a bank or trust company for safekeeping.
I The City has arranged for a bank to automatically move each night any available balance into an
overnight repurchase agreement. These "sweep accounts" are allowable under the Utah Money Management Act.
With respect to Statement No. 3 of the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, repurchase sweep accounts
are classified as investments which are uninsured and uncollateralized.
I
By following City policy and the stringent requirements of the Utah Money Management Act, the City can
maximize yields while maintaining low risk. All of the City's deposits and investments are made with
certified institutions according to the Utah Money Management Act. The City believes that by following
these requirements, the City's deposits and investments are safe and secure although some of the deposits
Iare uninsured and the City's overnight investments are uncollateralized.
Risk Management
I
The City carries a comprehensive general liability and hangarkeepers insurance policy with a private
carrier covering the airports which it owns in the sum of $100,000,000. The City is self-insured for
general liability claims. The Governmental Immunity Fund (an internal service fund) has been established
to pay these claims along with certain administrative expenses. The City is also self-insured for property
damage to City motor vehicles and other equipment. The City is self-insured for employee long-term dis-
I ability, unemployment and worker's compensation. The Employee Benefit Self-Insurance Fund (an internal
service fund) has been established to pay these claims along with certain administrative expenses. Employ-
ee health and accident insurance is provided through premiums paid to the state's health insurance plan.
II
I
ix
1/
Other Information IIIndependent Audit
State law requires an annual audit to be made of the financial records of the City by independent IIcertified public accountants selected by the City Council. This requirement has been complied with and
the report of certified public accountants has been included herein. A separate single audit report which
includes reports on federal financial assistance is available from the Department of Finance.
Awards '
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada (GFOA), awarded a
Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to Salt Lake City Corporation for its
comprehensive annual financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1987. IIIn order to be awarded a Certificate of Achievement, the City must publish an easily readable and
efficiently organized comprehensive annual financial report, whose contents conform to program standards.
Such reports must satisfy both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable legal requirements.
A Certificate of Achievement is valid for a period of one year only. We believe our current report II
continues to conform to Certificate of Achievement Program requirements, and we are submitting it to the
GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate.
Acknowledgments II
The preparation of this report on a timely basis could not have been accomplished without the
efficient and dedicated services of the staff of the Department of Finance. We would like to express our IIappreciation to Grant Thornton, Certified Public Accountants, for their assistance and guidance. We would
also like to thank the members of the City Council and the Mayor for their interest and support in planning
and conducting the financial operations of the City in a responsible and progressive manner.
Respectfully submitted. II
2.?.(3att/t
0- ,e R. Bateman '
'irector of Finance
11
I/
I/
I/
II
II
II
x I
1
Corporation
Salt Lake City1
i Organizational Chart
Citizens of Salt Lake City
I
t
. M.MM.MI LINI11111111111•11111MONIII
I
Mayor City City Council
I
Palmer DePaulis District
Florence Bittner 1
I
Executive Wayne Horrocks 2
Sydney Fonnesbeck 3
Staff
IMike Zuhl Alan Hardman 4
Tom Godfrey 5
I
Parks Development Roselyn Kirk 6
Department Services
IJohn Gust Craig Peterson Wilford Stoler 7
ANIIIMMELIIIMIONNIMMII w
I
Police Airport Department Authority Executive Director
Michael Chabries Louis Miller Linda Hamilton
1
Fire City
Department Attorney
I
Peter Pederson Roger Cutler
s
I
Public Utilities Finance
Department Department
LeRoy Hooton Lance Bateman
I
Public Works Administrative
IDepartment r... Services
Joe Anderson Rodger Neve
I
I xi
I
I
I
Certificate of I
Achievement
1
for Excellence
in Financial I
Reporting I
Presented to
Salt Lake City Corporation,
1
Utah 1
For its Comprehensive Annual
Financial Report I
for the Fiscal Year Ended
June 30, 1987 I
A Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial
Reporting is presented by the Government Finance Officers I
Association of the United States and Canada to
government units and public employee retirement
systems whose comprehensive annual financial 1
reports (CAFRs) achieve the highest
standards in government accounting
and financial reporting.
1
:11 SUTES'� ---- *e'ez="4".
I
i M o
,g S '�' r President
dRMil
4v* yit,,,zg•teeI
Executive Director
1
I
xii I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
IThis page intentionally left blank
I
1
I
1
I/
FINANCIAL SECTION 1
The Financial Section contains the Report of the Independent Certified Public 1
Accountants, the General Purpose Financial Statements, and the combining and
individual fund information. The General Purpose Financial Statements include
all fund types and account groups in order to provide an overview of the financial
position and results of operations for the City as a whole. The General Purpose
Financial Statements also include the Notes to the Financial Statements. The com-
bining and individual fund information contains detailed financial statements by
fund, and certain other information which the City deems necessary to provide
additional budgeted detail. '
I/
I/
1/
1
First Interstate Building
' Suite 1000
170 S.Main Street
P.O.Box11508
Salt Lake City,UT 84147
801 531-6888
I
i
GrantThornton IS-
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS Accountants and
' Management Consultants
The U.S.Member Firm of
Grant Thornton International
The Honorable Mayor and
Members of the City Council
Salt Lake City Corporation, Utah
We have audited the general purpose financial statements of Salt Lake City Corporation, Utah as of and for
the year ended June 30, 1988, as listed in the table of contents. These financial statements are the
responsibility of Salt Lake City Corporation's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
these financial statements based on our audit.
' We conducted our audit in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards. Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the
' amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting
principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the general purpose financial statements referred to above present fairly the financial
' position of Salt Lake City Corporation, Utah at June 30, 1988, and the results of its operations and the
changes in financial position of its proprietary fund types for the year then ended, in conformity with
generally accepted accounting principles.
' Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming an opinion on the general purpose financial statements
taken as a whole. The combining, individual fund, and individual account group financial statements and
schedules listed in the table of contents are presented for purposes of additional analysis and are not a
required part of the general purpose financial statements of Salt Lake City Corporation, Utah. Such
information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the general purpose
' financial statements and, in our opinion, is fairly stated in all material respects in relation to the
general purpose financial statements taken as a whole.
r
November 16, 1988
Salt Lake City, Utah
11
I
' -1
1
GENERAL PURPOSE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The General Purpose Financial Statements include all fund types and account
groups in order to provide an overview of the financial position and results of
operations for the City as a whole. The General Purpose Financial Statements
include the combined statements and the notes to the financial statements.
1
r
I
1
I
1
1
I
1
r
I
I
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
COMBINED BALANCE SHEET - ALL FUND TYPES AND ACCOUNT GROUPS
June 30, 1988
Governmental Fund II
Special
ASSETS AND OTHER DEBITS General Revenue Debt Service
Assets:
Cash and investments (Note 2) $ 3,871,482 $2,747,648 $ 5,208,297
Receivables:
Property and franchise taxes 5,873,696 643,804 -
Accounts, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $196,040 - - -
Assessments, including $738,363 delinquent - 767,964 3,408,072 II
Loans (Note 3) - - -
Other, principally accrued interest 157,782 - 203,692
Due from other governments 1,187,977 65,340 -
Inventory of supplies - - -
Restricted assets - cash and investments (Notes 2 and 4) 419,605 200,278 1,186,239
Land and water rights (Note 5) - - -
Buildings and improvements (Note 5) - - -
Improvements other than buildings (Note 5) - - - II
Machinery and equipment (Note 5) - - -
Leased property under capital leases (Notes 5 and 6) - - -
Construction in progress (Note 5) - - -
Accumulated depreciation and amortization - - - IIBond issue costs, less accumulated amortization of $584,754 - - -
Land and buildings held for resale - 75,000 -
Other assets - - -
Other debits:
Amount available in Debt Service Fund - - - II
Amount available in General Fund - - -
Resources to be provided for retirement of general long-term obligations - - -
Total assets and other debits $11,510,542 $4,500,034 $10,006,300
LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
Liabilities:
Cash overdraft (Note 2) $ - $ 39,545 $ - IIAccounts payable 2,436,536 355,780 3,175
Accrued liabilities 2,769,395 343,660 -
Deposits and advance rentals - - -
Deferred revenue 3,784,934 2,244,030 3,408,072
Deferred compensation payable from restricted assets (Note 14) - - - '
Other liabilities payable from restricted assets - 200,278 -
Obligations under capital leases (Note 6) - - -
Obligations under certificates of participation (Note 6) - - -
Long-term compensation liability (Note 6) - - - IISpecial improvement bonds with governmental commitment (Note 6) - - -
General obligation bonds payable (Note 6) - - -
Revenue bonds payable (Note 6) - - -
Redevelopment Agency tax allocation bonds payable (Note 6) - - - IIMortgages payable (Note 6) - - -
Notes payable to banks and watermain extension debt (Note 6) - - -
Notes payable to Department of Housing and Urban Development (Note 6) - - -
Total liabilities 8,990,865 3,183,293 3,411,247 11
Commitments and contingencies (Notes 11, 15 and 21) - - -
Fund equity (Notes 7 and 8):
Contributed capital (Note 18) - - - '
Investment in general fixed assets - - -
Retained earnings:
Reserved under bond, loan and land sale agreements - - -
Unreserved - - -
Fund balances: II
Reserved for encumbrances 720,292 - -
Reserved for guaranty of special improvement bonds - - 1,186,239
Reserved for retirement of bonds - - 5,408,814
Reserved for certificates of participation 419,605 - -
Reserved for investment in land held for resale - 75,000 -
II
Unreserved 1,379,780 1,241,741 -
Total fund equity 2,519,677 1,316,741 6,595,053 II
Total liabilities and fund equity $11,510,542 $4,500,034 $10,006,300
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement. II
-4-
II
Fiduciary I
Types Proprietary Fund Types Fund Type Account Groups
Total
Capital Internal Trust and General General Long- (memorandum
Projects Enterprise Service Agency Fixed Assets Term Obligations only)
II $15,406,726 $ 42,736,904 $ 4,014,998 $ 227,105 $ - $ - $ 74,213,160
- - - - - - 6,517,500
- 9,040,034 285,527 - - - 9.325,561
-
-
-
3,398 4,179,434
6,326,230 6,326,230
- 1,333,774 - - - - 1,695,248
47,707 5,046,547 - _ - - 6,347,571
1,756,755 245,600 2,002,355
49,834,773 9,462,645 7,039,734 68,143,274
41,029,911 13,942 - 8,806,885 - 49,850,738
137,107,169 60,871 - 28,064,507 - 165.232,547
-II 225,846,236 145,017 - 5,578,093 - 231,569,346
33,901,613 32,517,677 11,430.476 77,849,766
4,444,315 1,313,283 - 5,757,598
25,163,444 51,500 - 21,002,857 - 46,217,801
II _ (115,185,876) (13,502,152) _ - - (128,688,028)
1,675,349 371,142 2,046,491
9,961,293 10,036,293
1,055,572 - - - - 1,055.572
II -- - -- 6,595,053 419,605 6,595,053
419,605
- - - - 40,567,455 40,567,455
11 $15,454,433 $476,629,728 $38,111,082 $7,270,237 $76,196,101 $47,582,113 $687,260,570
Is _ $ 3,805,289 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 3,844,834
2,979, 60 2,241,713 1,153,373 67,845 9,238,082
11,687,662 833,737 15,634,454
1,330,866 - - - - 1,330,866
- 462,646 3,398 - - 9,903,080
II _ - - 7,039,734 - - 7,039,734
2,429,388 617,885 3,247,551
- 3,637,931 - - 982,012 4,619,943
- - - - 750,000 750,000
II - 2,164,061 475,053 - 6,949,101 9,588,215
-
-
-
4,401,000 4,401,000
14,825.000 - - - 34,500,000 49,325,000
122,627,569 19,595,875 - - - 142,223,444
- 2,400,000 - - - - 2,386,344
II 2,386,344 2,386,344
103,485 103,485
18,627,474 - - - - 18,627,474
II2,979,660 184,628,851 26,776,500 7,110,977 - 47,582,113 284,663,506
- 100,478,442 6,590,546 - - - 107,068,988
II - 76,196,101 76,196,101
39,947,003 - - - - 39,947,003
1 151,575,432 4,744,036 - _ - 156,319,468
- - - 720,292
- - - - - 1,186,239
- - - - - 5,408,814
II
- - - - - 419,605
75,000
12,474,773 - - 159,260 - - 15,255,554
12,474.773 292,000,877 11,334,582 159,260 76,196,101 - 402,597,064
$15,454,433 $476,629,728 $38,111,082 $7,270,237 $76,196,101 $47,582,113 $687,260,570
I -5-
II SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - ALL GOVERNMENTAL FUND TYPES AND EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND
11 Year ended June 30, 1988
Fiduciary
Governmental Fund Types Fund Type
II Total
Special Capital Expendable (memorandum
General Revenue Debt Service Projects Trust only)
II Revenues: - - - -
General property taxes 525,260,946 $4,528,857 $ $ $ $ 29,789,803
Sales and use taxes 19,233,930 19,233,930
Franchise taxes 14,909.149 - - - - 14,909,149
Licenses 2,517,573 107,357 - - - 2,624,930 I
Permits 1,554,803 1.554,803
Fines and forfeitures 658,011 91,771 749,782
Assessments - 339,907 1,056,947 57,806 1,688 1,456,348
Interest 2,714,081 177,389 2,029,379 27,239 5,791 4,953,879
I Intergovernmental 2,415,272 4,230,401 1,022,770 4,021,680 - 11,690,123
Interfund services charges 3,606,993 3,606,993
Parking meter 1,281,631 - - 1,281,631
Parking ticket 2,487,393 - - - - 2,487,393
I Charges for services 1,688,965 - - - 1,688,965
Proceeds from sale of property 467,560 467,560
Contributions 52,070 52,070
Miscellaneous 77,378 21,159 243 50,198 25,564 174,542
1 Total revenues 78,406,125 9,496,841 4,109,339 4,624,483 85,113 96,721.901
Expenditures:
Current:
1City Council 460,603 - - - - 460,603
Mayor 1,745,285 - 1,745,285
City Attorney 1,106,236 - 1,106,236
Finance 5,060,395 - 29,781 - - 5,090,176
Administrative Services 3,398,925 - - - - 3,398,925
I/ Fire 16,599,917 16,599,917
Police 22,398,519 22,398,519
Development Services 3,408,213 - - - - 3,408,213
Parks 5,525,474 - - - - 5,525,474
II Public Works 15,589,426 324,916 - _ - 15,914,342
Library services 4,633,130 4,633,130
Community development - 2,913,318 - - - 2,913,318
Nondepartmental 639,038 - - - 181,327 820,365
II Capital outlay - - - 27,719,634 - 27,719,634
Debt service:
Principal 1,175,000 50,567 906,000 2,131,567
Interest 94,319 5,753 3,047,789 - - 3,147,861
II
Total expenditures 77,201,350 7,927,684 3,983,570 27,719,634 181,327 117,013,565
Revenues over (under) expenditures 1,204,775 1,569,157 125,769 (23,095,151) (96,214) (20,291,664)
I Other financing sources (uses):Bond and lease proceeds 937,294 28,159 485,761 469,239 -
1,920,453
Operating transfers in 1,756,669 455,390 - 4,923,000 26,000 7,161,059
Operating transfers out (5,161,129) (1,731,779) - - - (6,892,908)
I Total other financing
sources (uses) (2,467,166) (1,248,230) 485,761 5,392,239 26,000 2,188,604
I Revenues and other sources over (under)
expenditures and other uses (1.262,391) 320,927 611,530 (17,702,912) (70,214) (18,103,060)
Fund balances, June 30, 1987 3,782,068 995,814 5,983,523 30,177,685 229,474 41,168,564
Fund balances, June 30, 1988 $ 2,519,677 $1,316,741 $6,595,053 $12,474,773 $159,260 $ 23,065,504
I
I The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
-7-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATIONI/
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES -
BUDGET AND ACTUAL - GENERAL, SPECIAL REVENUE, AND DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
Year ended June 30, 1988
11
General Fund
II
Adjustment Actual on
to budgetary budgetary Variance -
Actual basis basis favorable
(GAAP basis) (Note 19) (non-GAAP) Budget (unfavorable) II
Revenues:
General property taxes $25,260,946 $ - $25,260.946 $25,424,831 $(163,885) IISales and use taxes 19,233,930 - 19,233,930 19,406,295 (172,365)
Franchise taxes 14,909,149 - 14,909,149 15,091,190 (182,041)
Licenses 2,517,573 - 2,517,573 2,531,754 (14,181)
Permits 1,554,803 - 1,554,803 1,805,805 (251,002)
Fines and forfeitures 658,011 - 658,011 620,130 37,881 II
Assessments - - - - -
Interest 2,714,081 - 2,714,081 2,732,291 (18,210)
Intergovernmental 2,415,272 - 2,415,272 1,924,286 490,986
Interfund service charges 3,606,993 - 3,606,993 3,521.440 85,553 I
Parking meter 1,281,631 - 1,281,631 1,273,000 8,631
Parking ticket 2,487,393 - 2,487,393 2,509,631 (22,238)
Charges for services 1,688,965 - 1,688,965 1,885,732 (196,767)
Miscellaneous 77,378 - 77,378 33,302 44,076 I
Total revenues 78,406,125 - 78,406,125 78,759,687 (353,562)
Expenditures:
Current: I
City Council 460,603 19,567 480,170 499,033 18,863
Mayor 1,745,285 (12,302) 1.732,983 1,786,114 53,131
City Attorney 1,106,236 (50,521) 1,055,715 1,071,860 16,145
Finance 5,060,395 14,077 5,074,472 5,101,628 27,156 IIAdministrative Services 3,398,925 (43,557) 3,355,368 3,402,936 47,568
Fire 16,599,917 (592,532) 16,007,385 16,020,550 13,165
Police 22,398,519 (1,516,868) 20,881,651 20,989,553 107,902
Development Services 3,408,213 (42,702) 3,365,511 3,393,424 27,913
Parks 5,525,474 125,529 5,651,003 5,682,405 31,402 IIPublic Works 15,589,426 101,975 15,691,401 15,754,115 62,714
Library services - - - - -
Community development - - - - -
Nondepartmental 639,038 - 639,038 639,350 312 II
Debt service:
Principal 1,175,000 - 1,175,000 1,175,000 -
Interest 94,319 - 94,319 94,319 -
Total expenditures 77,201,350 (1,997,334) 75,204,016 75,610,287 406,271II
Revenues over (under) expenditures 1,204,775 1.997,334 3,202,109 3,149,400 52,709
Other financing sources (uses): II
Bond and lease proceeds 937,294 (937,294) - - -
Operating transfers in 1,756,669 - 1,756,669 1,769,600 (12.931)
Operating transfers out (5,161,129) - (5,161.129) (5,164,000) 2,871
Total other financing sources (uses) (2,467,166) (937,294) (3,404,460) (3,394,400) (10,060) II
Revenues and other sources over (under)
expenditures and other uses (1,262,391) 1,060,040 (202,351) (245,000) 42,649
Fund balances (deficit) , June 30, 1987 3,782,068 (774,723) 3,007,345 3,007,345 -
Fund balances, June 30, 1988 $ 2,519,677 $ 285,317 $ 2,804,994 $ 2,762,345 $ 42,649
II
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement. II
-8-
II
II
Special Revenue Funds Debt Service Funds
II Adjustments for funds
without annual budgets
(Note 1) Actual
on budgetary Variance - Variance -
II Actual CD Grants basis favorable Actual favorable
(GAAP basis) Operating Operating (non-GAAP) Budget (unfavorable) (GAAP basis) Budget (unfavorable)
I
$4,528,857 $ - $ - $4,528,857 $4,526,311 $ 2,546 $ - $ - $ -
107,357 - - 107,357 115,000 (7,643) - - -
I
91,771 - - 91,771
3 90,000 1,771 - - -
339,907 39,907 315,429 24,478 1,056,947 1,059,000 (2,053)
177,389 - - 177,389 152,700 24,689 2,029,379 212,000 1,817,379
4,230,401 2,481,491 1,681,278 67,632 45,000 22,632 1,022,770 - 1,022,770
21,159 - 2,462 18,697 8,000 10,697 243 - 243
9,496,841 2,481,491 1,683,740 5,331,610 5,252,440 79,170 4,109,339 1,271,000 2,838,339
II
- - - _ - - - - -
324,916 - - 324,916 430,429 105,513 - - -
4,633,130 - - 4,633,130 4,840,511 207,381 - - -
2,913,318 1,092,973 1,683,740 136,605 217,500 80,895 - - -
50,567 - - 50,567 10,000 (40,567) 906,000 908,000 2,000
5,753 - - 5,753 - (5,753) 3,047,789 3,059,500 11,711
II7,927,684 1,092,973 1,683,740 5,150,971 5,498,440 347,469 3,983,570 3,967,500 (16,070)
1,569,157 1,388,518 - 180,639 (246,000) 426,639 125,769 (2,696,500) 2,822,269
I28,159 - - 28,159 28,500 (341) 485.761 - 485,761
455,390 343,261 - 112.129 115,000 (2,871) - - -
(1,731,779) (1,731,779) - - - - - - -
I
(1,248,230) (1,388,518) - 140,288 143,500 (3,212) 485,761 - 485,761
I 320,927 - - 320,927 (102,500) 423,427 611,530 (2,696,500) 3,308,030
995,814 995,814 995,814 5,983,523 5,983,523
$1,316,741 $ -_--= ==c=- S =c- $1,316,741 $ 893.314 $423,427 $6,595,053 $3,287,023 $3,308,030
II
I -9-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
COMBINED STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS II
ALL PROPRIETARY FUND TYPES
Year ended June 30, 1988
Total I
Internal (memorandum
Enterprise Service only)
Operating revenue:
II
Water sales and charges for services $ 20,673,790 $ - $ 20,673,790
Sewer charges for services 11,412,132 - 11,412,132
Airport charges for services 35,288,264 - 35,288.264 IIGolf course charges for services 2,814,215 - 2,814,215
Rental and other 1,303,430 - 1,303.430
Refuse collection charges 1,893,820 1,893,820
Fleet management charges for services - 7,595,109 7,595,109
Data processing charges for services - 3,408,612 3,408,612 II
Self-insurance charges for services - 6,723,751 6,723,751
Fire dispatch charges for services - 723,002 723,002
Total operating revenue 73,385,651 18,450,474 91,836,125 II
Operating expenses:
Personal services 19.782,039 4,262,478 24,044,517
Operating and maintenance 5,025,849 2,189,985 7,215,834 I
Charges and services 21,405,043 8,256,208 29,661,251
Depreciation and amortization 12,679,428 3,348,184 16,027,612
Participating airline rebate 2,354,890 - 2,354,890
Total operating expenses 61,247,249 18,056,855 79,304,104 II
Operating income 12,138,402 393,619 12,532,021
Nonoperating revenues (expenses) :
Interest income 5,283,988 566,308 5,850,296II
Interest expense (net of interest
expense capitalized of $1,177,474) (9,806,574) (773,443) (10,580,017)
Property taxes 8,633,948 - 8,633,948
Grants 5,064,649 - 5,064,649
Gain (loss) on disposition of
II
property and equipment 172,163 (24,164) 147,999
Writedown of land and buildings
held for resale (1,027,997) - (1,027.997) II
Total nonoperating
revenues (expenses) 8,320,177 (231,299) 8,088,878
Income before operating transfers 20,458,579 162,320 20,620,899 II
Operating transfers in 1,293,020 100,000 1,393,020
Operating transfers out (343.261) (1,317,910) (1,661.171) IINet income (loss) 21,408,338 (1.055,590) 20,352,748
Add amount equal to depreciation on
property and equipment acquired by
grants externally restricted for
capital construction 2,344,547 - 2,344,547
Increase (decrease) in retained earnings 23,752,885 (1,055,590) 22,697,295 IIRetained earnings, June 30, 1987 167,769,550 5,799,626 173,569,176
Retained earnings, June 30, 1988 $191,522,435 $ 4.744,036 $196,266,471 II
II
II
The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement. I
-10-
I SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
COMBINED STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
ALL PROPRIETARY FUND TYPES
Year ended June 30, 1988
II
Total
Internal (memorandum
Enterprise Service only)
I Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
Cash flows from operating activities
Net income (loss) $21,408,338 $(1,055,590) $20,352,748
I Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to net cash
provided by operating activities
Depreciation and amortization 12,679,428 3,348,184 16,027,612
Bad debt expense 299,489 - 299,489
Department of Housing and Urban DevelopmentII -
interest expense 1,456,659 1,456,659
Change in compensated absence liability 66,298 68,205 134,503
Loss on fixed asset dispositions
and writedown 855,834 24,164 879,998
I Changes in assets and liabilities -
Decrease (increase) in accounts receivable 980,903 (162,651) 818,252
Increase in grants receivable (28,514) (28,514)
Increase in interest receivable (714,483) - (714,483)
I Decrease in other receivables 155,431 - 155,431
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable (294,313) 257,062 (37,251)
Increase (decrease) in accrued liabilities 1,415,369 (414,310) 1,001,059
Increase in deferred revenue - 228,909 228,909
Decrease in consumer and other deposits (47,261) - (47,261)
IIIncrease in interest payable 92,475 - 92,475
Net cash provided by operating activities 38,325,653 2,293,973 40,619,626
I Cash flows from investing activities -
Increase in long term cash investments (4,831) -
(4,831)
Loans made to residents (989.668) (989,668)
Principal collected on loans 456,545 - 456,545
Proceeds from sale of equipment 544,847 684,061 1,228,908 I
Proceeds from sale of land and buildings 867,222 867,222
Net change in restricted assets (18,425,000) (18,425,000)
Payments for purchase of fixed assets (44,019,923) (12,647,572) (56,667,495)
INet cash used in investing activities (61,570,808) (11,963,511) (73,534,319)
Cash flows from financing activities
Decrease (increase) in other assets 6,715 (386,146) (379,431)
I Proceeds from issuance of debt -
(net of discount and issuance costs) 22,696,101 19,595,875 42,291,976
Contributions for aid in construction 9,629,332 9,629,332
Increase in cash overdraft 1,809,739 - 1,809,739
11 Repayment of contribution - (50,000) (50,000)
Payment on debt (6,556,779) (717,209) (7,273,988)
Net cash provided by financing activities 27,585,108 18,442,520 46,027,628
I/ Noncash transactions affecting financial position -
Contributions of fixed assets from developers 1,077,993 1,077,993
Acquisitions of fixed assets through
developer contributions (1,077,993) - (1,077,993)
ilNet effect of noncash transactions - - -
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents 4,339,953 8,772,982 13,112,935
II
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year 63,647,231 4,704,661 68,351,892
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year $67,987,184 $13,477,643 $81,464,827
1/ _=. == =
Cash and cash equivalent components: =c= c===@=
Unrestricted S42,736,904 $ 4,014,998 $46,751,902
I Restricted 25,250,280 9,462,645 34,712,925
$67,987,184 $13,477,643 $81,464,827
II The accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement
-11-
I
I
I/
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The notes to the financial statements include a summary of significant accounting
policies of Salt Lake City Corporation. Additional disclosures include details
of cash and investments, restricted assets, general fixed assets, long-term
obligations, reserved fund equity, deficit fund balances and retained earnings
and excess of expenditures and other uses over appropriations in individual
funds, general fund interfund service charges, operating transfers, risk
management, pension plans, post employment benefits, deferred compensation plan,
commitments and contingencies, segments of enterprise fund activities, related
party transactions, contributed capital, budgetary-GAAP reporting reconciliation,
statement of changes in financial position, and subsequent events. The notes to
the financial statements are an integral part of the General Purpose Financial
Statements.
r
1
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-12- 1
I/ SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30. 1988
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Salt Lake City Corporation (the City) was incorporated January 6, 1851. The City operates
under a Council-Mayor form of government and provides services to residents and businesses in many areas
including police and fire protection, street maintenance, sanitation, planning and zoning, building con-
struction inspection, parks, recreation, animal control, prosecutor, water, sewer, airports, and general
administrative services.
Reporting Entity
In evaluating how to define the City, for financial reporting purposes, management has
considered all potential component units. The decision to include a potential component unit in the
reporting entity was made by applying the criteria set forth in generally accepted accounting principles.
The basic criterion for including a potential component unit within the reporting entity is the governing
body's ability to exercise oversight responsibility. The most significant manifestation of this ability is
financial interdependency. Other manifestations are the selection of governing authority, the designation
of management, the ability to significantly influence operations, and accountability for fiscal matters. A
second criterion used in evaluating potential component units is the scope of public service. A third
criterion is the existence of special financing relationships, regardless of whether the government is able
to exercise oversight responsibilities.
The General Purpose Financial Statements of the City include the financial statements of the
Salt Lake City Library (Library), the Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City (Redevelopment Agency), the
Housing Authority of Salt Lake City (Housing Authority), and the Municipal Building Authority. The City
exercises oversight responsibility over these component units and therefore includes them in these
financial statements. The City's financial statements do not include the Metropolitan Water District of
Salt Lake City (Metropolitan Water District). The board members of the Metropolitan Water District are
appointed by the Mayor and approved by the City Council. However, the City does not designate management
and does not have the ability to significantly influence operations. The City and the Metropolitan Water
District do not have a fiscal relationship, except that the City buys water from the Metropolitan Water
District. The scope of public services is greater than that of the City boundaries. Based on these
criteria, this agency has been determined to be independent of the City and therefore is not reported in
these statements. The Salt Lake City School District, State of Utah, Salt Lake County, Salt Lake City
Suburban Sanitary District #1, and Granger-Hunter Improvement District have overlapping debt with the City,
but have no other relationship with the City and are not included in this report.
Basis of presentation - fund accounting
The accounts of the City are organized on the basis of funds or account groups, each of
which is considered to be a separate accounting entity. The operations of each fund or account group are
accounted for by providing a separate set of self-balancing accounts which comprise its assets, liabilities,
fund balance, revenues and expenditures or expenses. The various funds are grouped by type in the combined
financial statements. The City utilizes the following fund types and account groups:
General Fund - The General Fund is used to account for all financial resources applicable
to the general operations of City government which are not accounted for in other funds. Operating reve-
nues which are not restricted or designated as to use by outside sources are recorded in the General Fund.
Special revenue funds - The special revenue funds are used to account for certain property
taxes, grant funds, street lighting assessments, and other special revenues legally restricted for specific
purposes.
Debt service funds - Debt service funds are used to account for the accumulation of resourc-
es for the payment of the general obligation public building bonds, and for the accumulation of special
assessments for the payment of special improvement bonds.
Capital Projects Fund - The Capital Projects Fund is used to account for resources designat-
ed to construct general fixed assets which may require more than one budgetary cycle for completion.
Enterprise funds - Enterprise funds are used to account for operations that are financed and
operated in a manner similar to private business enterprises where the intent of the City is that the costs
of providing goods or services to the general public on a continuing basis be financed or recovered primari-
ly through user charges, or where the City has decided that periodic determination of revenues earned,
expenses incurred, and/or net income is appropriate for capital maintenance, public policy, management
control, accountability, or other purposes. The existing enterprise funds account for construction,
operation, maintenance, related debt, and property, plant and equipment of the City-owned water utility,
sewer utility, airports, golf courses, garbage collection, and housing and urban redevelopment activities.
Internal service funds - Internal service funds are used to account for the financing of
services provided by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the City. The City
maintains internal service funds for fleet management, data processing, fire dispatch, payment of employee
benefit claims, payment of general liability claims and damages, and for the Municipal Building Authority.
