The URL can be used to link to this page

06/05/2003 - Minutes PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, DUNE 5, 2003 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah met in Work Session on Thursday, June 5, 2003, at 4:00 p.m. in Room 326, Committee Room, City County Building, 451 South State Street. In Attendance: Council Members Carlton Christensen, Van Turner, Eric Jergensen, Nancy Saxton, Jill Remington Love, Dave Buhler, and Dale Lambert. Also In Attendance: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Gary Mumford, Deputy Council Director; Michael Sears, Council Budget and Policy Analyst; Russell Weeks, Council Policy Analyst; Lehua Weaver, Council Constituent Liaison; Sylvia Jones, Council Research and Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Brenda Hancock, Human Resource Management Division Director; Steve Fawcett, Management Services Deputy Director; Rick Graham, Public Services Director; Randall Hillier, Administration Budget/Policy Analyst; Laurie Dillon, Administration Budget Analyst; Linda Cordova, Property Manager; Matt Williams, Real Property Agent; Tracey Stevens, Chief Procurement Officer; Steven Allred, Deputy City Attorney; Chris Bramhall, Assistant City Attorney; Lyn Creswell, Assistant City Attorney; Kendrick Cowley, City Recorder; Susan Roberts, City Economist; Alison Weyher, Community and Economic Development Director; David Dobbins, Community and Economic Development Deputy Director; Jerry Burton, Police Administrative Services Manager; Charles Querry, Fire Chief; Roger Evans, Business Services and Licensing Director; Angela Romero, Youth City Government Coordinator; Nancy Tessman, Library Director; Candace Gibson, Youth City Government; Tim Scott, Youth City Government; Bo Peng, Youth City Government; Kathie Sharp, Youth City Government; Eboni Page, Youth City Government; Thomas Cabral, Youth City Government; Talon Ozmore, Youth City Government; Mark Stillman, Youth City Government; Susie Woodward, Youth City Government; and Scott Crandall, Deputy Recorder. Councilmember Christensen presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 4:09 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1. SOME COUNCIL MEMBERS WILL MEET WITH MEMBERS OF THE ADMINISTRATION AND REPRESENTATIVES OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS COMPANIES REGARDING THE PROPOSED TELECOMMUNICATIONS RIGHT-OF-WAY ORDINANCE. View Attachment Councilmember Christensen asked Chris Bramhall to identify issues which needed to be addressed. Mr. Bramhall said some industry concerns were definitional in nature and could be resolved with clarifications. He said the City would not compromise on fundamental issues relating to the City's ability to receive compensation for use of City property. Mr. Bramhall said the ordinance changed the way fees would be calculated. He said the change involved moving from a fair market appraisal value to a lineal foot value. He said there could be legal challenges regarding the City's right to compensation. He said he felt the majority of the concerns could be resolved by discussing the proposal with industry representatives. The following telecommunication representatives submitted written comments or spoke concerning the proposal: Jerry Oldroyd, Ballard, Spahr, Andrews, Ingersoll, Jeff Fox, Utah Consumers Network, Jerry Finn, Questar InfoComm, and Bill Uber, Questar InfoComm. Comments included long haul carriers, franchises, access to public right-of-way, local service, economic development, permit fees, methods and difficulty of calculating fees, discouraging development, telecommunication task force, municipalities using right-of- way to raise general revenues, right-of-way available on cost-based fees, state policies, economic disincentives, vague/ambiguous ordinance, and recovering management 03 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, JUNE 5, 2003 costs. Councilmember Saxton asked if the City currently taxed communication lines. Mr. Bramhall said yes. Councilmember Saxton asked how the proposed charges were different. Mr. Bramhall said the difference was in the way fees were calculated. Mr. Finn said franchise taxes were a separate issue. He said telecommunication providers wanted to be charged for actual costs incurred by the City. Mr. Bramhall said there were two types of companies. He said the first category provided standard telephone service and paid a franchise fee. He said the second category were companies which by definition did not provide telephone service within the City. He said the City was obligated to collect revenue when it made property available to the private sector. He said telecommunication providers believed State statues prohibited the City from charging anything in excess of management costs. He said the City believed that view was unconstitutional under the Utah Constitution. Councilmember Saxton asked how many companies would share the estimated $350, 000 cost increase. Mr. Bramhall said approximately 15. Mr. Oldroyd said actual costs were unknown but he believed they would be much higher than $350,000. Mr. Uber said his calculations indicated Questar InfoComm's costs would increase up to 30 times. Mr. Bramhall said Questar InfoComm no longer qualified for a franchise and would be moving to a lease. Councilmember Christensen asked how charges were determined when several companies used the same conduit. Mr. Bramhall said only the original lease holder was charged. Councilmember Christensen asked if subleases would be charged under the new proposal. Mr. Bramhall said they would be charged a 5% component but the projected revenue was based on a 2% lineal charge. Councilmember Love said other cities charged by the lineal foot and asked how telecommunication vendors dealt with that. Mr. Oldroyd said Portland had been in litigation for a number of years. Councilmember Buhler asked how much the City received in annual revenue. Mr. Fawcett said $150, 000. Councilmember Jergensen asked if the City was going to try to resolve this issue before the Council voted on the budget. Ms. Gust-Jenson said the issue was scheduled for a future briefing. Mr. Fluhart said the Administration planned to work with the industry representatives prior to the budget adoption. Linda Cordova said three types of telecommunication agreements were managed by her office. She said the proposal would only affect the point-to-point carriers. She said she felt more cities would go to the lineal foot charge because it was easier to manage. Councilmember Jergensen asked what the policy purpose was for the proposal. Ms. Cordova said she felt the City would be consistent with other cities nationwide and have the ability to manage agreements more efficiently. Councilmember Christensen asked the Administration to work with industry representatives and inform the Council as soon as possible. He said the Council would be available to discuss policy issues with the Administration concerning this issue. #2. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. No discussion was held. #3. INTERVIEW HARVEY WRIGHT PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE CITY AND COUNTY BUILDING CONSERVANCY AND USE COMMITTEE. 03 — 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, DUNE 5, 2003 Mr. Wright said he was involved in construction for 54 years and served as the project administrator when the City and County Building was remodeled. He said he felt this would be a good opportunity and looked forward to serving the community. Councilmember Christensen asked about the condition of the building. Mr. Wright said a lot of effort had gone into the building and he felt it was holding up well. Councilmember Buhler asked about preserving the sandstone. Mr. Wright said a treatment was applied when the building was restored. He said sandstone needed to be laid with the grain running horizontally. He said some stone in the City and County Building was laid vertically which allowed moisture to collect and cause flaking. He said nothing could be done and the stone would continue to deteriorate. #4 . THE YOUTH CITY GOVERNMENT WILL PRESENT THE STATE OF THE CITY ADDRESS. View Attachment Candace Gibson, Tim Scott, Bo Peng, Kathie Sharp, Eboni Page, Thomas Cabral, Talon Ozmore, Mark Stillman, and Susie Woodward briefed the Council with the attached report. #5. CONSIDER A MOTION TO ENTER INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANN. 52-4-4 AND 52-4-5 (1) (a) (ii) , AND ATTORNEY- CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANN. 78-24-8. An Executive Session was held. See File M 03-2 for sworn statement and tape. #6. DISCUSS POLICY DIRECTION AND OTHER ISSUES RELATED TO THE BUDGET INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LEGISLATIVE INTENT STATEMENT REVIEW; RESPONSES TO THE COUNCIL'S REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION ON: GOLF, TELECOMMUNICATIONS, TRAFFIC CALMING, IMS, YOUTH AND FAMILY SERVICES, FIRE DEPARTMENT FOUR-HANDED STAFFING, USE OF FUND BALANCE, REVENUE PROJECTIONS; POTENTIAL BUDGET SHIFTS AND REDUCTIONS: POTENTIAL REVENUE ISSUES, OPTIONAL BUDGET REDUCTIONS, AND POTENTIAL POLICY SHIFTS. View Attachment Russell Weeks, Michael Sears, Rocky Fluhart, Jerry Burton, Susan Roberts, and Nancy Tessman briefed the Council with the attached handouts. Ms. Tessman said due to budget uncertainties the Library wanted to add $112,000 to contingency. She said if revenues came in high enough, contingency funds could be used to replace reductions made to the material fund. She said the Sprague and Day-Riverside branches would remain open on Sunday. Councilmember Buhler asked about raises for Library employees. Ms. Tessman said employees would not receive merit increases, only a 2% cost-of-living increase. Councilmember Turner asked about construction on the east side of the Library block. Ms. Tessman said construction was scheduled to be completed in September 2003. Council Members were in favor of the budget proposal. The Council discussed adjustments to the proposed budget and made the following decisions. Potential Revenue Issues: 1) use of fund balance to meet on-going expenditures-$968, 642, 2) conservative revenue projections-$219,000, and 3) telecom fee-$326, 675. Total revenue anticipated by Administration: $164,485, 893. Total revenue anticipated by Council: $162, 971,576. Council Members wanted an additional column added to this section showing the Council's anticipated revenue for each category. The Council wanted additional information on the property tax issue. Optional Budget Reductions: 1) eliminate proposed Information Management Services (IMS) network technician full-time employee (FTE) -$75, 936, 2) eliminate proposed IMS 03 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, DUNE 5, 2003 web programmer-$75, 936, 3) consolidate Capital Improvement Program (CIP) administration with finance/engineering (1 FTE layoff) ($32, 000 to Housing and Neighborhood Development Division) -$31,468, 4) consolidate Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) and organizational development function in Human Resources (HR) -$78, 115, 5) consolidate inspection services in City (1 FTE layoff) -$87, 000, 6) reduce bus pass expenditure to reflect actual anticipated amount-$30, 000, and 7) eliminate Career Ladder Program in Prosecutor's Office-$18,482. Council Members asked for additional information on the following issues: 1) emergency management function transfer/Fire Department, 2) number/type of crime labs available valley wide including staffing and duplication of services, 3) traffic calming position, and 4) events coordination function. Potential Policy Shifts: 1) transfer retirement payout liability (with one-time funds) to a separate retirement liability account and pay out anticipated retirement expenses from that account, and 2) eliminate on-going expenditure-$650,000. Total expenditures anticipated by the Administration: $164,485, 893. Total expenditures anticipated by the Council: $163,438, 956. Council Members asked for additional information on the following issues: 1) early retirement, 2) personal leave program changes, 3) grant writer position, and 4) Fire Department staffing. Discussion was held on using general fund to balance the budget or request additional cuts from the Administration. The majority of the Council was in favor of the following: 1) appropriating $2, 650,000 from fund balance, 2) requesting the Administration make approximately $1 million in additional departmental cuts, and 3) recognize $500,000 in collection revenue. The meeting adjourned at 9:56 p.m. sc 03 - 4 R WY11-C2g 0 - , a.'11111l.• • 'V. OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Posted:June 4,2003 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING 5:00 p.m.,Some Council Members may dine together in Room 343 at the City&County Building. (The room is open to the public.) DATE: June 5,2003 TIME: 4:00 p.m. PLACE: City and County Building 451 South State Street,Room 326 Salt Lake City,Utah AGENDA ITEMS I. Some Council Members will meet with members of the Administration and representative of Telecommunications companies regarding the proposed Telecommunication right-of-way ordinance. (Please note: this item will begin at 4:00.The Council will break from 5:00 to 5:30 p.m. for dinner prior to their normally scheduled Work Session meeting.) II. Report of the Executive Director,including review of Council information items and announcements. (Beginning at 5:30 p.m.) . The Council will interview Harvey Wright prior to consideration of his appointment to the City&County Building Conservancy and Use Committee. IV. The Youth City Government will present the State of the City address. V. The Council will consider a motion to enter into Executive Session to discuss collective bargaining,pursuant to Utah Code Ann. 52-4-4 and 52-4-5 (1)(a) (ii),and attorney-client matters that are privileged,pursuant to Utah Code Ann. 78-24-8. VI. The Council will discuss policy direction and other issues related to the budget including,but not limited to: • Legislative Intent statement review • Responses to the Council's requests for information o Golf o Telecommunications o Traffic Calming o IMS o Youth&Family Services o Fire Department four-handed staffing o Use of Fund Balance o Revenue Projections . • Potential Budget shifts and reductions o Potential revenue issues o Optional budget reductions o Potential Policy shifts Access agendas at www.slcgov.com/council/agendas/default.htm. A sound system for the hearing impaired is available and headphones can be btained for all public meetings upon four hours advance notice. Arrangements can be made for sign language interpreters;please allow 72 hours advance notice. TDD Number 535-6021. Assisted listening devices are available on Channel I. Large type and#2 Braille agendas are available upon 72 hours advance notice. After 5:00 p.m.,please enter the City and County Building through the east entrance. Accessible route is located on the east side of the building. In accordance with State Statute,City Ordinance and Council Policy,one or more Council Members may be connected via speakerphone. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH B41 1 1 TELEPHONE:80 1-5/35-7600, FAX: 80 1-535-7651 . 0221 RECYCLED PAPER • BLACKBURN & STOLL, LC Charles M.Bennett Attorneys at Law Telephone(801)521-7900 Fax(801)521-7965 Kristy L.Bertelsen 77 West 200 South, Suite 400 Michael D.Blackburn David J.Castleton Salt Lake City, Utah Henry K.Chai II 84101-1609 Thomas Christensen,Jr. Jerry D.Fenn Mark Dean Michael E.Dyer June 5 2003 Direct Dial No. 578 3535 Jerry D.Fenn Bryce D.Panzer Dori K.Petersen Eric L.Robinson Kira M.Slawson Stanley K.Stoll Thomas C. Sturdy Hand-delivered The Honorable Ross C. Anderson, Mayor 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 • Salt Lake City Council 451 South State Street, Rm. 304 Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Salt Lake City Attorney 451 South State Street Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Re: Proposed Salt Lake City Ordinance 14.32.425 Telecommunications Right-of-Way Permits Dear Mayor Anderson, City Council Members and City Attorneys: This firm represents Questar InfoComm("QIC") an affiliate of Questar Corporation offering a wide range of telecommunications services. I have been asked by QIC to express its concerns with proposed Salt Lake City Ordinance 14.32.425, Telecommunications Right of Way Permits(the"Proposed Ordinance"). QIC does not believe its operations fall squarely within the Proposed Ordinance's definition of a"Local Network Operator," since it does not transmit telecommunications signals solely and exclusively for internal purposes. However, this is the designation in the Proposed Ordinance that would come closest to what services QIC provides. QIC, moreover, does not believe that the Proposed Ordinance, if adopted, would apply to it, since it is QIC's understanding that this ordinance is only applicable to entities which do not provide telecommunications services to customers within the City and who are not subject to City franchise taxes. QIC believes it meets the exemptions from the Proposed Ordinance. Nevertheless, QIC is gravely concerned about the potential impact of the Proposed Ordinance as set forth below. QIC believes the Proposed Ordinance, if adopted, would create disincentives for • deployment of telecommunications facilities and would have a negative impact on economic The Honorable Ross C. Anderson Salt Lake City Council . Salt Lake City Attorney June 5, 2003 Page 2 development. The Proposed Ordinance is overly broad and ambiguous such that there are issues raised as to its scope and impact. Moreover, the Proposed Ordinance violates federal and state law. Under state law, municipalities are prohibited from recovering more than their actual costs incurred in managing the rights-of-ways. This ordinance also likely would be found to be pre- empted by the FCC as a violation of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (the"1996 Act"). By its nature, this ordinance in reality constitutes a new tax which has not been authorized by the Legislature and the City may be prohibited from enforcement thereof. Finally, the Proposed Ordinance would be poor public policy and is inconsistent with State policy to promote the deployment of advanced telecommunications facilities. QIC respectfully requests that the City Council reject this Proposed Ordinance in its entirety. The Nature of the Ordinance The Proposed Ordinance identifies two types of entities from which the City proposes to obtain fees for the use of City rights-of-ways: (1)"Point-to-Point Telecommunications Operators" defined as entities who use the rights-of-ways for the primary purpose of transmitting telecommunications signals through the City, and not for the primary purpose of providing telecommunications services to customers within the City; and (2)"Local Network Operators" defined as entities who have the sole and exclusive purpose of transmitting signals for internal, private uses at multiple locations within the City. Both Point-to-Point Telecommunications Operators and Local Network Operators are assessed annual fees under the Proposed Ordinance to utilize the City rights-of-ways,which are grossly disproportionate to the costs incurred by the City in allowing their rights-of-ways to be accessed and to the actual use of the right-of-way. It should be noted, that this ordinance is an extreme deviation from the norm in Utah. No other municipality charges telecommunications providers an annual fee anywhere near the magnitude of the fees proposed in this ordinance Fees Imposed on Local Network Operators The Proposed Ordinance imposes an annual fee on a Local Network Operator based on the"fair rental value" of the portion of the City's rights of way occupied by the Local Network Operator. It is described as being the greater of the"Minimum Annual Local Network Fee,"or an amount calculated as follows: (i) the City shall identify and establish the fair market value of property adjacent to the portion of the [right of way] occupied by the Local Network Operator; The Honorable Ross C. Anderson • Salt Lake City Council Salt Lake City Attorney June 5, 2003 Page 3 (ii) such fair market value shall be multiplied by the area of the [right of way] so occupied, based upon a corridor of not less than three(3)feet in width, as calculated by the City; (iii) such fair market value shall then be multiplied by 33-1/3%; and (iv) such value shall then be multiplied by 9%, representing the capitalization rate. It is unclear how the City proposes to make the calculations set forth under this proposal. Property values vary over the course of the right-of-way occupied. Each segment of the right-of- way can have a different value. There may be extraordinary variations in property values over the entire distance of the right-of-way occupied by the Local Network Operator's facilities. Some short routes could have incredibly high values if they were located in the heart of the city. This valuation method is quite vague and ill-defined. Valuations could result in extremely high fees being assessed. Given the flaws in the methodology set forth in the Proposed Ordinance, QIC is unable to fully assess the financial impact on the Company if these fees were adopted. • The Proposed Ordinance Constitutes a New Tax Rather than a Fee QIC believes that this proposed right-of-way fee structure is in the nature of a tax increase rather than a fee increase. The power of a municipality to tax is narrowly circumscribed and must be granted by the Legislature. It is clear black letter law that the power of a municipality to tax is derived solely from legislative enactment, and a municipality has only such authority as is expressly conferred or necessarily implied by state statute. The Utah Legislature has not expressly authorized municipalities to raise taxes by rights-of-way fees and, as set forth below, has in fact, expressed a clear directive to the contrary. The Utah Supreme Court has clearly held that unless a fee bears a reasonable relationship to the cost of regulating the business, it will be considered a tax. In Weber Basin Home Builders v. Roy City, 287 P.2d 866 (1971), the Utah Supreme Court struck a city ordinance raising building fee permits from $12 to $112. The increase in cost was not to defray costs associated with providing a building permit but was paid into the general fund. The Court noted there was a difference between the authority to charge a fee for the granting of a permit and the authority to impose a tax. If the money collected for the permit was used to service and regulate the activity for which the permit was granted, it was regarded as a permit fee. If, on the other hand, the relationship between the fee and the activity regulated is minimal and the money collected is mainly for raising revenue for general purposes, it is a tax. The city had no power to impose a tax without express authorization from the legislature. • The Honorable Ross C. Anderson Salt Lake City Council11111 Salt Lake City Attorney June 5, 2003 Page 4 If money collected from a license fee is used primarily to regulate and police the business or activity, then the fee is appropriately considered a license fee. Here, however, the rights-of- way fees bear little relationship to the costs incurred by the City in administering rights-of-ways or overseeing the businesses using the rights-of-way. Instead, this fee is primarily for raising revenue for general municipal purposes. Hence, it is properly regarded as a tax. Accordingly, it can only be imposed if authorized by the Legislature. The Legislature has not authorized such a tax. State Law Clearly Provides that Rights-of-Way Fees Should be Cost Based The Protection of Highways Act of Title 72, Chapter 7 of the Utah Code, governs the compensation that a municipality can receive for allowing access to highway rights-of-ways by telecommunications providers. The Utah Legislature has narrowly limited the fees a municipality may collect on telecommunications providers for use of rights-of-ways to "management costs." This act states: "A highway authority may recover from a utility service provider, only those management costs caused by the utility service provider's activities in the right-of-way of a highway under the jurisdiction of the highway authority." Section 72-7-102(4)(b) Utah Code Ann. (2002). 1 "Management costs" are defined as"the reasonable, direct, and actual costs a • A municipality is clearly a"highway authority" as defined in the Act. "Highway Authority" means the [Utah Department of Transportation] or the legislative, executive, or governing body of a county of municipality." Section 72-1-102(8)Utah Code Ann. (2002). Moreover, QIC is a"utility services provider". While this phrase is not defined in the Utah Code, the terms"utility" and"utility company" are. "Utility" includes telecommunication, gas, electricity, cable television, water, sewer, data, and video transmission lines, drainage and irrigation systems, and other similar utilities located in, on, along, across, over, through, or under any state highway. "Utility company" means a privately, cooperatively, or publicly owned utility, including utilities owned by political subdivisions. Section 72-6-116(1)(b) and c)Utah Code Ann. (2002). Moreover, the phrase"utility service provider" is analogous to "telecommunications provider" defined in the Municipal Telecommunications License Tax Act enacted by the 2003 Legislature. A"telecommunications provider" is defined therein as any entity that owns, controls, manages or operates a telecommunications service whether or not regulated by the Public Service Commission. Section 10-1-402(9)Utah Code Ann. (2003). QIC is a telecommunications provider and there is no question that the prohibition on municipalities charging more than management costs contained in the Protection of Highways Acts applies to QIC. A telecommunications provider using the public rights-of-ways to deliver telecommunications services is providing a utility service and is a"utility service provider." 411 The Honorable Ross C. Anderson • Salt Lake City Council Salt Lake City Attorney June 5, 2003 Page 5 highway authority incurs in exercising authority over the highways under its jurisdiction." Section 72-7-102(1)Utah Code Ann. (2002). Here, the proposed fees to be charged to rights-of-way users bear absolutely no relation to the actual costs of managing the rights-of-way. Instead, they are in the nature of a tax. Thus, the Utah Legislature has clearly proscribed a municipality from charging the types of right-of-way fees proposed in the ordinance. Further, Section 72-7-102(4)(c)(ii) states that if the highway authority's management costs cannot be attributed to only one entity, the management costs"shall be allocated among all privately owned and government agencies using the highway right-of-way for utility service purposes, including the highway authority itself" The allocation must"reflect proportionately the management costs incurred by the highway authority as a result of the various utility uses of the highway." Id. In addition, a highway authority is prohibited from assessing a fee for use of the right of way"as a basis for generating revenue for the highway authority that is in addition to its management costs." Section 72-7-102(4)(d)Utah Code Ann. (2002). The Proposed Ordinance allows for multiple fees for use of the same right-of-way by more • than one Point-to-Point or Local Network Operator, rather than apportioning the fees. The Proposed Ordinance indicates that for any person using the right-of-way, whether they own the conduit and cable, lease the fiber or merely have the right to use one fiber in the cable in the conduit, each is considered an operator for purposes of the Proposed Ordinance and each would be required to pay the same fees to the City. A fee not apportioned among the number of users of the same facilities is disproportionate and is excessive. This is clearly disallowed by the Protection of Highways Act. In the legislative sessions in 2000 and 2003, the Utah Legislature reaffirmed the principle that governmental entities should only be able to recover actual management costs from rights-of- way users. In considering whether compensation should be allowed for access to interstate highway rights-of-ways, the 2000 Legislature clearly stated that other than on the interstate, highway authorities did not have the authority to charge compensation for rights-of-ways. 2 Most recently, in the 2003 session, the Legislature enacted the Municipal Telecommunications License Tax Act. While some provisions of this Act do not go into effect until July 1, 2004, the provisions dealing with rights-of-ways go into effect a year earlier. In 2 "Except for a right-of-way of a highway on the interstate system, nothing in this section shall be construed to allow a highway authority to require compensation from a telecommuni- cation facility provider for longitudinal access to the right-of-way of a highway under the highway • authority's jurisdiction." Section 72-7-108(8)Utah Code Ann. (2002). The Honorable Ross C. Anderson Salt Lake City Council . Salt Lake,City Attorney June 5, 2003 Page 6 enacting the municipal telecommunications license tax, the Legislature imposed strict limits on other taxes and fees that a municipality could enact. Specifically, the Legislature stated that a municipality could only recover the"management costs of the municipality caused by the activities of the telecommunications provider in the right-of-way." Section 10-1-406 Utah Code Ann. (2003). Moreover, any such fee must be in accordance with Section 72-7-102 (discussed above) and cannot be related to"a municipality's loss of use of a highway as a result of the activities of the telecommunications provider in a right-of-way or increased deterioration of a highway as a result of the activities of the telecommunications provider in the right-of-way." Section 10-1- 406(1(a)(i) and(ii) Utah Code Ann. (2003). Given the Legislature's clear and repeated declarations that municipalities are limited to the recovery of actual costs to manage the rights-of-ways and that they cannot charge compensation therefor, this Proposed Ordinance is clearly inconsistent with State statutes. The Proposed Ordinance Is Pre-empted by the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 In the 1996 Act, Congress attempted to eliminate barriers to entry into the telecommunications market. In that regard, Congress eliminated state and local barriers which • would prevent telecommunications companies from providing services. Section 253(a) of the Act provides: "No State or local statute or regulation, or other State or local legal requirement, may prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the ability of any entity to provide any interstate or intrastate telecommunications service." 