(Continued)
I/ -13-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued) II
Trust and agency funds - Trust and agency funds are used to account for assets held by the
City as trustee or agent for individuals, private organizations or other governmental units. II
General Fixed Assets Account Group - The General Fixed Assets Account Group is used to
record the cost of the fixed assets owned by the City, other than those accounted for in proprietary fund
types, and to aid in maintaining physical control over these assets. General fixed assets are recorded as
expenditures in the governmental fund types at the time of purchase or construction. These assets are then II
concurrently recorded, at cost, in the general fixed assets account group. General fixed assets are valued
at historical cost or estimated historical cost for assets where actual historical cost was not available.
Donated assets are recorded in the general fixed assets account group at their estimated fair market value
at the date of donation. Assets acquired through capital leases are recorded at the net present value of
the minimum lease payments at the inception of the lease. Depreciation is not provided on general fixed II
assets. Certain improvements constructed in the public right of way, such as roads, bridges, streets and
sidewalks, and drainage and lighting systems, (infrastructure) are not recorded in the account group.
General Long-term Obligation Account Group - The General Long-term Obligation Account Group
11
is used to account for the outstanding principal balances of capitalized lease obligations, general obliga-
tion bonds, special improvement bonds, and other long-term liabilities, other than obligations of propri-
etary and fiduciary fund types. The Debt Service Fund is used to accumulate resources for repayment of the
general obligation bonds and special assessment bonds. The General Fund will repay other general long-termII
obligations.
Basis of accounting
11 Basis of accounting refers to when revenues and expenditures or expenses are recognized in
the accounts and reported in the financial statements, regardless of the measurement focus applied.
Governmental fund types - All governmental funds are accounted for using the modified
accrual basis of accounting. Under the modified accrual basis, revenues are recognized when they become
measurable and available as net current assets. "Measurable" means that amounts can be reasonably deter-
mined within the current period. "Available" means that amounts are collectible within the current period
or soon enough thereafter (within 60 days) to be used to pay liabilities of the current period.
Property taxes, sales and use taxes, and franchise taxes are considered "measurable" when
collected and held by the county, utility company or State, and are recognized as revenue at that time.
Other revenues that are determined to be susceptible to accrual include grants-in-aid earned and other
intergovernmental revenues, charges for services, interest, assessments, interfund service charges, and sale
of property. Taxes and assessments are recorded as receivables when assessed; however, they are reported as
deferred revenue until the "available" criterion has been met. Revenues collected in advance are deferred
and recognized in the period to which they apply.
Revenues that are determined to not be susceptible to accrual because they are either not
available soon enough to pay liabilities of the current period or are not objectively measurable include li-
censes, permits, fines, forfeitures, parking ticket and meter fees, contributions, and miscellaneous
revenues.
Expenditures are recognized in the accounting period in which the liability is incurred, II
except for general long-term obligations and related interest which are recognized as expenditures when due.
Prepaid expenses and inventories of supplies are not recorded as assets and are expended when purchased.
The financial flow measurement focus is used to account for all governmental funds.
II
Proprietary fund types - Revenues and expenses are recognized using the accrual basis of ac-
counting. Revenues are recognized in the accounting period in which they are earned and expenses are recog-
nized in the period incurred following the capital maintenance measurement focus. Unbilled water and sewer
utility receivables are recorded at year end.
Fiduciary fund types - The Expendable trust fund is accounted for using the modified accrual
basis of accounting. Revenues and expenditures in the City's expendable trust fund are recognized on the
same basis as governmental fund types. Revenues are recognized when they meet both the measurable and
available criteria. Expenditures are recognized in the accounting period in which the liability is in-
curred. Agency funds are custodial in nature (assets equal liabilities) and do not involve measurement of
results of operations. The modified accrual basis of accounting is used to account for the assets and
liabilities of the agency fund.
II
Funds established during the year
In November 1987, the City Council created the Municipal Building Authority of Salt Lake
City under the authority of the Utah Municipal Building Authority Act for the purpose of acquiring a
building and equipment, and leasing the building and equipment to the City. The City has classified this
Authority as an internal service fund for financial reporting purposes. The building and equipment leases
to other funds will begin in July 1988 and will be accounted for as operating leases.
-14-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
Budgets and budgetary accounting
Budgets are legally required for governmental funds. The City has a policy of budgeting for
proprietary funds. Annual budgets are prepared and adopted by the City Council on or before June 15 for the
fiscal year commencing the following July 1, in accordance with state law. The operating budget includes
proposed expenditures and the proposed sources of financing for such expenditures. Prior to June 15, a
public hearing is conducted to obtain taxpayer input. Budgets are adopted for each line item within
departments, but control of budget appropriations is exercised, under state law, at the department level.
The General Fund budget is prepared using the modified accrual basis of accounting adjusted
for encumbrances, changes in compensated absences, early retirement incentives, and capital lease purchas-
es. Encumbrance accounting is used by the City to assure effective budgetary control and accountability,
and to comply with state law. However, only, the General Fund budget is prepared under the assumption that
actual expenditures will be adjusted for encumbrances. Unencumbered General Fund appropriations lapse at
year end. Encumbered amounts carry over to the subsequent year. Generally accepted accounting principles
require that open encumbrances not be reported with expenditures, however, in the General Fund budget to
actual financial statement, the actual amounts are adjusted for encumbrances. Compensated absences and
early retirement incentives are budgeted on a cash basis. Non-cash changes are eliminated for budgetary
purposes. Capital lease purchases are budgeted in the year due rather than in the year purchased.
Budgets for the special revenue funds, debt service funds and the Capital Projects Fund are
also prepared using the modified accrual basis of accounting. The budgets for the Grants Operating Fund,
the Community Development Operating Fund (special revenue funds), and the Capital Projects Fund are pre-
pared by project and do not lapse at year end. Therefore, budget comparisons are not shown for these funds
in the General Purpose Financial Statements since annual budgets are not adopted. Budgets for the Library
Fund, the Central Business Improvement Fund, the Street Lighting Fund (special revenue funds) lapse at
year end. Encumbrances are not reported as expenditures, but where necessary, are reappropriated in the
ensuing year's budget.
' Budgets for the proprietary fund types are prepared using the accrual basis of accounting
except that depreciation, lease amortization and the change for compensated absences are not budgeted.
Budgets are adopted for the entire amount of estimated proceeds from the sale of property and equipment
rather than on the gain or loss from the sale as is reported in the financial statements. A 1988 operating
budget was not adopted for the Housing Development Project of the Housing Authority. Budget information for
combined totals of the Housing Authority is not meaningful and therefore is not presented in this report.
Investments
Investments are stated at cost or amortized cost, except for investments in the Deferred
Compensation agency fund which are reported at market value.
Inventories of supplies
Inventories of supplies for the proprietary fund types are stated at the lower of cost
(using the first-in first-out method) or market. In the proprietary funds, inventory items are considered
expenses when used (consumption method). Inventory items in the governmental fund types are considered
expenditures when purchased (purchases method). inventories in the General Fund and other governmental fund
types are immaterial and are not recorded except for land held for resale in the Library (special revenue)
Fund.
Depreciable fixed assets
Fixed assets in the proprietary fund types are valued at historical cost or estimated
historical cost for assets where actual historical cost was not available. Donated fixed assets are valued
at their estimated fair market value on the date donated. Depreciation of fixed assets in the proprietary
fund types is computed using the straight-line method over the following estimated useful lives:
Buildings 35-60 years
Building improvements 5-40 years
Improvements other than buildings 25-30 years
Machinery and equipment, including leased
property under capital leases 3-35 years
Water and sewer lines 13-100 years
' Amortization
Amortization of bond issue costs and bond discount is computed on the straight-line method
over the life of the related revenue bonds.
(Continued)
-15-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued) II
Property taxes
Ad valorem (based on value) property taxes constitute the main source of General Fund II
revenue. Taxes are levied through the passage of an ordinance in June of each year. The levy is applicable
to only one year. All taxable property is required to be assessed and taxed at a uniform and equal rate on
the basis of its fair market value. The State Tax Commission is required to assess certain statutorily IIspecified types of property including public utilities and mining property as of January 1. The county
assessor is required to assess all other taxable property as of January 1 and complete the tax rolls by May
15. By July 21, the county treasurer is to mail assessed value and tax notices to property owners. Then a
taxpayer may petition the county board of equalization between August 1 and August 15 for a revision of the
assessed value. Approved changes in assessed value are made by the county auditor by November 1 and on this II
same date the auditor is to deliver the completed assessment rolls to the county treasurer. Tax notices are
mailed with a due date of November 30, and delinquent taxes are subject to a penalty. Unless the delin-
quent taxes and penalties are paid before January 15, a lien is attached to the property, and the amount of
taxes and penalties bear interest from January 1 until paid. If after five years delinquent taxes have not II
been paid, the County sells the property at a tax sale. Tax collections are remitted to the City from the
County on a monthly basis.
Interfund transactions IIIn the normal course of its operations, the City has various transactions between funds.
Various City funds provide a number of services such as administrative, fleet maintenance, and data process-
ing to certain other City funds. Beginning in July 1988, building and equipment operating lease payments
will also be made to the Municipal Building Authority Fund (an internal service fund) from some other City II
funds. Charges are treated as revenues in the fund providing the service and as operating expenses in the
fund receiving the service (see note 9). Nonrecurring, nonroutine or residual equity transfers are account-
ed for as changes in fund balance. Other transfers are recognized as operating transfers from a fund
receiving revenue to the fund through which the resources are to be expended. IILong-term liabilities
Long-term liabilities that will be financed from governmental funds are accounted for in the IIGeneral Long-term Obligation Account Group. Long-term liabilities of proprietary funds are accounted for in
the respective funds.
Contributions
Certain proprietary fund types receive contributions for aid in construction from various II
sources. These contributions are credited directly to contributed capital accounts and are not reflected
in operations. Amounts equal to depreciation on property and equipment purchased with contributions which
are externally restricted, are transferred from contributed capital accounts to retained earnings each year. IIDeferred contributions for reservoir and supply line construction
Certain contributions from land developers and private individuals have legal and contractu-
al requirements which must be satisfied before being recognized as fund equity. Such contributions are
recorded as deferred contributions as received and recognized as fund equity when the legal and contractual
requirements have been met.
Land and buildings held for resale II
The cost of land and buildings held for resale in the Redevelopment Fund (an enterprise
fund), and the Library Fund (a special revenue fund) are capitalized until the related property is subse-
quently sold. Land and buildings held for resale are carried at the lower of cost, market, or committed IIsales price. Costs of buildings and improvements that management determines are not recoverable are
expensed. Gains and losses on dispositions of land and buildings held for resale are included in the
operating statement.
Capitalization of interest costs II
The City follows generally accepted accounting principles by capitalizing a portion of its
interest costs as a cost of self-constructed property and equipment in proprietary funds.
Total columns I
The total columns shown on the accompanying combined financial statements are mathematical
totals only and do not eliminate interfund transactions or include other entries required to present IIconsolidated financial statements. Therefore, the accompanying combined financial statements are not
intended to present consolidated financial information.
-16- '
' SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
' 2. Cash and Investments
The City maintains a cash and investment pool that is available for use by all funds. Each
fund type's portion of this pool is included in the combined balance sheet as "Cash and investments". Also
' included are investments separately held by several of the City's funds.
The City's investment policies are governed by state statutes and by the City's own written
investment policies. City funds are invested only in the following: (1) Negotiable or nonnegotiable
' deposits of qualified depositories (See definition of qualified depository under "Deposits" below). (2)
Repurchase agreements with qualified depositories or primary reporting dealers, acting as principal for
securities of the United States Treasury or other authorized investments, only if these securities are
delivered to the custody of the City Treasurer or the City's safekeeping bank or are conducted with a
qualified depository. (3) Commercial paper which is rated P-1 by Moodys Investor Services or A-1 by
Standard and Poors Inc. having a remaining term to maturity of 180 days or less. Commercial paper can be
purchased directly from the issuer provided proper delivery and safekeeping procedures are followed with a
qualified depository or the City Treasurer's safekeeping bank or trust company. (4) Bankers' acceptance
that are eligible for discount at a federal reserve bank and which have a remaining term to maturity of 180
' days or less. (5) Negotiable certificates of deposits of $100,000 or more which have a remaining term to
maturity of 365 days or less. (6) Obligations of the United States Treasury including United States
Treasury Bills, United States Treasury Notes, and United States Treasury Bonds. (7) Obligations
issued by or fully guaranteed as to principal and interest by the following agencies or instrumentalities
' of the United States in which a market is made by a primary reporting government securities dealer:
Federal Home Loan Banks, Federal Farm Credit Banks, Federal National Mortgage Association, Government
National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, or Student Loan Marketing Associa-
tion. (8) The Utah State Treasurer's Investment Pool. (9) Investments with deferred compensation plan
' administrators.
The City did not enter into any reverse repurchase agreements during the year.
Deposits - State law requires that City funds be deposited with a "qualified depository" as
' defined by the Utah Money Management Act. "Qualified depository" includes any depository institution which
has been certified by the Utah State Commissioner of Financial Institutions as having met the requirements
as defined in Rule 11 of the Utah Money Management Act. Rule 11 establishes the formula for determining
the amount of public funds which a qualified depository may hold in order to minimize risk of loss and
' defines capital requirements which an institution must maintain to be eligible to accept public funds.
City policy provides that not more than 25% of total City funds or 25% of the qualified
depository's allotment, whichever is less, can be invested in any one qualified depository. Not more than
20% of total City funds may be invested in any one certified out-of-state financial institution.
' The City's deposits are categorized in the following table to give an indication of the
level of risk assumed by the City at year end. Category 1 includes deposits that are insured or
collateralized with securities held by the City or its agent in the City's name. Category 2 includes
' deposits which are collateralized with securities held by the pledging financial institution's trust
department or agent in the City's name. Category 3 are deposits which are uninsured and uncollateralized.
Category Carrying Bank
' 1 2 - 3 Amount Balance
Bank accounts $ 304,189 $ $ 2,703,787 $ 3,007,976 $ 4,946,944
Certificates of deposit 1,600,000 7,531,603 45,504,297 54,635,900 54,635,900
Money market accounts 312,417 907,206 - 1,219,623 1,219,623
' $2,216,606 $8,438,809 $48,208,084 $58,863,499 $60,802,467
Investments - The City Treasurer takes physical delivery of securities or may use a qualified
depository bank for safekeeping securities or maintain an account with a money center bank for the purpose
' of settling investment transactions, safekeeping and collecting those investments. Repurchase agreements
with qualified depositories are supported by a safekeeping receipt issued by a qualified depository;
otherwise, the securities are in the custody of the City Treasurer or the City's safekeeping bank or trust
company. Investments in the State Treasurer's Pool are supported by deposit receipts issued by the State
' Treasurer's Office. All funds pledged or otherwise dedicated to the payment of interest and principal of
bonds issued by the City are invested in accordance with the terms and borrowing instruments applicable to
such bonds. City policy also provides that the remaining term to maturity of an investment may not exceed
the period of availability of the funds invested. The investment of City funds can not be of a speculative
' nature.
The City's investments are categorized in the following table to give an indication of the
level of risk assumed by the City at year end. Category 1 includes investments that are insured or regis-
tered or for which the securities are held by the City or its agent in the City's name. Category 2 includes
' uninsured and unregistered investments for which the securities are held by the counterparty's trust
department or agent in the City's name. Category 3 includes uninsured and unregistered investments for
which the securities are held by the counterparty, or by its trust department or agent but not in the City's
name.
' (Continued)
-17-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
2. Cash and Investments (continued)
Category Carrying Market
1 2 3 Amount Value
Repurchase Agreements-sweep accounts $ - $ - $ 5,235,927 $ 5,235,927 $ 5,235,927
U.S. Government Securities 13.567,036 16,679,950 277,837 30,524,823 30,223,558
Municipal bonds - 1,845,208 18,425,000 20,270,208 20,235,856
Commercial paper 14,459,035 - - 14,459,035 14,551,779
$28,026,071 $18,525,158 $23,938,764 70,489,993 70,247,120
Investment in state treasurer's pool 2,104,628 2,104,628
Investment with deferred compensation plan administrator (investment pool) 7,039,734 7,039,734
Total investments $79.634,355 $79,391,482
The degree of risk associated with the investments held by the state treasurer's pool and
the deferred compensation plan administrator depends on the underlying portfolio. Therefore, these amounts
are not categorized according to risk.
A summary of restricted and unrestricted cash investments at June 30, 1988 is as follows:
Amount per combined balance sheet:
Unrestricted amounts $ 74,213,160
Restricted amounts 68,143,274
Overdraft amounts (3,844,834)
$138,511,600
Deposits $ 58.863,499
Investments 79,634,355
Cash on hand 13,746
$138,511,600
3. Loans Receivable
The Redevelopment Agency (an enterprise fund) provides loans to residents for improvements
in existing housing within designated project areas. Some loans are payable in monthly installments, others
are due on sale or transfer of ownership of the related property, and other loan payments are deferred until
between 1988 and 1993. Redevelopment loans receivable as of June 30, 1988 were $6,326,230.
4. Restricted Assets
Restricted assets in the General Fund are restricted by provisions of the certificates of
participation agreement.
Restricted assets in the Water and Sewer Utility Funds (enterprise funds) include unexpended
bond proceeds. The bond resolutions require all bond proceeds and revenue earned on bond proceeds to be re-
stricted to the payment of bond construction projects specified within the resolutions, the payment of bond
principal and interest, and for renewal and replacement of property and equipment. Certain Water Utility
certificates of deposit are also restricted for consumer deposits and for contributions for reservoir and
supply line construction.
Restricted assets in the Airport Authority Fund (an enterprise fund) include unexpended bond
proceeds. These assets are restricted under both the general obligation bond resolution and the revenue bond
resolution for the purpose of paying bond principal and interest and for construction of specific Airport
facilities. Also, certain assets are restricted for operating and maintenance costs, and for renewal and
replacement of property and equipment.
Restricted assets in the Redevelopment Agency (an enterprise fund) are restricted by
provision of bond resolutions and bank loan agreements. Also grant monies are restricted for specific
purposes.
Restricted assets in the Housing Authority Fund (an enterprise fund) are restricted by
provisions of the bond resolution for construction and revenue bond debt service.
Restricted assets in the Deferred Compensation Agency Fund are investments with deferred
compensation plan administrators according to legal agreements with employees.
Restricted assets in the Grants Operating Fund (a special revenue fund) are related to Urban
Development Action Grant loan repayments.
Restricted assets in the Municipal Building Authority (an internal service fund) are
restricted by provisions of the bond resolution for acquisition of a building and equipment.
-18-
IISALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
II
5. General Fixed Assets
The following table summarizes the changes in general fixed assets during the year ended
June 30, 1988:
II Improvements Machinery
other than and Construction
Land Buildings buildings equipment* in progress Total
II Balance, June 30, 1987 $8,806,885 $27,780,335 $5,037,629 $12,477,097 $ 6,170,341 $60,272,287
Additions:
General Fund - 1,050 1,828,171 - 1,829,221
Special revenue funds - 8,553 23,073 239,996 - 271,622
I
Capital Projects Fund - 274,569 517,391 44,395 14,832,516 15,668,871
Retirements:
General Fund (1,812,107) (1,812,107)
Special revenue funds - - - (33,793) - (33,793)
IIBalance, June 30, 1988 $8,806,885 $28,064,507 $5,578,093 $12,743,759 $21,002,857 $76,196,101
*Includes leased property under capital leases of $1,313,283 at June 30, 1988.
II
6. Long-term Obligations
Changes in long-term obligations
II
Revenue bonds and other long-term liabilities directly related to and intended to be paid
from proprietary funds are included in the accounts of such funds. All other long-term obligations of the
City are accounted for in the General Long-term Obligation Account Group. Long-term obligations of the City
are as follows:
II
Balance Balance
Obligations under capital leases: June 30, 1987 Additions Retirements June 30, 1988
Internal service funds $ 4,355,139 $ - $ 717,208 $ 3,637,931
General Long-term Obligation Account Group 1,489.037 965,454 1,472,479 982,012
II Certificates of participation 1,925,000 - 1,175,000 750,000
Long-term compensation liability:
Enterprise funds 2,026,430 137,631 2,164,061
Internal service funds 421,976 53,077 - 475,053
Long-term Obligation Account Group 6,758,000 191,101 - 6,949,101
II
Special improvement bonds (capital projects and
debt service funds) 4,352,000 955,000 906,000 4,401,000
General obligation bonds:
1986 Public Building Bonds 34,500,000 - - 34,500,000
II
Enterprise funds: (net of unamortized discount)Airport 1971 series 2,625,000 - 675,000 1,950,000
Airport 1975 series 5,545,000 - 410,000 5.135,000
Airport 1977 series 7,785,000 - 45,000 7,740,000
II
Revenue bonds: -
Enterprise funds:
Water 1986 series 24,556,816 891,426 23,665,390
Sewer 1986 series 6,527,762 - 236,962 6,290,800
Airport 1978 series 32,412,809 - 1,045,172 31,367,637
II
Airport 1983 series 24,769,704 (34,749)* 24,804,453
Airport 1987 limited obligation special
facility (net of unamortized discount) - 21,758,000 - 21,758,000
Redevelopment Agency home improvement
II
and rehabilitation 830,000
14, - 230,000 600,000
Housing for the Elderly, 1985 series A 637,202 (6,171)* 14,643,373
Internal service funds:
Municipal Building Authority Lease Revenue - 19,595,875 - 19,595,875
II
Redevelopment Agency tax allocation bonds -
Enterprise fund 4,600,000 2,200,000 2,400,000
Mortgages payable:
Redevelopment Agency mortgages (enterprise fund) 1,495,727 - 52,241 1,443,486
II
Housing Authority mortgages (enterprise fund) 1,023,998 - 81,140 942,858
Notes payable:
Enterprise funds:
Housing Authority notes payable to HUD 17,770,257 857,217 - 18,627,474
Redevelopment Agency note payable to bank 178,536 - 178,536 -
' Housing Authority note payable to bank 85,814 - 17,779 68,035
Watermain extension debt (enterprise fund) 292,433 256,983 35,450
$200,963,640 $44,513,355 $10,550,006 $234,926,989
II
*Amortization of discount
(Continued)
-19-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION I
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
6. Long-term Obligations (continued) I
Description of certificates, bonds and mortgages outstanding
The following summarizes certificates, bonds and mortgages outstanding at June 30, 1988: I
Final Interest Outstanding
Maturity Rates Balance
Certificates of participation 1989 6.75% $ 750,000 IISpecial improvement bonds with governmental commitment:
38-496 1990 11.5% 27,000
38-517 1990 8.7-9% 63,000
38-523 1990 11.5% 15,000 II
38-533 1992 12.5% 60,000
38-535 1993 8.25-8.75% 150,000
38-539-2 1991 11.5% 32,000
38-545 1990 8.75-9% 27,000
38-555-1 1992 12.5% 16,000
38-555-2 1991 11.5% 24,000
II
38-560 1991 11.5% 25,000
38-576 1990 11.5% 14,000
38-596 1990 8.5-9.0% 123,000 II
38-601-2 1992 12.5% 16,000
38-622 1992 10% 178.000
38-668 1990 8.0-8.25% 100,000
38-684 1994 8.2-10.2% 240,000 II
38-700 1994 8.85-10.85% 65,000
40-R-5 1990 7.71% 240,000
38-681 1995 9.28% 62,000
38-708 1995 8.75% 670,000
38-686 1995 9.4% 84,000 II
38-723 1995 9.28% 177,000
38-728 1995 9.39% 64,000
40-R-6 1991 5.1% 410,000
38-760 1996 6.03% 85,000 I
38-685 1997 6.53% 127,000
40-R-7 1992 6.04% 92,000
38-750 1997 6.92% 283,000
38-800 1997 6.92% 185,000
40-R-10 1992 7.06% 143,000 I
50-1119 1989 6.4% 40,000
50-1313 1997 7.33% 344,000
35-4012 1989 6.15% 220,000
4,401,000 I
1986 Building bonds - general obligation 2011 7.8% 34,500,000
Enterprise funds - general obligation:
Airport 1971 series 1991 4-6% 1,950,000
Airport 1975 series 1997 5-6.5% 5,135,000 IIAirport 1977 series 1998 5-5.5% 7,740,000
14,825,000
Revenue bonds:
Water 1986 series
(net of unamortized discount of S224,210) 2005 5.25-7.5% 23,665,390 II
Sewer 1986 series
(net of unamortized discount of S59,600) 2005 5.25-7.5% 6,290,800
Airport 1978 series
(net of unamortized discount of $227,363) 2004 6.1-7% 31,367,637 II
Airport 1983 series
(net of unamortized discount of $695,547) 2008 9.125-9.9% 24,804,453
Airport 1987 limited obligation special facility 2017 Variable-weekly 21,758,000
(net of unamortized discount of $242,000) (5.28% at June 30,1988) IIHousing Authority (enterprise fund) Housing for the Elderly,
1985 series A (net of unamortized discount of $256,627) 2030 5-7.25% 14,643,373
Redevelopment Agency (enterprise fund) home improvement
and rehabilitation program bonds, series A 1996 7-10.25% 600,000 IIMunicipal Building Authority (internal service fund)
lease revenue bonds, series 1988
(net of unamortized discount of S44,125) 2002 5.1-7.5% 19,595,875
142,725,528
Redevelopment Agency tax allocation bonds (enterprise fund) 1989 10-11% 2,400,000 IIMortgages payable (enterprise funds):
Redevelopment Agency mortgages 2008 9-9.25% 1,443,486
Housing Authority mortgages 2023 6-12% 942,858
2,386,344
-20- S201,987,872II
ISALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
II
Summary of certificate, bond and mortgage maturities
Long-term certificate, bond and mortgage maturities, along with interest cost, at June 30,
II
1988 are as follows:
Governmental Fund Types Enterprise Funds Internal Service Funds
Certificates General Special
Year ending of obligation improvement Bonds and
I
June 30 participation bonds bonds mortgages Bonds
Principal:
1989 $750,000 $ - $1,002,000 $ 7,427,757 $ 1,310,000
1990 - 675,000 783,000 4,392,358 1,395,000
I
1991 - 725,000 718,000 4,652,200 1,475,000
1992 800,000 549,000 4,883,565 1,565,000
1993 850,000 380,000 5,360,279 1,660,000
1994-1998 - 5,325,000 969,000 31,170,214 6,100,000
1999-2003 - 7,425,000 - 29.026,117 6,135,000
II
2004-2008 -
10,450,000 21,325,496
2009-2013 8,250,000 1,157,784 -
2014-2018 - - - 23,700,824 -
2019-2023 - - - 3,252,137 -
' 2024-2028 - - - 5,005,613 -
2029-2030 2,850,000
-
Less unamortized
discount - - - (1,463,347) (44,125)
I
$750,000 $34,500,000 $4,401,000 $142,740,997 $19,595,875
Interest:
1989 $ 24,375 $ 2,691,500 $ 349,588 $ 8,795,530 $ 1,505,773
1990 - 2,691,500 271,323 8,271,934 1,172,263
II
1991 -
2,625,688 207,507 8,000,658 1,093,298
1992 2,555,000 150,030 7,706,428 1,005,830
1993 - 2,477,000 107,107 7,381,942 908,618
1994-1998 - 11,044,692 181,734 31,039,360 3,340,427
II 1999-2003 - 8,684,026 - 20,571,004 1,199,538
2004-2008 5,456.726 10,501,942 -
2009-2013 1,182,914 5,089,044 -
2014-2018 - - - 4,547,751 -
I
2019-2023 - - - 3,636,778 -
2024-2028 2,196,051
2029-2030 315,375 -
$ 24,375 $39,409,046 $ 1,267,289 $118,053,797 $10,225,747
II
II
II
II
II
II
I (Continued)
-21-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
6. Long-term Obligations (continued) II
Obligations under capital leases
The City is obligated under certain leases accounted for as capital leases. The leased II
assets and related obligations are accounted for in the funds or account groups to which they apply. Assets
under capital leases consist of $1,313,283 in the General Fixed Assets Account Group and $4,444,315 in the
internal services funds. Accumulated amortization for assets under capital leases in internal service funds IIwas $845,282 at June 30, 1988.
The following schedule of future minimum lease payments under capital leases, is separated
into principal and interest as of June 30, 1988.
Internal Service Funds II
Data General
Processing Long-term obligations
Year ending June 30 Fund Account Group IIPrincipal:
1989 $ 748,396 $109,168
1990 795,481 118,709
1991 845,551 132,257 II1992 877,242 142,896
1993 371,261 149,542
1994 - 161,137
1995 - 168,303
$3.637,931 $982,012 II
Interest:
1989 $ 200,943 $ 95,448 II
1990 153,858 82,321
1991 103,787 68,639
1992 50,450 54,434
1993 5,584 40,158 I
1994 - 25,830
1995 - 10,904
$ 514,622 $377,734
Compensation Liabilities (Compensated Absences) II
Vacation leave, compensatory leave, and the portion of sick leave that will eventually be II
paid are recognized as liabilities as they are earned. In the event of termination or retirement an
employee is reimbursed for unused accumulated vacation. It is the policy of the City to provide an award
to employees who retire early for their years of service to the City. The award includes a payment of 50
percent, 75 percent, or 100 percent of unused accumulated sick leave depending on the employee's age and IIyears of service. Employees who do not elect to retire early are reimbursed for 25 percent of unused
accumulated sick leave upon retirement. Liability for accumulated compensated absences at June 30, 1988 is
reported in the individual funds except for the long-term portion in the governmental funds which is
recorded in the General Long-term Obligations Account Group.
Special Improvement Bonds with Governmental Commitment II
Principal and interest on special improvement bonds are paid from special assessment collec-
tions. A separate fund has been established, the Special Improvement Debt Service Fund. to contain the II
receipts derived by the City from the special assessments levied upon the property included in the special
improvement districts together with interest on the assessments and if necessary additional funds trans-
ferred by the City to the debt service fund. Under the terms of the special improvement bond resolutions
and state law, the City has agreed to maintain a special improvement guaranty account for the benefit of IIthe bondholders. This account is to receive a tax levy of .0002, unless the account is equal to or greater
than forty percent of the amount of all outstanding special improvement bonds issued prior to March 30,
1981, and twenty-five percent of the amount of all outstanding special improvement bonds issued on or after
March 30, 1981. The special improvement guaranty account is $1.186,239 at June 30, 1988. The City is IIlegally obligated to transfer funds from the guaranty account if sufficient debt service funds are not
available. City officials are also committed to assume responsibility for the debt in the event of default.
II
-22 '
II
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
IIWater and Sewer Utility Bonds and Debt
The 1986 Water and Sewer Utility Bonds were issued to defease the outstanding 1983 series
I
revenue bonds and to retire the 1981 series revenue bonds. The outstanding balance of the 1983 series
revenue bonds at June 30, 1988 is $22,300,000. The 1983 series revenue bonds defeased 1982 series revenue
bonds, of which the outstanding balance at June 30, 1988 is $15,300,000.
I
The bond resolution approved in conjunction with the issuance of the Salt Lake City Water
and Sewer revenue bonds provides, among other things, that certain funds be established and that certain
accounting procedures be followed. Under the terms of the resolution the City irrevocably pledged the net
revenues of the Utilities to the payment of the bonds and covenanted that rates will be established to yield
IInet revenues, as defined, equal to at least 1.25 times the debt service to become due in the next fiscal
year.
Watermain extension debt represents the Water Utility's liabilities to developers that have
constructed watermain extension that became part of the City's system. The amounts are payable over a ten-
year period. Yearly installments are based on water connections in the areas where watermain extensions
I
were constructed.
Airport Authority Bonds
I While the full faith and credit of the City are pledged to the payment of the Airport
Authority general obligation bonds, it is the City's intention that the proceeds necessary to retire the
general obligation bonds be provided from Airport resources. Consequently, the Airport Authority general
obligation bonds have been recorded in the Airport Authority Fund.