47 U.S.C. §253(a). QIC believes that the Proposed Ordinance has the effect of prohibiting the ability of telecommunications providers to provide telecommunications services. Section 253(a) has been interpreted to prohibit a municipal ordinance that assesses fees that are not based on the municipality's costs or that allow the municipality to recover more than its costs. City of Auburn v. Qwest, 260 F.3rd 1160, 1176 (9th Cir. 2001);New Jersey Payphone Ass'n v. Town of West N.Y. 130 F. Supp. 2d 631, 638 (D.N.J. 2001). It should be noted that, while the 1996 Act maintains the ability of local government to manage rights-of-ways, local governments cannot go so far as to impose user fees to generate revenues in excess of management costs, or fees that are based on the rental value of rights-of-ways. Bell Atlantic - Maryland, Inc. v. Prince George's County, 49 F. Supp. 2d, 806, 818-11(D. Md. 1999). TCI Cablevision of Oakland, Inc. 12, F.C.C.R 21396 (1997). QIC believes the Proposed Ordinance would be subject to FCC preemption if enacted. It clearly goes beyond permissible limits in managing rights-of-ways and imposes such excessive fees as to have the effect of prohibiting the providing of telecommunications services. • The Honorable Ross C. Anderson • Salt Lake City Council Salt Lake City Attorney June 5, 2003 Page 7 It would be Poor Public Policy to Enact the Proposed Ordinance Finally, QIC submits that seeking to alter the status quo system of cost-based permits for access to highway rights-of-ways, by introducing the concept of unprecedented high user fees for such access, runs counter to the State policy to make telecommunication facilities and services widely available to all customers in the State at affordable prices. The imposition of such user fees may increase rates to telephone subscribers. Furthermore, if the City adopts this Proposed Ordinance, the domino effect if other governmental entities take a similar action, exacerbates the impact on the telecommunications industry in this State. The interests of the citizens of the State of Utah are served by affordable state-of-the-art telecommunications services. These interests would be seriously impacted by allowing the imposition of non-cost based user fees for access to rights-of-ways. Moreover, enactment of this ordinance would be viewed as hostile to businesses. QIC believes it will create a disincentive for high-tech businesses to locate within City boundaries and, for those companies that are presently located within the City, will create an incentive for them to • shift high-tech operations to other locales. Rights-of-ways are owned by the citizens and should be utilized for the benefit of the citizens. Thus, uses of rights-of-ways should be granted to multiple providers, including telecommunications providers. The goal should be to optimally use public resources, including rights-of-ways to improve infrastructure and the quality of life for citizens. The interests of the State are served by an affordable state-of-the-art telecommunications system. The impact of the Proposed Ordinance, if adopted, would seriously impact further deployment of advanced telecommunications facilities in the City, since the cost to access rights- of-ways will skyrocket. Such a result could create a disincentive to invest in network improvements. Conclusion QIC strongly urges the City not to enact the Proposed Ordinance. The Proposed Ordinance is overly broad and ambiguous. By its nature, this ordinance in reality constitutes a new tax which has not been authorized by the Legislature and the City will likely be prohibited from enforcement thereof. The Proposed Ordinance also violates state statutes that limit a municipality to recovery of no more than management costs for access to rights-of-ways. It also violates the federal 1996 Act that attempted to remove barriers to providing telecommunications services and would likely be preempted by the FCC. Finally, the Proposed Ordinance would be poor public policy and would create disincentives to deploy advanced telecommunications • The Honorable Ross C. Anderson Salt Lake City Council Salt Lake City Attorney 111 June 5, 2003 Page 8 facilities in the City. QIC would like to participate in a process to analyze these issues and respectfully requests a meeting with City Staff to discuss its concerns with the present draft of the Proposed Ordinance. However, for the reasons set forth above, QIC respectfully requests that the City Council reject this Proposed Ordinance in its present form. Thank you for you consideration of this issue. Very truly yours, BLACKBURN& STOLL,L.C. rry . Fenn JDF:ek IDcc: Questar InfoCom m • A SALT LAKE CITY • YOUTH STATE OF THE CITY REPORT YOUTHCITY GOVERNMENT'S REPORT TO MAYOR ANDERSON, CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS AND THE SALT LAKE CITY COMMUNITY "COLLABORATION" JUNE 5, zoo3 The Youth State of the City Report informs Mayor Anderson, City Council members and others in the Salt Lake City community of the objectives and activities of YouthCity Government (YCG). YCG's focus this academic year was to provide a forum for youth voices. Our main goal was to collaborate with other youth and community organizations. Through collaboration, youth have a stronger voice in the . political process. To achieve this goal, YCG members focused: i) government policies and procedures, 2) addressing youth issues through leadership training, and 3) collaborating with other youth organizations to identify fun activities for youth in the city. YOUTH ISSUES On April 24, 20o2, the Salt Lake City Council requested YouthCity Government (YCG) participants review and make recommendations to the proposed Bike and Helmet Safety Ordinance. The proposed ordinance favored establishing a helmet mandate for all bicycle users under eighteen (18) years of age. YCG members appreciated the opportunity given by the Council to review the proposed ordinance. We met with a variety of city officials and students to discuss an action plan. After months of discussion, a majority of YCG members agreed that helmet safety education would be 40 more effective than mandating an ordinance. The majority of YCG members agreed to the following recommendations: 1 • • Establish a citywide campaign to heighten the public's awareness regarding the benefits of proper helmet use. • Support and publicize access to free or low cost helmets. • Adopt a "Share the Road" campaign. • Increase funding to continue upgrading bicycle routes as recommended in the zooz Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan. On Wednesday, August 7, zooz,Candace Gibson, YCG member, testified before the City Council on behalf of the Cesar Chavez Boulevard Committee. Prior to Candace's testimony, YCG members discussed the importance of teaching young people about the role of Cesar Chavez in establishing the United Farm Workers Union. Members committed to learning more and teaching others about this pivotal historical figure. YCG members also celebrated the unveiling of Cesar Chavez Boulevard with leaders of the Latino community. YCG members and skaters of all ages and skill levels met with city engineers, park maintenance staff, and the skate park designer to give input on Salt Lake City second skate park at Fairmont Park. Skaters and • YCG members lobbied Public Services and the designer for an advanced skate park with deeper bowls and more street skating space. After much discussion and three workshops, the designer presented participants with three sketches. Participants were able to use components of each sketch to design a skate park of their choice. Our participation in the skate park design allowed many youth, who had never been involved in the community, the opportunity to give their input on a project. The Fairmont Skate Park will open in the fall. YCG participants hosted a Gender Justice Summit in collaboration with the YWCA, UP-Net and a variety of community organizations on November zi, zooz. The summit featured the film "A Passion for Justice." After the film, YCG members lead a discussion about the images of women as portrayed by media and popular culture. For the second year, YCG members hosted a press conference with Mayor Anderson. The press conference provided high school media students with an opportunity to ask Mayor Anderson questions and discuss concerns they.had regarding Salt Lake City government. 2 • During the legislative session, YCG students received first-hand experience in lobbying their state representatives and senators. Participants collaborated with UP-Net, Rowland Hall St. Marks school and other community organizations in support of House Bill 8i sponsored by Representative Ty McCartney. H.B. 8i is a compensation study that will address possible wage and benefit differences between men and • women who work for the State of Utah. A salary study conducted by the labor department has shown that men and women are compensated differently for the same or similar jobs.' Nationally women typically make $.73 for every dollar earned by a man. In Utah the ratio is $.66 (over all job sectors) to every dollar.' YCG students met,.e-mailed and phoned their representatives and senators to discuss pay equity. On the last day of the session, H.B. 8i passed the Senate floor. Governor Leavitt signed H.B. 8i into law in April. On May 7, zoo3, in collaboration with Peer Court, the U.S. Attorney's Office and Weed & Seed, YCG hosted a Youth Summit on Gun Violence. The summit focused on the legal consequences of firearms policies and how they affect the community. Over 90 youth • attended the summit. We were able to survey S7 attendees regarding gun violence in their neighborhoods. Based on the discussions during the summit, surveys and additional research, we will submit recommendations to the U.S. Attorney's Office regarding methods and messages that are effective in communicating the dangers and legal consequences of gun violence as it pertains to teens. LEADERSHIP TRAINING As part of our leadership training YCG members participated in a variety of youth forums including the Youth Forum: Refugees Voice Their Power, hosted by National Youth Network and the Utah Peace Institute. YCG members joined ioo youth from across the country to discuss the struggles that many of their refugee peers experience in Salt Lake City High Schools. One item of discussion revolved around the segregation of refugee students in area high schools. A majority of the refugee participants felt isolated from other students. All participants acknowledged that the lack of communication at their school leads to racial segregation and stereotyping. They also committed that their • http://www.feminist.com/fairpay/f wagegap.htm 2 http://www.iwpr.org 3 • organizations will work with local school officials to address concerns raised at the conference. YCG members participated in the Phoenix Alliance: Utah's Anti- tobacco Revolution Summit. Participants attended leadership workshops focusing on event planning, media relations and becoming a part of the political process. YCG members helped facilitate the icebreaker for the summit by playing "Cultural Bingo." Students were asked to have their bingo card signed by somebody they did not know. Cultural bingo allows students to recognize the diversity that exists within every group. The icebreaker was a great success and we were able to discuss many of the concerns that the participants were facing in their schools and communities. The icebreaker also helped student recognize that all participating organizations can assist each other in reducing tobacco use among teens. The Utah Bar Association asked YCG members to participate in the Dialogue on Freedom. Participants were given a hypothetical scenario and asked to respond. Chief Justice Christine Durham and • attorney Ron Yengich facilitated the discussion. The dialogue was taped by KUED and is now being used to engage Utah secondary students in thought-provoking dialogue about our democratic system of government and civic traditions. YCG members learned about individual rights, the rule of law and the importance of engaging all community members in the political process. YouthCity Government students were asked by the National League of Cities to assist in their MetLife Foundation Youth-City Connection grant selection process. Members reviewed applications from 9 cities. After reviewing and scoring each city, members participated in a phone conference with National League of Cities staff to select the top three cities. The selected cities will receive technical assistance to develop strategies that encourage youth participation and involvement in their communities. During the National League of Cities Conference, YCG students participated in two workshops. Thomas Cabral represented YCG on a panel titled "Erasing Color Lines: A Youth Perspective on Race • Relations." Youth from across the country discussed race relations from their perspectives and offered insight and practical suggestions to local officials on how to improve race relations in their schools and 4 • communities. YCG members were also able to join youth from across the United States, between the ages of 15-18, in a forum. Participants discussed a variety of issues regarding youth involvement in municipal government. YCG members ended the night by hosting a delegate social and dance at the Rice Eccles Stadium. Subsequently, we received requests from other cities inquiring about the success of our youth programs. COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT YCG members were approached by the Westview, a west side community newspaper, to interview candidates running for local and national office. Members interviewed ii candidates and learned about their various platforms. The project was fun and everyone learned about the importance of political involvement. In commemoration of the September it, zoo' attack on the World Trade Center, the National Conference for Community and Justice held a unity walk and concert. YCG members joined youth and adults to pay respect and celebrate our diverse community. IIYCG members attended and Amnesty sponsored the Am p y International Film Festival held at Rowland Hall, St. Mark's school. Members invited Mayor Rocky Anderson as the opening guest speaker. In collaboration with AmeriCorps and the Medically Underserved of Utah and the Association for Utah Community Health, YCG members hosted a free health fair, blood drive and day of service in celebration of the Martin Luther King,Jr. holiday. Participants delivered food boxes and health kits to low-income senior citizens. The experience was humbling and rewarding. Many of our youth were unaware of the struggles that elderly and medically underserved individuals face within our community. Prior to the project, YCG members learned about Dr. King's passion for service and civil rights. FUN EVENTS We consistently hear complaints from our peers about the lack of IIIsafe environments for fun activities. YouthCity Government answered this concern by successfully hosting a Skate Against Hate and Violence concert and skate park competition at Jordan Park. The concert and 5 competition were a great success and attracted over zoo youths from across Salt Lake City. Two area high school bands performed. The event provided a venue for them to showcase their talent and allowed youth from different schools to get to know each other better. We were able to secure local sponsorship from Milo Sports, Marine Products, Kinkos and the Salt Lake City Police Department. CONCLUSION This brief offers the Mayor, City Council and community members the opportunity to learn more about Youth City Government and our involvement in the community. YCG members are very proud of our accomplishments this year. We appreciate the continued support that we have received from the Mayor, City Council Members, Director of Youth Programs, YCG Advisory Board Members, YCG Champions in the schools, and our families and friends. As young leaders, we are committed to creating more opportunities for youth to participate in the political process through collaboration and • community outreach. 6 III 4 June 2003 Salt Lake City Corporation Office of the City Council 451 South State Street Salt Lake City,UT 84111 Honorable Members of the City Council: Just a note to let you know how much my wife Rosa and I appreciate and how much our daughter Candace has benefited from the YouthCity Program in Salt Lake City. Youth City Government,headed by Ms. Angela Romero, has been an important and integral part of Candace's life for the last four years. Under the leadership of Ms. Romero and with the cohesion and creativity of its junior members she has developed many rewarding long-term skills. These include but are not limited to: confidence, fulfillment, self-worth, public speaking, delegation,to name but a few. This junior model of city government has served as an inspiration for her that she will be able to take the rest of her life,as well as set a shining example to the youth of this community as to what can be accomplished when actions speak louder than words. The IIIprogram has enabled her to build a solid resume for future career endeavors as well as apply at the nation's top colleges-she was accepted at Smith College in Northampton, Massachusetts, and will begin her freshman year this fall. Thank you aiding the fulfillment of the goals and dreams of our youth and keeping this program alive,even during the hard times. A Very Heartfelt Thank You, Brad and Rosa Gibson c II Weeks, Russell Wrom: Nancy Tessman[ntessman@mail.slcpl.Iib.ut.us] ent: Wednesday, June 04, 2003 4:59 PM To: Russell.Weeks@ci.slc.ut.us Subject: Good new for Library Budget June 4, 2003 To: City Council Members From:Nancy Tessman, Library Director Re: Projected Budget Revenues for 2003-2004 We have received the good news that the Library Budget should receive additional revenues of approximately $200,000 next year, thereby reducing the shortfall to approximately $400,000 for 2003-2004. Although we have not discussed this change with the Board officially, we would like to ask the Council to ensure that the budget reflects this additional anticipated revenue. At this moment, we would recommend that $112,000 of this restored funding be added to the operating contingency. If the full revenue estimate materials by April of 2004, we would allocate these funds to restore some of the cutbacks planned for collections. If not, we have a bit more in contingency to absorb any additional revenue disappointments. We would like to keep the two branches - Sprague and Day-Riverside - open on Sundays. These cutbacks seems to have created the greatest concern from patrons. We would also like to use approximately $25,000 for limited one-time performance recognition awards for staff. Since merit increases were eliminated and we think it wise to avoid increases that could have long-term impact this year, this would enable us to acknowledge the remarkable performance of many of our staff throughout this very demanding and successful year. Therefore, the changes would restore approximately $100,000 to the Personnel Budget and the other $112,000 to the operating contingency. We will look forward to additional conversation on Thursday. Y i 6/6/2003 1:07 PM POTENTIAL REVENUE ISSUES Total Total MRB Anticipated Revenue $ 164,485,893 • A Use of fund balance to meet on-going expenditures $2,968,642 $ 968,642 B Conservative Revenue Projections $ 1,475,000 $ 219,000 C Anticipated delinquent fine and forfeiture collections $ 500,000 D One-time cuts in Police Department to meet on-going expenditures $ 326,000 E One-time cuts in Prosecutor's Office to meet on-going expenditures $ 42,350 F Fund Neighborhood Matching Grant P.ugtam with on-going revenue $ 250,000 G Telecom fee $ 326,675 $ 326,675 Total Council Anticipated Revenue $ 162,971,576 OPTIONAL BUDGET REDUCTIONS Total Total MRB Expenditures $ 164,485,893 Proposed Additional FTE IMS 1 Eliminate proposed IMS network technician FTE $ 75,936 $ 75,936 2 Eliminate proposed IMS web programmer $ 75,936 $ 75,936 Proposed Additional FTE Attorney's Office 3 Eliminate proposed paralegal position in Prosecutor's Office $ 52,500 4 Eliminate proposed paralegal position in City Attorney's Office $ 52,500 Proposed Existing FTE Reduction in Management Services 5 Consolidate CIP Administration with Finance/Engineering(1 FTE Layoff)($32,000 to Housing and Neighborhood $ 31,468 $ 31,468 Development Division) 6 Transfer Emergency Management fimction in Dept.of Management Service to Police and Fire(I FTE Layoff)Total budget $ 45,000 $105,000;enterprise funds pay for$60,000 7 Consolidate EEO function with existing HR positions(1 FTE Layoff) $ 78,115 8 Transfer Organizational Development function in HR to Policy Analysts(1 FTE Layoff) $ 78,768 or 8a Consolidate EEO and Organizational Development function in HR(1 FTE) $ 78,115 $ 78,115 Proposed Existing FTE Reduction in Police 9 Investigate collaborative opportunities to reduce Crime Lab staffing(1 FTE Layoff)or include this item as a legislative intent. $ 35,500 10 Eliminate duplication in Community Mobilization Program in Police Deportment(1 FTE layoff is$52,000,2 FTE layoffs is $ 208,000 $104,000) Proposed Existing FTE Reduction in CED 11 Consolidate inspection services in City(1 FTE Layoff) $ 87,000 $ 87,000 12 Transfer Traffic Calming position to CIP $ 49,815 Proposed Existing FTE Reduction in Public Services 13 Transfer events coordination function to existing Public Service employees(1 FTE Layoff) $ 68,928 Proposed Other Reductions • 14 Reduce Bus Pass Expenditure to reflect actual anticipated amount $ 30,000 $ 30,000 15 Eliminate career ladder program in Prosecutor's Office $ 18,482 $ 18,482 Potential Policy Shifts Early Retirement Program Early Retirement a. conditions of this program will include limitations on rehiring or contracting with retirees b. 90 Day participation period 16 c. Management discretion in timing of employee departure $ 500,000 d. $ per month for toward health insurance,or option of$_lump sum deposited to 401 or 457,or cash payment of $ (subject to taxation) (Total yearly savings is anticipated to be$1,140,000,timing of departure will affect savings amount.Investment of one-time funds is required.) Transfer retirement payout liability(with one-time funds)to a separate retirement liability account and pay out anticipated 17 retirement expenses from that account;eliminate on-going expenditure $ 650,000 $ 650,000 Personal Leave Program Changes 18 Eliminate personal leave payout at reduced rate $ 210,200 19 Restructure accumulated sick leave/personal leave benefit plans and"freeze"the cash value of accumulated sick leave to eliminate future additional expenses.Refer this item to the Compensation committee for further review. Pay Increase 20 No Pay Increase-General Fund Impact(Union=$1,920,177,Non-Union=$904,994) $ - 21 1%Pay Increase-General Fund Impact(Union=$1,417,4588,Non-Union=$653,147) $ - 22 2%Pay Increase-General Fund Impact(Union=$914,740,Non-Union=$401,300) $ 1,316,040 23 2%Pay Increase rather than proposed pay increase(Non-Union=$235,300) $ - 24 Fund grant writer positions on the condition that X%of total dollar amount of grant applications are non youth oriented grants. $ - (This item is listed as a proposed Legislative Intent statement.) 25 Transfer Data&Information Resource Officer to Police(1/4 to Housing and Neighborhood Development) $ - Constant staffing in Fire Department 26 Maintain 4 handed crews except covering"unplanned"sick,fimeral leave,dependent leave $ 260,000 27 Maintain 4 handed crews except covering vacation,sick,funeral leave,dependent leave $ 390,000 28 Maintain 4 handed crews except covering vacation,sick,funeral leave,dependent leave,department business,training $ 525,000 Total Council Anticipated Expenditures $ 163,438,956 Other Council Member Initiatives/Concerns Total 29 Restore 50/50 Program $ 168,564 30 Allocate staffing from 50/50 Program to the Curb&Sidewalk programs currently funded through CDBG&CIP $ 168,564 31 Restore Fire Prevention Educator _ $ 45,435 32 Allocate one-time money for design review guidelines $ 33 Allocate one-time money to Housing Trust Fund $ 6/52003 4:04 PM POTENTIAL REVENUE ISSUES Total Total MRB Anticipated Revenue $ 164,485,893 A Use of fund balance to meet on-going expenditures $2,968,642 B Conservative Revenue Projections $ 1,475,000 C Anticipated delinquent fine and forfeiture collections $ 500,000 D One-time cuts in Police Department to meet on-going expenditures $ 326,000 E One-time cuts in Prosecutor's Office to meet on-going expenditures $ 42,350 F Fund Neighborhood Matching Grant Program with on-going revenue $ 250,000 G Telecom fee $ 326,675 Total Council Anticipated Revenue $ 164,485,893 OPTIONAL BUDGET REDUCTIONS Total Total MRB Expenditures $ 164,485,893 Proposed Additional FTE IMS 1 Eliminate proposed IMS nvzwurk technician FTE $ 75,936 2 Fliminate proposed IMS web programmer $ 75,936 Proposed Additional FTE Attorney's Office 3 Eliminate proposed paralegal position in Prosecutor's Office $ 52,500 4 Eliminate proposed paralegal position in City Attorey's Office $ 52,500 Proposed Existing FTE Reduction in Management Services 5 Consolidate CIP Administration with Finance/Engineering(1 FTE Layoff)($32,000 to Housing and Neighborhood $ 31,468 Development Division) 6 Transfer Emergency Management function in Dept.of Management Service to Police and Fire(1 FTE Layoff)Total budget $ 45,000 $105,000;enterprise funds pay for$60,000 7 Consolidate EEO function with existing HR positions(1 FTE Layoff) $ 78,115 8 Transfer Organizational Development function in RR to Policy Analysts(1 FTE Layoff) $ 78,768 or 8a Consolidate EEO and Organizational Development function in HR(1 FTE) $ 78,115 Proposed Existing FTE Reduction in Police 9 Investigate collaborative opportunities to reduce Crime Lab staffing(1 FTE Layoff)or include this item as a legislative intent. $ 35,500 10 Eliminate duplication in Comity Mobilization Program in Police Department(1 FTE layoff is$52,000,2 FTE layoffs is $ 208,000 $104,000) Proposed Existing FTE Reduction in CED 11 Consolidate inspection services in City(1 FTE Layoff) $ 87,000 12 Transfer Traffic Calming position to CIF $ 49,815 Proposed Existing FTE Reduction in Public Services 13 Transfer events coordination function to existing Public Service employees(I FTE Layoff) $ 68,928 Proposed Other Reductions 14 Reduce Bus Pass Expenditure to reflect actual anticipated amount $ 30,000 15 Eliminate career ladder program in Prosecutor's Office $ 18,482 Potential Policy Shifts Early Retirement Program • Early Retirement • a conditions of this program will include limitations on rehiring or with retirees b.90 Day participation period 16 c. Management discretion in timing of employee departure $ 500,000 • d. $ per month for_toward health insurance,or option of$lopsum deposited to 401 or 457,or cash payment of $ (subject to taxation) (Total yearly savings is anticipated to be$1,140,000,timing of departure will affect savings amount Investment of one-time funds is required.) 17 Transfer retirement payout liability(with one-time funds)to a separate retirement liability account and pay out anticipated $ 650,000 retirement expenses from that account;eliminate on-going expenditure Personal Leave Program Changes 18 Filmiest,.personal leave payout at reduced rate $ 210,200 19 Restructure accumulated sick leave/personal leave benefit plans and"freeze"the cash value of accumulated ulated sick leave to eliminate future additional expenses.Refer this item to the Compensation committee for further review. Pay Increase 20 No Pay Increase-General Fund Impact(Union=$1,920,177,Non-Union=S904,994) $ - 21 1%Pay Increase-General Fund Impact(Union=$1,417,4588,Non-Union=$653,147) $ - 22 2%Pay Increase-General Fund Impact(Union=$914,740,Non-Union=$401,300) $ 1,316,040 23 2%Pay Increase rather than proposed pay increase(Non-Union=$235,300) $ 24 Fund grant writer positions on the condition that X%of total dollar amount of grant applications are non youth oriented grants. $ (This item is listed as a proposed Legislative Intent statement.) 25 Transfer Data&Information Resource Officer to Police(1/4 to Housing and Neighborhood Development) $ - Constant staffing in Fire Department 26 Maintain 4 handed crews except covering"unplanned"sick,funeral leave,dependent leave $ 260,000 27 Maintain 4 handed crews except covering vacation,sick,fimeral leave,dependent leave $ 390,000 28 Maintain 4 handed crews except covering vacation,sick,funeral leave,dependent leave,department business,training $ 525,000 Total Council Anticipated Expenditures $ 164,485,893 Other Council Member Initiatives/Concerns Total 29 Restore 50/50 Program $ 168,564 30 Allocate staffing from 50/50 Program to the Curb&Sidewalk programs currently funded through CDBG&CIP $ 168,564 31 Restore Fire Prevention Educator $ 45,435 32 Allocate one-time money for design review guidelines. - 33 Allocate one-time money to Housing Trust Fund $ - • fa Itr. N O f71 O cr. O (71 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O River Jordan \ \ \ $5.50 Nibley F $10.00 orest Dale $10.00 West Ridge p$10.00 Glendale Rose $11.0I ® • • bl , se park $11. 0 o v C m Dais park rt N 3 0 Valley View I I -: �u o r'o *2 m a $11.00 Murray 1 I I S Ca m Mead O $11:50 s n ,. O N 0 o s n -< o fD 3 CD Mo wbrOpk $12.00 0 c 0 y e $1 .00 o n o n N -- C Mick a c _,, tv l Riley Mt Dell ey $12.00 d - CCD -n r n. Lake -- v p, m n+ $1 .50 ° m °nnewlle $1�.50 N m ngpointe , K -0 v $1 .50 rroo Fn ,c Eag/ewood I ,•* - Riverbend csa $12.50 = $13.00 old mill $14.50 Bridge N I Thai:o:::MgOupn�t nt* �7�.1.1111$15.0 0 11111 $22.50 • • +Pr N O (!1 O (n O In O O O O O b a) O O O O O O O O O O Jordan River Par 3 \ \ a 56.05 Nib/ej, MIIr_ West $10.00 a) tone B edge e D $10.00 CD n Davis I Q $10.00 T Q. Park 4 $11.00 -' Valley View I I g ® ®� CO or 4$11.00 Q m °; - to = F est Dale .. r r $11.00 m m m CO) C v . m o c> g. xi m Murray 4511.50 0 K = °c z e Glendale v i c' aCD o 0 m 2 Ro $12.00 x v' c o 0 0 a se Par �� .