' The bond resolution approved in conjunction with the issuance of the Airport revenue bonds
provides, among other things, that certain funds be established and certain accounting procedures be
followed. Under the terms of this resolution, the City irrevocably pledged the net revenues of the City
airports to the payment of the bonds and covenanted that rates will be established to yield net revenues, as
I
defined, equal to at least 1.25 times the debt service to become due in the next fiscal year.
The 1978 series Airport Authority revenue bonds are subject to redemption at the election of
the City after October 31, 1988 in inverse order of maturity at redemption prices equal to the principal
I
amount plus a premium ranging up to 2-1/2% of the principal amount. The 1983 series revenue bonds are
subject to redemption at the election of the City after May 30, 1993 in inverse order of maturity at
redemption prices equal to the principal amount plus a premium ranging up to 2$ of the principal amount.
The limited obligation special facility revenue bonds totaling $22,000,000 were issued in
I
July 1987 to finance the acquisition and construction of the Delta Air Lines hangar, marketing, reserva-
tions, and training center at the Airport. The bonds are special and limited obligations of the City and do
not constitute a debt of or a pledge of revenues of the City other than the rental revenues for the facili-
ties from Delta Air Lines.
II
Municipal Building Authority Bonds
In February 1988, the Municipal Building Authority (an internal service fund), sold
I
$19,640,000 of lease revenue bonds. Proceeds of the bonds are being used to purchase street lights, garbage
trucks and cans, telephone equipment, and to purchase and renovate a building and parking structures.
Redevelopment Agency Bonds, Mortgages, and Notes
II The Redevelopment Agency home improvement and rehabilitation program revenue bonds are
special obligations of the Agency and are secured by and payable solely from repayments of principal and
interest on loans issued from proceeds from the bond sale and the amounts on deposit in various accounts and
the investment income therefrom. The bonds are subject to redemption prior to maturity, including special
I
redemption, at amounts ranging from par to par plus a premium of 2.9%.
The Redevelopment Agency tax allocation bonds are secured by a first pledge of taxes levied
upon taxable property in the redevelopment project area, as well as all revenues of the Redevelopment
II Agency. Redevelopment Agency incremental property tax revenue will be used to pay principal and interest on
the Redevelopment Agency tax allocation bonds.
The bond resolution approved in conjunction with the issuance of tax allocation bonds
provides, among other things that certain funds be established and certain accounting procedures be fol-
II lowed. The bonds are callable before maturity at principal plus accrued interest, and must be redeemed to
the extent that there is an excess of funds over the related project costs covered by the bonds or if any
part of the project area is taken from the Redevelopment Agency by eminent domain or other proceedings
authorized by law.
I
The Redevelopment Agency assumed two mortgages in acquiring land held for resale. These 9%
and 13% mortgages are payable in monthly installments and secured by the land.
(Continued)
II -23-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
6. Long-term Obligations (continued)
Housing Authority Bonds, Mortgages, and Notes
In 1985, the Housing Authority issued $14,900,000 of housing revenue bonds to finance a
housing project for the elderly. During 1988, it was decided to discontinue development of five housing
projects, due to uncertainty of the feasibility of the projects. These projects had total capitalized costs
of $1,932,997 as of June 30, 1988. The Housing Authority intends to sell the properties. The accompanying
financial statements reflect a write-down of the properties of $1,027,997 to their estimated realizable
value based on appraisal.
The Housing Authority mortgages payable include a mortgage payable to a bank at 10.33%
secured by real property, and various mortgages assumed by the Housing Authority in acquiring property with
interest ranging from 6% to 12% secured by real property.
Housing Authority notes payable to HUD are to be forgiven by the U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development in accordance with legislation enacted by Congress in April 1986. The debt and
related accrued interest are to be forgiven after debt forgiveness amendments have been executed between the
Housing Authority and HUD. These amendments are expected to be executed in the next two years.
The Housing Authority note payable to the bank for 10.5% interest will be retired by monthly
payments of $2,159 through 1991 and is secured by equipment.
Other
Principal and interest due on July 1 are treated as though due June 30 of each year since
the City has historically paid the principal and interest prior to year end and plans to continue to do so.
Tax anticipation notes totalling $23,000,000 were issued and repaid during fiscal 1988.
7. Reserved Fund Equity
Retained earnings reserved under bond, loan, and land sale agreements, represent that
portion of the Water and Sewer Utilities, Airport Authority, Redevelopment Agency, and Housing Authority
(enterprise) Funds' retained earnings that are legally restricted for the payment of debt service, opera-
tions and maintenance, renewal and replacement of property and equipment, and capital improvements.
Amounts reserved for encumbrances represents that portion of fund balance which has been
segregated pending vendor performance on purchase commitments or contracts outstanding at June 30, 1988.
Amounts reserved for guaranty of special improvement bonds represents that portion of fund
balance restricted by state law to guaranty the payment of special improvement bond principal and interest.
Amounts reserved for the retirement of debt represents that portion of fund balance re-
stricted by bond agreements for the payment of debt service requirements.
The amount reserved for certificates of participation is that portion of certificate
proceeds which is restricted by bond agreements to guaranty the payment of debt service requirements.
Amounts reserved for temporary investment in land held for resale represents that portion of
fund balance which is not available for current expenditures.
i
-24-
I
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
I8. Deficit Fund Balances/Retained Earnings and Excess of Expenditures and Other Uses Over Appropriations
in Individual Funds
II The combined retained earnings for the enterprise funds includes a $102,468 deficit in the
Refuse Collection Fund. Revenues are expected to be sufficient in the 1989 fiscal year to offset the
deficit.
The combined retained earnings for the enterprise funds includes a $4,867,670 deficit
II
balance in the Housing Authority Fund. The deficit will be eliminated when HUD forgives the debt and
related accrued interest.
The combined retained earnings for the internal service funds includes a $536,885 deficit
I
balance in the Employee Benefit Self-Insurance Fund. Effective November 1, 1987 the City replaced its
medical plan by joining the state's health insurance plan. The deficit in the fund is expected to be
eliminated by premiums over the next five years.
U
The combined retained earnings for the internal service funds includes a $811,911 deficit
balance in the Municipal Building Authority Fund. This was the first year of operations for this fund
having been established in February 1988. Currently the objective of the City is to fund debt service
however in the long run revenues are expected to be sufficient to offset the deficit.
II The Special Improvement Fund (a debt service fund) expenditures of $1,292,070 exceeded
appropriations of $1,276,000 by $16,070 because paying agent and registrar fees were not budgeted.
The Governmental Immunity Fund (an internal service fund) expenses of $432,276 exceeded
I
appropriations of $361,997 by $70,279 because of higher than expected claim settlements. An additional
$300,000 of revenue has been budgeted in the 1989 fiscal year.
II 9. General Fund Interfund Service Charges
The General Fund charges the proprietary funds, certain special revenue funds, a debt
service fund and the Capital Projects Fund for various services. These transactions have been recorded as
revenue and expenses or expenditures to the funds as if they involved organizations external to the City.
IIThe amounts of the charges to those funds are as follows:
General Fund charges for:
Fire Police
I
Administrative protection protection Engineering Telephone
Enterprise funds: services services services services services Total
Water Utility $ 458,617 S $ $ $ 66,834 $ 525,451
Sewer Utility 183,109 - - 1,025 27,142 211,276
I
Airport Authority 463,705 1,014,268 103,614 - - 1,581,587
Refuse Collection 97,833 1,447 99,280
Golf Course 88,988 38,001 5,063 132,052
Housing Authority - - - - 43,731 43,731
Redevelopment Agency 39,873 - - - - 39,873
II
Internal service funds:
Fleet Management 219,475 8,654 228,129
Data Processing 69,080 - - - - 69,080
Employee Benefit Self-Insurance 73,402 - - - 1,446 74,848
II Central Fire Dispatch 17,140 - - - - 17,140
Governmental Immunity 7,792 7,792
Special revenue funds -
Library 13,000 - - - - 13,000
U
Central Business Improvement - - - - -
District 2,709 -
-
-
2,709
Community Development Operating 3,504 3,504
Debt service -
I
Special Improvement - - - 85,272 - 85,272
Capital Projects Fund 160,000 312,269 472,269
Total $1,894,723 $1,014,268 $103,614 $440,071 $154,317 $3,606,993
II
I
-25-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION IINOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
10. Operating Transfers II
Operating transfers were made from the General Fund (1) to the Capital Projects Fund for
$4,923,000 to fund certain capital improvements, (2) to the Street Lighting Fund (a special revenue fund) II
for $112,129 representing the City's share of street lighting costs, (3) to the Employee Benefit Self-
insurance Fund (an internal service fund) for $100,000 to help pay for early retirement incentive costs, and
(4) to the Salt Lake City Trust Fund for $26,000 to provide funding for demolition of structures and weed
control. IIThe Community Development Operating Fund (a special revenue fund) transferred $1,293,020 to
the Redevelopment Fund (an enterprise fund), and the Redevelopment Fund transferred $343.261 back to the
Community Development Operating Fund. The Community Development Operating Fund also transferred $438,759
to the General Fund to reimburse for allowable grant expenditures. Transfers to the General Fund from the IIFleet Management Fund (an internal service fund) for $1,240,675 were made to reimburse the General Fund for
garbage trucks purchased in the prior fiscal year, and to refund over collected revenues from prior years.
The Municipal Building Authority Fund (an internal service fund) transferred $77,235 to the General Fund to
reimburse for allowable expenditures. II
11. Risk Management
The City is self-insured for general liability claims, except for liability incurred at the II
airport. The Governmental Immunity Fund (an internal service fund) has been established to pay these
claims along with certain City Attorney expenses. The City is also self-insured for property damage to City
motor vehicles and other equipment. The operating departments of the General Fund or proprietary funds
assume financial responsibility for property damage losses. Further, the City is self-insured for employee II
long-term disability, unemployment and worker's compensation. The Employee Benefit Self-Insurance Fund (an
internal service fund) has been established to pay these claims along with certain administrative expenses.
Liability is recorded for any claims or judgments when information available prior to IIissuance of the financial statements indicates it is probable that an asset has been impaired or a liability
has been incurred at the date of the financial statements and the amount of the loss can be reasonably
estimated.
12. Pension Plans I
Identification - The City participates in four cost-sharing multiple-employer public
employee retirement systems which are defined benefit retirement plans covering public employees of the IIState of Utah and employees of participating local governmental entities. The systems are administered
under the direction of the Utah State Retirement Board whose members are appointed by the governor of Utah.
The systems are considered part of the State of Utah financial reporting entity and are included in the
State of Utah comprehensive annual financial report. IICurrent-year covered payroll - The City's total payroll was $62,712,727 for the year ended
June 30, 1988. The City's covered payroll eligible for retirement benefits for the year ended June 30, 1988
is as follows:
Covered I
payroll
Contributory System $21,083,118
Noncontributory System 16,353,093
Public Safety System 9,717,532 II
Firemen's System 9.797,891
$56,951,634
Plan provisions - The retirement systems have been established and are governed by Utah II
State Law. City police officers are covered by the Public Safety System, firefighters are covered by the
Firemen's System, and substantially all other permanent City employees are covered by either the Contributo-
ry System or the Noncontributory System. The Noncontributory System was implemented during the year as a IIresult of legislation by the State of Utah. The Noncontributory System is mandatory for all new full time
employees other than police and firefighters. Current employees were given the opportunity to remain with
their present retirement plan or to convert membership to the new Noncontributory plan which provides a
benefit formula using a three-year rather than a five-year average salary. Other legislation enhanced death
benefits for public employees, removed time limitations on redeposits in the Firemen's System, amended the I
laws on disability within the Public Safety System, and tightened the laws governing refunds. A brief
summary of eligibility and benefits are as follows:
II
-26 '
I
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
II
Contributory Noncontributory Public Safety and Firemen's
System System Systems
I
Highest average salary Highest 5 years Highest 3 years Highest 3 years
Years of service 30 years any age 30 years any age 20 years any age
required and/or age 20 years age 60 25 years any age 10 years age 60
I
eligible for benefit (with actuarial reduction)
10 years age 62 20 years age 60 4 years age 65
4 years age 65 10 years age 62
4 years age 65
I
Benefit percent 1.10% per year to June 1967 2.5% per year up to 20 years
per year of 1.25� per year July 1967 to June 1975 2.0% per year over 20 years
service 2.00% per year July 1975 to present
I
Employer and employee obligations - Contribution rates consist of an amount to finance
benefits earned by the members during the current service year and an amount for amortization of the
unfunded actuarial liability over a period of 40 years. The retirement systems are governed by the state
I
legislature and administered by the Utah State Retirement Board. In addition to the City's matching
contributions to the plans, the City also pays most or in some cases all of the employee contributions. All
contributions have been made on their monthly due dates. The nature of the employer's legal obligation to
contribute to the plans and the extent of employee obligations to contribute at June 30, 1988 were as
follows:
IIContributions Employee City's
deducted from contributions matching
employee pay paid by City contribution
I
(100% vested) (100% vested) (vested upon retirement)
Contributory System - $ 6.00% 3.65%
Noncontributory System - - 7.00
I
Public Safety System:
Policemen 4.34 9.40 14.64
Police officers 1.84 11.90 14.64
Police executives - 13.74 14.64
Firemen's System:
IIFirefighters 2.00 12.81 11.15
Fire officers - steps A-L 1.15 13.66 11.15
Fire officers - steps M-P - 14.81 11.15
Fire executives - 14.81 11.15
IIContributions made and actuarially determined contribution requirement - Contributions are
based upon participating employees' annual salaries, at actuarially determined rates which are designed to
I
fund current pension costs as they accrue and to fund past service costs over a 40-year period. Actuarial
assumptions used to compute contribution requirements are the same as those used to compute the pension
benefit obligation. The City contributions and the employee deductions for the year ended June 30, 1988 are
as follows:
Employee Employer
IIContributions Contributions
Contributory System $ - $2,034,520
Noncontributory System - 1,144,718
I
Public Safety System 342,073 2,415,760
Firemen's System 141,685 2,401,863
$483,758 S7,996,861
I
Explanation of pension benefit obligation - The pension benefit obligation, which is the
actuarial present value of credited projected benefits, is a standardized disclosure measure of the present
value of pension benefits, adjusted for the effects of projected salary increases and any step-rate bene-
fits, estimated to be payable in the future as a result of employee service to date. The measure is'
intended to help users assess the public employees retirement systems' funding status on a going-concern
basis, assess progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due , and make compari-
sons among public employees retirement systems and among employers. The systems do not make separate
measurements of assets and pension benefit obligation for individual employers.
I
Total pension benefit obligation and total net assets available for benefits - The Utah
State Retirement Board engages an independent firm of actuaries at least biennially to estimate the present
value of accumulated benefits for the purpose of evaluating the reserves for retired individuals, funding
I
ratios and contribution rates.
-27-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
12. Pension Plans (continued) II
Accumulated plan benefits are those future periodic payments, including lump sum distribu-
tions, that are attributable to the service employees have rendered and which are vested under the plan
provisions of the various systems. The present values of accumulated plan benefits as of December 31, 1987 IIare presented in the following table. The most recent actuarial study was made as of January 1, 1987. The
assumed rates of return on investments used in the actuarial studies are 7.5% for each system and the
assumed rate of projected salary increases was 5.75%.
Actuarial present
Net assets value of credited II
available for projected benefits Unfunded Funding
System benefits (pension benefit obligation) portion ratio
Contributory System $1,348,403,000 $1,481,935,000 $133,532,000 91% IINoncontributory System 811,079,000 780,954,000 - 104%
Public Safety System 225,989,000 306,778,000 80,789,000 74%
Firemen's System 104,241,000 166,190,000 61,949,000 63%
Actuarially determined contribution requirement - The City's contribution to the Contributo- '
ry System represented 3.5% of total contributions required of all participating employers. The City's
contribution to the Noncontributory System represented 1.5% of total contributions required of all partici-
pating employers. The City's contribution to the Public Safety System represented 13.9% of total contribu-
tions required of all participating employers. The City's contribution to the Firemen's System represented II37.1% of total contributions required of all participating employers. Assets and vested benefits of the
plans are not segregated by unit within the plan. Therefore, it is not possible to determine the portion of
the assets and vested benefits or unfunded liabilities of the plans that are applicable to City employees,
or whether the contribution for individual employees as a percent of salary will increase in the future. IIHistorical trend information - Historical trend information is available in a separately
issued financial report issued by the Utah Retirement Systems. These statistical trends provides informa-
tion about progress made in accumulating sufficient assets to pay benefits when due. IILoans or notes between City and retirement systems - There are no securities, loans or notes
of Salt Lake City included in the retirement systems.
13. Post-Employment Benefits II
In addition to providing pension benefits, the City provides health care and life insurance
benefits for retired City employees. Substantially all of the City's employees may become eligible for IIthose benefits if they reach normal retirement age while working for the City. The retired employee
contributes 74% of the cost of the insurance premiums and the City contributes 26%. The employee can prepay
the contribution for a portion of the time or have amounts withheld from their retirement checks by the
state retirement system and sent to the City. Any prepaid contribution is recorded as a deferred revenue in
the Self-Insurance Employee Benefit Fund (an internal service fund). The cost of retiree health care and I
life insurance benefits for the year ended June 30, 1988 was $658,608 of which the City's expense was
$171,238.
14. Deferred Compensation Plans II
457 Deferred Compensation Plan - The City offers its employees a deferred compensation plan
created in accordance with Internal Revenue Code Section 457. The plan, available to all City employees, IIpermits them to defer a portion of their salary until future years. Employees are eligible to voluntarily
participate from the date of employment and are vested immediately upon participating. The City is not
obligated and does not contribute to the plan. The City's total payroll was $62,712,727 for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 1988. Employees contributed $1,179,440 to the plan during the fiscal year. All payroll IIdeducted contributions were transferred to the administering insurance companies by the due dates.
All amounts of compensation deferred under the plan, all property and rights purchased with
those amounts, and all income attributable to those amounts, property, or rights are (until paid or made
available to the employee or other beneficiary) solely the property and rights of the City (without being IIrestricted to the provisions of benefits under the plan), subject only to the claims of the City's general
creditors. Participants' rights under the plan are equal to those of general creditors of the City in an
amount equal to the fair market value of the deferred account for each participant. The deferred compensa-
tion is not available to employees until termination, retirement, death, or unforeseeable emergency. An IIagency fund is used to account for the plan's assets and liabilities. The assets of the plan are reported
at market value in the agency fund.
II
_2g '
I
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
I
401(k) Deferred Compensation Plan - The City also sponsors a deferred compensation plan
under Internal Revenue Code 401(k) for City employees covered by any of the state retirement plans. The
Utah State Retirement Board administers this plan. The City's total payroll in the fiscal year ended June
I
30, 1988 was $62,712,727. Of that amount, payroll of $56,951,634 was eligible to participate in this plan.
The City participates at a rate of 2.65% of base payroll only for those current employees who changed from
the contributory state retirement plan to the noncontributory retirement plan. The rate of City participa-
tion was established and can be changed by City Council action. During the year ended June 30, 1988,
' contributions totaling $231,154 were made to this plan by employees and $365,386 by the City. All contribu-
tions were made by the due dates. The 401(k) deferred compensation moneys are not available to the City or
its general creditors. Therefore, no assets or liabilities of the 401(k) deferred compensation plan are
reflected in these financial statements.
II
15. Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments for major construction and capital improvement projects at June 30, 1988 are as
I
follows:
General Fund $ 118,000
Capital Projects Fund 25,885,000
Enterprise funds 11,101.000
$37,104,000
11 The City is lessee under a number of noncancelable operating lease agreements involving
land, buildings and equipment. Rent expense during the year ended June 30, 1988 approximated $1,507,000.
The following is a schedule of future minimum rental payments required under operating leases as of June
II 30, 1988:
General Data Processing
Fund Fund
II 1989 $ 701,459 $ 266,580
1990 423,786 266,580
1991 141,254 266,580
1992 69,630 266,580
1993 33,818 125,215
II
Thereafter 426,870
$1,796,817 $1.191,535
I
In 1982, several hotels located in the City filed actions in state court challenging the
legality of the 1% occupational license tax imposed by the City upon the gross revenue of innkeepers within
the City. It was alleged that the tax is discriminatory and otherwise unconstitutional and beyond the
enabling power of the City. Summary judgment was granted in favor of the City at the trial court level.
The plaintiff hotels have appealed the summary judgment ruling. City attorneys anticipate that the Utah
II Supreme Court will uphold the trial court in this matter. It appears a decision from the court is about one
year away. The City ordinance being challenged produces approximately $660,000 a year, which constitutes
less than 1% of the City's general fund revenues.
I
In 1988, a property owner filed suit against the Redevelopment Agency and the City claiming
an inverse condemnation taking and sundry other damage claims for his property located in the downtown area.
The suit claims $4 million in damages. The Redevelopment Agency would desire to voluntarily acquire the
property at its fair market assessed value, however, the property owner and the Redevelopment Agency
I
disagree over the value. The City does not believe that its actions or failure to act constituted a
"taking" by inverse condemnation and intends to vigorously defend the claim against it. The suit was
initially filed in the federal court, but on motion of the City the case was dismissed. It was refiled as a
state action.
I
In 1987, approximately 64 City Fire Department captains filed a claim under the Fair Labor
Standards Act asserting they are entitled to overtime compensation totaling approximately $2,000 per
individual. The City views the captains as being managerial and exempt from the overtime provisions imposed
by the Fair Labor Standards Act. The City intends to vigorously defend against the claim.
IIIn 1983, sundry property owners along North Temple Street filed inverse condemnation claims
relating to the management of the 1983 flood waters. The suit claims damages of approximately $1 million.
The suit was dismissed on a summary judgment motion but appealed to the Utah Supreme Court. It is antici-
pated that the supreme court will sustain the dismissal by the lower court.
II
There are sundry claims or lawsuits which have been filed against the City or its employees
involving tort and civil rights matters. The City has evaluated those claims individually and recorded an
I
estimated claims payable liability in the Governmental Immunity Fund (an internal service fund) to cover any
expected losses from these claims or suits.
II -29-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
16. Segments of Enterprise Fund Activities II
There are seven services provided by the City which are financed, in part, by user charges.
These are water and sewer utilities, airport, refuse collection, golf courses, housing, and urban redevelop- IIment. The key financial data for the year ended June 30, 1988 for the seven services are as follows:
Water Sewer Airport Refuse
Utility Utility Authority Collection IIOperating revenue $20,673,790 $11,412,132 $ 35,288,264 $1,893,820
Operating expenses:
Depreciation and amortization 1,935,147 1,578,954 8,444,171 -
Other 15,271,136 5,513,763 16,160,655 1,939,756 II
17,206,283 7,092,717 24,604,826 1,939,756
Operating income (loss) $ 3,467,507 $ 4,319,415 $ 10,683,438 $ (45,936) II
Net income (loss) $ 2,904,709 $ 5,829,489 $ 6,775,370 $ (102,468)
Current capital contributions $ 930,185 $ 691,471 $ 8,007,676 $ - '
Total assets $97,991,477 $75,798,603 $234,557,702 $ 138,651
Bonds, mortgages, and notes payable $23,700,840 $ 6,290,800 $ 92,755,090 $ -
Fund equity (deficit) $70,013,617 $68,309,401 $131,060,514 $ (102.468) '
Acquisitions of property and equipment $ 5,495,265 $ 6,339,669 $ 27,728,317 $ -
Disposal proceeds of I
property and equipment $ 93,965 $ 43,435 $ 14,049 $ 393,398
Net working capital (deficit) $ 7,993,140 $20,625,137 $ 1,045,326 $ (70,845)
Golf Housing Redevelopment II
Course Authority Agency Total
Operating revenue $2,917,104 $ 890,732 $ 309,809 $ 72,082,221 I
Operating expenses:
Depreciation and amortization 203,669 511,615 5,872 12,679,428
Other 2,316,372 5,807,985 1,558,154 48,567,821
2,520,041 6,319,600 1,564,026 61,247,249 II
Operating income (loss) $ 397,063 $(5,428,868) $(1,254,217) $ 12,138,402
Net income (loss) $ 472,992 $(3,367,283) $ 8,895,529 $ 21,408,338 II
Current capital contributions $ - $ - $ - $ 9,629,333
Total assets $5,005,607 835,621,562 $27,516,126 $476,629,728 II
Bonds, mortgages, and notes payable $ - $34,281,740 $ 4.443.486 $161,471,956
Fund equity (deficit) $4,687,536 $(4,867.670) $22,899,947 $292,000,877 IIAcquisitions of property and equipment $ 143,001 $ 2,712,820 $ 1,600,851 $ 44,019,923
Disposal proceeds of
property and equipment $ - $ - $ 867,222 $ 1,412,069 I
Net working capital (deficit) $1,140,045 $(4,222,766) $ 6.130,583 $ 32,640,620
17. Related Party Transactions I
During the year ended June 30, 1988, the Water Utility Fund (an enterprise fund) paid
$2,432,301 for water purchased from the Metropolitan Water District of Salt Lake City.
II
-30- ,
II
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
II
18. Contributed Capital
II During the year, contributed capital changed by the following amounts:
Amounts equal
to depreciation
on property and
II
Additions from equipment acquired
customers, by grants externally
Balance developers, restricted for Return of Balance
June 30, 1987 and grants capital construction contribution June 30, 1988
I
Enterprise funds:Water Utility $29,409,598 $ 930,185 $ (125,648) $ - $30,214,135
Sewer Utility 20,300,401 691,471 (94,276) - 20,897,596
Airport Authority 37,691,965 12,029,119 (2.124,623) - 47,596,461
II Golf Course 1,770,250 - - - 1,770,250
Internal service funds:
Fleet Management 6,293,558 6,293,558
Data Processing 129,209 - - - 129,209
Employee BenefitII - - 5,533
-
Self Insurance 5,533 -
Central Fire Dispatch 212,246 (50,000) 162,246
II 19. Budgetary-GAAP Reporting Reconciliation
The City Council can amend the budget to any extent, provided the budgeted expenditures do
not exceed budgeted revenues and appropriated fund balance. During the year, General Fund appropriations
I decreased by $752,000 to offset revenue short falls. Special revenue funds appropriations increased by
$1,252,000 to fund additional projects. Total Capital Project Fund appropriations decreased by $5,204,000
primarily to reflect a change in the financing of the public safety building to the Municipal Building
Authority (an internal service fund). Appropriations for proprietary funds increased by $32,278,000 for
capital improvements in the Airport Authority Fund, Water Utility Fund, Sewer Utility Fund, and to purchase
I a building to be used for public safety, to purchase street lights, telephone equipment, and garbage trucks
and cans.
The accompanying Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance -
' Budget and Actual includes comparisons of the legally adopted budget (more fully described in Note 1) with
actual data on a budgetary basis for the General Fund. Since accounting principles applied for purposes of
developing data on a budgetary basis differ from those used to present financial statements in conformity
with generally accepted accounting principles, a reconciliation of resultant timing differences for the
I
year ended June 30, 1988 is presented below:
General Fund Expenditures
Change in Change Less
II Actual on Less Plus compensated in early capital Actual on
reporting encumbrances encumbrances absences retirement lease budgetary
basis June 30, 1987 June 30, 1988 liability liability purchases basis
II City Council $ 460,603 $ (46,166) $ 66,497 $ (764) $ - $ - $ 480,170
Mayor 1,745,285 (17,994) 7,016 (1,324) 1,732,983
City Attorney 1,106,236 (61,251) 9,078 1,652 1.055,715
Finance 5,060,395 (34.296) 54,772 (6,399) - - 5,074,472
I Administrative - -
Services 3,398,925 (126,797) 72,077 11,163 3,355,368
Fire 16,599,917 (91,147) 56,859 (97,957) (460,287) 16,007,385
Police 22,398,519 (17,113) 20,788 (4.816) (578,433) (937,294) 20,881,651
Development
I
Services 3,408,213 (83,624)
(42,147) 20.472 20,450 - - 3,365,511
Parks 5,525,474 140,740 26,936 5,651,003
Public Works 15,589,426 (146,327) 271,993 (11,071) (12,620) - 15,691,401
Nondepartmental 639,038 - - - - - 639,038
I
Debt service: - - - - -
Principal 1,175,000 1,175,000
Interest 94,319 94,319
Total I
expenditures $77,201,350 $(666,862) $720,292 $(62.130) $(1,051,340) $(937,294) $75,204,016
Included in the budget for General Fund revenues was $245,000 of reserved certificates of
I participation fund balance. These funds were remaining after acquisitions were made, and were used to
retire certificates early.
-31-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June 30, 1988
20. Statement of Changes in Financial Position II
To provide more meaningful information, the City has changed from a working capital to a
cash basis presentation for the statement of changes in financial position for proprietary fund types. Cash II
and cash equivalents as shown in the statement of changes in financial position include demand deposits and
short term investments with a maturity date within six months of the date acquired.
21. Subsequent Events I
Subsequent to June 30, 1988, the following commitments for major construction projects were
made:
General Fund $ 124,000 II
Special revenue funds 22,000
Capital Projects Fund 5,040,000
Enterprise funds 3,777,000 IIInternal service funds 2,112,000
Expendable trust fund 15,000
$11,090,000 '
The following events occurred subsequent to June 30, 1988: (1) The City issued $17,000,000
of tax anticipation notes maturing June 30, 1989 bearing interest at 5.289%. (2) The Municipal Building
Authority issued $9,424,410 of lease revenue bonds to build a golf course near the airport and to add 18 II
additional holes at the Mountain Dell Golf Course. The bonds are dated November 1, 1988 and bear interest
at 6% to 7.2%. (3) The City's Municipal Building Authority purchased a building for approximately
$6,000,000 to be leased to the City for use as a public safety building. (4) The City obtained $2.5 million
from a law firm as a result of a suit brought against the law firm by the City in connection with urban '
development action grant funds that had been improperly handled by a recipient to whom the City loaned funds
in 1984. This settled a demand from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for the return of
federal funds loaned by the City. (5) The City retired the outstanding certificate of participation debt.
I
II
II
11
II
II
II
II
II
_32 '
1
COMBINING AND INDIVIDUAL FUNDS
Detailed financial information for individual funds are presented in combining
or individual fund or account group statements and in schedules.
I
GENERAL FUND
The General Fund is the principal fund of the City and is used to account for
resources traditionally associated with governments which are not required to be
' accounted for in another fund. The General Fund accounts for the normal recur-
ring activities of the City, (i.e. police, fire, public works, parks, development
services, general government, etc.). These activities are funded principally by
property taxes, sales and use taxes, franchise taxes, licenses and permits.