�? mw Meado k $12.00 - - C) • k brook �� a o o °c m m y Mountain $12.00 =2 'S C m N 3 r. un n View �11 $12.Oo � c m w C m x Mick Rile �� d 0 Q.n `° Ea y $12.00 cD m D 0 glewood a @ e y 4$12.50 Et as N m Riverbend .;a $13.00 0 -. wingpointe g. M Bo $13.50 d nL. neville �� 0 0Mtn Nil Canyon $13.50 w Can C Mt $13.50to n Dell fake -- Q $13.50 iv ut Otd Mil __ 614.00 A South o h Mountain Thanksgivi n $22.50 $40.00 ng Point. ...111.111.1 • • -En- I-• I--` NJ N W W A U1 O Ul O Ul O ()IO O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O Jordan'liver Par 3 \ NibleY J •4.20 Porest Dale $7.00 G/e $7.70 m nda/e Rose $8.40 ro Park x. $6.40 ° m win ® ® ® n Bo $9.45 0 0 -•° w m % : ao nneville c <' 3 m Mtn Dell $9.45 s "I' m w E. e ufDi ci G) Mtn.pe canyon $9.45 ii 2, ° F o - v ' lfake H bye . a 0 mstR .6 v 0 - c 0 a rn Stone Br ,.$)$10.00 0 v m v ° o m VOi O g �d9e** w; F 8 F '» rn m cn Davis $10.00 „ o n °c m - = °. Park a 2 0 F. H 4 ° T r $11.01 Vall 1 ` " N , m m x ey View m 3 L7 m N 1 $11.0C d °—° --yam =m D m urraY o o o -0 e Mead°wbr �; 1 $11.50 s F. = m s< MO ntain �ok O o .* u $12.4Q View moommini 3 Mic $12 00 0 0) k Rlley � '2 $1 �.00 •E n> a9/e wood I o River $1k.50 A bend OW mill Mill ionmEN Th a South Mountain �� 14.00 nksgivnig Point* .,�� $2 .50 40.00 s 1 e . . . . 4„ . N W A to Q1 V OD U OO OO OO OO OO O O O O O O O Ol O o O O west'wage \ \ '\ •. \ Q$20.00 I G/enda/e $22.00 Rose park $22.00 1 Davis Park i$22.00 Valley view ( CD VI0110 It F OD 0$22.00 (/)MurrayS I IF O o _ 1,13 v rtD 1$23.00 ` T A Mead owbr a y Z F r g ook $23.00 31 co m m x -n Mountain view- S ''' ' 3 cap, ew $23.00 1; v o 0. 0 N • /Mtn Delcanyon -° c G) o m g o c> , w 625.00 n 3' n c M a) Mtn.Dell c o c m 7 ^' Lake a c c a, r- m tD A- fD onneyille $25 00 0. 0o N 75 D a o m g D �ngpoihte c -, f"0 N $25.00 -, 'a9/etlood : n CD Q$25.00 Riveryend • $26.00 Old Mill $26.00 Stone Bndge 0 $30.00 South Mountain Thanksgiving P ��- $45.00 �75.00 oint* 0 • N W A W Q1 V 00 r O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O West Ric/gof O$20.01 < Da,,. G is Park I v Valle \ O$22. 0 r Y ViewIs. 0$22 00 x Murray I m ca Meadow , 4$2 .00 - - MD `Z ao °rook M "Wain — $2 .00 T y m G7 View N o -13 m m N N $2..00 G/ m O_i r r -, CD engale N $ 4.00 v > m m X x 0 Rose Park I _ a O 0 c> 0 Q N • E $ 4.00 v m 0 to ,n �. agieW 2 a , o m G fn ood Q 25.00 • w o n o N 41 o ,� 7 r« Riverbe • 0 o n c O r nq 3 0 C) c m s - Dl 26.00 a C 0 m N m N N d Mill Mr., d m a D 2s.00 • o N " O w�ngpolnte cOi -13 co El $27.00 <�G onneyille f m Mtn Dell $27.00 c so Mt anYon $27.00 c n Dell lake ME $27.0 Stone Bridge — o h Sout $30. 0 O+l Mountain I Thanks giving Pont* $ 5.00 I $75.00 0 • SA.t.`I LAlC£.CI I V Memo Public Services Department To: Michael Sears Copy: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rocky Fluhart, Steve Fawcett, Kevin Bergstrom, Steve Wetherell ()\lfFrom: Rick Graham Date: June 5, 2003 Re; Follow-up items requested by City Council from Golf Fund Budget Briefings on May 29, 2003 (Items requested by email on Friday May 30, 2003.) Request: Provide Council Member Buhler information about the sound system at Bonneville- • specifically: confirm whether a new system was purchased. Response: It has been confirmed, as stated in the briefing, that the sound system wasn't replaced recently. Course management has been contacted and asked to be considerate in the use of the system and to be particularly sensitive on Saturday and Sunday mornings. Request: Provide Council Member Lambert a chart for each of the courses, include: the current rates, the proposed rates changes and a comparison to other cities and County courses. Response: See accompanying schedule and charts that were reviewed and recommended by the Golf Advisory Board. (Attachments - Schedule of Proposed Changes to Golf Rates Effective January 1, 2004 and five colored charts entitled Green Fees in Salt Lake Area) Request: Provide Council Member Saxton with information for the number of employees at each golf course — provide seasonal numbers and year-round employee levels. Response: The question has arisen whether, in order to lower personnel expenses, opportunity exists to operate the Golf Fund with a larger ratio of seasonal employees to salaried employees. The Golf Division implemented reductions in staff at the supervisory level in Fiscal Year 2002. Further reductions in salaried staffing in the lower tiers would prove detrimental to service levels and the quality and condition of the golf courses. • Golf management continually analyzes its operations to identify opportunities to improve operating P 9 efficiency and reduce costs. In Fiscal Year 01-02, five positions within the Golf Fund -- two golf Page 1 of 5 professional positions, one golf course superintendent, one equipment mechanic and the assistant Golf Manager position --were eliminated in order to hold down the level of fee increases necessary to generate required revenues. At that time it was indicated to the Council that additional opportunities for labor-related expense reductions were considered few in number without significantly reducing the current level of quality and service expected by Golf's customers. Most of the positions eliminated in FY02 were in the upper tier of the Golf Fund staffing document in order to effect the largest possible reduction in expenses. These economy-of-scale reductions in mostly supervisory positions were, in part, made feasible by the existence of highly-qualified, experienced staff in the lower tier of positions. Without this solid underpinning of experienced and very committed employees, these reductions would not have been contemplated, proposed or carried out. Certainly cost containment is extremely important in these economic times. Almost universally across the country, golf courses are overbuilt and rounds played are flat. However, in highly- competitive business situations, perceived value becomes even more important to customer retention than it may prove in less competitive times. In virtually all customer surveys conducted in the golf business, including our own, the condition of the golf course is consistently identified as the single most important reason avid golfers choose to play one golf course over another, usually far outdistancing factors such as price, speed of play, availability of tee times, and proximity to home. In golf operations, the management position responsible for providing the playing condition of the golf course, as well as all maintenance operations, is that of the Golf Course Superintendent. An indication of the value which golf course owners and operators place on the fundamental importance of maintenance operations is demonstrated in the compensation levels awarded to golf course superintendents. • According to a recently-released joint study conducted by the National Golf Course Owners Association (NGCOA) and the National Club Association, golf course superintendents are among the top three highest paid professionals in golf course operations. Staffing for maintenance operations on an upper-end golf course typically consists of the following salaried positions, with actual staffing levels at each position dependent upon need: Golf Course Superintendent Asst. Golf Course Superintendent Equipment Manager Horticulturist Crew Foreman Irrigation Specialist Asst Equipment Manager Chemical Technician Office Assistant Equipment Operator Gardner Triplex Operator Groundskeeper • Page 2 of 5 This list indicates the variety of specialized skills which are required to produce a well-maintained golf course. Salt Lake's staffing combines many of these duties into far fewer positions to ensure efficiency. • Golf course pro shop operations are the purview of Head Golf Professionals. The pro shop is a valuable profit center for every golf operation. Among their duties, Golf Professionals manage the volume of customer traffic through the clubhouse, schedule and manage all golf course play including tournaments and leagues, control all golf retail merchandise ordering, stocking and sales, teach golf lessons, and manage the driving range and golf car operations. PGA Golf Professionals are typically college graduates who must then serve a minimum of 5 years as full-time apprentice golf professionals before certifying for Class A status. The PGA requires every apprentice to complete substantial, formal educational course work in preparation for managing pro shop operations prior to conferring its Class A certification status. Typical staffing of Golf Pro Shop operations consist of the following positions, with staffing at each level dependent on need: Head Golf Professional Asst. Golf Professional 2nd Asst Golf Professional Golf Starter Driving range/ Golf car staff Golf course marshal • In staffing its golf courses, the Golf Division attempts to use the minimum number of salaried personnel possessing the requisite skills to provide high-quality golf operations, and then employs a large body of seasonal personnel to cover all other positions. The accompanying documents (Staffing, FY2003 authorized positions in FTEs and Staffing - FTEs and Number of individual employees) report the current staffing level of the Golf Fund. In regard to the use of seasonal golf employees on the City's courses, it should be noted that analysis of the data for Calendar Year 2002 indicates that the total percentage of hours worked by seasonal employees in the Division was 44 percent of all hours worked. The number of seasonal employees employed was 139; the number of salaried individuals employed was 55. If one compares the total number of salaried individuals employed with the total number of seasonal individuals employed it may serve as an indication of the relatively low number of salaried personnel assigned to any particular golf course. The Fund has taken the conscious course of implementing economy-of-scale reductions wherein many management positions share responsibilities among multiple golf courses. Six golf course superintendents manage maintenance operations on the City's nine golf courses; five golf professionals manage all golf course pro shop operations; and only three mechanics are employed to service all the specialized equipment employed in the maintenance of the courses. Golf management has continued to monitor the results of the staff reductions which were implemented in FY02. It should be recognized that there are significant hidden costs in operating with seasonal labor. The high turnover rate, the necessity for continuous retraining due to turnover, • and the lesser commitment to sustainable operations, are all contributing factors. Page 3 of 5 At its current staffing level, it is felt that the City continues to offer high-quality golf courses for its customers, but further reductions in salaried staff will prohibit Golf's ability to continue to offer the type of operation which is expected by those who play the City's courses. Golf courses are multi-million dollar assets, generating revenues in the hundreds of thousands of 1111 dollars, which require professional, committed staff with abundant technical expertise to operate them profitably and in a manner the golfing public expects. Having stated this, if the Council wishes, Public Services will further explore by the end of the calendar year the increased use of seasonals in its operations. (Attachments -Staffing, FY2003 authorized positions in FTEs and Staffing -FTEs and Number of individual employees.) Request: Include typical annual schedules for each course, too(?) i.e. Mountain Dell is closed more than Wingpointe during the winter, etc. — impact to employee staffing levels. Response: In a normal weather pattern the following courses are typically open to substantial amounts of golf play in the months indicated. With the exception of Mountain Dell, the other courses are typically open on a sporadic basis during many of the months shown here as closed. Bonneville March through October Forest Dale March through November Glendale March through November Jordan River April through October Mountain Dell April through October Nibley Park March through November Rose Park March through November II Wingpointe Mid-February through mid-December It should be noted that because it is a recreational, seasonal endeavor, employees working in actual golf course operations in the Golf Division are exempt from the FLSA requirements regarding compensatory time. By Department policy, salaried employees in the Golf Division can accumulate up to 600 hours of compensatory time. This circumstance is heavily utilized by the Golf Division in managing the number of hours worked by salaried employees. For instance, at Mountain Dell — which is closed for the longest duration —salaried staff frequently work 7 days a week, 12 hours a day, for weeks on end. These employees work approximately the same number of hours per year that a more typical city employee works, they just complete their annual labor in a much shorter period of time. Request: Reminder of Rick Graham's conversation with Council Members Christensen and Jergensen re: secondary water use and analysis of the cost of implementing such a system in parks/courses versus the savings such a program would generate. Response: The Golf Division believes the use of secondary water sources as a means of irrigating its golf courses is in its future. The division has been working with the Public Utilities Department in studying the opportunity to use effluent water from the Rose Park Treatment Plant for irrigating the Rose Park Golf Course. This project appears to be at last three years down the road, the timeframe that Public Utilities indicates is required to put the infrastructure in place. The projected cost for an irrigation system upgrade to accommodate the use of effluent water is in the range of$1.5 to $2.0 million dollars. Upgrades to the other courses which remain to be converted to secondary water Illwould be dependent upon the secondary water source located. Page 4 of 5 From a practical business point of view, the Golf Fund will not have the funds in place to build the irrigation system infrastructure at Rose Park until its current revenue bonds are retired, which is 2008. The Division will consider other funding options, to accelerate the program, such as bonding • under the assumption that a new watering system will create culinary water and labor savings which may offset the annual cost of the bond. That analysis will be conducted this coming year. (The bond could also be used to fund other golf course and park projects in reasonable proximity to the Rose Park treatment plant.) The Golf Division currently uses alternative water sources at two of its golf courses. At Glendale Golf Course a well has been drilled which produces irrigation water that requires pre-use treatment with sulfur and that accounts for approximately 30% of the course's annual water needs. The Division believes that over time, the well will generate additional augmentation of the course's secondary water needs. At Mountain Dell Golf Course, untreated water from Lambs Creek is purchased from the Public Utilities Department and is used to irrigate 100% of the golf course. • II Page 5 of 5 Salt Lake City Corporation DRAFT GOLF FUND Schedule of Proposed Changes to Golf Rates Effective January 1,2004 Current Proposed Calculation of Discount Enacted to be effective % Full Price Full Price Full Price $Dollar %Discount Jan-02 Jan-04 Chg Green Fee 1/2 Car Fee Total Savings Fr Full Price GREEN FEES REGULAR 9 HOLE Bonneville All week $ 12.50 $ 13.50 8.0% Forest Dale All week $ 10.00 $ 11.00 10.0% Glendale&Rose Park All week $ 11.00 $ 12.00 9.1% Jordan River Par-3 All week $ 6.00 $ 6.00 0.0% Mountain Dell, Lake All week $ 12.50 $ 13.50 8.0% Nibley Park All week $ 10.00 $ 10.00 0.0% Wingpointe All week $ 12.50 $ 13.50 8.0% Mountain Dell Canyon-Evening only All week $ 12.50 $ 13.50 8.0% 18 HOLE Bonneville All week $ 25.00 $ 27.00 8.0% Glendale&Rose Park All week $ 22.00 $ 24.00 9.1% Mountain Dell,Canyon and Lake All week $ 25.00 $ 27.00 8.0% Mountain Dell Canyon-TWILIGHT All week $ 20.00 $ 22.00 10.0% Wingpointe All week $ 25.00 $ 27.00 8.0% SENIOR(offered Mon thru Friday,excluding legal holidays) 9 HOLE Bonneville $ 9.50 $ 10.50 10.5% Forest Dale $ 8.00 $ 9.00 12.5% Glendale&Rose Park $ 9.00 $ 10.00 11.1% Jordan River Par-3 $ 4.50 $ 5.00 11.1% Mountain Dell, Lake $ 9.50 $ 10.50 10.5% Nibley Park $ 8.00 $ 8.00 0.0% Wingpointe $ 9.50 $ 10.50 10.5% Mountain Dell Canyon-EVENING $ 9.50 $ 10.50 10.5% 18 HOLE Bonneville $ 19.00 $ 21.00 10.5% Glendale&Rose Park $ 18.00 $ 20.00 11.1% Mountain Dell,Canyon and Lake $ 19.00 $ 21.00 10.5% Mountain Dell Canyon-TWILIGHT $ 15.00 $ 17.00 13.3% Wingpointe $ 19.00 $ 21.00 10.5% 6/5/2001) Fee Revenue Projections anSparisons-draft 6-04-03.xls • 1 • • 0 Salt Lake City Corporation DRAFT GOLF FUND Schedule of Proposed Changes to Golf Rates Effective January 1,2004 Current Proposed Calculation of Discount Enacted to be effective % Full Price Full Price Full Price $Dollar %Discount Jan-02 Jan-04 Chg Green Fee 1/2 Car Fee Total Savings Fr Full Price GREEN FEES(CONTINUED) JUNIOR(offered Mon thru Friday,excluding legal holidays) 9 HOLE Jordan River Par-3 All week $ 4.50 $ 5.00 11.1 Forest Dale&Nibley Park $ 6.50 $ 7.00 7.7% Glendale&Rose Park $ 6.50 $ 7.00 7.7% Mountain Dell, Lake $ 6.50 $ 7.00 7.7% Mountain Dell Canyon-EVENING $ 6.50 $ 7.00 7.7% Wingpointe&Bonneville $ 6.50 $ 7.00 7.7% 18 HOLE Glendale&Rose Park $ 13.00 $ 14.00 7.7% Mountain Dell,Canyon and Lake $ 13.00 $ 14.00 7.7% Mountain Dell Canyon-TWILIGHT $ 13.00 $ 14.00 7.7% Wingpointe&Bonneville $ 13.00 $ 14.00 7.7% GREEN FEES-WEEKEND TWILIGHT-NEW IN 2004 RIDING June 1 through August 31,after 3:00 PM,Saturday and Sunday, includes golf car rental 9 HOLE Nibley $ - $ 10.00 $ 10.00 $ 6.50 $ 16.50 $ 6.50 39.4% Glendale $ - $ 12.00 $ 12.00 $ 6.50 $ 18.50 $ 6.50 35.1% Rose Park $ - $ 12.00 $ 12.00 $ 6.50 $ 18.50 $ 6.50 35.1% Wingpointe $ - $ 13.00 $ 13.50 $ 6.50 $ 20.00 $ 7.00 35.0% 18 HOLE Glendale $ - $ 24.00 $ 24.00 $ 13.00 $ 37.00 $ 13.00 35.1% Rose Park $ - $ 24.00 $ 24.00 $ 13.00 $ 37.00 $ 13.00 35.1 Wingpointe $ - $ 26.00 $ 27.00 $ 13.00 $ 40.00 $ 14.00 35.0% WALKING June 1 through August 31,after 3:00 PM,Saturday and Sunday,walking 9 HOLE Nibley $ - $ 6.00 $ 10.00 $ 10.00 $ 4.00 40.0% Glendale $ - $ 10.00 $ 12.00 $ 12.00 $ 2.00 16.7% Rose Park $ - $ 10.00 $ 12.00 $ 12.00 $ 2.00 16.7% Wingpointe $ - $ 11.00 $ 13.50 $ 13.50 $ 2.50 18.5% 18 HOLE Glendale $ - $ 20.00 $ 24.00 $ 24.00 $ 4.00 16.7% Rose Park $ - $ 20.00 $ 24.00 $ 24.00 $ 4.00 16.7% Wingpointe $ - $ 22.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 5.00 18.5% 6/5/2003 Fee Revenue Projections and Comparisons-draft 6-04-03.xls 2 , Salt Lake City Corporation DRAFT GOLF FUND Schedule of Proposed Changes to Golf Rates Effective January 1,2004 Current Proposed Calculation of Discount Enacted to be effective % Full Price Full Price Full Price $Dollar %Discount Jan-02 Jan-04 Chg Green Fee 1/2 Car Fee Total Savings Fr Full Price GREEN FEES-OFF-PEAK DISCOUNTS-NEW IN 2004 These discounts will be offered only for unreserved tee times,on a space-available basis,on the day of play,at the point of purchase at the respective golf course. RIDING July 1 through August 31,from 11:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m. Includes golf car rental 9 HOLE Nibley Monday-Thursday $ - $ 12.00 $ 10.00 $ 6.50 $ 16.50 $ 4.50 27.3% Glendale Monday-Thursday $ - $ 14.00 $ 12.00 $ 6.50 $ 18.50 $ 4.50 24.3% Rose Park Monday-Tuesday $ - $ 14.00 $ 12.00 $ 6.50 $ 18.50 $ 4.50 24.3% Wingpointe Monday-Tuesday $ - $ 15.00 $ 13.50 $ 6.50 $ 20.00 $ 5.00 25.0% 18 HOLE Glendale Monday-Thursday $ - $ 28.00 $ 24.00 $ 13.00 $ 37.00 $ 9.00 24.3% Rose Park Monday-Tuesday $ - $ 28.00 $ 24.00 $ 13.00 $ 37.00 $ 9.00 24.3% Wingpointe Monday-Tuesday $ - $ 30.00 $ 27.00 $ 13.00 $ 40.00 $ 10.00 25.0% WALKING July 1 through August 31,from 11:00 a.m.-2:00 p.m.,on the indicated days. 9 HOLE Nibley Monday-Thursday $ - $ 6.00 $ 10.00 $ 10.00 $ 4.00 40.0% Glendale Monday-Thursday $ - $ 10.00 $ 12.00 $ 12.00 $ 2.00 16.7% Rose Park Monday-Tuesday $ - $ 10.00 $ 12.00 $ 12.00 $ 2.00 16.7% Wingpointe Monday-Tuesday $ - $ 11.00 $ 13.50 $ 13.50 $ 2.50 18.5% 18 HOLE Glendale Monday-Thursday $ - $ 20.00 $ 24.00 $ 24.00 $ 4.00 16.7% Rose Park Monday-Tuesday $ - $ 20.00 $ 24.00 $ 24.00 $ 4.00 16.7% Wingpointe Monday-Tuesday $ - $ 22.00 $ 27.00 $ 27.00 $ 5.00 18.5% GREEN FEES-WEEKEND TWILIGHT JUNIOR SPECIAL-NEW IN 2004 Juniors golf free of charge if accompanied by a minimum of one fee- free,with paying adult per foursome,after 6pm Saturday and Sunday,June 1 restrictions 100% thru Oct 31 at Glendale, Rose Park,Wingpointe,and Jordan River Par-3. GREEN FEES-MOUNTAIN DELL OFF SEASON FEE AT -NEW IN 2004 Effective October 1 through last day of February, includes golf car $ - $ 25.00 $ 27.00 $ 13.00 $ 40.00 37.5% rental, 18 holes only 6/5/200. Fee Revenue Projections an parisons-draft 6-04-03.xls ill 3 • • • Salt Lake City Corporation DRAFT GOLF FUND Schedule of Proposed Changes to Golf Rates Effective January 1,2004 Current Proposed Calculation of Discount Enacted to be effective % Full Price Full Price Full Price $Dollar %Discount Jan-02 Jan-04 Chg Green Fee 1/2 Car Fee Total Savings Fr Full Price GREEN FEES JORDAN RIVER ALL-DAY PASS(MULTIPLE HOLES) Offered Monday through Thursday,9:00 a.m.-4:00 p.m.,excluding legal holidays Regular $ 11.00 $ 12.00 9.1% Senior $ 9.00 $ 10.00 11.1% Junior $ 9.00 $ 10.00 11.1% GREEN FEES-JORDAN RIVER 10 ROUND PUNCH PASS-NEW IN 2004 Regular $ - $ 54.00 Senior $ - $ 45.00 Junior $ - $ 45.00 GREEN FEES-SCHOOL TEAM SPECIAL 9 HOLE All Courses Monday-Friday $ 6.00 $ 6.00 0.0% 18 HOLE All Courses Monday-Friday $ 12.00 $ 12.00 0.0% DRIVING RANGE FEES Large bucket of balls for the price of a small bucket of balls $ 3.00 $ 4.00 33.3% FREQUENT PLAYER DISCOUNT CARD Cardholder receives a 30%discount from the prevailing greens fee rate for which the cardholder qualifies on the day of play. Cardholders receive a 30%discount on range balls. Frequent Player Card discounts cannot be used in conjunction with other discounts,with the sole exception on Senior and Junior rate discounts as defined in the ordinance. Frequent Player Discount Cards are non-transferable Valid at all Courses, Mon-Fri-All Day,Sat-Sun-After 2 p.m. $ 50.00 $ 75.00 50.0% 6/5/2003 Fee Revenue Projections and Comparisons-draft 6-04-03.xls 4 Salt Lake City Corporation DRAFT GOLF FUND Schedule of Proposed Changes to Golf Rates Effective January 1,2004 Current Proposed Calculation of Discount Enacted to be effective % Full Price Full Price Full Price $Dollar %Discount Jan-02 Jan-04 Chg Green Fee 1/2 Car Fee Total Savings Fr Full Price OTHER FEES ADVANCED TEE TIME RESERVATIONS 18-Hole minimum 0-7 Days in Advance Fee per player $ - $ - 8 Days to One Year in Advance Fee per player $ 5.00 $ 5.00 0.0% CLUB RENTALS Regular Club Rental 9-Hole $ 6.00 $ 6.50 8.3% 9-Hole-Jordan River Par-3 $ 3.00 $ 3.00 0.0% 18-Hole $ 12.00 $ 13.00 8.3% Premium Club Rental 9-Hole $ 12.50 $ 13.50 8.0% 18-Hole $ 25.00 $ 27.00 8.0% DRIVING RANGE FEES Small bucket of balls $ 3.00 $ 4.00 33.3% Large bucket of balls $ 6.00 $ 7.00 16.7% DRIVING RANGE PUNCH PASS Valid for 10 Large Buckets of Balls $ 50.00 $ 50.00 0.0% GOLF CAR COVER RENTAL 9-Hole Car Cover Rental $ 5.00 $ 5.00 0.0% 18-Hole Car Cover Rental $ 10.00 $ 10.00 0.0% 6/5/2003• Fee Revenue Projections an •parisons-draft 6-04-03.x1s • 5 • ® • Salt Lake City Corporation DRAFT GOLF FUND Schedule of Proposed Changes to Golf Rates Effective January 1,2004 Current Proposed Calculation of Discount Enacted to be effective % Full Price Full Price Full Price $Dollar %Discount Jan-02 Jan-04 Chg Green Fee 1/2 Car Fee Total Savings Fr Full Price OTHER FEES(CONTINUED) GOLF CAR RENTAL Single Rider Car Rental 9-Hole $ 6.00 $ 6.50 8.3% Twilight-Mountain Dell Canyon $ 10.00 $ 11.00 10.0% 18-Hole $ 12.00 $ 13.00 8.3% Double Rider Car Rental 9 Hole $ 12.00 $ 13.00 8.3% Twilight-Mountain Dell Canyon $ 20.00 $ 22.00 10.0% 18 Hole $ 24.00 $ 26.00 8.3% PRIVATE CAR TRAIL FEE 9-Hole $ 4.00 $ 5.00 25.0% 18-Hole $ 8.00 $ 10.00 25.0% PULL CARTS 9-Hole $ 1.50 $ 2.00 33.3% 9-Hole-Jordan River Par-3 $ 1.00 $ 1.00 0.0% 18-Hole $ 3.00 $ 4.00 33.3% TOURNAMENT FEES(minimum) 9-Hole at Nibley Park $ 3.00 $ 3.00 0.0% 9-hole other than Nibley Park $ 5.00 $ 5.00 0.0% 18-hole $ 10.00 $ 10.00 0.0% SEASON GOLF PASSES Junior/Senior Season Golf Pass Rate $ 400.00 $ 400.00 0.0% Regular season passes will be discontinued on Dec 31,2003. No season passes will be issued after Dec 31,2003 for individuals who are neither junior nor senior golfers. SEASON GOLF PASS ROUNDS SURCHARGE Resident Surcharge 9-Hole $ 3.00 $ 3.00 0.0% 18-Hole $ 6.00 $ 6.00 0.0% Non-Resident Surcharge 9-Hole $ 4.00 $ 4.00 0.0% 18-Hole $ 8.00 $ 8.00 0.0% 6/5/2003 Fee Revenue Projections and Comparisons-draft 6-04-03.xls 6 Golf Division Staffing, FY2003 authorized positions in FTEs DETAIL OF POSITIONS BY GRADE AND FUNCTION Admin & Forest Jordan Grade Mech Bonn Dale Glendale River GC Mt Dell Nibley Rose Pk Wingpte Total FTEs FOR FULL-TIME POSITIONS Golf Manager 611 1.00 1.00 Golf Marketing Manager 606 1.00 1.00 Accountant III 312 0.90 0.90 Office Facilitator I 306 1.00 1.00 Office Tech II 219 2.00 2.00 Equipment Mechanic Supervisor 123 1.00 1.00 Equipment Mechanic II 119 2.00 2.00 Pro Shop: Golf Professional (note 1) 608-610 0.50 0.50 0.50 0.20 1.00 0.50 0.80 1.00 5.00 Assistant Golf Professional 307 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 7.00 Golf Starter 213 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 Maintenance: Superintendents, 27 &36 holes (note 1) 604 0.20 1.00 0.80 2.00 Superintendents, 18 holes 603 1.00 0.50 1.00 0.50 1.00 4.00 Assistant Superintendents 119 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 8.00 Golf Course Maintenance Worker 118 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 Golf Course Groundskeeper 114 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00 11.00 Total full-time 8.90 7.50 4.00 6.50 1.40 9.00 4.00 6.60 7.00 54.90 FTEs FOR PART-TIME POSITIONS PT/Pro Shop (Starter, Marshall, Range) 3.29 1.53 2.59 0.56 3.93 2.73 2.16 2.30 19.09 PT/Groundskeeper&Watermen 3.22 1.79 2.32 0.12 4.17 2.80 1.95 3.45 19.82 PT/Equipment Mechanic 0.69 0.69 Total part-time 0.69 6.51 3.32 4.91 0.68 8.10 5.53 4.11 5.75 39.60 FTEs FOR ALL POSITIONS 9.59 14.01 7.32 11.41 2.08 17.10 9.53 10.71 12.75 94.50 Notes: (1) Partial FTEs indicate sharing between sites • • printed 6/5/2003 10:43 AM file:Golf staffing detail.xls Staff•FTEs S S • SLC Corporation Public Services Department-Golf Fund Stafffing - FTEs and Number of individual employees Full-time equivalents (FTEs) Individuals Full Time Seasonal Total Seasonal Full-time Shared FTEs FTEs Full-time individuals Total indiv. Administration 5.00 5.00 5.00 - 5.00 Accountant 0.90 0.90 1.00 1.00 Mechanics 3.00 0.69 3.69 3.00 1.00 4.00 Bonneville Pro 2.00 0.50 3.29 5.79 2.50 12.00 14.50 Bonneville Maint 5.00 3.22 8.22 5.00 7.00 12.00 Forest Dale Pro 1.00 0.50 1.53 3.03 1.50 6.00 7.50 Forest Dale Maint 2.00 0.50 1.79 4.29 2.50 3.00 5.50 Glendale Pro 3.50 2.59 6.09 3.50 11.00 14.50 Glendale Maint 3.00 2.32 5.32 3.00 4.00 7.00 Jordan Park Pro - 0.20 0.56 0.76 0.20 6.00 6.20 Jordan Par 3 Maintenance 1.00 0.20 0.12 1.32 1.20 3.00 4.20 Mountain Dell Pro 3.00 3.93 6.93 3.00 25.00 28.00 Mountain Dell Maint 6.00 4.17 10.17 6.00 11.00 17.00 Nibley Pro 1.00 0.50 2.73 4.23 1.50 9.00 10.50 Nibley Maint 2.00 0.50 2.80 5.30 2.50 8.00 10.50 Rose Park Pro 3.00 0.80 2.16 5.96 3.80 6.00 9.80 Rose Park Maint 2.00 0.80 1.95 4.75 2.80 9.00 11.80 Wingpointe Pro 3.00 2.30 5.30 3.00 12.00 15.00 Wingpointe Maintenance 4.00 3.45 7.45 4.00 6.00 10.00 Total 49.50 5.40 39.60 94.50 55.00 139.00 194.00 printed 6/5/2003 file:Golf staffing detail.xls Staffing-individuals Nit ' ' , Current Year Proposed ' 11-month Projected FY02, Last Year 1, Current Year: Amended Budget Discrepancies Actual 03 1 Actual 'Adopted Budget! Budget FY03-04 ' Comments 1103 PROPERTY TAXES '$ 38,599,717'$ 38,599,717 $ 37,718,287 $ 42,654,780'$ 39,454,780'$ 39,554,560,$ 954,843'Separate tax for Governmental Immunity$1,300,000 1104 G.O.Property Tax _ 6,814,421 6,814,421! 6,639,663, 6,826,697 6,826,697, 6,962,835' 148,414', 1105 Real prop_prior(redemption) _ 1,489,478 1,787,373' 1,537,776 I 1,326,283! 1,326,283' 1.300,000' (487,373)1 1107 PERSONAL PROPERTY 6,743,186 I 6,743,186' 7,211,535 I. 6,218,591' 6,218,591 6,945,951 202,765' 1109 MOTOR VEHICLE 2,662,740, 3,550,319 4,601,224, 4,622,496 4,016,496 4,465.163• 914,844 Property taxes are expected to decrease by_$1 100,000E Total Property Taxes 56,909,541 I 57,495,016 57,706 485' 61,648,847, 57,842,847' 59,228,509' 1,733,493 112001 PILOT-HOUSING AUTHORITY� -I 107,500'. 105,000 _. ' 100,000! 100,000! 100,000' 0)_Will occur beforend of June (7,50 --._ e 112002 PILOT-WATER UTILITY 424,798 424,798 I 398,111; 457,479' 457,479 I 341,871 i_ (82,92,; 112003 PILOT-SEWER UTILITY 164,813 164,813' 114,091 i 124,359, 164,813 284,110' 119,297 112004 PILOT GARBAGE FUND 102,500 102 500 102,500' 26 900• (61,6�_88.5051 18,595 112005 STORM WATER-PILOT 118,593 118,593'� 91,215, 86,654; 86 654 131,735, 13,142 112006 GOLF-P.LL.O.7. 39,251 I 39,251 64,968 64,968 64,968� 35,420 (3,831), Total Payments In Lieu of Taxes ' 835,960 I 943,460' 875,885' 935,960 976,414' 920,036 (23,424)' 34,988,478 36,056,730 I 36,788,309' 35,656,809' 37 330,255 1,135,925'New tax on cable/satellite TV$137,600;Expected to decline$184,482 113001 State Reimbursement • 2,360,832 , -- - -- -_ -- 1130 SALE AND USE TAXES 22,240,969; , 2,360,832� 4,209,137 2,400,000 2,400,000; - ,One-t me revenue(IJTA)1140 _ g 2,791,343' 2,431,583: 2431,583' 2,435,961• (162,716) 1149 Other Municipal Enelrgy Sales Ta 2 275,020 I 2 428,354' ------------ _- --- --- --- Municipal 488.496' 331,436! 331,436' 338,230 (90,124p- Total Sales&Use Taxes ' 27,075,354; 40,376,341 43,545,706' 41,951,328' 40,819,828' 40,104,446 883,085 1150 Water Franchise Taxes ' 1,947,903, 2,476,792, 2,405.090' 2,150,000; 2,642,200 I 2,392,611' (84,181)'. 1151 Telephone Franchise Tax , 2,303,790! 3.188,489' 3,307,796' _ 3,235,459' 3,235,459, 3,293,497_ 105,008, 1152 Natural Gas Franchise Tax 1,114,420' 1,619,820' 1,479,678 1,718,016' 98,196: 1153 ElectricityFranchise Tax '' 8,040,278, 9,624,600, 9,683,992 9,506,966 9,506,966 � 1,816,092' 1,816 092� 9 679,399 54,799' - - ------ - - -- -1155 Telecommunication Leases 220,335! 