I
I
' -33-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
GENERAL FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988 II
Actual on IIbudgetary Variance -
basis favorable
Budget (non GAAP) (unfavorable)
City Council: '
Personal services $ 261,796 $ 274,314 $(12,518)
Operating and maintenance 20,950 17,075 3,875
Charges and services 200,937 173,506 27,431 IICapital outlay 15,350 15,275 75
Total City Council 499,033 480,170 18,863
II
Mayor:
Personal services 1,353,195 1,347,188 6,007
Operating and maintenance 49,889 46,251 3,638
Charges and services 372,042 327,667 44,375II
Capital outlay 10,988 11,877 (889)
Total Mayor 1,786,114 1,732,983 53,131 '
City Attorney:
Personal services 723,416 713,387 10,029
I/
Operating and maintenance 31,600 30,850 750
Charges and services 294,485 291,015 3,470
Capital outlay 22,359 20,463 1,896
Total Attorney 1,071,860 1,055,715 16,145 II
Finance: '
Personal services 1,999,727 2,001,931 (2,204)
Operating and maintenance 275,348 259,232 16,116
Charges and services 2,740,608 2,728,787 11,821
Capital outlay 85,945 84,522 1,423 '
Total Finance 5,101,628 5,074,472 27,156
Administrative Services: I
Personal services 1,425,520 1,460,346 (34,826)
Operating and maintenance 157,685 123,558 34,127 '
Charges and services 1,736,380 1,683,463 52,917
Capital outlay 83,351 88,001 (4,650)
Total Administrative Services 3,402,936 3,355,368 47,568
I
Fire:
Personal services 14,076,971 14,094,156 (17,185) II
Operating and maintenance 283,556 270,040 13,516
Charges and services 1,314,139 1,319,093 (4,954)
Capital outlay 345,884 324,096 21,788
Total Fire 16,020,550 16,007,385 13,165II
I
(Continued) '
-34-
II SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF EXPENDITURES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
GENERAL FUND (Continued)
Year ended June 30, 1988
II
II Actual on
budgetary Variance -
basis favorable
Budget (non GAAP) (unfavorable)
I
Police:
Personal services 17,115,602 17,190,154 (74,552)
Operating and maintenance 216,632 200,765 15,867
Charges and services 2,885,269 2,831,646 53,623
ICapital outlay 772,050 659,086 112,964
Total Police 20,989,553 20,881,651 107,902
II
Development Services:
Personal services 2,546,671 2,649,590 (102,919)
I Operating and maintenance 78,825 67,067 11,758
Charges and services 486,252 400,951 85,301
Capital outlay 281,676 247,903 33,773
Total Development Services 3,393,424 3,365,511 27,913
II
Parks:
II Personal services 3,199,508 3,138,070 61,438
Operating and maintenance 599,374 594,626 4,748
Charges and services 1,569,509 1,575,295 (5,786)
Capital outlay 314,014 343,012 (28,998)
IITotal Parks 5,682,405 5,651,003 31,402
II Public Works:
Personal services 7,887,234 7,834,330 52,904
Operating and maintenance 2,564,551 2,574,629 (10,078)
Charges and services 3,727,694 3,719,998 7,696
I
Capital outlay 1,574,636 1,562,444 12,192
Total Public Works 15,754,115 15,691,401 62,714
IINondepartmental:
Charges and services 639,350 639,038 312
1
Debt service:
II Principal 1,175,000 1,175,000 -
Interest 94,319 94,319 -
Total debt service 1,269,319 1,269,319 -
II
Total General Fund $75,610,287 $75,204,016 $406,271
1
II
I -35-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
This page intentionally left blank I
-3 6- I
I/
1
I
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
1
Special revenue funds are used to account for the certain property taxes, grant
funds, and other special revenues legally restricted for specific purposes. The
City's special revenue funds are as follows:
1 Library Fund - To account for library taxes levied, and for operations of City
libraries.
' Central Business Improvement Fund - To account for special license fees which are
restricted for downtown projects or improvements.
Community Development Operating Fund - To account for monies received by the City
1 as grantee participant in the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG)
program, except for CDBG monies to be used for capital improvements which are
accounted for in the Capital Projects Fund. Annual budgets are not adopted
for this fund.
Grants Operating Fund - To account for monies received by the City under the
Urban Development Action Grant program, the Housing Development Action Grant
' program, the Renter Rehabilitation program, Community Fire Prevention grants,
a homeless mentally ill study, transient shelter grants, and other studies and
grants. Annual budgets are not adopted for this fund.
' Street Lighting Fund - This fund is used to account for the operation of addi-
tional street lights, the cost of which is paid by the City and by property
owners who benefit from these improvements.
1
1
I
I
-37-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET - SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
June 30, 1988
1
Central Community II
Business Development Grants Street
ASSETS Library Improvement Operating Operating Lighting Total
Cash and investments $2,146,164 $157,504 $ - $ - $ 443,980 $2,747,648 II
Property taxes receivable 643,804 - - - - 643,804
Restricted assets - cash and IIinvestments - - - 200,278 - 200,278
Assessments receivable - - - - 767,964 767,964
Due from other governments - - 65,340 - - 65,340
Land held for resale 75,000 - - - - 75,000
Total assets $2,864,968 $157,504 $65,340 $200,278 $1,211,944 $4,500,034 ,
11
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities: II
Cash overdraft $ - $ - $39,545 $ - $ - $ 39,545
Accounts payable 321,605 4,233 23,261 - 6,681 355,780
Accrued liabilities 341,126 - 2,534 - 343,660 IIDeferred revenue 1,476,066 - - 767,964 2,244,030
Liabilities payable from
restricted assets - - - 200,278 - 200,278
Total liabilities 2,138,797 4,233 65,340 200,278 774,645 3,183,293 II
Fund balances:
Reserved for investment in
land held for resale 75,000 - - - - 75,000
11
Unreserved 651,171 153,271 - - 437,299 1,241,741
Total fund balances 726,171 153,271 - - 437,299 1,316,741
Total liabilities and II
fund balances $2,864,968 $157,504 $65,340 $200,278 $1,211,944 $4,500,034
II
II
II
II
1
-38- II
II SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
IIYear ended June 30, 1988
I
Central Community
Business Development Grants Street
Library Improvement Operating Operating Lighting Total
1 Revenues:General property taxes $4,528,857 $ - - - -$ $ $ $4,528,857
Licenses - 107,357 - - - 107,357
I Fines
91,771 - - - - 91,771
Assessments 339,907 339,907
Interest 155,293 10,633 11,463 177,389
Intergovernmental 67,632 - 2,481,491 1,681,278 - 4,230,401
Miscellaneous 18,697 - - 2,462 - 21,159
I
Total revenues 4,862,250 117,990 2,481,491 1,683,740 351,370 9,496,841
I
Expenditures:
Personal services 2,952,613 - 46,064 - - 2,998,677 1
Operating and maintenance 695,496 49,884 39,157 21,591 806,128
Charges and services 348,471 86,721 994,048 1,662,149 324,916 3,416,305
Other 636,550 - 13,704 - - 650,254
1 Expenditures before
debt service 4,633.130 136,605 1,092,973 1,683,740 324,916 7,871,364
Debt service:
Principal 50,567 - - - - 50,567
IIInterest 5,753 5,753
Total expenditures 4,689,450 136,605 1,092,973 1,683,740 324,916 7,927,684
1 Revenues over (under) -
expenditures 172,800 (18,615) 1,388,518 26,454 1,569,157
Other financing sources (uses)
Operating transfers in - - 343,261 - 112,129 455,390
II Operating transfers out (1,731,779) (1,731,779)
Lease proceeds 28,159 28,159
1Total other financing -
sources (uses) 28,159 - (1,388,518) 112,129 (1,248,230)
Revenues and other sources
over (under) expenditures
I
and other uses 200,959 (18,615) _ - 138,583 320,927
Fund balances, June 30, 1987 525,212 171,886 298,716 995,814
Fund balances, June 30, 1988 $ 726,171 $153,271 $ - $ -
1 $437,299 $1,316,741
___ __
II
II
I -39-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - BUDGET AND ACTUAL
CERTAIN SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS II
Year ended June 30, 1988
Library Fund II
Variance -
Actual favorable IIBudget (GAAP basis) (unfavorable)
Revenues:
General property taxes $4,526,311 $4,528,857 $ 2,546 I
Licenses - - -
Fines 90,000 91,771 1,771
Assessments - - -
Interest 152,700 155,293 2,593 IIIntergovernmental 45,000 67,632 22,632
Miscellaneous 8,000 18,697 10,697
Total revenues 4,822,011 4,862,250 40,239
Expenditures: II
Personal services 3,033,713 2,952,613 81,100
Operating and maintenance 708,982 695,496 13,486
Charges and services 373,701 348,471 25,230II
Other 724,115 636,550 87,565
Expenditures before debt service 4,840,511 4,633,130 207,381
Debt service:
Principal 10,000 50,567 (40,567)
II
Interest - 5,753 (5,753)
Total expenditures 4,850,511 4,689,450 161,061 II
Revenues over (under) expenditures (28,500) 172,800 201,300
Other financing sources (uses)
Lease proceeds 28,500 28,159 (341)
II
Operating transfers in - - -
Revenues and other sources over (under)
expenditures and other uses - 200,959 200,959 II
Fund balances, June 30, 1987 525,212 525,212 -
Fund balances, June 30, 1988 $ 525,212 $ 726,171 $200,959
II
II
II
II
II
II
-40- I
II
IICentral Business Improvement Fund Street Lighting Fund Total
Variance - Variance - Variance -
II Actual favorable Actual favorable Actual favorable
Budget (GAAP basis) (unfavorable) Budget (GAAP basis) (unfavorable) Budget (GAAP basis) (unfavorable)
II $ -
$ - $ - $ - $ - $ - $4,526,311 $4,528,857 $ 2.546
115,000 107,357 (7,643) 115,000 107,357 (7,643)
-
-
-
-
-
90,000 91,771 1,771
- 315,429 339,907 24,478 315,429 339,907 24,478
II - 10,633 10,633 - 11,463 11,463 152,700 177,389 24,689
-
-
-
-
-
-
45,000 67,632 22,632
-
-
-
-
-
-
8,000 18,697 10,697
115,000 117,990 2,990 315,429 351,370 35,941 5,252,440 5,331,610 79.170
I/
- - - - - - 3,033,713 2,952,613 81,100
II 55,000 49,884 5,116 - - - 763,982 745,380 18,602
162,500 86,721 75,779 430,429 324,916 105,513 966,630 760,108 206,522
-
-
-
-
-
724,115 636,550 87,565
217,500 136,605 80,895 430,429 324,916 105,513 5,488,440 5,094,651 393,789
10,000 50,567 (40,567)
- - - - - - - 5,753 (5,753)
II
217,500 136.605 80,895 430,429 324,916 105,513 5,498,440 5,150,971 347,469
(102,500) (18,615) 83,885 (115,000) 26,454 141,454 (246,000) 180,639 426,639
II
- _ _ - - - 28,500 28,159 (341)
115,000 112,129 (2,871) 115,000 112,129 (2,871)
I
(102,500) (18,615) 83,885 - 138,583 138,583 (102,500) 320,927 423,427
171,886 171,886 298,716 298,716 995,814 995,814 -
$ 69,386 $153,271 $83,885 $298,716 $437,299 $138,583 $ 893,314 $1,316,741 $423,427
II
II
II
II
II
II
II -41-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
SCHEDULE OF PROJECT EXPENDITURES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OPERATING FUND
As of June 30, 1988
Current Year II
Expenditures Total
Project Prior Years' and Operating Project Project
Budget Expenditures Transfers Out Expenditures Balance
11
DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES PROJECTS
Administration/Planning $ 450,700 $ - $ 375,959 $ 375,959 $ 74,741
Art Enhancement for Community
Development Projects 8,495 3,125 2,640 5,765 2,730II
Atlas of Statistics 5,000 4,176 - 4,176 824
Capitol Hill Historical Revolving
Fund 117,188 104,021 - 104,021 13,167
Capital Planning and Programming 897,087 784,987 49,470 834,457 62,630
City Creek Canyon Plan 87,311 84,010 - 84,010 3,301 II
City Development Action Loans 60,943 59,800 1,143 60,943 -
City General Master Plan Update 60,971 40,052 - 40,052 20,919 IICommunity Gardens Water Hookup 3,400 - - - 3,400
District Heating & Cooling 15,000 - 1,056 1,056 13,944
East Central Neighborhood Plan
Expansion and Completion 13,000 11,203 - 11,203 1,797
Economic Development Plan
Implementation 60,000 59,505 - 59,505 495II
Emergency Home Repair (Assist) 1,720,696 1,484,237 227,229 1,711,466 9,230
Emergency Housing 217,714 216,433 1,281 217,714 -
First Step House Improvements 40,000 - 27,306 27,306 12,694
Foothill/Open Space Plan 77,500 27,592 14,194 41,786 35,714II
Guadalupe Center Improvements 77,517 76,415 1,102 77,517 -
Historical Survey 138,100 124,992 2,000 126,992 11,108
Housing Assistance Plan 45,756 40,422 668 41,090 4,666
Housing Outreach Rental Program 181,225 151,554 27,128 178,682 2,543 IIHousing Rehabilitation 9,948,018 8,073,641 1,293,021 9,366,662 581,356
Low Income Housing Relocation 3,000 - - - 3,000
Marketing Salt Lake City
Neighborhoods 20,000 12,622 4,771 17,393 2,607 IINeighborhood Attorney Program 9,000 - 1,155 1,155 7,845
Neighborhood Housing Services 1,124,999 945,417 126,274 1,071,691 53,308
Neighborhood Housing Services
Owner Built 749,999 467,683 - 467,683 282,316
New Hope Cultural Center 10,000 - - - 10,000
Northwest Dental Operatory 12,500 - - - 12,500 II
Operation Paintbrush 324,500 264,248 57,000 321,248 3,252
Project 1990 - 2000 16,649 14,450 2,199 16,649 -
Property Management Planning IIAssistance 25,000 4,154 11,763 15,917 9,083
Publication of Master Plans 62,500 22,904 18,164 41,068 21,432
Relocation Services 26,800 23,800 - 23,800 3,000
Revision of Zoning Ordinances 30,000 26,289 - 26,289 3,711
Salt Lake City Arts Council 10,000 - - - 10,000II
Security Lock Program 84,363 13,531 67,178 80,709 3,654
Shelter For The Homeless 395,273 50,730 338,309 389,039 6,234
Transfer Land Use Data 20,951 20,388 - 20,388 563
United Native American Council
Housing and Office Rehabilitation 26,468 26,000 - 26,000 468 II
Urban Design 123,000 105,500 - 105,500 17,500
Voluntary Code Enforcement 169,068 114,068 55,000 169,068 -
West Capitol Boys & Girls Club 36,000 16,167 16,810 32,977 3,023
West Side Food Bank 98,700 75,332 20,530 95,862 2,838
II
Westside Community Master Plan 98,975 28,875 4,301 33,176 65,799
TOTAL DEVELOPMENTAL SERVICES PROJECTS 17,703,366 13,578,323 2,747,651 16,325,974 1,377,392
II
II
II
(Continued) II
-42-
II
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF PROJECT EXPENDITURES
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT OPERATING FUND (Continued)
II
As of June 30, 1988
Current Year
I
Expenditures Total
Project Prior Years' and Operating Project Project
Budget Expenditures Transfers Out Expenditures Balance
IPOLICE DEPARTMENT PROJECTS
Crime Prevention 468,256 459,736 1,101 460,837 7,419
Police Athletic League 20,000 14,543 5.457 20,000 -
IITOTAL POLICE PROJECTS 488,256 474,279 6,558 480,837 7,419
I
PARKS DEPARTMENT PROJECTS -
People's Freeway Mini-Park 138,087 116.970 116,970 21,117
Sego Park 105,730 105,000 414 105,414 316
Tree Planting Project 5,000 - 5,000 5,000 -
IUrban Forestry Management Plan 57,500 - 53,738 53,738 3,762
TOTAL PARKS PROJECTS 306,317 221,970 59,152 281,122 25,195
1 PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
Handicapped Barrier Removal 10,000 - 6,741 6,741 3,259
II200 West Pedestrian Signals 22,000 21,608 21,608 392
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS 32,000 21,608 6,741 28,349 3,651
IINONDEPARTMENTAL PROJECTS
Slippage 4,340 - - - 4,340
II Contingency 24,405 - - - 24,405
TOTAL NONDEPARTMENTAL PROJECTS 28,745 28,745
I
ATTORNEY PROJECTS
Administration- Legal Advice
and Support 348,277 293,168 - 293,168 55,109
IFINANCE PROJECTS
II Administration- Controller 196,147 164,208 - 164,208 31,939
Management Services - Capital
Improvement Community Development 9,600 4,109 4,109 5,491
TOTAL FINANCE PROJECTS 205,747 168,317 - 168,317 37,430
I/
MAYOR PROJECTS
I
Constituent Relations 321,766 297,110 4,650 301,760 20,006
Crime Prevention 261,392 253,132 253,132 8,260
TOTAL MAYOR PROJECTS 583,158 550,242 4,650 554,892 28,266
1 GRAND TOTAL PROJECTS $19,695,866 815.307,907 $2,824,752 $18,132,659 $1,563,207
1
II -43-
I/SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF PROJECT EXPENDITURES
GRANTS OPERATING FUND
As of June 30, 1988 I
Total
Project Prior Years' Current Year Project Project I
Budget Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Balance
Renter Rehabilitation $ 881,754 $ 404,079 $ 234,475 $ 638,554 $243,200
Community Fire Prevention 25,000 24,261 664 24,925 75 I
UDAG Operating 8,772,788 8,771,240 1,548 8,772,788 -
Historic Preservation 6,029 4,094 - 4,094 1,935I/
Homeless Mentally Ill Study 49,499 46,819 2,462 49,281 218
State EMS Grant 117,000 6,388 77,009 83,397 33,603 '
Heating/Cooling Study 75,000 3,225 - 3,225 71,775
Rick Warner Ford UDAG 1,100,000 - 862,432 862,432 237,568 II
Grant for Homeless 128,000 - 128,000 128,000 -
Transient Shelter 10,000 - 10,000 10,000 - IIEmergency Shelter 367,150 - 367,150 367,150 -
$11,532,220 $9,260,106 $1,683,740 $10,943,846 $588,374 I
II
II
I
II
I
II
II
II
I
-44- I
1
1
1
IDEBT SERVICE FUNDS
II
Debt service funds are used to account for the servicing of debt of governmental
funds.
ISpecial Improvement Fund - This fund is used to account for the cost of servicing
the debt created by financing the construction of public improvements deemed
I
to benefit the properties against which special assessments are levied.
Building Restoration Fund - This fund is used to account for the cost of servic-
ing the debt created by financing the restoration of the historic City and
I
County Building.
I
1
II
1
1
I
II
1
I
-45-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET - DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
June 30, 1988
II
Special Building II
ASSETS Improvement Restoration Total
Cash and investments $1,615,998 $3,592,299 $ 5,208,297 II
Interest receivable - 203,692 203,692
Assessments receivable 3,408,072 - 3,408,072
Restricted assets - cash IIand investments 1,186,239 - 1,186,239
Total assets $6,210,309 $3,795,991 $10,006,300 II
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities: II
Accounts payable $ 3,175 $ - $ 3,175
Deferred revenue 3,408,072 - 3,408,072 II
Total liabilities 3,411,247 - 3,411,247
Fund balances: IIReserved for guarantee of special
improvement bonds 1,186,239 - 1,186,239
Reserved for retirement of bonds 1,612,823 3,795,991 5,408,814
Total fund balances 2,799,062 3,795,991 6,595,053 II
Total liabilities and
fund balances $6,210,309 $3,795,991 $10,006,300 I
II
II
II
II
II
II
-46 I/
-
I
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES - DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
IIYear ended June 30, 1988
I
Special Building
Improvement Restoration Total
I
Revenues:
Assessments $1,056,947 $ -
$1,056,947
Interest 316,209 1,713,170 2,029,379
Intergovernmental - 1,022,770 1,022,770
I
Miscellaneous - 243 243
Total revenues 1,373,156 2,736,183 4,109,339
II
Expenditures:
IICharges and services 29,781 - 29,781
Debt service:
Principal 906,000 906,000
Interest 356,289 2,691,500 3,047,789
I/ Total expenditures 1,292,070 2,691,500 3,983,570
Revenues over expenditures 81,086 44,683 125,769
I
Other financing sources -
Bond proceeds 485,761 -
485,761
Revenues and other sources
II
over expenditures 566,847 44,683 611,530
Fund balances, June 30, 1987 2,232,215 3,751,308 5,983,523
Fund balances, June 30, 1988 $2,799,062 $3,795,991 $6,595,053
1
II
II
II
II
I/
I -47-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION IICOMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES -
BUDGET AND ACTUAL
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
Year ended June 30, 1988 II
Special Improvement II
Variance -
Actual favorable
Budget (GAAP basis) (unfavorable
Revenues:
Assessments $1,059,000 $1,056,947 $ (2,053)
Interest 212,000 316,209 104,209 II
Intergovernmental - - -
Miscellaneous - - -
Total revenues 1,271,000 1,373,156 102,156 II
Expenditures:
Charges and services - 29,781 (29,781) IIDebt service:
Principal 908,000 906,000 2,000
Interest 368,000 356,289 11,711
Total expenditures 1,276,000 1,292,070 (16,070) '
Revenues over (under) expenditures (5,000) 81,086 86,086
Other financing sources - I
Bond proceeds - 485,761 485,761
Revenues and other sources over
(under) expenditures (5,000) 566,847 571,847 IIFund balances, June 30, 1987 2,232,215 2,232,215 -
Fund balances, June 30, 1988 $2,227,215 $2,799,062 $571,847
II
II
I/
II
I/
II
II
II
-48- I
II
11
IBuilding Restoration Total
Variance - Variance -
' Actual favorable Actual favorable
Budget (GA Budget (GAAP basis) (unfavorable) AP basis) (unfavorable)
IS - $ - $ - $1,059,000 $1,056,947 $ (2,053)
1,713,170 1,713,170 212,000 2,029,379 1,817,379
1,022,770 1,022,770 1,022,770 1,022,770
- 243 243 - 243 243
I
- 2,736,183 2,736,183 1,271,000 4,109,339 2,838,339
II
- - - - 29,781 (29,781)
- 908,000 906,000 2,000
2,691,500 2,691,500 - 3,059,500 3,047,789 11,711
II2,691,500 2,691,500 - 3,967,500 3,983,570 (16,070)
(2,691,500) 44,683 2,736,183 (2,696,500) 125,769 2,822,269
I - - - - 485,761 485,761
I
(2,691,500) 44,683 2,736,183 (2,696,500) 611,530 3,308,030
3,751,308 3,751,308 5,983,523 5,983,523 -
$1,059,808 $3,795,991 $2,736,183 $3,287,023 $6,595,053 $3,308,030
11
II
II
II
1
II
II
II
II -49-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
This page intentionally left blank I
-50- I
II
II
II
ICAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
II
The City's Capital Projects Fund is used to account for resources designated to
construct general fixed assets which, by their nature, may require more than one
II budgetary cycle for completion. Project budget, rather than annual budgets, are
adopted for the Capital Projects Fund.
II
I/
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
II
II
I/
II -51-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION '
SCHEDULE OF PROJECT EXPENDITURES
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
As of June 30, 1988
I/
Total
Project Prior Years' Current Year Project Project
Budget Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Balance '
PARKS PROJECTS
4th Avenue Stairs $ 180,505 $ 12,002 $ 155,347 $ 167,349 $ 13,156 '
Athletic Park Design 10,000 - - - 10,000
Avenues Mini-Park 51,500 45,816 4,482 50,298 1.202
Block U Park 200,000 13,142 5,289 18,431 181,569
Canal Greenbelt 78,891 74,362 4,529 78,891 - '
Elk's Park Construction 8,850 8,815 - 8,815 35
Fairmont Park 200,000 194,544 890 195,434 4,566
Guadalupe Park 201,527 104,011 66,621 170,632 30,895
Isaac Chase Mill 73,376 73,088 114 73,202 174
Jefferson Park 13,224 6,967 - 6,967 6,257 IIJordan Park 568,955 506,093 60,790 566,883 2,072
Laird Park 44,705 44,527 178 44,705 -
Lindsey Gardens 100,000 - 39,865 39,865 60,135
Memory Grove 10,000 - 484 484 9,516 '
Miller Park 142,500 8,351 132,711 141,062 1,438
Northwest Park 100,000 6,627 89,957 96,584 3,416
Paint Shop Sprinkler 17,000 - 17,000 17,000 -
People's Freeway 129,000 110,445 11,475 121,920 7,080 '
Pioneer/Fairmont Park 421,500 421,297 - 421,297 203
Pugsley-Ouray Mini-Park 53,500 51,198 1,900 53,098 402
Reservoir Park/ Art Barn Parking 70,000 69,971 29 70,000 -
Riverside Park 121,417 8,619 110,061 118,680 2,737
Sherwood Park 164,050 158,706 4,710 163,416 634 '
Sorensen Park CDBG 100,000 - 2,828 2,828 97,172
South Central Mini-Park Acquisition 35,000 - - - 35,000
Sports Complex 30,000 28,622 - 28,622 1,378
Stewart Montgomery Park 91,622 90,075 - 90,075 1,547 '
Sugarhouse Pedestrian Link 113,000 - 45,784 45,784 67,216
Sunnyside Park Repairs 134,486 134,686 (200) 134,486 -
Sunnyside Recreation Center 14,000 - 7,100 7,100 6,900
Tennis Courts Resurfacing 91,600 42,520 45,000 87,520 4,080
Tracy Aviary 475,000 226,420 164,673 391,093 83,907 '
Wasatch Warm Springs Park 269,250 264,739 2,850 267,589 1,661
Westminister Park 180,000 98,573 67,866 166,439 13,561
TOTAL PARKS PROJECTS 4,494,458 2,804,216 1,042,333 3,846,549 647,909 '
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS
700 North Redwood Intersection 25,000 - - - 25,000 II
200 South, 300 - 400 West 447,034 446,789 245 447,034 -
200 South State Parking Lot RDA 175,000 - 71,154 71,154 103,846
200 South Storm Drain (Gateway) 2,027,320 1,639,067 256,031 1,895,098 132,222 '
400 South Viaduct Design/Repair 1.340.000 164,425 634,517 798,942 541,058
400 to 500 South Connector Design 88,500 87,014 - 87,014 1,486
400 West Drainage 475,000 433,315 - 433,315 41,685
900 South Street & Drainage 598,122 30.362 445,067 475,429 122,693
900 West 9th to 21st South 3,758,000 176,189 2,812,857 2,989,046 768,954 '
900 West Design North Temple 20,000 1,219 52 1,271 18,729
1300 South State-500 East Street Widening 34,796 27,924 6,872 34,796 -
1700 South State to Jordan River 2,884,682 2,446,502 203,666 2,650,168 234,514
1700 South Storm Drain 2,173,018 2,150,163 - 2,150,163 22,855 '
2700 South Storm Drain 2,803,811 2,596,876 92,386 2,689,262 114,549
4800 West & I-80 Interchange 92,000 - - - 92,000
7200 West I-80 to 700 South 232,000 27,476 200,000 227,476 4,524
7200 West Railroad Crossing 58,000 41,943 8,849 50,792 7,208
Animal Control Roof Repair 27,100 - 25,278 25,278 1,822 '
Artspace Dock Improvements 138,525 108,279 9.819 118.098 20,427
Asphalt Plant Improvements 82,000 - 75,386 75,386 6,614
I/
(Continued) '
-52-
I
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF PROJECT EXPENDITURES (Continued)
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
1 As of June 30, 1988
Total
Project Prior Years' Current Year Project Project
IIBudget Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Balance
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS (Continued)
I
Avenues Cross Drain 60,000 - 5,273 5,273 59,727
CWA Drainage Ditch #4 Plan 39,076 19,024 19,024 20,052
California Avenue 1,606,847 170,663 777,640 948,303 658,544
Capitol Hill Community Center 69,500 67,699 - 67,699 1,801
I Childrens
Museum 71,728 71,636 - 71,636 92
City/County Landfill 2,600,000 528,588 10,335 538,923 2,061,077
City/County Building Restoration 30,000,000 6,170,341 14,814,491 20,984,832 9,015,168
Curb & Gutter So. Temple 50,000 - 14,772 14,772 35,228
Downtown Beautification 530,000 500,000 6,375 506,375 23,625
II
Earthquake Hazard Assessment 215,000 66,147 66,147 148,853
East Central Block Redesign 1,009,775 38,088 971,687 1,009,775 -
East Central Storm Drain 120,000 116,849 - 116,849 3,151
El Centro Civico 470,931 - 313,125 313,125 157,806
I
Euclid Area Drainage 121,492 - 87,248 87,248 34,194
Euclid Area Streets Design 628,627 31,869 445,747 477,616 151,011
Fire Facility - Various Programs 125,160 76,191 894 77,085 48,075
Fire Station #'s 1 & 2 Remodeling 80,000 61,804 - 61,804 18,196
I
Fire Station #8 537,150 537,005 - 537,005 145
Fire Station #9 899,237 849,026 13,019 862,045 37,192
Guadalupe Block Redesign 7,052 6,116 52 6,168 884
Handicapped Access Ramp 100,000 46,122 - 46,122 53,878
Hartland Pump Station 78,000 63,441 1,794 65,235 12,765
I
Hartland Street Improvements 36,153 - 35,000 35,000 1,153
Indiana Avenue 1,140,705 212,913 17,572 230.485 910,220
Jefferson Storm Drain 304,218 174,928 - 174,928 129,290
Kennedy Drive Street Improvements 1,066,602 1,065,780 - 1,065,780 822
I
Lake Street 700-800 South CDBG 100,000 - - - 100,000
Local Streets: SID 3,050,663 2,330,153 573,901 2,904,054 146,609
Low Income SID Abatements 15,000 3,849 4,257 8,106 6,894
Mead Avenue Sidewalks 45,746 - 45,746 45,746 -
' Metropolitan Hall of Justice 130,000 - _ - 130,000
Mid-City Storm Master Plan 17,500 17,500 17,500
-
Mitigation of Problem Springs 211,488 108,719 102.769 211,488 -
Montague Ave. 900-1000 W. CDBG 40,000 - - - 40,000
Northeast Central Block Redesign 10,000 - 5,834 5,834 4,166
I
Northwest Quadrant Design 145,000 38,064 20,236 58,300 86,700
Oil Drain Siphon 499,800 469,381 6,717 471,098 28,702
People's Freeway Street Improvements 954,988 941,516 11,740 953,256 1,732
Railroad Safety Improvements 665,641 139,541 - 139,541 526,100
I
Redwood Detention Basin (CWA#4) 35,000 25,331 - 25,331 9,669
Research Park 1,696,964 962,193 542,872 1,505,065 141,899
Reservoir Park - Art Barn 20,000 19,989 19,989 11
Salt Lake International Center Street 128,954 - 127,090 127,090 1,864
I
Salt Lake/Jordan Canal Cover 173,000 75,656 50,811 126,467 96,533
Sherwood Drive Storm Drain 304.954 303,501 1,453 304,954 -
Sidewalk, C&G Emergency Repairs 694,457 487,972 161,171 649,193 45,314
Sidewalk Curb & Gutter Projects 6,696,461 4,615,847 1,401,643 6,017,490 678,971
I Sodium
Vapor Light Conversion 7,693 7,685 - 7,685 - 8
Streets Maintenance Shops Rehabilitation 103,760 86,816 16,944 103,760
Sugarhouse Beautification 1,616,404 1,583,083 2,060 1,585,143 31,261
Terrace Hills Drain 89,977 82,745 7,232 89,977 -
Traffic Safety Improvements 742,500 247,109 130,820 377,929 364,571
I
Traffic Signals 55,126 52,600 - 52,600 2,526
Turf Blocking At Liberty Park 33,000 20,925 20,925 12,075
Westside Block Redesign 51,091 5,141 45,549 50,690 401
West Capitol Hill Streets 555,373 341,754 213,013 554,767 606
West Valley Highway I-80 243,000 227,761 - 227,761 15,239
II
Westside Senior Citizen Center 77,400 59,184 7,394 66,578 10,822
Work Activity Center CDBG 35,000 35,000
TOTAL PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS 78,643,051 34,500,788 25,836,455 60,337,243 18,305,808
II
I
(Continued)
-53-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
SCHEDULE OF PROJECT EXPENDITURES (Continued)
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
As of June 30, 1988
II
Total
Project Prior Years' Current Year Project Project IIBudget Expenditures Expenditures Expenditures Balance
ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROJECTS
Fifth Circuit Court Parking 5,000 - - - 5,000 II
TOTAL ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES
PROJECTS 5,000 - - - 5,000
NONDEPARTMENTAL PROJECTS '
10th Year CDBG Slippage 12 - - - 12
llth Year CDBG Slippage 4,806 - - - 4,806 II12th Year CDBG Slippage 157,517 - - - 157,517
13th Year CDBG Slippage 43,185 - - - 43,185
Administrative Fees 320,000 160,000 160,000 320,000 -
Contingency 168,496 7,500 (450) 7,050 161,446 II
TOTAL NONDEPARTMENTAL PROJECTS 694,016 167,500 159,550 327,050 366,966
FIRE PROJECTS II
Fire Communications Dispatch 339,186 262,245 27,059 289,304 49,882
Fire Facility - Various Programs 55,000 - 17,390 17,390 37,610
TOTAL FIRE PROJECTS 394,186 262,245 44,449 306,694 87,492 II
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PROJECTS IIPercent for Art CDBG/CIP 3,900 - 325 325 3,575
Hartland Infrastructure 178,595 177,166 - 177,166 1,429
TOTAL DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PROJECTS 182,495 177,166 325 177,491 5,004 '
MAYOR PROJECTS
City/County Building-Rehabilitation II
and Tower Stabilization 2,617,152 1,880,464 634,945 2,515,409 101,743
City Relocation 648,000 646.423 1,577 648,000 -
TOTAL MAYOR PROJECTS 3,265,152 2,526,887 636,522 3,163,409 101,743 '
GRAND TOTAL $87,678,358 $40,438,802 $27,719,634 $68,158,436 $19,519,922
II
II
II
II
II
-54- I
1
II
IIENTERPRISE FUNDS
1
Enterprise funds are used to account for operations that are financed and
operated in a manner similar to private business enterprise where the intent is
II that the costs of providing goods or services to the general public on a continu-
ing basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges, or where it
has been decided that periodic determination of revenues earned, expenses
incurred, and/or net income is appropriate for capital maintenance, public
II policy, management control, accountability, or other purposes. The City's
enterprise funds are as follows:
II Water Utility Fund - This fund is used to account for the activities related to
providing water service to the residents of the City and certain residents of
Salt Lake County.