331,795' 324,200' 188,007• 188,007! 834,030• 175,235;Linear fool fee$327,000 1157 Cell Phone Tax ' 1,198,505 i 1,746,000 1,688,076' 1,746,000' 1,746,000' 1,800,000', 54,000• 1158 Other Telephone ', 1,209,349 I 1,507,667, 1,403,054 1,332,234, 1,332,234, 1,507,261: 1406)_ 1159 Cable Franchise Tax 839,254 I 860,017', 702,462'. 820,017. 860,017! 860,000' (17). Total Franchise Tax ' 16,873,834 I 21,355A80, 20,994,348, 20,794,775' 21,326,975' 22,084,814 (193,366)'Projected to increase$596,000 3,075,250' ,835,9 1209 INNKEEPERS TAX 1,753,5221 2,075,250; 1,835,9144' 183591 1,830,886' 3,157,627' 3110,000• (20,886}_ 4'. 1810,000_ (20,886�'_ 1210 Airport parking/license tax _ 324,837 408,682' 433,267' 460,000 420000, 428,000 19,318 Total Business License Fees 4,976,002 5,451,939' 5,968,750; 5,453,541' 5,413,541' 5,398,000 (53,939)' 125001 High Rise Permits ' 7,700 20,750, 15,000. 15,000 7,500, (13,250)I_ 125002 Hazardous Materials Permits _119,849 119,849 - - 105 000' (14,849)' TEETER- -, 125004 Fireworks Permits I 2,265 I 2,265^ 2,500' 235 125005 Tent Permits 7 4,525 l 4,525 ---. 5,000 1 475 12506 Aircraft Refueling Permits . ---1,840 -- 1,840. -' ' r �8, -_ .__125007 Tank Inspections 2,170' 2,170 4000 L 1,830 125008 Fire Reports 750 750! - - - _ __. 1 500' 750 - -- - - _ _ _-. • 125009 Photography Charges 50 50; _ • (50) 125010 Key Boxes 3,090' 3,090 i _ _. _- - -• 4,OOt1 910 125011 Inspections 1251101 BUILDING PERMITS , 1,357,994� 1,507,226' 1,959.826 6,500, (10) ' --- __. 7,878,252 1,885,591' 1 689,175' 181,949 125102 PLUMBING PERMITS i 59,308 I 68,973 j 74,601', 93,494. 93,494, 63,540'i (5,433)T 125103 ELECTRICAL PERMITS i 142,732'� 161,311. 190,190' 198,910• _198,910. 164,712 I 3,401, _ _ _ 125104 MECHANICAL PERMITS 1 __ 69,508 88,843{ 99,688 121,088• 121,088' 75,793 (13,050)I1 - 125105 PLAN CHECK FEES i_ 580,308 774,827 J 831,465 7.34,158 734158 617,306 (157,521), 125106 BOILER OPERATION PERMIT( 2,055 2,065, 4,755 850. _ 850 2,071' 6 125107 SIGN PERMITS T 27,576 33,827 38,362 62 310 62,310 29,677 (4,150p �. __.__- __TREE 125108 RELOCATABLE OFFICES 1,300'. 1,858: 600' 1,650', 1650' 82020 51,038): 125109 UNIT LEGALIZATIONS 2,303 2,971 I 3231 4092 _ 4,092 2,870' (101): 125110 ROUTINE&UNCONTESTED At 5,310' 6,010i 7.613 5940 5940 6171 161E . __. 125111 BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FEN 10,419 11,937+ 19 013 15,030 15,030. _ 6,977 (4,960) 125112 ALTERNATIVE PARKING_ 70 70 _ -_L - - - - 143 73 _.____ . 125113 DEMOLITION PERMITS 12,894. 12,894 I 5,964, 3,816'.__ 3,816E 9,861 (3,033)_ 125114 WEED FEE FOR DEMOLITION' 600' - -. 1,435 235 125116 BOARDUP A BUILDING PERT 7,700, 7,700 -- 90 --- - - -- - - - -11,300, 7,080 i 7,080' 7,790' 90 125117 OTHER PERMITS(MISCELLAN 2,806' 4,949 16,337' 15,941, 15,941, 3,396, (1,551)_ ,90 -- _ -_--, -_ - 125116 CONDITIONAL USES ,_ 233 29,096� 59,087, 40,564! 40,564' 31,190 I 2,094;_ 125119 CONDITIONAL HOME OCCUR. 5,400 I 5.468, 6,269' 2.197 2.197'. 4,966 I (502), • • • PROPOSED COMPENSATION INCREASE SUMMARY • 100 Series (AFSCME operations and maintenance): The proposed ordinance funds the second year of a memorandum of understanding agreed to by the City and the American Federation of State County 8s Municipal Employees Local 1004 (AFSCME). The term of agreement was for three years beginning July 2002 and ending June 2005. o 2.75% increase on June 22, 2003 o Merit pay increases averaging 0.16% on the employee's employment anniversary date. 200 Series (AFSCME technical and clerical): The proposed ordinance funds the second year of a memorandum of understanding agreed to by the City and the American Federation of State County 8s Municipal Employees Local 1004 (AFSCME). The term of agreement is for the period July 2002 through June 2005. o 2.75% average increase on June 22, 2003 o Merit pay increases averaging 1.02% on the employee's employment anniversary date. ) 400 Series (Fire Union): The proposed ordinance funds the second years of a memorandum of understanding agreed to by the City and the Fire Fighters Local. The term of agreement is for July 2002 through June 2005. o 2.8% average increase on June 22, 2003 o Merit pay increases averaging 1.03% on the employee's employment II/ anniversary date (unless the employee is already at the top of the pay scale). 500 Series (Police Union): The proposed ordinance funds the third year of the memorandum of understanding agreed to by the City and the International Union of Police Associations, Local 75, AFL-CIO in June 2001: The term of agreement is from July 2001 to June 2004. o 3.5% for top step officer; 2.9% average increase on June 22, 2003 o Merit pay increases averaging 1.26% on the employee's employment anniversary date (unless the employee is already at the top of the pay scale). 300/600 Series (Professional - non-union): The ordinance prepared for 300/600 Series compensation is not negotiated with a bargaining unit. However, the Administration does work with a group of employee representatives called the Professional Employees Council (PEC) to review the implications of proposed changes. o 2% increase to salary ranges for the 300 and 600 Series. o 2.7% general percentage pay increase applied by determining whether each employee is below the midpoint or above the midpoint. Those below the midpoint will receive a greater increase than the 2.7% depending on how much below the midpoint. Employees above the midpoint will receive less than the 2.7%. Since more City employees are below the midpoint than above the midpoint, the total estimated cost for the City is 3.7%. Merit increases are not provided to 300/600 series employees. • 700 Series (Regular Part-Time employees who perform essentially the same duties of employees classified by the City as 100 and 200 series): The ordinance 11111 prepared for 700 Series compensation is not negotiated with a bargaining unit. The proposed ordinance funds: o 2.75% average increase paid in accordance with salary structure of full-time employees in the 100 and 200 series. Merit increases are not provided. 800 Series (Police non-union - sergeants, lieutenants, captains): The ordinance prepared for 800 Series compensation is not negotiated with a bargaining unit. However, the Administration does work with a group of employee representatives (PEC) to review the implications of proposed changes. The ordinance proposes the following based on a study of the local market: o 3.5% increase to steps for sergeants, lieutenants and captains o Merit increases averaging .04% for eligible employees. The amount is small, because most employees in this series are currently at the top step. 900 Series (Fire non-union - captain, battalion chief): The ordinance prepared for the 900 Series compensation is not negotiated with a bargaining unit. However, the Administration does work with a group of employee representatives (PEC) to review the implications of proposed changes. o 3% increase in steps o 0.03% cost of merit increases (applies to those not already at the top of the pay scale). The amount is small, because most employees in this series are currently at the top step. Unclassified Employees (Appointed staff in the Mayor's Office, Council Office, IDand City Attorney's Office): Employees in the unclassified compensation plan are "at will" and subject to termination without cause. These employees receive a severance benefit of one week for each year of service up to a maximum of six weeks but do not have longevity or lay-off benefits (professional employees not in this pay plan have bumping rights and, for one year, can fill a vacant position anywhere in the City if satisfying minimum qualifications). This compensation plan provides greater discretion of the appointing authority in deciding the unclassified employee's salary. The proposed budget includes an average increase of 2.5% for fiscal year 2003-04. Executive Employees: The ordinance prepared for executive employees' compensation contains the same pay adjustments as the compensation plan for the 600 series employees. o 2.5% increase to the salary schedule. Raising the range minimums and maximums increases pay potential, but does not by itself create pay raises. o 2.7% general percentage pay increase for executives, as a guideline for base pay and performance-based adjustments. Base pay increases may vary between individuals from zero percent to six percent or more, as the Mayor and the department heads deem appropriate. Department heads are expected to make judgments reflecting their perception of the value of each executive's contribution to the City, and how much money for raises should be distributed to maintain an equitable relationship between incumbents. Executives do not receive anniversary date or "merit step" changes. o The proposed budget includes an average increase of 3.3% for fiscal year 2003-04. • 2 1 Current Year Proposed 11-month Projected FY02. Last Year Current Year Amended Budget Discrepancies Actual 03 Actual Adopted Budget Budget FY03-04 Comments 125120 ADMINISTRATIVE INTERPRElI 3,850 4,263 3,270 4,160 4,160 3,383 (880)1 125121 SITE DEVELOPMENT 1,350 6,264 9,007 11,836 11,836 1,743 (4,521) 125122 LANDSCAPE WAIVER FEES 270 291 - 98 1_ 98 554 263 125123 SUBDIVISIONS --___ _- 32,152 32,972 34,899 4,945 I 4,945 41,977 ---9,005 I t -- - 125124 TREETVENDING 100 100 174 1031 3 I 125125 NEWS STAND I 1,835 2,418 2,795 2,960 ,I 2,960 3,711 1,293 125127 Temporary Uses 1,474 1,474 3,670 625 I I 625 I 1,128 (346) 125128 Land Use Appeals Board Fees 1,184 1,184 125135 2nd submission plan check fees 1,898 1,898 1,311 5,510 5,510 1 2,977 1,079 , 125199 BUILDING PERMITS-SURCHA 5,001 8,335 332 5,510 I I 5,5101 9,980 1,645 125201 Impact Fee-Police 158,732 158,732 • 107,770 90,499 90,499 _ 4.25,000 41,268 Impact fee expected to decrease by$225,000 due to economy 125203_Impact fee-Fire 173,536 173,536 122,342 106,874 106,874 1 _ - I _ (173,536), --- ----- --------- - ---- 125207 Impact Fee-Streets FI' 137,881 310,659 130,583 310,659 1 1 310,659 I - __ ---- L (141,968)I - -- --- - - 125205 0 p 1 310,659 rt (310(409 Impact Fee-Parks 58,740 141,968 I 107,690 , 1280 SEWER INSPECTION&SURV 405 _ 405 285 141�968 � __ � _ (405))�_ 1281 SIDEWALK CURB&GUTTER Pk 24,841� 25,046 I 17,725 18,000 1_, 18,000 I 15,1501_ (9,896)I 1282 POLE 1283 HOUSE NUMITS BER PERMITS 169 169 486 100 (69)_ 1284 STREET EXCAVATION 1 0,590 1,600 1,900 1,000 1 01,000 I 01,000 j ,606) - ------ ---------------- - ------ L 320,000 ; 250,000 ___ (10,606) -- - 1285 HOUSE MOVING PERMIT 40 0 640 271 930 320,000 (40)' 1295 BICYCLE PERMITS 1,314 2,225 1,228 4,001 4,001 1,150 I (1,075)_ 1299 OTHER PERMITS 17,111 17,111 243,911 (5,322)1 (5,322) 15,000 (2,111) Total Permit Fees 3,315,399 4,034,470 1 4,390,287 I 4,224,500 4,231,839 I 3,627,001 I 165,031 Expected to decrease due to economy 1312 REDEVELOPMENT 1 613,696 764,647 543,559 744,115 720,549 720,084 (44,563) 1316 LIBRARY REIMBURSEMENT i-- 63,543 63,543 ___ 29,464 35,000 35,000 33,000 (30,543) - -- - - - - 1360 FEDERAL GRANT REVENUE - 30,750 20,000 59,775 - - 1370 STATE GRANT REVENUE 15,750 - 81,849 - 1381 CLASS C ROADS 1,375,000 2,750,000 2,750,000 2,750,000 2,750,000 _ 3,000,000 - $250,000 more from portion that previously went to CIP 1383 LIQUOR LAW ENFORCEMENT I 48,513 48,513 130,496 274,000 148,000 275,000 - Legislature set 1%tax to result in$275,000 1442 SCHOOL RESOURCE OFFICER 91,242 157,100 137,910 133,000 133,000 144,000 (13,100) Total Intergovernmental 2,207,744 3,814,553 3,673,278 3,956,115 3,746,324 4,172,084 (88,206) _ 1401 SALE O_F GRAVES ON ACCOUP 19,469 23,768 18,996 27,348 27,348 103,862 80,094 --- - - - - 140110 SALE OF GRAVES ON ACCT P 14,170 19,434 14,504 16,324 I 16,324 22,000 2,566 1402 SALE OF GRAVES ADULT RES 129,300 152,971 88,700 86,500 -__86,500 106,000 (46,971)I - ----- --- 140201 SALE OF GRAVES INFANT RE 3,700 3,700 600 - --- -� _ 5,500 r 1,800 140210 SALE OF GRAVES ADULT NOI 17,374 24,876 i 875 - I_ (4,876) 140211 RC 2400400 1403 PERPETUAL RESIDENT; 27,800 37,658 23,10071 17,300 IL 17,300 I 25,000 1 (12,658) 140310 PERPETUAL CARE NON-RESIN 4,600 5,850 7,000 8,700 ; 8,700 tI 5,500 (350) 140320 Perpetual Care Deed Transfer 5,000 5,000 77,000 6,000 6,000 8,500ij___ __ 3,500140 140401 OPEN/CLOSE DOUBLE DEEP 19,000 25,807 33,500 33,500 92,050 118,000 7,87 � - - --- ( ) -- 33,500 18,000 (7,807) P N/CLOSE REGULAR RES 90,800 105,690 98,300 92,050 140402 OPEN/CLOSE(CREMAINS)R 3,450 3,875 6,650 2,550 2,550 4,800 925 I _ 140403 OPEN/CLOSE(INFANT)RESICI _ 3,330 3,797 2,600 4,000 4,000 4,300 _ 503 _ 140404 OPN/CLOSE LWER EXISTING I 1,800 1,800 1,350 - j - 2,400 600 --- ---- ------------- ---------- ------------- 140410 OPEN/CLOSE(REGULAR)NO 53,100 62,550 _ 60,450 59,400 59,400 60,500 _ (2,050)1 • -- -140411 OPEN/CLOSE(DOUBLE DEEP) 12,550 15,300 I 13,450 16,500 16,500 10,000 (5,300)' 140412 OPEN/CLOSE(CREMAINS)NC 4,900 4,944 _ 6,300 1,400 1,400 5,300 j _ 356 _ 1407 FEES-DEED TRANSFER 960 9,583 - 9,600 51,740 51,740 _ 1,550 (180) 140413 OPEN/CLOSE(INFANT)NON-F 1,125 1,125 900 _ 1,000t-____ 1406 REMOVALS 930 1,230 1,130 1,800 1,800 501 ----------- ------- ------------ --- ----- ----- - (8,083) -- - - 1408 FEES-STONE MONITORING 25,775 47,950 25,075 24,100 24,100 33,000' (14,950) 140801 FEES-OVERTIME 3,200 3,633 3,100 2,600 2,600 4,000 I 367 140802 FEES-MISCELLANEOUS 253 420 63 1,000 1,000 - (420)1 _ - 1423 OTHER FEES-CEMETERY - 50,000 - 50,000 50,000 - - I Total Cemetery • 444,986 613,361 528,489 555,012 555,012 555,012 (8,349)1_ 1431 GARNISHMENTS 1,700 1,600 2,545 (1,600) 1432 RETURNED CHECKS (23,058) (23,394) (2,663) - I (1,138) - 23,394 1433 OTHER COURT&LEGAL FEES I 1,633 1,633 3,319 I (1,633), 11111 0 III • • Current Year I Proposed ' 11-month Projected FY02• Last Year Current Year Amended Budget Discrepancies Actual 03 1 Actual Adopted Budget Budget FY03-04 1 Comments - - - - 1434 Warrant Transportation Fees 222 1 - 385 I 1 _ (385), 1435 Court Restitution-Police 6,389 5,431 2,907 (5,431) 1445 MPOUNDE EESE DESK 1 374,264 393,428 _ 328,290 114,991 _ 426,5757 521,55 1441 Police Off-Duty - - (88,123) - - - - uty Security , 93,373 88,123 86,190 0 _ 14-44 1 POLICE- IC = 7 1 18,710 i-- 128,129 144502 Booting Fees - '- 3,095 3,470 2,855 5,000 2,862 2,635 1_ (835) 1446 OTHER POLICE SERVICE 1 379,278 321,233 1,819,359 - 1 257,000 r _ (321,233) 1448 POLICE ALARM FEES 58,284 75,199 67,984 127,000 127,000 66,000 (9,199)'__ i 145050 PARAMEDIC FEES 1 567,359 1 727,882 632,083 665,000 665,000 648,000 (79,882)1 Total Public Safety 1 1,561,675 I 1,690,280 I 3,048,462 911,991 1,552,299 1,352,192 (338,088) 1451 _ PARKING METER COLLECTIOIr 876,943 1,168,022 1,101,563 1,203,500 1,203,500 1,336,500 35,478 , Increase of$133,000 due to additional parking meters I 1453 BAGGING PARKING METERS i 59,154 81,867 37,449 140,000 140,000 140,000 1 58,133 1 - -- - --------------- 1454 RESIDENTIAL PARKING PERM O 29,063 31,136 31,499 26,500 _ 26,500 26,500 � (4,636)' 1455 PROCESSINGFEE-SPECIALS 14,265 14,273 17,924 11,000 11,000 - (14,273)1 Total Parking Meters 979,425 1,295,298 1,188,435 1,381,000 1,381,000 1,503,000 74,702 1501 Bail Forfeiture 306,264 517,573 407,183 2,840,000 _ 1,500,000 - (317,573); Recriminalization