IISewer Utility Fund - This fund is used to account for the activities related to
providing sewer service to the residents of the City.
I
Airport Authority Fund - This fund is used to account for the activities related
to the operation of City airports.
I
Golf Course Fund - This fund is used to account for the operation of golf course
facilities for use by the general public.
I
Refuse Collection Fund - This fund is used to account for the operations and
activities related to garbage collection and disposal.
I
Housing Authority Fund - This fund is used to account for the operations and
activities of the Housing Authority of Salt Lake City. A 1988 operating
budget was not adopted for the subsidiary of the Housing Authority. Budget
information for combined totals of the Housing Authority and subsidiary is not
IImeaningful and therefore is not presented in this report.
Redevelopment Agency Fund - This fund is used to account for urban redevelopment
activities such as acquisition of land sites and sale of such land for
I
development, and loans provided for improvements in existing housing and the
repayment of loans and related interest.
1
I
II
II -55-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION '
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET - ENTERPRISE FUNDS
June 30, 1988
Water Sewer
ASSETS Utility Utility '
Current assets:
Cash and investments $ 6,162,582 S19,467,521
Receivables: '
Accounts, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $196,040 3,853,162 1,391,703
Due from other governments - -
Other, principally accrued interest 154,494 527,394
Inventory of supplies 958,747 371,051 '
Total current assets 11,128,985 21,757,669
Restricted assets -
Cash and investments 3,803,394 1,709,048
Property and equipment, at cost: '
Land and water rights 7,125,819 4,184,448
Buildings 8,336,811 17,161,703
Improvements other than buildings 78,877,924 21,337,030 IIMachinery and equipment 8,421,626 15,208,988
Construction in progress 3,022,109 9,138,457
105,784,289 67,030,626 IILess accumulated depreciation 24,324,773 14,871,924
Net property and equipment 81,459.516 52,158,702
Other assets: '
Bond issue costs, less accumulated amortization of $574,150 651,503 173,184
Loans and other long-term receivables - -
Land and buildings held for resale - -
Other 948,079 - '
Total other assets 1,599,582 173,184
Total assets $ 97,991.477 $75,798,603
LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY '
Current liabilities:
Cash overdraft $ - $ - '
Accounts payable 999,325 155,951
Accrued liabilities 446,729 536,819
Current portion of long-term debt 590,754 147,612
Current deposits and advance rentals - - '
Total current liabilities 2,036,808 840,382
Deposits and advance rentals - -
Liabilities payable from restricted assets 2,104,839 324,549 '
Bonds, mortgages, and notes payable 22,713,440 6,037,750
Long-term compensation liability 1,122,773 286,521
Total liabilities 27,977,860 7,489.202 '
Fund equity:
Contributed capital:
Municipality 3,218,421 11,510,245
Customers and private developers 22,777,342 6,742,815 '
Federal and state grants-in-aid 5,713,208 4,455,330
31,708,971 22,708,390
Less accumulated amortization 1,494,836 1,810,794 IITotal contributed capital 30,214,135 20,897,596
Retained earnings (deficit):
Reserved under bond, loan, and land sale agreements 4,828,145 23,498,539
Unreserved 34,971,337 23,913,266 '
Total retained earnings (deficit) 39,799,482 47,411,805
Total fund equity (deficit) 70,013,617 68,309,401 '
Total liabilities and fund equity $ 97,991,477 $75,798,603
-56- '
II
Airport Refuse Golf Housing Redevelopment
II
Authority Collection Course Authority Agency Total
$ 5,126,039 $ - $1,399,645 $ 1,154,687 $ 9,426,430 $42,736,904
1 3,621,518 138,651 - - 35,000 9,040,034
4,240,559 716,120 89,868 5,046,547
422,025 - - 144,073 85,788 1,333,774
426,957 - - - - 1,756,755
II13,837.098 138,651 1,399,645 2,014,880 9,637,086 59,914,014
31,254,518 - - 10,585,978 2,481,835 49,834,773
I22,757,796 - 1,433,985 5,527,863 - 41,029,911
94,426,898 - 1,086,275 16,095,482 - 137,107,169
II 122,126,059 7,802,575
- 1,891,226 1,613,997 - 225,846,236
1,589,308 849,754 29,362 33,901,613
13,002,878 25,163,444
260,116,206 - 6,000,794 24,087,096 29,362 463,048,373 I
71,157,308 2,394,832 2,422,359 14,680 115,185,876
188,958,898 - 3,605,962 21,664,737 14,682 347,862,497
I
507,188 - - 343,474 - 1,675,349
- - - - 6,326,230 6,326,230
- - - 905,000 9,056,293 9,961,293
II
_ 107,493 - 1,055,572
507,188 1,355,967 15,382,523 19,018,444
$234,557,702 $138,651 $5,005,607 $35,621,562 $27,516,126 $476,629,728
II
II $ 3,648,521 $156,768 $ - $ - $ - $3,805,289
658,578 26,755 156,791 220,868 23,445 2,241,713
4,525,418 25,973 102,809 5,986,624 63,290 11,687,662
2,835,000 - - 30,154 3,419,768 7,023,288
I
1,124,255 -
209, - - - 1,124,255
12,791,772 496 259,600 6,237,646 3,506,503 25,882,207
II
206,6-
11 - = = - 2,429,388
206,611
89,920,090 34,251,586 1,023,718 153,946,584
578,715 31,623 58,471 - 85,958 2,164,061
II
103,497,188 241,119 318.071 40,489,232 4,616,179 184,628,851
1,384,209 - 1,770,250 - - 17,883,125
II
- _ - - 29,520,157
72,596,418 82,764,956
73,980,627 - 1,770,250 - - 130,168,238
26,384,166 - - - - 29,689,796
II47.596.461 1,770,250 100,478,442
4,712,678 - - 1,120,050 5,787,591 39,947,003
I
78,751,375 (102,468) 2,917,286 (5,987,720) 17,112,356 151,575,432
83,464,053 (102,468) 2,917,286 (4,867,670) 22,899,947 191,522,435
I
131,060,514 (102,468) 4,687,536
$5,005,607 (4,867,670) 22,899,947
$27,516,126 292,000,877
$234,557,702 $138,651 $35,621,562 $476,629,728
I -57-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION ,
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
For the year ended June 30, 1988 '
Water Sewer
Utility Utility '
Operating revenue:
Sales and charges for services $20,673,790 $11,412,132
Rental and other - -
Total operating revenue 20,673,790 11,412,132 II
Operating expenses:
Personal services 7,473,286 3,269,516 '
Operating and maintenance 1,217,064 538,489
Charges and services 6,580,786 1,705,758
Depreciation and amortization 1,935,147 1,578,954
Participating airline rebate - -
Total operating expenses 17,206,283 7,092,717 II
Operating income (loss) 3,467,507 4,319,415
Nonoperating revenues (expenses): ,
Interest income 918,437 1,519,634
Interest expense (net of interest expense capitalized
of $1,177,474) (1,556,497) - '
Property taxes - -
Grants - -
Gain (loss) on disposition of property and equipment 75,262 (9,560)
Write-down of land and buildings held for resale - -
Total nonoperating revenues (expenses) (562,798) 1,510,074 '
Income (loss) before operating transfers 2,904,709 5,829,489
Operating transfers in - - ,
Operating transfers out - -
Net income (loss) 2,904,709 5,829,489
Add amount equal to depreciation on property and equipment IIacquired by grants externally restricted for
capital construction 125,648 94,276
Increase (decrease) in retained earnings 3,030,357 5,923,765
Retained earnings (deficit), June 30, 1987 36,769,125 41,488,040 II
Retained earnings (deficit) , June 30, 1988 $39,799,482 $47,411,805
I
11/
I/
I/
I
I
-58- '
II
II
Airport Refuse Golf Housing Redevelopment
IIAuthority Collection Course Authority Agency Total
$35,288,264 $1,893,820 $2,814,215 $ - $ - $ 72.082,221
II
- - 102,889 890,732 309,809 1,303,430
35,288,264 1,893,820 2,917,104 890,732 309,809 73,385,651
II 6,114,354 859,652 839,476 751,570 474,185 19,782,039
906,178 18,919 356,906 1,031,560 956,733 5,025,849
6,785,233 1,061,185 1,119,990 4,024,855 127,236 21,405,043
8,444,171 - 203,669 511,615 5,872 12,679,428
I
2,354,890 - - - - 2,354,890
24,604,826 1,939,756 2,520,041 6,319,600 1,564,026 61,247,249
10,683,438 (45,936) 397,063 (5,428,868) (1,254,217) 12,138,402
II
1,034,903 - 75,929 795,705 939,380 5,283,988
II (4,954,748) (56,532) _ (2,536,297) (702,500) (9,806,574)
- 8,633,948 8,633,948
- - 4,830,174 234,475 5,064,649
11,777 - - - 94,684 172,163
II
- - (1,027,997) - (1,027,997)
(3,908,068) (56,532) 75,929 2,061,585 9,199,987 8,320,177
6,775,370 (102,468) 472,992 (3,367,283) 7.945,770 20,458,579
I' - - - - 1,293,020 1,293,020
- (343,261) (343,261)
6,775,370 (102,468) 472,992 (3,367,283) 8,895,529 21,408,338
II
2,124,623 - - - - 2,344,547
II 8,899,993 (102,468) 472,992 (3,367,283) 8,895,529 23,752,885
74,564,060 2,444.294 (1,500,387) 14,004,418 167,769,550
$83,464,053 $ (102,468) $2,917,286 $(4,867,670) $22,899,947 $191,522,435
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
-59-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATIONI/
COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
ENTERPRISE FUNDS
Year ended June 30, 1988
II
Water Sewer ,
Utility Utility
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
Cash flows from operating activities
Net income (loss) $ 2,904,709 $ 5,829,489II
Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to net cash provided
by operating activities
Depreciation and amortization 1,935,147 1,578,954 IIBad debt expense 13,562 33,287
Department of Housing and Urban Development
interest expense - -
Change in compensated absences liability (33,804) (40,867)
Loss (gain) on fixed asset dispositions and writedown (75,262) 9,560 IIChanges in assets and liabilities
Decrease (increase) in accounts receivable 390,183 (647,287)
Decrease (increase) in grants receivable - -
Increase in interest receivable (19,477) (254,830) II
Decrease (increase) in other receivables 156,550 14,804
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable (495,457) (202,249)
Increase (decrease) in accrued liabilities 9,738 8,014
Increase (decrease) in consumer and other deposits - - IIIncrease (decrease) in interest payable - -
Net cash provided (used) by operating activities 4,785,889 6,328,875
Cash flows from investing activities '
Increase in long term cash investments - -
Loans made to residents - -
Principal collected on loans - -
Proceeds from sale of equipment 93,965 43,435 IIProceeds from sale of land and buildings -Net change in restricted investments - -
Payments for purchase of fixed assets (5,495,265) (6,339,669)
Net cash provided (used) in investing activities (5,401,300) (6,296,234) II
Cash flows from financing activities
Decrease (increase) in other assets 84,268 (6,593)
Proceeds from issuance of debt
II
(net of discount and issuance costs) - -
Contributions for aid in construction 930,185 691,471
Increase (decrease) in cash overdraft - -
Payment on debt (1,148,409) (240,451)
Net cash provided (used) by financing activities (133,956) 444,427 I/
Noncash transactions affecting financial position
Contributions of fixed assets from developers
Acquisitions of fixed assets through developer 784,724 293,269
II
capital contributions (784,724) (293,269)
Net effect of noncash transactions - - '
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents (749,367) 477,068
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year 10,715,343 20,699,501 II
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year $ 9,965,976 $21,176,569
sc===c==c==Cash and cash equivalent components: II
Unrestricted $ 6,162,582 $19,467,521
Restricted 3,803,394 1,709,048
$c9,965,976 $21,176,569 '
-60-
II
II
I Airport Refuse Golf Housing
Authority Redevelopment
Authority Collection Course Agency Total
IIS 6,775,370 5(102,468) S 472,992 $(3,367,283) $ 8,895,529 521,408,338
I
8,444,171- -- 203,669 511,615- 5,872
252,640 12,679,428
299,489
- - - 1,456,659 - 1,456,659
87,446 35,886 14,602 - 3,035 66,298
II (11,777) 1,027,997 (94,684) 855,834
1,411,658 (138,651) - - (35,000) 980,903
- - - 61,354 (89,868) (28,514)
I (383,359) - - - (56,817) (714,483)
-
(15,923) 155,431
575,257 (154,749) (4,068) 53,616 (66,663) (294,313)
1,450,382 57,596 22,150 (138,722) 6,211 1,415,369
I
152,739 - - - (200,000)
(59,633) (47,261)
100,728 51,380 92,475
18,602,615 (302,386) 709,345 (359,307) 8,560,622 38,325,653
I/ - - - (4,831) - (4,831)
- - - - (989,668) (989,668)
- - - - 456,545 456,545
14,049 393,398 - - - 544,847
II 867,222 867,222
(18,425,0-00) (18,425,000)
(27.728,317) - (143,001) (2,712,820) (1,600,851) (44,019,923)
II
(46,139,268) 393,398 (143.001) (2,717,651) (1,266,752) (61,570,808)
(53,224) - - (17,736) - 6,715
I
21,620,661 - - 1,075,440 - 22.696,101
8,007,676 - - - - 9,629,332
1,900,751 (91,012) - - - 1,809,739
11 (2,190,000) - - (317,142) (2,660,777) (6,556,779)
29,285,864 (91,012) 740,562 (2,660,777) 27,585,108
r - - - - - 1,077,993
- - - - - (1,077,993)
I - - - - - -
1,749,211 - 566,344 (2,336,396) 4,633,093 4,339,953
II11,156,346 - 833,301 12,967,568 7,275,172 63,647,231
S12,905,557 $ - S1,399,645 S10,631,172 511,908,265 $67,987,184
II
S 5,126,039 $ - $1,399,645 S 1.154,687 $ 9,426,430 $42,736,904
7,779,518 - - 9,476,485 2,481,835 25,250,280
IIS12,905,557 S - S1,399,645 S10,631,172 $11,908,265 567,987,184
II -61-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION '
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
WATER UTILITY FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988
111
I
Budgetary Basis I
Actual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
Revenues and other sources: I
Operating revenue - metered sales $20,673,790 $20,673,790 $19,211,700 $1,462,090
Gain on sale of surplus equipment 75,262 - - -
Proceeds from sale of surplus equipment - 93,965 39,000 54,965 '
Interest income 918,437 918,437 850,000 68,437
Contributions and nonoperating grants - 707,489 235,000 472,489
Reservoir and supply line fees - 222,696 573,780 (351,084)
Bond proceeds - - 2,583,119 (2,583,119)
II
Total revenue and other sources 21,667,489 22,616,377 23,492,599 (876,222)
Expenses and other uses: II
Personal services 7,507,090 7,507,090 7,430,115 (76,975)
Accrued compensated absences (33,804) - - -
Operating and maintenance 1,217,064 1,217,064 1,627,040 409,976 IICharges and services 6,580,786 6,580,786 6,519,287 (61,499)
Depreciation 1,935,147 - - -
Total operating expenses 17,206,283 15,304,940 15,576,442 271,502 '
Debt service:
Principal - 1,148,409 1,044,550 (103,859)
Interest 1,713,441 1,713,441 1,808,230 94,789 111
Capitalized interest (156,944) - - -
Capital outlay:
Purchase of land and water rights - 30,845 50,000 19,155
Buildings - 253,183 628,000 374,817 111
Purchase of equipment - 594,775 830,106 235,331
Improvements other than buildings - 4,616,462 5,761,388 1,144,926
Total expenses and other uses 18,762,780 23,662,055 25,698,716 2,036,661
I/
Excess revenue and other sources over
(under) expenses and other uses $ 2,904,709 $(1,045,678) $(2,206,117) $1,160,439
IIRR
II
II
I/
-62- 1
I SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
SEWER UTILITY FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988
II
II
Budgetary Basis
Actual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
IRevenues and other sources:
Operating revenue - sales and charges
for current services $11,412,132 $11,412,132 $12,492,000 $(1,079,868)
II Sale of surplus equipment - 43,435 10,000 33,435
Interest income 1,519,634 1,519,634 1,000,000 519,634
Contributions and nonoperating grants - 691,471 - 691.471
II
Total revenue and other sources 12,931,766 13,666,672 13,502,000 164,672
I Expenses and other uses:
Personal services 3,310,383 3,310,383 3,440,501 130,118
Accrued compensated absences (40,867) - - -
Operating and maintenance 538,489 538,489 707,125 168,636
I/ Charges and services 1,705,758 1,705,758 1,978,307 272,549
Loss on sale of property and equipment 9,560
-
-
Depreciation 1,578,954 -
Total operating expenses 7,102,277 5,554,630 6,125,933 571,303
II
Debt service:
Principal - 240,451 240,450 (1)
I
Interest 455,472 455,472 463,250 7,778
Capitalized interest (455,472) -
Capital outlay:
Buildings - 215,265 2,315,000 2,099,735
II Improvements other than buildings - 5,515,858 12,074,921 6,559,063
Purchase of equipment 608,546 848,027 239,481
Total expenses and other uses 7,102,277 12,590,222 22,067,581 9,477,359
IIExcess revenue and other sources over
(under) expenses and other uses $ 5,829,489 $ 1,076,450 $(8,565,581) $ 9,642,031
II
11
II
I -63-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION '
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
AIRPORT AUTHORITY FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988
II
I
Budgetary Basis IIActual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
Basis basis Budget (unfavorable) IIRevenues and other sources:
Airfields $10,291,935 $10,291,935 $10,078,400 $ 213,535
Terminals 13,036,740 13,036,740 13,315,800 (279,060)
Landside 6,718,512 6,718,512 6,721,900 (3,388) '
Airport II 172,917 172,917 174,400 (1,483)
General aviation 1,007,727 1,007,727 999,700 8,027
Support areas 2,824,305 2,824,305 2,498,700 325,605
Other revenue 1,236,128 1,236,128 1,179,500 56,628 IITotal operating revenue 35,288,264 35,288,264 34,968,400 319,864
Gain on sale of surplus equipment 11,777 - - -
Proceeds from equipment sale - 14,046 5,000 9,046 IIInterest income 1,034,903 1,034,903 800,000 234,903
Contributions for aid in construction - 12,029,118 17,445,500 (5,416,382)
Total revenue and other sources 36,334,944 48,366,331 53,218,900 (4,852,569) II
Expenses and other uses: •
IIPersonal services 6,979,208 6,979,208 7,203,300 224,092
Accrued compensated absences 87,446 - - -
Capitalized personal services (952,300) - -
Operating and maintenance 906,178 906,178 1,018,400 112,222
Charges and services 6,785,233 6,785,233 6,861,200 75,967 II
Depreciation and amortization 8,444,171 - - -
Participating airline rebate 2,354,890 2,354,890 2,080,000 (274,890)
Total operating expenses 24,604,826 17,025,509 17,162,900 137,391 II
Debt service:
Principal - 2,190,000 2,190,000 -
Interest 5,490,654 5,490,654 5,237,600 (253,054)
Capitalized interest (535,906) - -
Capital outlay: II
Purchase of land - 2,780,905 8,436,100 5,655,195
Purchase of equipment - 1,096,003 1,113,400 17,397
Construction - II 22,981,553 27,037,300 4,055,747
Total expenses and other uses 29,559,574 51,564,624 61,177,300 9,612,676
Excess revenue and other sources over II
(under) expenses and other uses $ 6,775,370 $(3,198,293) $(7,958,400) $4,760,107
II
II
-64- '
II SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
REFUSE COLLECTION FUND
IIYear ended June 30, 1988
II
1 Budgetary Basis
Actual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
IIBasis basis Budget (unfavorable)
Revenues:
Operating revenue -
1 Refuse collection fees $1,893,820 S1,893,820 S2,202,000 $(308,180)
II Expenses: - -
Personal services 823,766 823,766 698,038 (175,728)
Accrued compensated absences 35,886 -
Operating and maintenance 18,919 18,919 21,300 2,381
Charges and services 1,061,185 1,061,185 1,532,662 471,477 1
Total operating expenses 1,939,756 1,903,870 2,202,000 298,130
Interest expense 56,532 56,532 - (56,532)
I
Total expenses 1,996,288 1,960,402 2,202,000 241.598
Excess expenses over revenues $ (102,468) $ (66,582) $ - S (66.582)
I
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
I -65-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION ,
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
GOLF COURSE FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988
I
II
Budgetary Basis I
•
Actual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
Revenues and other sources:
II
Green fees $1,821,817 $1,821,817 $1,789,704 $ 32,113
Season passes 243,692 243,692 200,000 43,692
Driving range fees 204,563 204,563 150,191 54,372
Golf cart rental 496,073 496,073 468,588 27,485
Concessions 48,070 48,070 58,636 (10,566) 1/
Other revenue 102,889 102,889 - 102,889
Total operating revenue 2,917,104 2,917,104 2,667,119 249,985
II
Interest income 75,929 75,929 30,000 45,929
Total revenue and other sources 2,993,033 2,993,033 2,697,119 295,914 II
Expenses and other uses: IIPersonal services 824,874 824,874 784,564 (40,310)
Accrued compensated absences 14,602 - - -
Operating and maintenance 356,906 356,906 355,892 (1,014)
Charges and services 1,119,990 1,119,990 1,275,244 155,254 IIDepreciation 203,669 - - -
Total operating expenses 2,520,041 2,301,770 2,415,700 113,930
Capital outlay: II
Purchase of equipment - 56,522 60,419 3,897
Improvements other than buildings - 86,479 221,000 134,521
Total expenses and other uses 2,520,041 2,444,771 2,697,119 252,348 1
Excess revenue and other sources over a== ====c
expenses and other uses $ 472,992 $ 548,262 $ - $548,262
II
II
I
1
1
1
-66- '
ISALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY FUND
IIYear ended June 30, 1988
I
I Budgetary Basis
Actual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
I Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
Revenues and other sources:
Operating income - rental
and other $ 309,809 $ 309,809 $ 100,000 $ 209,809
I
Property taxes 8,633,948 8,633,948 8,750,000 (116,052)
I Grants 234,475 234,475 477,675 (243,200)
Interest income 939,380 939,380 200,000 739,380
Proceeds for land disposition 867,222 867,222
Gain on land disposition 94,684 - - -
Operating transfers in 1,293,020 1,293,020 1,874,376 (581,356)
II
Total revenue and other sources 11,505,316 12,277,854 11,402,051 875,803
IExpenses and other uses:
Personal services 471,150 471,150 440,958 (30,192)
Accrued compensated absences 3,035 - -II Operating and maintenance 956,733 956,733 1,138,159 181,426
Charges and services 127,236 127,236 3,280,421 3,153,185
Community Development Block
Grant loans - 1,005,180 1,771,627 766,447
Depreciation 5,872 - -
II -
Total operating expenses 1,564,026 2,560,299 6,631,165 4,070,866
I Operating transfers out 343,261 - - -
Debt service:
Principal - 2,660,777 2,200,000 (460,777)
Interest 702,500 702,500 461,800 (240,700)
ICapital outlay:Purchase of land - 1,600,851 9,437,141 7,836,290
Total expenses and other uses 2,609,787 7,524,427 18,730,106 11,205,679
11 Excess revenue and other sources over
(under) expenses and other uses S 8,895,529 $ 4,753,427 S(7,328,055) S12,081,482
I
II
1/
I -67-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
This page intentionally left blank 1
_68 I
i
I
I
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
' Internal service funds are used to account for the financing of services provided
by one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the City. The
City's internal service funds are as follows:
I
Fleet Management Fund - This fund is used to account for the costs of the fleet
' management system which provides vehicles for use by City departments, and
which provides vehicle maintenance on a cost-reimbursement basis.
Data Processing Fund - This fund is used to account for the costs of providing
data processing services to City departments. Costs are recovered by charges
to user departments.
Employee Benefit Self-Insurance Fund - This fund is used to account for the costs
of providing insurance for employee health, accident, long-term disability,
unemployment and worker's compensation.
Central Fire Dispatch Fund - This fund is used to account for the costs of
providing fire dispatch services to the Salt Lake City Fire Department and to
other local governmental entities.
' Governmental Immunity Fund - This fund is used to account for payment of general
liability claims against the City.
' Municipal Building Authority Fund - This fund is used to account for the acquisi-
tion and lease to the City of the public safety building, mechanized garbage
trucks and cans, street lights, and telephone equipment. This fund will
I/ account for the retirement of bonds which were issued to purchase the building
and equipment.
I
I
I
I
11
I -69-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET - INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
June 30, 1988
11
Fleet Data
ASSETS Management Processing
Current assets: ,
Cash and investments $ 1,939,731 $ 438,586
Accounts receivable - 435
Inventories of supplies, at cost 245,600 -
Total current assets 2,185,331 439,021
Restricted assets -
Cash and investments - -
II
Property and equipment, at cost:
Land 13,942 -
Buildings 60,871 - IIImprovements other than buildings - 145,017
Machinery and equipment 21.003,144 1,294,554
Leased property under capital leases - 4,444,315
Construction in progress - -
21,077,957 5,883,886
Less accumulated depreciation
and amortization 10,791,515 2,009,965
Net property and equipment 10,286,442 3,873,921
II
Other assets - bond issue costs,
less accumulated amortization of $10,604 - -
11
Total assets $12,471,773 $4,312,942
II
LIABILITIES AND FUND EQUITY
Current liabilities: IIAccounts payable $ 73,300 $ 243,931
Accrued liabilities 68,165 66,382
Deferred revenue - -
Liabilities payable from restricted assets - -
Obligations under capital leases
due within one year - 748,396 I/
Current portion of bonds payable - -
Total current liabilities 141,465 1,058,709 II
Long-term liabilities:
Obligations under capital leases
due after one year - 2,889,535 1
Obligations for compensation liabilities
due after one year 214,947 176,430
Bonds payable - -
Total long-term liabilities 214,947 3,065.965 II
Total liabilities 356,412 4,124,674
Fund equity:
Contributed capital from municipality 6,293,558 129,209 II
Retained earnings (deficit) 5,821,803 59,059
Total fund equity (deficit) 12,115,361 188,268 II
Total liabilities and fund equity $12,471,773 $4,312,942
-70- 11
I
II
II Employee
Benefit Central Govern- Municipal
Self- Fire mental Building
Insurance Dispatch Immunity Authority Total
I $ 985,171 $124,185 $527,325 $ - $ 4,014,998
24,828 41,640 - 218,624 285,527
II
- - - - 245,600
1,009,999 165,825 527,325 218,624 4,546,125
II - - - 9,462,645 9,462,645
- - - - 13,942
- - - = 60,871
145,017
36,493 262,246 9,921,240 32,517,677
- - - - 4,444,315
- - = 51,500 51,500
36,493 262,246 9,972,740 37,233,322
14,379 62,991 - 623,302 13,502,152
II22,114 199,255 - 9,349,438 23,731,170
I - - - 371,142 371,142
$1,032,113 $365,080 $527,325 $19,401,849 $38,111,082
II
II $ 417,932 $ - $418,210 $ - $ 1,153,373
672,886 22,413 3,891 - 833,737
462,646 - - - 462,646
II - - - 617,885 617,885
- 748,396
- - - 1,310,000 1,310,000
I' 1,553,464 22,413 422,101 1,927,885 5,126,037
II
- - - - 2,889,535
10,001 73,675 - - 475,053
- - - 18,285,875 18,285,875
I10,001 73,675 - 18,285,875 21,650,463
1,563,465 96,088 422,101 20,213,760 26,776,500
II
5,533 162,246 - - 6,590,546
(536,885) 106,746 105,224 (811,911) 4,744,036
11 (531,352) 268,992 105,224 (811,911) 11,334,582
$1,032,113 $365,080 $527,325 $19,401,849 $38,111,082
I -71-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
COMBINING STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENSES AND CHANGES IN RETAINED EARNINGS
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Year ended June 30, 1988
1
Fleet Data II
Management Processing
Operating revenue - sales and
charges for services $7,595,109 $3,408,612
Operating expenses:
Personal services 1,812,153 1,557,273
II
Operating and maintenance 2,070,415 101,381
Charges and services 690,534 936,067
Depreciation and amortization 1,838,634 847,271
Total operating expenses 6,411,736 3,441,992II
Operating income (loss) 1,183,373 (33,380)
Nonoperating revenues (expenses):
II
Interest income 43,696 14,720
Interest expense (403) (245,222)
Loss on disposition of
property and equipment (22,172) (1,992)
II
Total nonoperating
revenues (expenses) 21,121 (232,494)
Net income (loss) before II
operating transfers 1,204,494 (265,874)
Operating transfers in - -
Operating transfers out (1,240,675) -
Net income (loss) (36,181) (265,874)
Retained earnings (deficit) , June 30, 1987 5,857,984 324,933
Retained earnings (deficit), June 30, 1988 $5,821,803 $ 59,059
II
I/
II
II
II
II
1
-72 '
I
II
II Employee
Benefit Central Govern- Municipal
Self- Fire mental Building
Insurance Dispatch Immunity Authority Total
II $6,723,751 $723,002 $ - $ - $18,450,474
II 178,002 605,058 109,992 - 4,262,478
14,964 3,225 2,189,985
6,287,107 20,216 322,284 8,256,208
2,148 26,225 - 633,906 3,348,184
1 6,482,221 654,724 432,276 633,906 18,056,855
241,530 68,278 (432,276) (633,906) 393,619
I28,840 7,336 44,668 427,048 566,308
(527,818) (773,443)
- (24,164)
I
28,840 7,336 44,668 (100,770) (231,299)
II270,370 75,614 (387,608) (734,676) 162,320
100,000 - - - 100,000
(77,235) (1,317,910)
11 370,370 75,614 (387,608) (811,911) (1,055,590)
(907,255) 31,132 492,832 - 5,799,626
II $ (536,885) $106,746 $105,224 $(811,911) $ 4,744,036
II
I
I
II
1
II
11
1 -73-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATIONII
COMBINING STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN FINANCIAL POSITION
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
Year ended June 30, 1988
I
I
Fleet Data
Management Processing
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents II
Cash flows from operating activities
Net income (loss) $ (36,181) $(265,874)
Adjustments to reconcile net earnings to net
cash provided by operating activities:
II
Depreciation and amortization 1,838,634 847,271
Change in compensated absences liability 32,982 30,741
Loss on sale of fixed assets 22,172 1,992
Changes in assets and liabilities: 11
Decrease (increase) in accounts
receivable - 10,426
Increase (decrease) in accounts payable (125,558) 166,800
Increase (decrease) in accrued
liabilities 7,627 12,680
II
Increase in deferred revenue - -
Net cash provided (used) by
operating activities 1,739,676 804,036 11
Cash flows from investing activities:
Proceeds from sale of equipment 679,711 4,350
Payments for purchase of fixed assets (2,540,873) (132,369) II
Net cash used in investing activities (1,861,162) (128,019)
Cash flows from financing activities:
11
Increase in other assets (4,400) -
Proceeds from issuance of debt
(net of discount) - -
Repayment of contribution - -
Principal payments (13,092) (704,117)
II
Net cash provided (used) by
financing activities (17,492) (704,117)
Net increase (decrease) in cash II
and cash equivalents (138,978) (28,100)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year 2,078,709 466,686 II
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year $1,939,731 $ 438,586
Cash and cash equivalent components: II
Unrestricted 81,939,731 $ 438,586
Restricted - -
$1.939,731 $ 438,586
II
II
1
_74 1
II
I
IIEmployee
Benefit Central Govern- Municipal
Self- Fire mental Building
IInsurance Dispatch Immunity Authority Total
II $ 370,370 $ 75,614 $(387,608) $ (811,911) $(1,055,590)
2,148 26,225 - 633,906 3,348,184
231 4,251 - - 68,205
I - - - - 24,164
(24,828) 70,375 - (218,624) (162,651)
II 114,336 - 11,417 90,067 257,062
(968,241) 5,193 613 527,818 (414,310)
228,909 - - - 228,909
II (277,075) 181,658 (375,578) 221,256 2,293,973
I (1,590) -- - -
(9 684,061
,972,740) (12,647,572)
(1,590) - - (9,972,740) (11,963,511)
I - - - (381,746) (386,146)
IIw - - 19.595,875 19, ,
875
(50,000) (50(50,000000
)
(717,209)
I - (50,000) - 19,214,129 18,442,520
(278,665) 131,658 (375,578) 9,462,645 8,772,982
I1,263,836 (7,473) 902,903 - 4,704,661
$ 985,171 $124,185 $ 527,325 $ 9,462,645 $13,477,643
$ 985,171 $124,185 $ 527,325 $ - $ 4,014,998
- - - 9,462,645 9,462,645
II $ =985,171 $124,185 $ 5277.3325 $ 9,462,645 $13,477,643
II
I
11
11 -75-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
Fleet Management Fund
Year ended June 30, 1988
11
II
Budgetary Basis
Actual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
Revenues and other sources: II
Charges for maintenance $4,938,749 $4,938,749 $ 4,931,309 $ 7,440
Charges for replacement 2,656,360 2,656,360 2,962,536 (306,176)
Total operating revenue 7,595,109 7,595,109 7,893,845 (298,736)
II
Proceeds from sale of equipment - 679,711 - 679,711
Interest income 43,696 43,696 - 43,696
II
Total revenue and other sources 7,638,805 8,318,516 7,893,845 424,671
Expenses and other uses: II
Personal services 1,779,171 1,779,171 1,839,311 60,140
Accrued compensated absences 32,982 - - -
Operating and maintenance 2,070,415 2,070,415 2,255,299 184,884
Charges and services 690,534 690,534 804,436 113,902
Loss on disposition of equipment 22,172 - - -
Depreciation 1,838,634 - - -
Total operating expenses 6,433,908 4,540,120 4,899,046 358,926II
Operating transfers out 1,240,675 1,240,675 300,000 (940,675) IIDebt service:
Principal - 13,092 13,092 -
Interest 403 403 403 -
Capital outlay - 2,540,873 3,896,804 1,355,931
II
Total expenses and other uses 7,674,986 8,335,163 9,109,345 774,182
Excess revenue and other sources over c- _ _
(under) expenses and other uses $ (36,181) $ (16,647) $(1,215,500) $1,198,853II
I
II
11
I
II
-76 II
-
I/ SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
DATA PROCESSING FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988
II
I
I Budgetary Basis
Actual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
IIRevenues and other sources:
Operating revenue -
Charges for services $3,408,612 $3,408,612 $3,367,018 $ 41,594
I
Other sources -Interest income 14,720 14,720 - 14,720
Proceeds from sale of equipment - 4,350 - 4,350
IITotal revenue and other sources 3,423,332 3,427,682 3,367,018 60,664
II Expenses and other uses:
Personal services 1,526,532 1,526,532 1,492,043 (34,489)
Accrued compensated absences 30,741 - - -
Operating and maintenance 101,381 101,381 54,306 (47,075)
II Charges and services 936,067 936,067 921,797 (14,270)
Depreciation 847,271
-
-
-
Loss on sale of equipment 1,992 -
11 Total operating expenses 3,443,984 2,563,980 2,468,146 (95,834)
Debt service:
Principal - 704,117 704,117 -
II Interest 245,222 245,222 245,222
Capital outlay:
Purchase of equipment - 132,369 234,671 102,302
IITotal expenses and other uses 3,689,206 3,645,688 3,652,156 6,468
Excess revenue and other sources over
II (under) expenses and other uses $ (265,874) $ (218,006) $ (285,138) $ 67,132
II
II
II
II
II
I -77-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATIONII
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
EMPLOYEE BENEFIT SELF-INSURANCE FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988
I
I
Budgetary Basis
Actual on Actual on Variance I/
GAAP budgetary favorable
Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
Revenues and other sources: II
Operating revenue - charges for
services $6,723,751 $6,723,751 $7,110,898 $(387,147)
Other sources: II
Interest income 28,840 28,840 94,000 (65,160)
Operating transfer in 100,000 100,000 100,000 -
Total revenue and other sources 6,852,591 6,852,591 7,304,898 (452,307) II
Expenses and other uses:
Personal services 177,771 177,771 183,412 5,641
il
Accrued compensated absences 231 - - -
Operating and maintenance 14,964 14,964 11,917 (3,047)
Premiums and other charges for services 6,287,107 6,287,107 7,001,569 714,462 II
Depreciation 2,148 - - -
Total operating expenses 6,482,221 6,479,842 7,196,898 717,056
Capital outlay - II
Purchase of equipment - 1,590 108,000 106,410
Total expenses and other uses 6,482,221 6,481,432 7,304,898 823,466
II
Excess revenue and other sources over
expenses and other uses $ 370,370 $ 371,159 $ - $ 371,159 II
II
II
II
I
II
-78- I
II
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
CENTRAL FIRE DISPATCH FUND
IIYear ended June 30, 1988
II
II Budgetary Basis
Actual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
I Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
Revenues and other sources:
Operating income -
Charges for services $723,002 $723,002 $677,303 $45,699
II Other sources -
Interest income 7,336 7,336 10,000 (2,664)
IITotal revenue and other sources 730,338 730,338 687,303 43,035
II Expenses and other uses: - -
Personal services 600,807 600,807 614,155 13,348
Accrued compensated absences 4,251
Operating and maintenance 3,225 3,225 6,262 3,037
Charges and services 20,216 20,216 16,886 (3,330)
IIDepreciation 26,225 - - -
Total operating expenses 654,724 624,248 637,303 13,055
IIDecrease in contributions - 50,000 50,000 -
II Total expenses and other uses 654,724 674,248 687,303 13,055
Excess revenue and other sources over
expenses and other uses $ 75,614 $ 56,090 $ - $56,090
II
II
II
II
I
II
II -79-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION I
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988
II
II
Budgetary Basis IIActual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
Revenues - II
Interest income $ 44,668 $ 44,668 $ 60,000 $(15,332)
Expenses: I
Personal services 109,992 109,992 125,652 15,660
Claims, charges and services 322,284 322,284 236,345 (85,939) I
Total expenses 432,276 432,276 361,997 (70,279)
Excess revenue and other sources over II(under) expenses and other uses $(387,608) $(387,608) $(301,997) $(85,611)
II
I
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
-80- '
I
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF BUDGET AND ACTUAL
MUNICIPAL BUILDING AUTHORITY FUND
II
Year ended June 30, 1988
II
I
Budgetary Basis
Actual on Actual on Variance
GAAP budgetary favorable
I
Basis basis Budget (unfavorable)
Revenues and other sources:
Interest income $ 427,048 $ 427,048 $ - $ 427,048
IIBond proceeds (net of discount) - 19,595,875 19,595,875 -
Total revenue and other sources 427,048 20,022,923 19,595,875 427,048
I
Expenses and other uses:Bond issue costs -
381,746 393,602 11,856
Depreciation and amortization 633,906 - - -
IITotal operating expenses 633,906 381,746 393,602 11,856
Operating transfer out 77,235 77,235 68,342 (8,893)
I
Debt service - interest 527,818 527,818 720,620 192,802
Capital outlay:
Construction in progress - 51,500 6,000,000 5,948,500
Purchase of telephone system 1,311,368 1,516,256 204,888
I
Purchase of street lights - 4,711,637 4,711,637 -
323,Purchase of trucks and cans 3,898,235 4,221,418 183
I
Total expenses and other uses 1,238,959 10,959,539 17,631,875 6,672,336
Excess revenue and other sources over
(under) expenses and other uses $ (811,911) $ 9,063,384 $ 1,964,000 $7,099,384
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I -81-
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
This page intentionally left blank I
_82 I
I
II
II
ITRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS
I
Trust and agency funds are used to account for assets held by the City as trustee
or agent for individuals, private organizations or other governmental units. The
City's trust and agency funds are as follows:
I
Expendable Trust Fund:
Salt Lake City Trust Fund - This fund was established to account for indi-
vidual private and intergovernmental contributions held in trust by the
II City for the Tracy Aviary, Bicycle Advisory Committee, Freedom Trail,
Indigent Services, and other funds received to be held for a specific pur-
pose.
II
Agency Fund:
Deferred Compensation Fund - This fund is used to account for amounts deferred
I
under the City's employee deferred compensation plan.
11
II
II
I
II
II
11
II
II
I -83-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION '
COMBINING BALANCE SHEET - TRUST AND AGENCY FUNDS
June 30, 1988
I
Expendable Trust Fund Agency Fund I
Salt Lake '
City Deferred
ASSETS Trust Compensation Total
Cash and investments $227,105 $ - $ 227,105 I
Assessments receivable 3,398 - 3,398
Restricted cash and investments - 7,039,734 7,039,734
$230,503 $7,039,734 $7,270,237 I
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES I
Liabilities - '
Accounts payable $ 67,845 $ - $ 67,845
Deferred revenue 3,398 - 3,398
Deferred compensation payable from
restricted assets - 7,039,734 7,039,734 '
Total liabilities 71,243 7,039,734 7,110,977
Fund balance 159,260 - 159,260 1
Total liabilities and fund balance $230,503 $7,039,734 $7,270,237
II
I
II
I
I
1
II
-84- I
II SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES AND CHANGES
IN FUND BALANCE - EXPENDABLE TRUST FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988
II
II
II Salt Lake
City Trust
Revenues:
II Assessments $ 1,688
Interest 5,791
Contributions 52,070
Miscellaneous 25,564
I
Total revenues 85,113
II Expenditures:
Materials and supplies 13,137
Charges and services 168,190
IITotal expenditures 181,327
Revenues over (under) expenditures (96,214)
II Other financing sources -
operating transfers in 26,000
Revenues and other sources
II over (under) expenditures (70,214)
Fund balance, June 30, 1987 229,474
Fund balance, June 30, 1988 $159,260
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I
II
-85-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION I
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN ASSETS AND
LIABILITIES - AGENCY FUND
Year ended June 30, 1988
I/
1
Balance Balance
Deferred Compensation June 30, 1987 Additions Deductions June 30, 1988
Assets - '
Investment with plan
administrator $6,316,293 $1,463,845 $740,404 $7,039,734
I
Liabilities - '
Deferred compensation
payable $6,316,293 $1,463,845 $740,404 $7,039,734 '
I/
1
1
1
I
1
I
1
-86- I
II
II
II
IGENERAL FIXED ASSETS ACCOUNT GROUP
II
The City's General Fixed Assets Account Group is used to record the cost of the
II
fixed assets owned by the City, other than those accounted for in proprietary
fund types, and to aid in maintaining physical control over these assets.
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
11
II
II
I -87-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION I
SCHEDULE OF GENERAL FIXED ASSETS -
BY SOURCE
June 30, 1988
II
II
General fixed assets: '
Land $ 8,806,885
Buildings and improvements 28,064,507
Improvements other than buildings 5,578.093
Machinery and equipment 11,430,476 IILeased property under capital leases 1,313,283
Construction in progress 21,002,857
Total general fixed assets $76,196,101 I
II
Investment in general fixed assets from: I
General Fund $16,285,706
Special revenue funds 6,846,329
Capital Projects Fund 53,064,066 II
Total investment in
general fixed assets $76,196,101
I
I
I/
II
II
II
II
-88- II
ISALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
SCHEDULE OF GENERAL FIXED ASSETS -
BY FUNCTION AND ACTIVITY
11 June 30, 1988
IIImprovements Machinery Leased
Other than and Property Under
Function and Activity Total Land Buildings Buildings Equipment Capital Leases
II
General government:
Control:
I
City Council $ 51,505 $ - $ - $ _ $ 51,505 $ -
Mayor 265,424 265,424
IITotal control 316,929 - - - 316,929 -
Staff agencies:
Finance 15,724,021 2,470,855 12,239,673 613,077 400,416 -
II Administrative Services 318,439 - - - 318,439 -
City Attorney 108,957 108.957 -
II
Total staff agencies 16,151,417 2,470,855 12,239,673 613,077 827,812 -
Total general government 16,468,346 2,470,855 12,239,673 613,077 1,144,741 -
IPolice 5,999,774 574,766 579,278 - 3,793,913 1,051,817
Fire 6,427.040 547,372 4,596,690 21,516 1,261,462 -
Public Works 3,030,690 383,357 1,045,953 1.156 1,600,224 -
' Parks 16,579,538 4,366,088 6,245,498 4,588,559 1,379,393 -
Development Services 390,488 390,488 -
Library 6,297,368 464,447 3,357,415 353,785 1,860,255 261,466
Construction in progress 21,002,857 - 21,002,857 - - -
I
Total general fixed assets
allocated to functions $76,196,101 $8,806,885 $49,067,364 $5,578,093 $11,430,476 $1,313,283
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II -89-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION '
SCHEDULE OF CHANGES IN GENERAL FIXED ASSETS -
BY FUNCTION AND ACTIVITY
Year ended June 30, 1988
I/
General GeneralI/
Fixed Fixed
Assets Assets
Function and Activity 6/30/87 Additions Deductions Transfers 6/30/88
I/
General government:
Control:
City Council $ 45,320 $ 4,620 $ (8,230) $ 9,795 $ 51,505
Mayor 241,094 25,830 - (1,500) 265,424I/
Total control 286,414 30,450 (8,230) 8,295 316,929 II
Staff agencies:
Finance 15,670,399 85,059 (1,900) (29,537) 15,724,021
Administrative Services 1,930,630 154,516 (1,742,751) (23,956) 318,439
I/
City Attorney 67,552 41,405 - - 108,957
Total staff agencies 17,668,581 280,980 (1,744,651) (53,493) 16,151,417 II
Total general government 17,954,995 311,430 (1,752,881) (45,198) 16,468,346
Police 4,816,307 1,168,644 (10,633) 25,456 5,999,774 II
Fire 6,252,267 176,692 (1,919) - 6,427,040
Public Works 2,859,077 191,441 (19,828) - 3,030,690
Parks 15,829,507 757,135 (26,846) 19,742 16,579,538 IIDevelopment Services 327,654 62,834 - - 390,488
Library 6,062,139 269,022 (33,793) - 6,297,368
Construction in progress 6,170,341 14,832,516 - - 21,002,857
Total general fixed assets $60,272,287 $17,769,714 $(1,845,900) $ - $76,196,101 I
I
II
II
II
II
I
I
-90-
II
II
II
II
STATISTICAL SECTION
II
The Statistical Section presents comparative data for expenditures, revenue,
property tax levies and collections, assessed and estimated value of taxable
property, property tax rates and levies, special assessment collections, ratios
I
of net bonded debt, legal debt margin, overlapping debt, ratio of debt service to
general expenditures, schedules of revenue bond coverages, demographic statis-
tics, property value, new construction, principal taxpayers, and miscellaneous
statistics.
II
II
II
II
II
II
I
II
I
I
II
II -91-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTION -
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS ,
Years ended June 30, 1979 through 1988
1
Office of I
Budget and Finance and
Fiscal City City Management Administrative Administrative
year Council Mayor Attorney Planning Services Finance Services
1979 $ - $ 977,607 $ 515,018 $190,412 S 5,664,573 $ - $ - II
1980 98,192(1) 1,236,578 572,523 369,886 4,925,310 - -
1981 314.419 1,171,965 698,301 609,478 5,362,992 - -
1982 254,902 503,986 607,382 414,118 8,127,981 - - '
1983 285,376 509,914 668,129 413,015 9,685,451 - -
1984 260,921 578,691 896,806 (4) 7,845,617 - -
1985 362,184 660,143 949,054 - 10,024,289 - -
1986 369,242 1,639,711(5) 991,097 - (6) 4,665,572 3,780,618 '
1987 542,535 1,616,957 980,337 - - 4,944,360 3,294,118
1988 460,603 1,745,285 1,106,236 - - 5,060,395 3,398,925
Notes: I
(1) This department was created during fiscal 1980 when Salt Lake City Corporation changed from a
commission form of government to a council-mayor form of government.
(2) Effective July 1, 1981, the transactions of the Community Development Block Grant that were II
previously accounted for in the General Fund were accounted for in a special revenue fund. In
addition, some reclassifications of functions were made among departments.
(3) Effective July 1, 1982, the Office of Personnel Management was included in the department of Finance '
and Administrative Services.
(4) Effective July 1, 1983 the Office of Budget and Management Planning was included in Development '
Services and Finance and Administrative Services.
(5) Effective July 1, 1985, the Office of Personnel Management and the Resource Management Divisions were
transferred from the Department of Finance and Administrative Services to the Office of the Mayor.
(6) Effective July 1, 1985, Finance and Administrative Services became two separate departments. II
Source: Salt Lake City Department of Finance II
I/
I/
I
II
I/
_92 1
II
II
11
IIDevelopment Personnel Public Nondepartmental
Fire Police Services Parks Management Works and other Total
II $ 8,785,195 $13,046,859 $1,295,530 $2,962,335 $504,333 $11,315,238 $3,904,175 $49,161,275
10,870,553 14,923,675 2,254,315 3,516,125 572,022 12,625,756 4,849,386 56,814,321
11,741,582 16,508,884 4,606,548 4,442,040 647,862 14,472,150 2,617,475 63,193,696
II
12,601,460 16,855,551 1,546,453(2) 3,659,243 556,800 14,463,160 1,322,047 60,913,083(2)
14,014,962 18,472,953 1,611,477 4,417,428 (3) 12,961,109 4,777,248 67,817,062
14,029,013 18,378,788 1,666,510 4,689,941 - 14,964,637 452,537 63,763,461
14,598,914 19,608,879 1,983,409 5,189,814 - 16,164,173 946.990 70,487,849
11 16,110,597 20,811,079 2,399,717 5,446,764 - 16,720,852 665,575 73,600,824
14,936,881 20,781,410 2,847,820 5,249,128 16,820,567 1,692,815 73,706,928
16,599,917 22,398,519 3,408,213 5,525,474 - 15,589,426 1,908,357 77,201,350
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II -93-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION '
GENERAL FUND REVENUES BY SOURCE -
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
Years ended June 30, 1979 through 1988I/
1
Parking tickets '
Fiscal fines and
Year Taxes Licenses Permits forfeitures Interest
1979 $34,241,429 $1,025,599 $ 693,055 $2,299,782 $1,837,996 '
1980 35,823,267 1,044,820 709,755 2,184,538 3.520,625
1981 37,175,659 1,070,748 1,155,267 1,950,978 1,937,308
1982 39,764,287 1,101,438 1,043,772 2,324,208 3,271,390 '
1983 41,656,570 1,649,800 1,102,606 2,730,005 2,856,907
1984 48,761,600 1,888,151 1,373,729 1,226,219 2,451,949
1985 51,512,256 1,957,316 1,626,800 1,498,739 3,249,285
1986 54,369,274 1,937,710 1,659,929 1,333,480 3,220,280 '
1987 58,744,506 1,949,211 1,760,040 2,726,249 2,889,410
1988 59,404,025 2,517,573 1,554,803 3,145,404 2,714,081
Note: '
(1) Effective July 1, 1981, the revenues from the Community Development Block Grant that were
previously accounted for in the General Fund were accounted for in a special revenue fund.
I/
Source: Salt Lake City Department of Finance
I
1
I
I
11
I
I
I
I
-94 il
-
II
II
11
I
Interfund Parking Chargesfor
Intergovernmental service charges meter services Miscellaneous Total
I $ 6,994,556 $2,074,861 $ 338,382 $1,024,954 $212,375 $50,742,989
12,984,276 2,553,147 416,705 719,913 443,061 60,400,107
12,568,795 2,855,022 421,531 909,221 337,822 60,382,351
I
6,015,217(1) 2,968,776 643,983 762,596 347,159 58,242,826
5,738,258 2,916,882 937,466 1,135,025 142,462 60,865,981
6,281,746 2,809,699 1,010,260 1,006,581 512,892 67,322,826
6,563,488 2,972,298 1,012,459 1,123,124 501,589 72,017,354
II 6,969,550 2,983,717 994,782 1,419,282 537,035 75,425,039
2,446,080 3,406,119 1,015,925 1,110,125 657,089 76,704,754
2,415,272 3,606,993 1,281,631 1,688,965 77,378 78,406,125
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
II
I/
II
I
-95-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION I
GENERAL FUND TAX REVENUES BY SOURCE -
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS IIYears ended June 30, 1979 through 1988
1
General Fund Total I
Fiscal Franchise General property General Fund
year taxes sales tax taxes* taxes
1979 $10,041,860 812,180,984 $12,018,585 834,241,429 I
1980 11,338,445 13,293,313 11,191,509 35,823,267
1981 11,032,173 14,888,857 11,254,629 37,175,659
1982 11,104,274 15,915,708 12,744,305 39,764,287 II1983 10,841,694 16,713,964 14,100,912 41,656,570
1984 12,869,055 17,484,562 18,407,983 48,761,600
1985 14,066,247 18,937,784 18,508,225 51,512,256
1986 13,466,062 19,107,205 21,796,007 54,369,274 '
1987 14,832,734 19,482,405 24,429,367 58,744,506
1988 14,909,149 19,233,930 25,260,946 59,404,025
*Includes interest on tax collections. I
Source: Salt Lake City Department of Finance I
I
1
I
I
I
I
1
I/
-96- '
ilSALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
GENERAL FUND PROPERTY TAX LEVIES AND COLLECTIONS -
II LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
Years ended June 30. 1979 through 1988
11
Percent
1 Percent General Fund Total of total
General Fund General Fund of current delinquent General Fund property tax
Fiscal property tax current tax levy tax property tax collections
Year levy (1) collections collected collections(2) collections(2) to tax levy
' 1979 $12,468,110 $11,799,707 94.6% $ 218,878 $12,018,585 96.4%
1980 11,377,650 10,742,788 94.4% 448,721 11,191,509 98.4%
1981 11,652,264 10,760,408 92.3% 494,221 11,254,629 96.6%
I
1982 12,291,323 12,131,878 98.7% 612,427 12,744,305 103.7%
1983 13,913,643 13,545,785 97.4% 555,127 14,100,912 101.3%
1984 18,113,738 16,645,294 91.9% 961,623 17,606,917 97.2%
1985 19,132,648 17,670,825 92.4% 1,024,749 18,695,574 97.7%
I
1986 21,924,447 19,963,731 91.1% 896,668 20,860,399 95.1%
1987 25,649,887 23,049,835 89.9% 1,189,293 24,239,128 94.5%
1988 25,660,950 23,315,345 90.6% 1,761,559 25,076,904 97.7%
I
Notes:
I
(1) Excludes the portion allocated to Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency for the years 1979 through
1983. Excludes abatements, board letter, pumping plant exemptions, assessor's refunds and the
portion allocated to Salt Lake City Redevelopment Agency for the years 1984 through 1988.
II
(2) Includes interest (for the years 1984 through 1988), sales of real and personal property, and
miscellaneous delinquent collections.
Source: Taken from tax collection summary records of the Salt Lake County Treasurer's office.
II
II
II
II
11
I/
II
II
1 -97-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
ASSESSED AND ESTIMATED ACTUAL VALUE OF TAXABLE PROPERTY -
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
Years ended June 30, 1979 through 1988 '
I
Ratio of total I
Assessed/ assessed value to
Fiscal taxable Estimated total estimated
year value actual value actual value
1979 $812,490,096 $4,062,000,000 20% '
1980 859,281,563 4,296,000,000 20%
1981 917,014,774 4,585,000,000 20%
1982 863,039,944 4,315,000,000 20% '
1983 921,103,101 4,606,000,000 20%
1984 1,027,004,101 5,751,000,000 18%
1985 1,166,606,559 6,492,000,000 18%
1986 1,252,412,484 7,083,000,000 18%
1987 6,334,909.609 8,439,000,000 75%
1988 6,371,204,275 8,712,000,000 73%
NOTE: I
Prior to 1986, the assessed value of taxable property in the State of Utah was set equal to 15%
of the "reasonable fair cash value" of primary residential property and 20% of its "reasonable
fair cash value" of all other property. Beginning in 1987, all taxable property is assessed and1/
taxed on the basis of its fair market value. Utah law requires that the fair market value of
property that is assessed by county assessors using a comparable sales or a cost appraisal method
exclude expenses related to property sales transactions. These transaction costs are statutorily
deemed to equal 20% of the value of the property. For tax purposes, the fair market value of I
primary residential property is reduced by 25% under present law.
Source: Salt Lake County Auditor's Office.
1
II
I/
I/
I/
II
I
_9B 1
' SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
PROPERTY TAX RATES - ALL OVERLAPPING GOVERNMENTS -
11 LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
Years ended June 30, 1979 through 1988
II
Mill Levy (per $1,000 of assessed value)
I Salt Lake Governmental Salt Lake Salt Lake Mosquito Central Metropolitan
Fiscal City Immunity City City Salt Lake Abatement Utah Water Water
year Corporation S.L.C. Library Schools County District Conservation District Total
II
1979 14.47 .50 2.25 34.01 12.33 .20 1.20 - 64.96
1980 13.47 .50 2.50 34.01 14.61 .20 1.94 - 67.23
1981 13.47 .50 2.50 34.01 16.20 .23 2.00 - 68.91
II 1982 15.29 .50 3.00 40.18 17.79 .25 2.00 - 79.01
1983 15.79 3.39 40.68 18.02 .25 2.00 80.13
1984 18.79 - 3.39 40.68 19.40 .27 2.00 - 84.53
1985 17.48 - 3.12 38.81 19.89 .25 1.76 2.00 83.31
II
1986 18.79 - 3.70 38.09 22.85 .25 1.97 1.80 87.45
Tax Rate (per $1 of taxable value)
1986
II restated .003758 -
- .000740 .007618 .004570 .000050 .000394 .000360 .017490
1987 .004370 .000750 .007936 .004564 .000052 .000400 .000379 .018451
1988 .004370 - .000790 .008024 .004631 .000046 .000400 .000386 .018647
II Note:
Effective for fiscal year 1987, the Utah State Legislature adopted "Truth in Taxation" legislation. One
II effect of the legislation is that the term "mill levies" was replaced by "tax rates".
Source: The Utah Foundation and the Utah Taxpayers Association.
II
11
1/
II
II
II
II
11
II -99-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 11
PROPERTY VALUE AND CONSTRUCTION (1) -
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
Years ended June 30, 1979 through 1988
II
Commercial Residential
Construction (2) Construction (3)
Number Number I
Fiscal of Estimated of Estimated Estimated
year Permits Value Units Value Property Value(4)
1979 (5) $ 91,726,117 599 $ 26,540,975 $4,062,450,000 I
1980 (5) 134,100,687 573 27,982,611 4,296,408,000
1981 694 96,018,316 887 72,384,311 4,439,581,000
1982 726 92,138,608 609 29,703,192 4,281,493,000 II1983 769 93,097,565 678 28,196,385 4,496,799,000
1984 1049 118,082,483 766 45,641,448 5,750,833,000
1985 1068 100,499,694 1616 49,982,280 6,491,788,000
1986 1101 169,469,935 941 31,538,982 7,083,344,000
1987 1224 172,131,813 426 19,262,869 8.438,788,000I/
1988 1350 113,517,457 67 5,336,251 8,541,987,000
I
Notes:
(1) Bank deposit amounts are not shown on this schedule since Utah is a branch banking state, and deposit
figures are currently available on a statewide or county basis only.
(2) Source: Building permits issued by the City Building and Housing Services. Includes alterations. II(3) Source: Number of family units from building permits issued by the City Building and Housing
Services. Does not include alterations.
(4) Source: Salt Lake County Auditor's Office for assessed value for years prior to 1987. Assessed value IIfor years 1978-1983 was 20% of estimated actual value. Assessed value for years 1984-1986 was
approximately 18% of estimated actual value. Property Tax Division, Utah State Tax Commission for
taxable value and reasonable fair cash value for 1987. Reasonable fair cash value is equal to 80% of
estimated actual market value. II
(5) Not available.
II
I
II
II
II
II
-100- '
IISALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
PRINCIPAL PROPERTY TAXPAYERS AND PRINCIPAL EMPLOYERS
II
June 30, 1988
I
I Percentage
of total
Type of 1987 taxable assessed
Taxpayer business valuation (1) valuation(1)
I U.S. West Communications Communications $ 298,882,300 4.7%
Corporation of Presiding Bishop of
Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter Day Saints(2) Religious 232,513,902 3.6%
I
Utah Power and Light Company Electric utility 193,897,680 3.0%
American Telephone and Telegraph Communications 72,631,950 1.1%
Mountain Fuel Supply Company Natural gas utility 50,357,910 .8%
Little America Hotel Corporation Hotel 48,912,931 .8%
l
Unisys (Sperry Corporation) Manufacturing 47,449,284 .7%
First Security Bank Bank 39,675,453 .6%
American Oil Company oil 37,900,382 .6%
Union Pacific Corporation Railroads 36,947,090 .6%
II
$1,059,168,882 16.5%
Type of Number of
IEmployer business Employees
State of Utah Government 10,000-11,000
University of Utah (including Hospital) University 10,000-11,000(3)
I
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day
Saints (2) Religious 4,000- 5,000
U.S. West Communications Telephone communication 2,350- 3,500
Intermountain Health Care Hospitals 2,300- 3,400
Unisys Electronic computing 3,200
II
Salt Lake County Government 3,100
Delta Airlines Air transportation 3,000
Salt Lake City School District Public school district 3,000
Utah Power & Light Electric services 1,425- 2,750
I Salt Lake City Government 2,000- 2,500(3)
ZCMI Department stores 1,700- 2,400
Union Pacific Railroad 1,175- 2,350
O.C. Tanner Manufacturing Jewelry, precious metals 1,050- 2,100
I Holy Cross Hospital Hospital 1,000- 2,000
Newspaper Agency Corporation Newspapers 1,000- 2,000
First Security Bank Banking 1,100- 1,700
Blue Cross of Utah Medical services plans 700- 1,000
Mountain Fuel Supply Natural gas 700- 900
IAT&T Telephone communication 630- 870
Notes:
I (1) Total taxable value was $6,371,204,275.
(2) Includes: Corporation of President, Corporation of Presiding Bishop, Zions Security, Co-operative
Security.
(3) Includes full and part-time workers.
' Source: Principal property taxpayers - Salt Lake County Auditor.
Principal employers - Utah Division of Business and Economic Development,
Utah Directory of Business and Industry 1987-88.
I
I
I -101-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
RATIO OF NET GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDED DEBT
TO ASSESSED VALUE AND NET BONDED DEBT PER CAPITA -
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
Years ended June 30, 1979 through 1988 11
I/
Debt service
Assessed/ monies available '
taxable Gross for retirement of
Fiscal Population value general obligation general obligation
year estimates (in thousands) bonded debt bonded debt
1979 164,500(2) $ 812,490 $24,725.000 $1,725,000 I
1980 163,034(1) 859,282 23,245,000 955,000
1981 163,370(3) 887,916 22,105,000 570,000
1982 163,690(3) 856,299 20,735,000 -
11
1983 164,160(3) 899,360 19,885,000 -
1984 164,520(3) 1,037,435 18,985,000 -
1985 164,940(3) 1,154,391 18,035,000 -
1986 165,360(3) 1,252,412 51,525,000 4,333,302
1987 165,000(3) 6,334,910(4) 50,455,000 4,753,173I/
1988 165,000(3) 6,371,204 49,325,000* 5,408,814
Sources: II
(1) U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census.
(2) Based on change between Bureau of Census information.
(3) Salt Lake City Planning and Zoning Division. Data for 1981 to 1988 are linear estimations from
I/
the U.S. Bureau of the Census P-26 Current Population Series figures for 1982 and 1984, and the
1980 Census. Estimates for 1981 to 1988 are for January 1.
(4) The Utah State Legislature adopted "Truth in Taxation" legislation, which became effective in
fiscal year 1987. The term "Assessed Value" was replaced by "Taxable Value". The large
increase beginning in 1987 between assessed value and taxable value is the result of thisII
statutory change.
I
* It is the City's intention that the proceeds necessary to retire $14,825,000 of airport general
obligation bonded debt be provided from airport resources.
I
II
I/
I
II
II
II
-102- '
1
I
II
1 Ratio of net
General obligation debt Net bonded debt bonded debt to Net bonded
payable from enterprise payable from assessed/taxable debt per
fund revenues general operations value capita
1 $23,000,000 $ - - % $ -
22,290,000 - - -
1 21,535,000 - - _
20,735,000
19,885,000 -
8,985,000 - - -
18,035,000 - - -
1 17,025,000 30,166,698 2.409% 182.83
15,955,000 29,746,827 .470% 180.28
14,825,000* 29,091,186 .457% 176.31
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1 -103-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
COMPUTATION OF LEGAL DEBT MARGIN
June 30, 1988
1
I
Taxable value $6,371,204,275
Fair market value $7,121,427,000 I
I
Water and
General - 4% Sewer - 4% Total - 8%
Debt limit -
8% of fair market value $284,857,081 $284,857,081 $569,714,162
Less outstanding general
I/
obligation bonds 49,325,000 - 49,325,000
Debt margin $235,532,081 $284,857,081 $520,389,162 ,
Note:
The general obligation bonded debt of the City is limited by statute to 8% of the "reasonable fair cash
value" of property. Fair market value reflects a 20% reduction of market value for transaction costs
required under Section 59-2-304 of the Utah Code with respect to property assessed by the county assessor.
Of this amount, a maximum of 4% may be used for general purposes. The remaining 4% and any unused portion
of the 4% available for general purposes up to the maximum 8% may be utilized for sewer and/or water
purposes.
Source: Salt Lake County Auditor's Office
1
I/
I
1
I/
I/
-104- '
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
COMPUTATION OF DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING BONDED DEBT
IIJune 30, 1988
II
liAttributable to City
Total debt Percent Amount
IIDirect general obligation debt $34,500,000 100.00% $34,500,000
II Overlapping debt:
State of Utah 285,280,000 13.71� 38,626,912
Salt Lake City School District 7,780,000 100.00% 7,780,000
Salt Lake County 77,055,000 34.71% 26,745,791
Salt Lake City Suburban Sanitation District #1 28,999,000 1.65% 478,484
1 Granger Hunter Improvement District 100,000 1.20% 1,200
Total overlapping general obligation debt 399,214,000 73,632,387
II Less State of Utah 38,626,912
Total overlapping general obligation debt
excluding State of Utah 35,005,475
Total direct and overlapping
IIbonded debt $433,714,000 $69,505,475
Taxable value $6,371,204,275
I
Fair market value $7,121,427,000
IIPopulation 165,000
DEBT RATIOS
I/ To fair Population
To taxable market estimate
value value per capita
IIDirect general obligation debt 0.54% .48% $209
Direct and overlapping general obligation debt 1.09% .98% $421
' Notes: The State of Utah general obligation debt is not included in the debt ratios because the State of
Utah currently levies no ad valorem tax for payment of general obligation bonds. For purpose of
this table the City's general obligation airport bonds are not considered direct general
II obligation debt. To this date, the airport bonds have been liquidated from airport revenues and
it is expected that they will continue to be liquidated from airport revenues in the future.
IISource: Salt Lake City Department of Finance
II
II
-105-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
RATIO OF ANNUAL DEBT SERVICE FOR
GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDED DEBT TO TOTAL GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES -
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
Years ended June 30, 1979 through 1988
II
I/
Ratio of debt
Interest Total service to generalII
Fiscal and fiscal Total debt general fund fund expenditures
year Principal charges service expenditures (percent)
1979 $1,375,000 $ 69,742 $1,444,742 $49,161,275 3% r
1980 770,000 40,024 810,024 56,814.321 1%
1981 385,000 22,266 407,266 63,193,696 1%
1982 570,000 13,523 583,523 60,913,083 1%
11
1983 - - - 63,479,541 -
1984 - - - 63,763,461 -
1985 - - - 70,487,849 -
1986 - - - 73,600,824 - II1987 - 2,698,500 2,698,500 73,706,928 4%
1988 - 2,691,500 2,691,500 77,201,350 4%
Note:
II
This schedule includes only debt service for general obligation bonded debt to be paid by
general operations of the City rather than from special assessment or enterprise operations.
Source: Salt Lake City Department of Finance II
II
II
I/
I
I
II
II
II
I
-106- 1
IISALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
REVENUE AND GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND COVERAGE - ENTERPRISE FUNDS -
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
IYears ended June 30, 1979 through 1988
II Airport Authority, Water and Sewer Utilities, Golf Course
Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority Revenue Bonds and General Obligation Bonds
I Net revenue
Direct available Debt service requirement
Fiscal Gross operating for debt
year revenues(1) expenses(2) service Principal Interest Total Coverage
11 1979(3) $12,432,372 $ 6,663,657 $ 5,768,715 $ 710,000 $ 1,331,524 $ 2,041,524 2.83
1980 13,217,279 7,097,826 6,119,453 710,000 3,517,950 4,227,950 1.45
1981 14,717,415 8,054,868 6,662,547 710,000 3,496,013 4,206,013 1.58
I/ 1982(4) 38,308,155 24,098,120 14,210,035 1,605,000 5,547,150 7,152,150 1.99
1983 44,383,742 26,230,791 18,152,951 2,529,150 8,161,631 10,690,781 1.70
1984 50,878,254 29,183,230 21,695,024 2,898,150 8,330,153 11,228,303 1.93
1985(5) 64,257,031 34,734,586 29,522,445 4.543,150 9,473,503 14,016,653 2.11
1986 71,697,836 35,339,721 36,358,115 4,991,008 9,044,405 14,035,413 2.59
II 1987(6) 76,823,428 47,976,511 28,846,917 6.430,128 8,855,608 15,285,736 1.89
1988 80,297,942 46,698,465 33.599,477 6,556,779 10,927,516 17,484,295 1.92
I Notes:
(1) Gross revenues include operating revenues, property taxes, and gain on sale of property and equipment.
I
(2) Excludes depreciation.
(3) Last year for Revenue Bonds for the Golf Course Fund.
(4) First year for Revenue Bonds for the Water and Sewer Utilities Funds.
II (5) First year for Redevelopment Agency Fund.
(6) First year for Housing Authority Fund.
IISource: Salt Lake City Department of Finance
1
II
II
I
I
II
I/
II -107-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION II
SPECIAL IMPROVEMENT BILLINGS AND COLLECTIONS -
LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
Years ended June 30, 1979 through 1988
I/
II
Collections
Assessments Additional Assessments Assessments As Percent Of
Outstanding Assessments Collected Outstanding Assessments
Fiscal Beginning Made During During End Of Outstanding II
year Of Year Year Year Year During Year
1979 $4,055,331 $4,397,185 $2,747,357 $5.705,159 48.2%
II
1980 5,705,159 2,582,496 1,894,468 6,393,187 29.6%
1981 6,393,187 104,038 987,323 5,509,902 17.9%
1982 5,509,902 1,155,534 895,789 5,769,647 15.5%
1983 5,769,647 450,833 1,249,155 4,971,325 25.1%
1984 4,971,325 838,060 1,429,407 4,379,978 32.6% I/
1985 4,379,978 2,484,049 1,465,765 5,398,262 27.2%
1986 5,398,262 189,563 1,288,030 4,299,795 30.0%
1987 4,299.795 3,131,464 2,280,612 5,150,647 44.3% II
1988 5,150,647 485,386 1,456,599 4,179,434 34.9%
Source: Salt Lake City Department of Finance
11
I
II
II
II
II
I/
I
II
I/
-108- '
IISALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
DEMOGRAPHIC STATISTICS -
I LAST TEN FISCAL YEARS
Years ended June 30, 1979 through 1988
II
I Non-agricultural Average Average daily
Fiscal employment in household school High school Unemployment
year Salt Lake City(1) income membership(3) graduates(3) rate(4)
II1979 (5) $ (5) 23,830 1,874 3.5%
1980 166,179 17,300(2) 23,201 1,750 6.1%
1981 (5) 17,317(2) 23,426 1,780 6.6%
1982 163.947 20,990(2) 23,910 1,732 7.8%
1983 163,156 (5) 24,641 1,639 8.7%
1984 168,653 (5) 24,579 1,336 6.1%
1985 168,251 24,533(2) 24,764 1,453 5.6%
II 1986 174,775 25,250(2) 24,769 1,437 5.3%
1987 (5) (5) 24,582 1,411 (5)
1988 (5) (5) 24,474 1,302 (5)
II (1) Source: Salt Lake City Planning & Zoning Division: Figures are averages for May of each year and do
not include self employment. They are tabulated from Utah Department of Employment
Security's worksite master file for employment within Salt Lake City boundaries.
II (2) Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census.
(3) Source: Salt Lake City School District.
II (4) Source: Utah Department of Employment Security, Labor Market Information Services.
Seasonally adjusted for Salt Lake County.
(5) Not available.
II
11
li
II
II
I
II
I/
II -109-
SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION
MISCELLANEOUS STATISTICS
June 30, 1988
I
Date of incorporation January 6, 1851
11
Form of government (adopted January 7, 1980) Council-Mayor
1988 Population (provisional estimate) 165,000
Area - square miles 100
Lane miles of streets 1,700
Number of street lights 10,470
Fire protection:
Number of stations 14
Sworn/non-civilian employees 309
Non-sworn/civilian employees 34
Police protection:
Number of officers with power of arrest 321
Number of other police employees 121
Recreation and culture:
11
Number of municipal parks 57
Number of municipal playgrounds 47
Number of municipal golf courses 6
Number of municipal swimming poolsI/
3
Public Libraries 6
Municipal water plants:
Number of service connections 82,060
Water supplied to conduits (gallons per year) 29,890,100,000
Miles of water mains and supply lines 1,318
Number of fire hydrants 7,953
Sewers:
Miles of sanitary sewers 775
Miles of storm sewers 200
City employees, June 30, 1988 (full-time employees) 2,087
Election data:
Registered voters 89,068
Number of votes cast in 1987 local election 19,031
Percentage of registered voters voting 21.37%
I
I
I
I
I
-110- 1
REPORT TO
CITY COUNCIL
SALT LAKE CITY
AUDIT
Of The
CAR PER OFFICER PROGRAM
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
JANUARY 1989
MT' G()RP RATIONf
OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
SUITE 300, CITY HALL
324 SOUTH STATE STREET.
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111
535-7600
January 3, 1989
TO: Council Members
RE: AUDIT OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT'S CAR PER OFFICER PROGRAM
Transmitted herewith is the final report, A Management Audit of the Car Per
Officer Program. The objectives and scope of the audit are explained in the
introduction on page 1 . In the final analysis, the City has gained several
benefits from the program. These are explained in the summary and conclusions
portion of the report. There are however, several disadvantages with the
program as currently structured. I am recommending that the program be
retained, but with modifications to eliminate the weaknesses.
The Police Department has reviewed the report. They do not agree with several
of the conclusions and recommendations. Their response, to include where they
disagree, is included at the back of the report.
This audit report is scheduled for discussion during Committee of the Whole on
January 5, 1989. If you have questions before that time, I will be happy to
meet with you.
Sincerely,
Lee King
Staff Auditor
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION
Purpose 1
Scope 1
Background 1
Program Goals 3
II. Current Procedures
Requirements 4
Prior Studies 5
Vehicle Location 6
Off-duty Activities 7
Program Benefits 11 •
Operating Costs 11
Survey Results 15
Summary 17
Conclusions 18
Recommendationss 21
III. APPENDIXES
Appendix A: Exhibits
Appendix B: Department Response
PURPOSE
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the Car Per Officer Program and
determine whether the current policy operates the fleet resources of the
Police Department in the most effective manner while maximizing cost
effectiveness. Additionally, it will determine if the City gains any
appreciable benefit from the program and whether the program reduces
maintenance and purchase costs of vehicles over a multi-year base. The audit
is being conducted at the direction of the Salt Lake City Council .
SCOPE
This audit will evaluate the economies and efficiencies of. the Police
Department's car take home policy. Policies and procedures of other
departments were previously evaluated in the Car Take Home Audit, as were auto
allowances, and will not be addressed as part of this study.
BACKGROUND
From 1978 to 1982 the Police Department engaged in a limited take-home
car program in an attempt to increase its" productivity and to allow for
emergency responses of key personnel when needed. That program was successful
based on its limited scope. The department requested permission to initiate a
"Car Per Officer" program based on a recognized need to increase the number of
units available to answer calls for service and to enhance the protective
ability of the department to prevent crime. On February 4, 1982, Salt Lake
City began implementing the Car Per Officer Program department wide for all
sworn officers. Authority for the program was Salt Lake City Executive Order
5.03.200.
1
The department initially began studying the concept as one 'alternative
for increasing the productivity and availability of patrol officers. Their
original justification for the program was previous internal departmental
studies indicating that officers assigned take-home cars engaged in enough
call -backs, responses to assist patrol officers, and self-initiated activity
during off-duty hours to generate a significant increase in officer
availability if the program was implemented department wide. Various dollar
cost figures were pegged to the increased officer availability. The
implication was that there would be substantial savings. These were not true
savings to the City however, but were additional hours of productive time at
no additional personnel cost.
Additionally, the studies indicated that another advantage to the City
would be that routine maintenance, washing, and fueling of vehicles would be
done on off-duty time. The department anticipated that productivity would
also be increased by eliminating the requirement to carry equipment to and
from assigned vehicles each time an officer changes shift and immediate
response capabilities would be enhanced by having additional officers in radio
equipped vehicles even if they are off duty. Contingency planning would also
be enhanced because the department would have a rapid response capability
needed in case of riot, civil disorder, or natural disaster. The Car Per
Officer Program would enable the City to put 300 officers on the street at one
time.
Fleet evaluated the proposal in terms of reducing capital cost over the
long term, and reducing operating and maintenance costs through improved
scheduling and performance of routine maintenance. Both the Police Department
2
and Fleet concluded that a Car Per Officer Program would be cost effective and
enhance the department's ability to provide adequate law enforcement.
PROGRAM GOALS
The program had seven major goals:
1 . Reduce the cost of maintaining vehicles in the police fleet.
2. Promote the security of the citizens of Salt Lake City by increasing the
number of police officers and police vehicles on the streets and roadways of
the community.
3. Enhance police-community relations by increasing personal contacts and
services performed by the police.
4. Deter the commission of crime through the visibility of more police
vehicles.
5. Provide quicker response time to certain types of calls, and thereby
increase the opportunity for apprehending criminals.
6. Provide faster response by off-duty personnel when they are summoned back
to duty.
7. Provide increased incentive to perform properly and earn the privilege to
drive a city-owned vehicle, and to increase the morale of those officers who
participate in the program.
The department's stated intent was to deploy as many police vehicles as
possible within the Salt Lake City limits and to reduce the maintenance costs
and purchase costs of vehicles over a multi-year base.
The program was implemented in stages over a 24 month period so that all
individual sworn officers were assigned a vehicle on a take-home basis.
Specific responsibilities of the department and individual officers are
outlined in both the Executive Order and formally published departmental
General Orders. Review of these documents and associated changes, indicate
3
they are of sufficient detail , with one exception, to adequately administer
the program.
REQUIREMENTS
Officers are allowed to operate their assigned vehicle during off duty
hours with no restrictions within the City limits. Use of vehicles outside
the limits of Salt Lake City is restricted to official business and commuting
to and from place of residence.
When using the vehicle, off-duty officers must keep the police radio on
and, if necessary, be available to respond to emergency calls. If in the
vicinity, officers will respond to in progress crimes or other major calls.
Overtime will not be authorized unless the response exceeds two hours. Time
worked over two hours will be compensated consistent with the City"s overtime
• policy.
Officers are required to maintain their vehicles on their own time.
This includes routine maintenance, fueling, service, general appearance, and
cleanliness. Officers are also responsible for damage to assigned vehicles
caused by gross negligence and are subject to disciplinary action for the
same.
The original policy called for a mandatory reimbursement to the City
through payroll deduction of $10 per month for officers residing within the
corporate limits of Salt Lake City and $20 per month for those residing
outside the corporate limits. The monies derived from these reimbursements
4
were to be deposited by Finance into the Fleet Management account to help
defray the operational costs of the program. This requirement was dropped
from the program on August 1 , 1986. As it was part of the original cost
justification of the program, it will be discussed in greater detail later in
this report.
PRIOR STUDIES
The Car Per Officer Program has been studied several times since its
initial implementation. The first was a 1982 internal Fleet Management
evaluation. Fleet's conclusion was "The Car Per Officer Program has generally
worked out very well for Fleet Management in terms of lower costs, more
effective shop scheduling, and better care of vehicles. In a 1983 study, the
City's Office of Resource Management reported essentially the same thing.
Fleet Maintenance Consultants, Inc. stated in a January 1985 study, "The Car
Per Officer Program is proving to be cost effective for the City. As
predicted, maintenance costs for vehicles used by several different operators
are greater than those of individually assigned cars. Additional savings can
be expected in coming years in reduced vehicle replacement costs". They
recommended that the program be continued. The Buracker Study in 1986
reviewed the program but made no definitive statement as to its cost
effectiveness. Their only written recommendation was to eliminate the
requirement to maintain off-duty logs. They apparently made comments to
numerous individuals, to include the Council , that the program was a
worthwhile one and should be retained.
5
Vehicle Locations
Prior to the implementation of the program, the Police Department had 96
patrol vehicles that serviced 187 patrol officers and 129 other vehicles
assigned directly to individuals or to separate divisions. As of November 1,
1988, they have 269 vehicles assigned to individual officers and 86 unassigned
vehicles, vans and motorcycles for a net increase of 170 vehicles. Twenty-
five of these vehicles will be assigned to officers currently enrolled in
POST. The 269 vehicles assigned to the Car Per Officer Program are
distributed by residential location as follows:
NUMBER LOCATION PERCENT
73 Salt Lake City 27%
168 Salt Lake County 62%
23 Davis County - 9%
2 Weber County .8%
2 Summit County .8%
1 Utah County .4%
269
Sworn officers residing in a predesignated geographical area (all of
Salt Lake and most of Davis Counties) are automatically eligible for the
program. Sworn officers residing outside the designated boundaries must apply
to the Police Chief on a case by case basis for take home approval . There are
five officers currently meeting this criteria. There is no evidence of any
officer being denied this privilege by the previous Police Chief. The current
Chief of Police has denied the one request submitted since he assumed the
position.
6
OFF-DUTY ACTIVITIES
The following chart shows the number and types of activities that
officers participated in while in an off-duty status. The 1985/86 figures are
averages for the year. The 1988 figures are for October only.
TRAFFIC ACCIDENT MOTORIST OUTSIDE
COURT INVESTIGATION ARRESTS STOPS ASSISTS ASSISTS BACK-UP
1985( 1 ) 306 378 64 277 58 375 89
1986(1 ) 310 284 52 251 47 323 80
1988(2) 171 502 76 341 58 422 125
( 1 ) Average per month
(2) Oct 1988
Prior to 1986, officers were required to maintain logs showing uses of
assigned vehicles when in an off-duty status. This requirement was eliminated
by a recommendation of the Police Department Audit conducted by Carroll
Buracker and Associates, Inc. It was reinstituted as a temporary 45 day
requirement by Chief Chabries for the months of September and October 1988 to
validate current practices. Exhibit I is a copy of the log maintained by
officers during this period. With the exception of accident assists, which
are recorded only for assists within city limits, and arrests, all other
activities can happen anywhere within the commuting area. Assistance provided
to an accident scene outside the city limits is recorded under "outside back-
ups".
There is no doubt that all the trips to Court, some of the
investigations, arrests, and stops at accidents would have been made
regardless of the possession of a take home vehicle. However, traffic stops,
outside backups, and most of the motorist assists would probably not have been
made, resulting in a delay of information being passed to a dispatcher. This
delay could be crucial in the case of accidents.
7
Reported Activity by Commuting Location
TRAFFIC ACCIDENT MOTORIST OUTSIDE
LOCATION ARRESTS( 1 ) STOPS ASSISTS ASSISTS BACKUPS TOTAL
City 18 124 17 111 10 280
County 107 372 61 504 177 1221
Davis 13 32 4 48 23 120
Utah 1 5 0 4 2 12
Summit 0 0 3 0 0 3
Weber 0 5 0 8 1 14
TOTAL(2) 139 538 85 675 213 1650
(1 ) Arrests are made while the officer is in the City.
(2) Source: Officer daily logs from 15 Sep - 31 Oct 1988.
Analysis of off-duty activity indicates that the average vehicle does
not respond to- many incidents. The department is averaging 51 .12 stops per
assigned take home vehicle for the year. This works out to 4.26 stops per
month per vehicle. Overall , officers are engaged in some kind of measurable
off-duty activity at a frequency of just over once per week. These figures
were computed by projecting the 1650 responses over a 12 month period. Forty-
four (44) officers or 16% of those assigned vehicles reported no off-duty
activity during the months of September and October 1988. An additional
twenty-six (26) , or 9% did not submit reports at all . The number of officers
reporting no activity or not submitting a report is one of the major
weaknesses of the program. With no long term requirement to maintain off-duty
logs, police management has no way to measure off-duty responses of officers
and therefore, no way to measure the overall effectiveness of the program.
8
A further review of off-duty logs show that the 269 officers spend
approximately 103 hours per day in a travel- status (to and from shift) and 70 _
hours per day of off-duty on air time (City residents using cars for personal
reasons) during which they are able to respond to back-ups. It is during this
time that the department gains one of the greater benefits from the program.
Off-duty officers are able to respond as back-ups to routine calls for
assistance that would otherwise go unanswered for extended periods of time.
Current data indicate that response times have increased significantly over
the past 10 months, from 10 minutes in February to 22. 1 minutes in October.
It is assumed that if the additional hours were not available to the
department, then response time would be even greater.
Another perspective on off-duty activities can be gained by distributing
the activity of individual officers by division and marked vs unmarked cars.
The following chart shows these activities by total number by division and
percentage of stops made by marked vs unmarked cars.
NUMBER TRAFFIC ACCIDENT MOTORIST OUTSIDE
DIVISION ASSIGNED ARRESTS STOPS ASSISTS ASSISTS BACK-UPS
Admin 6 1 5 0 5 4
Crime Lab 7 4 19 1 6 5
Detective 27 5 22 5 42 19
Patrol 150 109 381 54 492 138
Staff 6 0 1 1 2 2
Traffic 29 11 87 22 98 38
Vice 22 4 3 0 5 3
Youth 22 5 12 2 16 3
TOTAL %
Marked 167 (62%) 86% 83% 84% 81% 77% 82%
Unmarked 102 (38%) 14% 17% 16% 19% 23% 18%
Patrol and Traffic Divisions, which have 67% of assigned take home
vehicles, make 88% of all off-duty responses. Marked vehicles, which make up
9
62% of those assigned, make 82% of the off-duty responses while unmarked (38%
of assigned) make 18% of the responses. An officer in a marked Police vehicle
is 5 time as likely to participate in an off-duty activity as one in an
unmarked one.
One of the difficulties in analyzing this data is that there is no
national standard with which to make a comparison. In arriving at a
conclusion, one has to determine what is reasonable as far as program
expectations are concerned. The figures were compared to Anchorage, Alaska,
which has a similar program, and a comparable number of vehicles. In the
Anchorage Police Department they are averaging slightly less off-duty
responses than the Salt Lake City Police Department.
VEHICLES TOTAL AVE PER AVE PER AVE PER UNIT
CITY ASSIGNED RESPONSES YEAR DAY PER MONTH
Anchorage 295 14,285(1 ) 48.42 39.1 4.03
Salt Lake City 269 13,750 51 . 12 37.7 4.26
(1 ) Projected
While this analysis can be qualified by citing problems relating to
officers not reporting activity, the findings described above, even if they
underestimate off-duty activity by a large measure, call into question the
overall value of the program in terms of the measurable off-duty activity
generated. There is a community expectation of service from police vehicles
on the street. Although these expectations should not be considered "quotas",
it is reasonable to expect some off-duty activities by all officers
participating in the program. This expectation is not being met in all cases.
10
BENEFITS
There are two key intangible benefits to the Car Per Officer Program
that are not quantifiable. They are the increased police presence in the
community and the department's ability to deploy all of its assets in a
relatively short period of time in cases of disaster or major incident. If
the program were structured in any other way, these benefits would probably be
lost or at best severely reduced. Even though non-quantifiable, they must be
weighed against the identified costs in determining the overall value of the
program.
OPERATING COSTS
Exhibit II shows the operating and maintenance cost for the Patrol
Division. Vehicles assigned to this division were most representative of all
•vehicles in the department. Half of them are 1985 Celebrity's and the other
half are 1982-84 Plymouth Gran Fury's. The average of these two vehicle types
was used to compute the running cost of commuting for all vehicles in the
Police Department. Running costs are defined as operating and maintenance
cost and do not consider capital cost of the vehicle. The following table
shows these costs by residential location.
RUNNING
NUMBER OF COMMUTING COST PER AVE # DAYS COST TO
LOCATION VEHICLES DISTANCE MILE COMMUTING COMMUTE
CITY 73 10 0.102 236 $17,573
COUNTY 168 25 0.088 236 $87,226
DAVIS 23 30 0.086 236 $14,004
WEBER 2 50 0.078 236 $1 ,841
SUMMIT 2 30 0. 132 236 $1 ,869
UTAH 1 40 0.079 236 $746
$123,258
11
At a minimum, it is costing the General Fund approximately $123,000 to
pay for the commuting miles. These cost are most likely understated because
they are lowsided estimates of miles driven for commuting purposes and do not
consider any cost associated with personal use by officers living in and using
their vehicle inside City limits. The running cost to commute accounts for
13% of the total operating and maintenance cost of police vehicles per year.
When the program was first implemented there was a requirement for
participating officers to reimburse the City for operating costs. These
reimbursements were payroll deductions in the amount of $10 per month for
officers residing within the corporate limits of Salt Lake City and $20 per
month for those living outside the corporate limits. Estimates at that time
were for reimbursements: to total approximately $44,000. The purpose of the
reimbursement was to partially offset operating expenses of the program.
Effective August 1 , 1986 this requirement was rescinded. Available
• documentation indicates that the change was initiated for two reasons.
Congressional action and changes in Internal Revenue Regulations exempted
police and emergency equipment from taxation and reporting requirements and
gas and oil prices dropped. Although these were the stated reasons, many of
the police officers perceive the change as in lieu of a pay raise. If
reimbursement fees were reinstituted, commuting cost could be reduced by
almost one-half, from $123,000 to $67,000, assuming the original $10 and $20
charge with the current number of participants ( includes all sworn officers) ,
Exhibit III
Exhibit IV shows the cost per off-duty response for October 1988. This
chart indicates that the cost per response is considerably higher for those
12
officers residing outside Salt Lake County. Considering the somewhat low
level of off-duty activity, the running cost to commute, and the cost per
response, it would seem to indicate that allowing officers outside Salt Lake
County a take home car is not cost effective from a purely fiscal standpoint.
Again, if fuel charge reimbursement was required, the cost per response could
also be reduced to a more acceptable figure.
When considering the advisability of charging officers for operating and
maintenance costs, you should consider the perception by the officers that the
reimbursement fee was eliminated in lieu of a pay raise. Reinstituting the
reimbursement fee after take home pay was reduced due to insurance rate hikes
on July 1, 1988, would have a major negative impact on department morale and
complicate an already tense situation.
The following chart shows total operating & maintenance cost and capital
expenditures for each budget year since 1981 . This was the last full year
operating under the old program.
Total Operating and Maintenance Cost from 1981 projected through 1989.
BUDGET O&M COST PER TOTAL COS
YEAR 0 & M CAPITAL TOTAL VEHICLES VEHICLE PER VEHICL
1981/82 $790,000 $626,000 $1 ,416,000 249 $3,173 $5,687
1982/83 $894,163 $475,611 $1 ,369,774 295 $3,031 $4,643
1983/84 $959,038 $422,435 $1 ,381 ,473 348 $2,756 $3,970
1984/85 $855,775 $375,710 $1 ,231,485 355 $2,411 $3,469
1985/86 $936,358 $599,679 $1 ,536,037 355 $2,638 $4,327
1986/87 $1,031 ,519 $544, 123 $1 ,575,642 355 $2,906 $4,438
1987/88 $937,414 $456,229 $1 ,393,643 355 $2,641 $3,926
1988/89( 1 ) $887,177 $708,300 $1 ,623,677 355 $2,499 $4,574
( 1 ) Estimated
13
This chart indicates that there has not been an overall reduction in
total fleet costs as originally anticipated. This is primarily caused by the
greater number of vehicles in the department, 225 at the beginning of 1981 vs
355 today. By purchasing the type of police sedan now used, at roughly $10,500
per sedan, the department has at least been able to minimize their capital
cost. Operating under the pool concept for patrol officers, capital costs
would have likely been higher because a different type vehicle would have had
to have been purchased to withstand the rigors of 18 hour days. Using today's
cost of $12,997 for a heavy duty sedan, 1987/88 capital cost would have been in
the neighborhood of $597,000 or a 24% increase. Exhibit V graphically portrays
the capital costs since 1981 . The last two exhibits confirm that under the Car
Per Officer Program, capital costs do not change significantly but operating
and maintenance cost are reduced on a per vehicle basis.
The following chart shows the change in operating & maintenance cost on
a per mile basis from a fleet pool concept to a CPO program.
Operating & Maintenance Cost Comparisons
Operating Cost Maintenance Cost Total Cost
Per Mile Per Mile Per Mile
( 1 ) 11.34 9.34 20.64
1981(2)1988 1.54 7.7 9.24
(1) Police Fleet Vehicles
(2) Car Per Officer
When viewed from a per vehicle standpoint the cost figures are more
favorable. Operating & maintenance costs per vehicle decreased 21% from $3173
to $2499. The reduction in 0 & M cost can be attributed to four specific
areas: ( 1 ) Technological advances in cars, power and drive trains last longer
14
and the fact that we are buying a different type car; (2) Lower fuel cost in •
1988 vs 1981 , (3) Better miles per gallon ratio; and (4) Solid preventive
maintenance program. Fleet maintenance reports indicate considerable
improvement in availability of vehicles because officers have taken better
care of individual cars. Shop scheduling has improved because of this.
Therefore, minor problems are more likely to be fixed long before they become
major problems. Additionally, there has been a considerable increase in the
number of years that a vehicle is available. In 1981 , Police Fleet vehicles
were replaced every 2 to 2.5 years or around 68,000 miles. Exhibit VI shows
the vehicles that were replaced in FY 87/88 along with mileage and resale
proceeds. Vehicles sold at auction in July 1988 averaged 102,969 miles.
Model years ranged from 1979 through 1983, for a life cycle of 5-8 years.
Police vehicles are now scheduled on a six (6) year replacement cycle.
SURVEY RESULTS
A survey was conducted to enable all sworn officers the opportunity to
share their perspectives on the Car Per Officer Program. Surveys were
completed by officers during line-up. Seventy percent of the officers
completed the survey. This is a reasonable response rate and the results
should be generally reliable as an indicator of perspectives department wide.
The consensus response indicates that officers see the strength of the
program as having more police cars on the road. The City saves money in
repairs and replacement cost of vehicles. Better maintenance has resulted in
increased equipment availability. With more cars on the road, there is a
visual deterrent to crimes. Officers are better able to respond as back-ups
15
because there are more cars and they perceive their fellow officers are more
willing to respond when off-duty.
Thirty-one of the respondents felt the one of the major weaknesses of
the program was officers abusing the privilege by using their vehicles in an
unauthorized manner, i .e. , personal use outside the City, transportation of
family members outside the City, and no discipline of abusers. There are
procedures to handle abuses, if they are reported and several officers have
had their privileges revoked. However, records do not support a claim of
significant abuses. I would assume from the written comments and personal
observations that some officers do use their vehicles for personal use outside
the City but that reports are not submitted. Other weaknesses noted were the
Council 's and the public 's negative perception of the program, no fuel
reimbursement, and poor selection of cars for police work.
By far the most common comment was that dealing with department morale.
Almost all of the respondents felt that either the Council or Administration
was trying to take away their cars and that this was having a detrimental
affect on the morale of the department. They generally believed that they
entered into the program in good faith, made it work, and now the City wants
to do away with the program as a budget cutting move. They genuinely believe
that the program is cost effective and that the City gains immeasurable
benefit by the increased availability of officers and a visible deterrent to
crime.
Most officers felt that the mandatory fuel reimbursements were
eliminated in lieu of raises. Several commented strongly that the CPO program
16
was "sold" to them as a benefit in lieu of pay increases. Since overtime is
- not authorized for off-duty responses (unless it exceeds 2 hours), most felt
that eliminating fuel cost was justifiable and is an adequate trade off for
lack of overtime. Several respondents indicated that they would be willing to
give up their cars if they received merits or pay raises. Of particular note,
was the fact that in response to the question, "What would be an appropriate
charge", 37% of the officers indicated that some sort of fuel charge might be
appropriate. This should not be interpreted that officers are volunteering to
reimburse the City, but merely responding to a question.
Summarized, a general trend among survey respondents could be
characterized as monitor the program for abuse, discipline abusers, declare
the program a success, and stop the threats to discontinue it.
+ SUMMARY
Measurable off-duty activity is low on a per vehicle basis. The
department is averaging a little more than one off-duty response per week per
officer. The analysis of off-duty responses however, does not attempt to
quantify the intangible benefit of having an increased police presence
throughout the City or the ability to simultaneously deploy the entire force
in an emergency. Commuting cost of $123,000 are not offset by reimbursements
that were originally part of the program justification. There may be a need
to review the reimbursement requirement in view of the need to reduce general
fund expenditures. Off-duty responses (made in the City) by officers residing
out of the County are too expensive. Operating and maintenance costs are less
per vehicle, but because we have more of them, total 0 & M costs are higher.
17
Vehicles are lasting longer because of personal care and better maintenance.
Consequently, capital costs have been minimized because of the program. The
costs associated with commuting must be balanced with the intangible benefits
received from extra police officers on the street and the department's ability
to respond to emergency situations.
CONCLUSIONS
1 . The Car Per Officer Program has benefited Salt Lake City in several ways.
It has increased the operational life of vehicles from 2.5 years to 6 years.
It has contributed to the decrease in operational cost per mile. It has
improved the maintenance and appearance of vehicles and it has increased
police availability throughout the City. These successes, however, are
achieved at a certain price. That- price is the cost of commuting and the
perception that the program is merely a benefit for the individual officer.
The cost of commuting can be compared against the value of services provided
to the community. If you assume that each off-duty response takes 15 minutes,
it is estimated that the value of off-duty responses alone is approximately
$61 ,875 in services at no additional cost to the City. If you assumed 30
minutes, the value would be $123,750. It should be noted however, the service
is provided in the commuting area, not necessarily the City. There is no way
to accurately project the length of time spent on each response, therefore, a
definitive dollar value is not provided. Because there are so many variables
in assigning a value to the off-duty responses and increased police
availability, a definite conclusion that the program is or is not cost
effective cannot be positively stated based on costs alone. The intangible
18
benefits of the program must be weighed when making this decision. What the
Council and Administration should decide is whether they are willing to accept
the cost of commuting as part of doing business.
2. Off-duty activity is relatively low when measured on a per car basis.
Average off-duty activity is a little more than one measurable incident per
week. Far too many officers have not participated in the spirit of the
program. Given off-duty activity levels, this is an expensive benefit to the
City for sworn personnel . One possible solution would be to require, as a
condition of retaining this privilege, that participants generate certain
levels of off-duty activity. Although an absolute quota system would not be
appropriate, the City should have a reasonable expectation for a return on its
investment. While this would not have an impact on costs, increasing the
level of off-duty activity would add credibility to the claim that the Car Per
Officer is a deterrent to crime and provides service to the community.
3. The crime prevention value of a take home car can be questioned for
unmarked vehicles A marked police vehicle is easily identifiable on city
streets and has a crime suppression impact as a result. Although it cannot be
• measured, the Car Per Officer program for marked police vehicles increases the
perceived police presence in the community. An unmarked police car can have
no such preventive impact, especially if unmarked cars have little off-duty
• activity.
4. Because there is no requirement to maintain off-duty logs, supervisors
have not been able to provide management oversight of the program. In view of
the number of officers not making off-duty responses, it would seem
19
appropriate that a tracking system be implemented. Although it might be
considered an unnecessary administrative burden, there needs to be- some sort
of reporting mechanism that allows management to periodically review the
program.
5. Although officers living outside the limits of Salt Lake City and Salt
Lake County show off-duty activity levels that compare favorably to those
officers living within these geographical areas, the cost of operating the
vehicle based on distances driven cannot be totally justified by off-duty
activity. Although law enforcement as a whole might be enhanced, Salt Lake
City does not always gain any direct benefit.
:6. It is possible that with the elimination of the Car Per Officer Program, a
total fleet reduction of 100-120 vehicles could be realized.. A one time
savings of $700,000 in capital cost is possible. There would however, be a
long term cost that would probably equal current program expenditures. The
anticipated short term savings have to be measured against increased costs for
heavy duty sedans, anticipated increases in per vehicle 0 & M, and a
requirement for parking that does not currently exist. Capital costs would
remain the same by purchasing fewer cars, but they would have to be replaced
more often, Additionally, the potential value of the off-duty activity which
might be lost, the value of additional police presence in the community and
-the value of the Car Per Officer Program as an implied benefit should be
considered.
20
,
RECOMMENDATIONS
1 . Given the overall benefits to the City during the past 6 years, it is
recommended that the Car Per Officer be retained as an integral part of the
Police Departments crime deterrent program. However, several changes are
recommended to further enhance the program.
2. Off-duty logs should be maintained in order for first line supervisors to
be able to monitor the activities of individual officers. Other approaches
for some sort of management oversight may be equally acceptable. As a
condition of retaining the privilege, officers should be required to generate
sufficient off-duty activities to justify the program. No specific number of
incidents is recommended for retention of the privilege, nor should a strict
quota be established. Officers who consistently show no off-duty activity
should not have the privilege. Procedures should be established whereby there
is a senior level management review of the program at the department level at •
least semiannually.
'c'.' Pt
0. The department should review its approval process and criteria for
officers living outside the current defined areas of Salt Lake County. It is
staff's recommendation that an absolute mileage limit be placed on authorized
Cv-s e" commuting distances. For officers currently living outside this limit, a
grandfather clause would probably be appropriate. Future request should be
judged strictly on the benefit to the department, not the individual officer.
4. Given the low level of off-duty activity compared with the cost to
commute, the fuel reimbursement charge should be reinstituted. One of the
21
ways to offset the criticism of this would be to do it in a year in which a
pay raise is given. This would possibly reduce the negative impact on the
individual officer. The exact formula for reimbursement can come in several
ways, from a charge based on exact commuting mileage for each officer to a
general fee established on a geographic location. If approval is granted for
officers residing outside the County, a reimbursement fee should be
established that covers the actual operating and maintenance cost to commute.
22
T
APPENDIX A
SALT LAKE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
x
OFF DUTY LOG — CAR PER OFFICER
w
OFFICER IBM SHOP VEH.# MONTH 19
DAYS OF MONTH
TIME (#1 THRU #3 RECORD IN MINUTES) I , 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30i31 Total
_ t - r -
I. TRAVEL TIME
(TO AND FROM REGULAR SHIFT)
2.0FF DUTY ON-AIR TRAVEL TIE V
(DRIVING IN SLC-AVAILABLE TO RESPOND)
3.POLICE RELATED ON-SCENE
TIME (TRAINING, MTGS, PARADES, ETC..)
INCIDENTS (RECORD THE # [1,2, 3..] ITEMS #1 THRU #3 - RECORD TIME INVOLVED
INVOLVED IN EACH DAY) ITEMS #4 THRU #10-RECORD NUMBER OF
4.COURT APPEARANCES MIS°.
(RECORD AM OR PM) FELONY _ I
DLH
5.1NVESTIGATIONS ON-VIEW
CALL-BACKS
v b
(CITY OR OUTSIDE) FOLLOW-UPS
SLOP() BACK-UPS r
6.ARRESTS ON-VIEW I
ASSISTS
7. TRAFFIC STOPS WARNINGS
CITATIONS
6.ACCIDENTS MINOR
(CITY ONLY) P 9 -
H CR
(Record 'A' for assisted PI -
or 'I' for investigated) FATAL l l 1
9.MOTORISTS ASSISTS CITY
OUTSIDE
IO.OUTSIDE BACK-UPS CRIMINAL
TRAFFIC
(ACCIDENTS ARE INCLUDED)
SALT LAKE CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT
VEHICLE MAINTENANCE LOG
DAY GALLONS WS MAINTENANCE WORK PERFORMED ON OFF
*VEH.# cf TIME of MILEAGE of WASH
MONTH FUEL OIL (Including cleaning interiors, minor repairs, P&M's and waxing) DUTY DUTY
•
•
1 1
x VEHICLE // SHOULD BE NOTED — IF DRIVING OUTER IHAN ASSIGNED VEIUELE.
0 & M COST - PATROL DIVISION EXHIBIT II
MAINT OPERATING MAINT & ODOMETER
VEHICLE LOCATION COST COST OPERATING READING
PER MILE PER MILE PER MILE
754 CITY 0. 076 0. 009 0. 084 91, 925
562 CITY 0. 066 0. 014 0. 08 65, 282
551 CITY 0. 101 0. 01 0. 111 64, 641
401 CITY 0. 085 0. 014 0. 099 59, 481
405 CITY 0. 063 0. 018 0. 081 58, 609
412 CITY 0. 123 0. 016 0. 139 57, 667
582 CITY 0. 062 0. 017 0. 078 54, 224
561 CITY 0. 099 0. 014 0. 113 53, 949
740 CITY 0. 081 0. 02 0. 101 48, 071
565 CITY 0. 069 0. 017 0. 087 36, 576
454 CITY 0. 307 0. 026 0. 333 33, 006
771 CITY 0. 122 0. 016 0. 138 30, 710
416 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 117555
382 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 114280
410 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 97120
456 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 90378
507 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 83997
438 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 83170
492 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 72964
538 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 63804
448 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 62300
531 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 59549
554 CITY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 56172
CITY AVERAGE 0. 088 0. 015 0. 102 67, 627
594 COUNTY 0. 144 0. 015 0. 159 87, 293
324 COUNTY 0. 081 0. 014 0. 096 85, 929
572 COUNTY 0. 09 0. 015 0. 105 82, 435
753 COUNTY 0. 058 0. 013 0. 072 79, 266
752 COUNTY 0. 094 0. 02 0. 114 79, 184
546 COUNTY 0. 11 0. 014 0. 124 74, 759
589 COUNTY 0. 139 0. 019 0. 157 72, 734
756 COUNTY 0. 086 0. 1016 0. 101 72, 190
585 COUNTY 0. 091 0. 016 0. 107 70, 156
339 COUNTY 0. 092 0. 021 0. 112 69, 777
583 COUNTY 0. 057 0. 016 0. 073 69, 354
757 COUNTY 0. 101 0. 014 0. 115 68, 527
574 COUNTY 0. 067 0. 016 0. 084 65, 756
530 COUNTY 0. 041 0. 012 0. 053 64, 430
576 COUNTY 0. 066 0. 015 0. 081 64, 086
537 COUNTY 0. 073 0. 014 0. 086 59, 002
579 COUNTY 0. 044 0. 011 0. 055 58, 668
302 COUNTY 0. 071 0. 018 0. 089 57, 917
476 COUNTY 0. 076 0. 018 0. 094 56, 892
738 COUNTY 0. 121 0. 018 0. 139 56, 785
536 COUNTY 0. 044 0. 011 0. 055 55, 472
730 COUNTY 0. 069 0. 021 0. 089 54, 311
399 COUNTY 0. 151 0. 012 0. 164 52, 119
571 COUNTY 0. 086 0. 017 0. 103 51, 669
387 COUNTY 0. 077 0. 015 0. 091 51, 018
371 COUNTY 0. 09 0. 015 0. 105 48, 968
385 COUNTY 0. 055 0. 009 0. 064 48, 058
584 COUNTY 0. 048 0. 02 0. 068 47, 226
379 COUNTY 0. 046 0. 017 0. 063 46, 023
420 COUNTY 0. 071 0. 017 0. 089 45, 781
424 COUNTY 0. 055 0. 015 0. 069 43, 220
578 COUNTY 0. 059 0. 015 0. 074 42, 750
575 COUNTY 0. 058 0. 017 0. 075 41, 585
741 COUNTY 0. 044 0. 014 0. 058 40, 100
570 COUNTY 0. 037 0. 015 0. 052 39, 464
720 COUNTY 0. 06 0. 011 0. 072 33, 497
429 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 129620
439 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 127878
423 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 112693
431 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 112080
436 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 110138
409 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 104728
325 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 103672
447 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 101556
329 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 101320
450 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 99006
446 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 98524
395 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 98505
455 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 98010
421 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 97342
435 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 95979
434 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 93992
534 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 93188
338 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 88131
342 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 87658
418 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 84570
437 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 80159
449 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 76256
529 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 75202
495 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 74820
553 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 66080
506 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 65016
533 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 64938
451 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 64597
493 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 58557
494 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 55123
377 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 51322
497 COUNTY 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 51255
COUNTY AVEAGE 0. 073 0. 016 0. 088 72, 916
580 DAVIS 0. 055 0. 016 0. 071 89, 693
532 DAVIS 0. 13 0. 0185 0. 145 64, 634
581 DAVIS 0. 06 0. 015 0. 075 48, 093
755 DAVIS 0. 041 0. 016 0. 057 44, 349
445 DAVIS 0. 07 0. 013 0. 083 82734
DAVIS AVERAGE 0. 071 0. 016 0. 086 65, 901
327 SUMMIT 0. 118 0. 013 0. 132 73, 385
577 UTAH 0. 064 0. 015 0. 079 108, 508
751 WEBER 0. 063 0. 015 0. 078 47, 834
AVERAGE FOR ALL LOCATIONS - 0. 077 0. 015 0. 091 71, 367
EXHIBIT III i
RUNNING
NUMBER OF COMMUTING COST PER AVE 0 DAYS COST TO REIMBURSE TOTAL COST
LOCATION VEHICLES DISTANCE MILE COMMUTING COMMUTE TO CITY TO COMMUTE
CITY 73 10 0.102 236 $11,513 ($8,760) $8,813
COUNTY 168 25 0.088 236 $87,226 ($40,320) $46,906
DAVIS 23 30 0.086 236 $14,004 ($5,520) $8,484
WEBER 2 50 0.078 236 $1,841 ($720) $1,121
SUMMIT 2 30 0.132 236 $1,869 ($480) $1,389
UTAH 1 40 0.079 236 $746 ($360) $386
$123,258 ($56,160) $67,098
Reimbursement Schedule
$10 City
$20 SLC/Davis/Summit
$30 Weber/Utah
Car Per Officer
co Off - duty Activities
. . .
Octgber 1988
City 162 0 9,04
County 773 9.43
Davis 68 0 17.16
Weber 7 21,91
Utah 4 -% 15.54
Summit D155
f f ► I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i
800 600 400 200 0 $20 $80 $ 120 $140
Number of Responses MA Cost per Response
Arrest-Traffic-Accident-Motorist-Backup
Police Department
Capital Costs
Thousands Hundreds
$ 800 - 70
62 63
58 ----57 54 1 ::
$600 - _ 46
- 40
$400 -
- 30
$200 - 20
- 10
$0 I 0
81/82 82/83 83/84 84/85 85/86 86/87 87/88 88/89
Budget Year
Purchase Cost i Number Purchased
1981-1988
< EXHIBIT VI
VEHICLES SOLD IN 1988 - POLICE DEPT
VEHICLE VEHICLE RESALE
TYPE YEAR NUMBER PROCEEDS ODOMETER
GRAN FURY 83 415 $512 127,589
GRAN FURY 82 312 $488 95,712
GRAN FURY 82 314 $395 114,078
MALIBU 79 315 $372 100,804 _
GRAN FURY 82 317 $744 139,445
GRAN FURY 82 318 $465 120,583
GRAN FURY 82 326 $442 115,058
GRAN FURY 82 332 $558 101,025
GRAN FURY 82 334 $488 92,258
GRAN FURY 82 350 $465 111,043
GRAN FURY 82 355 $20 83,275
GRAN FURY 82 357 $628 97,622
GRAN FURY 82 359 $372 112,525
GRAN FURY 82 360 $442 98,855
GRAN FURY 82 362 $512 140,454
GRAN FURY 82 365 $395 127,702
GRAN FURY 82 366 $419 124,748
GRAN FURY 82 370 $419 100,060
GRAN FURY 82 374 $442 127,499
VOLARE 77 376 $512 88,700
GRAN FURY 82 390 $372 100,001
GRAN FURY 82 391 $70 129,948
GRAN FURY 82 392 $326 105,862
AMC EAGLE 82 396 $1,070 78;000
AMC EAGLE 82 398 $1,256 78,190
GRAN FURY 83 464 $60 57,779
RELIANT K 83 465 $628 79,652
RELIANT K 83 466 $35 76,300
RELIANT K 83 469 $1,093 69,196
MALIBU 79 498 $442 83,806
CAMARO 79 505 $930 127,350
CUTLASS 79 508 $512 113,007
MALIBU 80 540 $419 108,444
MALIBU 80 542 $1,046 87,795
MALIBU 80 543 $349 97,780
MALIBU 80 544 $395 99,500
OMNI 80 550 $326 87,741
LEBARON 80 564 $535 86,840
LEBARON 80 567 $558 77,757
LEBARON 80 568 $419 100,015
LEBARON 81 573 $442 104,253
LEBARON 81 587 $395 113,103
MALIBU 79 739 $326 121,802
MALIBU 79 758 $326 127,471
TOTAL $21,412
AVERAGE $487 102,969
APPENDIX B
IP‘Ter"Pritr
4
•
t i� AN 0 3 1980 "•-
J
SA1 T a NKr= CITY COIJWCH..
-
r .�
SALT a:` ®:; ' TYG. 110,N14. • `'�:
Pa1iIQE,; Dtr iglEN l- MIKE CHABRIES
CHIEF OF POLICE
315 EAST 200 SOUTH
TELEPHONE 799-3000
SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84111
January 3, 1988
W. M. "Willie" Stoler, Chairman
Salt Lake City Council Office
324 South State Street
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Dear Councilman Stoler:
We appreciate the opportunity to respond to the Car Per Officer
Program audit. This program was implemented in February 1982. The purpose
was to increase officers available for call and to enhance the ability of
the Police Department to accomplish its mission. The initial program goals
identified in this report are still valid today.
As the program is reviewed and critiqued, "cost(s)" often becomes
the focal point of concern. We would only hope that an attempt is made to
determine not only the "costs" associated with this program, but that an
effort is made to "cost out the benefits" . This type of analysis provides
what we consider the true "value" of this program.
The scope of this response is directed to the "Conclusions" _and
the "Recommendations" section of the Council 's study.
CONCLUSIONS SECTION RESPONSE
COUNCIL AUDIT CONCLUSION #1
The Car Per Officer Program has benefited Salt Lake City in several
ways. It has increased the operational life of vehicles from 2.5 years to
6 years. It has contributed to the decrease in operational cost per mile.
It has improved the maintenance and appearance of vehicles and it has increased
police availability throughout the City. These successes , however, are
achieved at a certain price. That price is the cost of commuting and the
perception that the program is merely a benefit for the individual officer.
-2-
The cost of commuting can be compared..against the value of service provided
to the community. If you assume that each off-duty response takes 15 minutes,
it is estimated that the value of off-duty responses alone is approximately
$61,875 in services at no additional cost to the City. If you assume 30
minutes, the value would be $123,750. It should be noted, however, the ser-
vices provided are in the commuting area, not necessarily the City. There
is no way to accurately project the length of time on each response, there-
fore, a definitive dollar value is not provided. Because there are so many
variables in assigning a value to the off-duty responses and increased police
availability, a definite conclusion that the program is or is not cost effective
cannot be positively stated based on costs alone. The intangible benefits must
be weighed when making this decision. What the Council and Administration
should decide is whether they are willing to accept the cost of commuting as
part of doing business.
POLICE RESPONSE #1
Clearly this program has benefited Salt Lake City. This section
notes the "increased police availability throughout the City". It should
be noted that in a 6-week period of September 15, 1988, to October 31 , 1988,
this program provided for our officers responding to 1,650 police related
incidents. We purport that a high percentage of these incidents were within
Salt Lake City limits. The "cost savings" of this service should be con-
sidered in determining the real "costs" of this program. Be advised, this
service resulted in "no" manpower costs to the City. However, the benefit
costs are very real , while admittedly difficult to identify. For example,
since July of this year, two individuals were removed from burning buildings
by police officers on their way home or on their way to work in their police
vehicles. We cannot assign a value to these two incidents that could be used
in a cost-analysis determination. However, the point is well taken here that
actual costs do not reflect the true value(s) of this program. We do submit,
however, that when reviewing the study's statement concluding " . . .successes
are achieved at a certain price" , we must look beyond the commuting costs
and the perceptions mentioned in this section in justifying the "price" .
-3-
COUNCIL AUDIT CONCLUSION #2
Off-duty activity is relatively low when measured on a per car basis.
Average off-duty activity is a little more than one measurable incident per
week. Far too many officers have not participated in the spirit of the pro-
gram. Given off-duty activity levels, this is an expensive benefit to the
City for sworn personnel . One possible solution would be to require, as a
condition of retaining this privilege, that participants generate certain
levels of off-duty activity. Although an absolute quota system would not be
appropriate, the City should have a reasonable expectation for a return on
its investment. While this would not have an impact on costs, increasing the
level of off-duty activity would add credibility to the claim that the Car
Per Officer is a deterrent to crime.
POLICE RESPONSE #2
The recommendation in this section that the City "require" off-duty
activity as a condition of an officer retaining the Car Per Officer Program
troubles us. This requirement may create a liability under FLSA (Fair Labor
Standards Act) that would mandate the City to provide overtime reimbursement
in these off-duty situations. Furthermore, we believe that the (City's)
" . . .reasonable expectation for a return. . ." as referred to is, in fact,
appropriate; however, that return is currently being provided for in terms
of "free manpower" .
COUNCIL AUDIT CONCLUSION #3
The crime prevention value of a take home car can be questioned for
unmarked vehicles. A marked police vehicle is easily identifiable on City
streets and has a crime suppression impact as a result. Although it cannot
be measured, the Car Per Officer Program for marked police vehicles increases
the perceived police presence in the community. An unmarked police car can
have no such preventive impact, especially if unmarked cars have no off-duty
activity.
POLICE RESPONSE #3
While unmarked vehicles may not have the crime deterrent of a fully
marked police vehicle, it certainly provides for the availability and mobility
of the officers assigned to those vehicles. If the problem of lack of off-
duty activity is pervasive throughout the year, it can be dealt with admini-
-4-
stratively. There is no reason these vehicles cannot handle back-up situations
and in fact take police action when a crime has been committed.
COUNCIL AUDIT CONCLUSION #4
Because there is no requirement to maintain off-duty logs, supervisors
have not been able to provide management oversight of the program. In view of
the number of `officers not making off-duty responses, it would seem approp-
riate that a tracking system be implemented. Although it might be considered
an unnecessary administrative burden, there needs to be some sort of reporting_
mechanism that allows management to periodically review the program.
POLICE RESPONSE #4
The maintaining of logs would indeed be an "unnecessary administrative
burden" . It would require personnel to collect the data, enter it into the
data base, store it, retrieve and analyze as needed. This program has been
reviewed five times now since 1982. Each study, including this one, indicated
the benefits of this program for the City. This program is too valuable to
"burden" it with unnecessary paperwork. We do agree that supervisory oversight
is needed; however, the logs may not be the only alternative.
COUNCIL AUDIT CONCLUSION #5
Although officers living outside the limits of Salt Lake City and
Salt Lake County show off-duty activity levels that compare favorably to
those officers living within, there is no way to justify the cost of
operating the vehicle based on distances driven. Although law enforcement
as a whole might be enhanced, Salt Lake City does not gain any direct benefit.
POLICE RESPONSE #5
. The data referred to reflects off-duty activity based on home location
of the officer -- not the location of that activity. Again, to compare the
costs based on miles driven reflects that all costs and benefits were used in
determining this conclusion. We purport that all the benefits were not con-
sidered in making the conclusion, "The cost of operating the vehicles based
on distances driven cannot be totally justified" . Policy decisions will be
made that will minimize this concern in the future.
-
-5-
COUNCIL AUDIT CONCLUSION #6
It is possible that with the elimination of the Car Per Officer
Program, a total fleet reduction of 100-120 vehicles could be realized. A
one time savings of $700,000 in capital cost is possible. There would, however,
be a long term cost that would probably equal current program expenditures. The
anticipated short term savings have to be measured against increased costs for
heavy duty sedans and a requirement for parking that does .not currently exist.
Capital costs would remain the same by purchasing fewer cars, but they would
have to be replaced more often. Additionally, the potential value of the off-
duty activity which might be lost, the value of additional police presence in
the community and the increased availability and mobility value of the Car Per
Officer Program as an implied benefit should be considered.
POLICE RESPONSE #6
We agree with the audits final conclusion of the consequences of
eliminating the program and would again note we would also lose 24-hour avail-
ability and mobility.
RECOMMENDATIONS SECTION RESPONSE
In response to the recommendations of this study, we would submit:
COUNCIL AUDIT RECOMMENDATION #1
Given the overall benefits to the City during the past 6 years, it
is recommended that the Car Per Officer be retained as an integral part of
the Police Department's crime deterrent program. However, several changes
are recommended to further enhance the strengths of the program.
POLICE RESPONSE #1
We agree with the recommendation of retaining the program and
address recommended changes accordingly hereafter.
COUNCIL AUDIT RECOMMENDATION #2
Off-duty logs should be maintained in order for first line supervisors
to be able to monitor the activities of individual officers . Other approaches
that allows for some sort of management oversight are acceptable. As a
condition of retaining the privilege, officers should be required to generate
sufficient off-duty activities to justify the program. No specific number of
incidents is recommended for retention of the privilege, nor should a strict
quota be established. Officers who consistently show no off-duty activity
should not have the privilege. Procedures should be established whereby there
is a senior level management review of the program at the department level at
least semiannually.
-6-
POLICE RESPONSE #2
Off-duty logs should not be reinstated at this time for purposes of
justifying the Car Per Officer Program. The program is a valuable one that
provides justification beyond the off-duty activity criteria . Supervisors
can provide appropriate and adequate oversight to assure compliance with
policy and at the same time address the audits' concerns.
COUNCIL AUDIT RECOMMENDATION #3
The department should review its approval process and criteria for
officers living outside the defined areas of Salt Lake County. It is our
recommendation that an absolute mileage limit be placed on commuting distances
authorized. For officers currently living outside this limit, a grandfather
clause would probably be appropriate. Future requests should be judged
strictly on the benefit to the department, not the individual officer.
POLICE RESPONSE #3
This will be addressed.
COUNCIL AUDIT RECOMMENDATION #4
Given the low level of off-duty activity compared with the cost to
commute, the fuel reimbursement charge should be reinstituted. One of the
ways to offset the criticism of this would be to do it in a year in which a
pay raise is given. This would possibly reduce the negative impact on the
individual officer. The exact formula for reimbursement can come in several
ways, from a charge based on exact commuting mileage for each officer to a
general fee established on a geographic location. If approval is granted for
officers residing outside the County, a reimbursement fee should be estab-
lished that covers the actual operating and maintenance cost to commute.
POLICE RESPONSE #4
The recommendation of paying for using police vehicles based upon
"low level of off-duty activity" is not totally valid. This offers no con-
sideration for other benefits listed in the goals of this program. The
statement noting this would have "a negative impact on the individual officer"
is an understatement at best. We would recommend that those living within
the prescribed area be assessed no fee while those outside that area pay a
fee commensurate with the fuel/maintenance costs required for commuting .
c 4, k
-7-
In conclusion, we appreciate the opportunity to work with your
staff in this effort. The review of this valuable program has been extremely
disconcerting for the men and women of this department. This is reflected
in their responses to your survey. Please appreciate we must provide a
sense of stability for these valued employees if we are to expect morale
and service levels to improve.
We commit to each of you that we will manage this program both
effectively and responsibly.
Re pectfully,
't-X1--- -,1---/-(--
MICHAEL P. CHABRIES,
Chief of Police
MPC:sac