will result in$200,000 less revenue 1503 PARKING TICKET REVENUE 2,942,182 3,184,740 2,813,235 3,400,000 3,400,000 3,500,000 _ 215,260 Increase of$100,000 due to additional parking m eters 1504 Traffic Mitigation Fees-State 46,207 45,804 136,642 20,000 20,000 (45,804) 1505 LEGAL DEFENDERS RECOUP 8,794 8,620 13,983 1,900 1,900 2,100 (6,520) _ 1506 SNOW REMOVAL VIOLATION 177 120 1,196 _ _ (120) 1507 SMALL CLAIMS REVENUE 1,023 993 747 t_ (993) 150701 Small Claims Collection Fees 16,088 14,323 13,431 _ _ (14,323) 150702 Small Claims filing fee _ 24,817 24,462 - - - _ 90,000 65,538 1509 JUROR/WITNESS FEES - 177 329 (177) _ 1510 License violation cost recover 600 1,046 1,180 2,058 2,058 500 (546) _ 1512 TRAFFIC SCHOOL REVENUE 350,795 404,777 _ 307,641 380,000 380,000 400,000 4,777) 1515 M ovillg violations/General 2,759,404 3,007,841 2,009,195 1,076,542 2,812,883 3,508,914 (98,927) Up$600,000 as a result of DA caseload - 151502 Late fees Moving Violations 275,621 307,840 258,497 200,000 275,000 250,000 (57,840) 151503 Traffic Mitigation surcharge 312,385 288,505 295,262 - - 310,000 21,495 151504 Court Debt Svc.surcharge (15,211) (18,253) (7,476) 1 18,253 - 151505 Moving Violations 35%surcharg 7,198 8,637 (9,595) J_ 1 (8,637) 1516 Animal Control violations 1,222 1,097 458 _ _ --+ (1,097) 1520 Justice Court Fines/General__ 354,057 275,570 1 38,600 910,000 134,430 $500,000_from delinquent fines 1656 BILLED I 1608 -- -- - AGREEMENTS 15,769 45,742 I 52,947 I 45,742 45,742 I 46,350 (101,750); Total Fines&Forfeitures I 7,407,392 I 8,119,614 6,294,855 7,966,242 I 8,476,183 � 9,017,864 I I 1679 GOLF TOURNAMENT FEES 524 1,357 5,772 5,000 5,000 1 (1,357); 1680 LESSONS 610 793 1,063 1,100 1,100 1,100 307 j 1688 CASH OVER&SHORT (3,043) 15,556 261,972 15,556 15,556 36 (15,520)1 1689 SPECIAL ACTIVITIES 4,500 _ 6,411 4,015 4,500 4,500 4,000 j (2,411) - ------------------ ---- -- - - --- 1690 BASEBALL DIAMOND FEES 6,393 8,128 _ 2,462 3,500 3,500 1,500 � -- (6,628) 1691 _ BOWERY FEES• 18,317 20,852 20,965 18,000 18,000 17,500 (3,352)1 --- -- ----- --- --------------1693 --- --------LIBERTY PARK TENNIS 94 18,715 3,750 3,750 _ (94)' -- 13,537 14,097 10,277 _ 11,451 11,451 _ 13,440I (657) - 1694 OTHER 1695 DEESMITH TENNIS RECREATION FEES/CI- g00 1,447 - 1,740 _ 1,740 _ _1 (1,4471 1696 PROGRAM FEES 22,153 67,970 85,501 94,210 1 94,210� 130,211 1 f42,619)L Increases to rental and program fees of$104,860 1736 OTHER BUILDINGS 22 1,040 2,110 1 2,110 1 (22) • 1742 VENDING 4,478 _ 5,184 4,719 _ 3,500 3,500 - 3,025 t--- (2,159); 1792 OTHER 1,700 1,480 1,890 1,900 j 420 - - -1800 ADMISSION SALES _ 128,306 128,306 171,293 166,966 202,466 _ 168,024 39,718 1801 GROUND RENTAL 116,241 105,220 73,678 45,718 45,718 51,360 (53,860) 1802 FACILITY RENTAL 156,792 156,792 286,732 62,100 147,000 174,150 17,358 1803 EQUIPMENT RENTALS 37,247 37,247 34,936 40,246 40,246 30,000 (7,247) 1805 ENCROACHMENT LEASES - - 605 - 1807 BUILDING LEASES - - 42,765 - 180699 PAYPHONE REVENUE 1,945 2,238 3,353 2,000 2,000 - (2,238) 1810 FOOD CONCESSIONS _ 95,636 104,590 21,045 82,600 87,734 111,200 6,610 1812 AMUSEMENT CONCESSIONS 84,612 89,056 91,406 32,105 37,605 67,000 (22,056) 1814 LOCKER RENTAL 1,139 1,140 1,811 750 750 1,430 290 1817 BUZZ BASEBALL STADIUM RE 200,000 300,000 400,000 300,000 300,000 300,000 - • • III • I Current Year ' Proposed 11-month 1 Projected FY021 Last Year 1 Current Year I Amended Budget ' Discrepancies Actual 1 03 1 Actual 1Adopted Budget1 Budget ; FY03-04 I 1 Comments 181701 BUZZ BASEBALL PARKING ; 45,344 65,170 ' 68,704 80,000 1 80,000 55,000 1 (10,170) 181702 BUZZ BASEBALL MISC.REVE_ - - 825 I ---ANA--�_-_ ---- - -' -- - - --" � - 181801 FRANKLIN QUEST CONCESSI 17,466 17,446 17,446 _ 10,000 10,000 500 500 ! - 900 400 r - - - R (3,192)1 - -- - - 181803 FRANKLIN QUEST PARKING }- 181804 FRANKLIN QUEST MAJOR RE) 55,205 77,696 140,513 I 68,000 I _ 68,000 1 25,000 L _ _(52,696)j 1821 Retail Sales 10,098 12,692 12,980 6,200 L 6,200 9,500 (3,192) 181805 FRANKLIN QUEST SMALL RE', 907 3,234 4,784 --. 7,200 ' 7,700 1, 14,538 I 11,304 1829 Olympic Revenue-Other 1 -- 7,688 7,688 1 425,593 ' j ' (7,688)1 Total Recreation 1 1,011,628 1,234,960 2,216,880 1,075,748 1,207,282 1,190,814 I (149,006) 1830 INTEREST I 1,609,392 2,240,311 2,654,435 3,050,000 3,050,000 1,900,000I (340,311) 1842 ALE OF EQUIPMENT _ 1 60,600 60,600 52,480 16,000 16,000 18,100 (42,500) 1843 SALE OF MATERIALS&SUPPLE 785 911 22,749 450 450 902 1 (9) 1844 IMPOUNDS/EVIDENCE 195 195 115 1 (195) 1845 SALE OF VEHICLES L 236,504 274,138 220,490 183,000 I 279,600 286,590 12,452 0 le - 184501Saleof Vehicles for ScrapI 8,736 9,005 7,090 4,864 11,564 11,853 2,848 _ 1885 FUEL REIMBURSEMENT f 239,090 260,000 273,988 372,460 372,460 372,460 1 112,460 1890 SUNDRY REVENUES _ 126,550 107,849 107,988 82,395 29,009) 56,828 1 (51,021) 1891 INDUSTRIAL REVENUE BOND( 2,075 2,067 49,109 (2,0B7)1 1895 PRIVATE DONATIONS 1 667 15,300 3,685,969 15,300 21,300 56,000 40,700 11897 PUBLIC 1899 PUBL NDOSE ATIDNA EXPENDIS i_ 46,768 88,019 39,812 50,800 229,300 55,000 ))d(33,019 1480 ENGINEERING FEES 36,120 37,000 146,543 20,000 20,000 1 (80� 1473 OTHER 34,390 -- 1,536 -- - 1 30,000 t (7,050) 1485 LE- - - L ---- 20 -- -- 003-- 10 I - - -- ' (139) 000 1 10,000 1 1411403 MISCELLANEOUS 0 50 Residential al Concrete 1 136,570 143,033 1 117,696 I 160,990 ( 160,990 : 75_000 1 (17,939)1 --- � � - 11,967 ; Decrease$80,000 due to reductions to staff of concrete program 141404 1/3-2/3----- --- 1 �- 0 I I ( )� = _ I 3,125 7501 (7122) - - 4,250 '_ 141406 1/3-2/3 Commercial Concrete 167 1,000 1,000 - --------- - ----- -- ---- --- 141405 Commercial Concrete _ 10,950 11,358 26,420 28,000 28,000 _ - - -- Residential Concrete 3,700 3,700 ) 141407 City Concrete 17,772 , 17,939 1 11,987 1 1,000 1 1,000 -j- (17,939)1 195101 AIRPORT POLICE REIMBURS 161,161 161,161 266,728 177,000 137,000 2,939,803 1900 ADMINISTRATIVE FEES �I_ 2,260,008 2,799,364 3,139,804 2,799,364 2,799,364 969,906 67( ,678)I - --- TotalOther Revenue � 979,536 i 1,049,446 4,786,473 949,959 1,126,355 460 195510 INTERFUND REIMB LABOR 1952 FIRE SERVICE REIMBURSEME1 L 1 - -- 2,419,890 3 300,000 4,752,171 3,300,000 3,300,000 3,328,796 28,796 1,703,897 1,923,140T 887,052 936,236 1,736,236 _ 1,639,900 (283,240)• - 195570 INTERFUND REIMB UTILITIES 5,139 5,700 6,853 1 5,700 1 5,700 t 6,600 900 1956 Other Reimbursements/Rebates 1 - 20,989 87,416 (20 ggg)' Total Reimbursements ' 6,550,095 8,210,354 9,140,024 7,218,300 7,978,300 8,008,582 I (201,772) _ 197402 TRANSFER FROM E911 494,000 1,188,000 - -------------------------------- ---- ---- - 959,000 988,000_ 1,188,000 1,334,000 _ $346,000 00 additional 197403 TRANSFER FROM CDBG OPE 975,216 1,281,804 1,128,260 1,281,804 1,281,804 1 - Salaries to be charged directly to Community Development Operating Fu 197405 TRANSFER FROM CIP 1 592,291 691,994 410,000 - 573,821 - - -- 197406 TRANSFER-SID FUND 77,957 645,548 - 645,548 77,957 197407 TRANSFER-RISK MANAGEM 433,000 433,000 - - 433,000 1 - 197472 TRANSFER-MISC GRANTS F 97,505 150,000 196,092 - 150,000 1 - - - - 197478 TRANSFER-HOUSING FUND - - - 150,000 117,089 117,089 1982 Note Proceeds 83,060 83,820 531,147 - 83,000 - 1Tota ransfers 2,753,029 4,474,166 3,224,499 3,065,352 3,787,582 1,451,089 _ 117,089 _ _ • I Total 134,890,992 162,398,749 170,239,291 165,138,670 163,471,781 161,483,349 1,475,648 • III • Department PC Count FY98 as of 06/3098 FY99 as of 06/30/99 FY00 as of 08/30/00 FY01 as of 06/30,01 FY02 as of 06/30/02 FY03 as of 03/31/03 Projected FY04 Change# Change# Change# Change# Change# Change# Change# Units from Units from Units from Total PCs Units from Total PCs Units from Total PCs/ Units from Total PCs Units from DEPT DIVISION Total PCs Prior Year Total PCs Prior Year Total PCs Prior Year /Laptops Prior Year /Laptops Prior Year Laptops Prior Year /Laptops Prior Year Jtomey Attorneys Department 35 4 38 3 29 (9) 51 22 53 2 83 10 71 8 ;ouncil Council 21 6 29 8 22 (7) 21 (1) 33 12 30 (3) 28 (2) :ED CED Department 172 9 213 41 210 (3) 276 66 296 20 296 0 368 72 ire Fire Department 55 13 67 12 51 (16) 89 38_ 109 20 122 13 137 15 tome!Audit Internal Auditing 3 (1) 5 2 6 1 5 (1) 1 (4) 1 0 1 __ 0 llgmt Ser Mgmt Service Department 98 3 114 16 90 (24) 140 50 193 53 176 (17) 179 3 layor Mayor Department 27 2 25 (2) 20 (5) 41 21 40 (1) 38 (2) 39 1 Mice Police Department 216 63 287 71 440 153 579 139 582 3 755 173 785 30 'ubi Sery Public Service Department 68 (1) 100 32 125 25 146 21 151 5 180 29 206 26 Sub-Total General Fund 695 I 98 878 I 183 993 I 115 1,348 355 1,458 110 1,681 203 1,815 154 Jrport Airport 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 1 tgmt Services Copy Center 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 'ublic Services Fleet Management 16 4 15 (1) 30 15 52 22 34 (18) 36 2 38 2 'ublic Services Golf Department 15 9 18 3 31 13 34 3 53 19 49 (4) 44 (5) lgmt Services insurance Benefits 0 0 0 0 4 4 4 0 4 0 4 0 4 0 'ublie Utilities Public Utilities 140 (12) 140 0 162 22_ 264 102 326 62 326 0 329 3 tedevslopment Redevelopment Agcy 10 3 9 (1) 12 3 14 2 14 0 13 (1) 12 (1) 'ublic Services Urban Forestry 5 1 4 (1) 3 (1) 5 2 7 2 6 (1) 5 (1) 'ublic Services Sanitation 8 5 8 0 1 (7) 1 0 2 1 3 1 4 1 'ublic Services Cleanup 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 Total Enterprise/Internal 194 10 194 0 243 49 377 134 443 66 441 (2) 441 0 Total Without IMS 889 108 1,072 183 1,236 164 1,725 489 1,901 176 2,102 201 2,256 154 IMS N/A I 0 N/A I 0 300 0 319 N/A 382 63 359 (23) 337 (22) Grand Total 889 108 1,072 183 1,536 164 2,044 489 2,283 239 2,461 178 2,593 132 Network Technicians 20 21 21 21 Number of PCs Supported per Network Technician 102 109 117 124 Proposed Network Technicians 22 _ Number of PCs Supported per Network Technician 118 Revised 0 6/4/2003 III 0 Attachment 1 System Backlog Projects ,Program I e Ji i r�''� C[escr 'i:i`' q ,. p , ,, � , ...p�F�,�<; ,,s:. .. ..�,... , :`,�'a.;:�'>.°' k;r, ,. teed 1*,. ''Reqtreste. Apartment Inspections CED Web page to allow public to request the inspection of Employees Focus Group apartment building for code compliance. and Public Building Permit Applications CED The Building Permit application is scheduled to be rewritten. Employees CED It will include enhancements such as application and and Public payment options over the internet plus wireless inspection forms. Business License Rewrite CED Rewrite and re-engineering of business licensing software Employees CED and procedures. CED Arts Application CED Web page to allow public to download applications for City Public Focus Group funded arts projects. Housing Enforcement CED Web page to allow public to report code violations and to Employees CED allow employees to track and resolve reported violations. and Public Needs Line- Request for Service CED Web page to allow public to request specific services from Employees CED the City. and Public Neighborhood Watch CED Web page providing information and forms regarding Public CED establishment of a neighborhood watch program Online Bldg Inspection Information CED Web page to allow the public to request a building Employee and CED inspection associated with a building permit. Public • 1 • . • • • • Attachment 1 System Backlog Projects 0 7 fPr a' e` �v. 'D scr Jti��., p P ,y��.;`� ,, ';,.:` llsed.,�Y . ��i�.eggeste� B Rehab Loans CED Web page to allow public to apply for rehab loans online. Public CED Weed Removal CED Application to allow public to report weed removal problems Employee and Focus Group on city and private land Public Zoning Enforcement CED Web page to allow public to report zoning vilations and Employees CED employees to manage,track, and report on actions taken to and Public resolve. EDMS Solution Implementation Citywide Application to image and index documents, drawings, Employees Public Services correspondence, and other types of data Several departments, lead by the City Recorders and Engineering, will be implementing a new Electronic Electronic Document Management Document Management System (EDMS) system. It is Employees System (EDMS) Citywide estimated that to successfully implement this project one and Public CityWide which is attached,that have to be maintained. Application maintenance tasks consume a substantial effort. With the Employees Existing Application Maintenance Citywide increasing number of applications in the past few years,this and Public CityWide In/Out Board Citywide Web page to provide departments the ability to show their Employees CityWide employees as in, out, eta, etc. One Stop Page Citywide Web page to allow public to view information pertaining to Public CityWide their address such as voting district,trash collection day, council district, schools, etc. that have been purchased in the past few years. These systems require maintenance and integration efforts from Employees Third Party Software Support Citywide the software engineering team. and Public CityWide Fire Permits Fire Web page to allow the public to apply for and receive Employees Fire specialized fire permits. (Includes fireworks permits, luau and Public permits, mass gathering permits, etc) 2 Attachment 1 System Backlog Projects -Pro ,ram., t. "v` ;,>' : ...- t''s: , g � ,. .,.. Dip,.%JAI. ;Desceiption�,::,.,..» ..,....• 4.;. �ry�.:p 1�.� .uested BV Hazmat Permits Fire Web page to allow the public to apply for and renew Employee and Fire hazardous material permits. Also classifies and reports on Public EPA Tierll information Medical Reporting Fire Web based application to allow EMT ato update patient Employees Fire information on line in real time and have the information automatically sent to the hospital of choice. infrastructure to allow for higher level of access and performance which will allow us to better accommodate Employees Spatial Database Engine GIS present and future needs. and Public GIS Animal Control Justice Courts Enhancement of the existing Administrative Law Employees Justice Courts Enforcement system to handle animal control violations more efficiently. Court Room Docket Justice Courts Web page to allow public and defendants visibility of the Public Justice Courts court docket for a given date. Criminal Traffic Import Justice Courts Rewrite of interfaces to allow import of criminal traffic Employees Justice Courts information as required by the recent change of traffic violations from civil to criminal jurisdiction. DUI/Criminal Convictions to State Justice Courts Application to handle reporting of DUI convictions to the Employees Justice Courts state more efficiently. Jems Import from Prosecutor Dialog Justice Courts Application to import Prosecutor Dialog information into the Employees Justice Courts justice courts JEMS system. Online Traffic School Justice Courts Web site that would allow a person to "attend"traffic school Public Justice Courts via the Internet. Budget Resource Planning Management Web page to track detail information and budgetary impact Employees Management Services of initiatives planned or requested by the departments for Services future fiscal years. Camp Encumbrance and Payment Management Web page to allow employees to enter contract Employees Management Services encumbrances and payment requests. Rewrite of an Services existing application 3 i • 0 Attachment 1 System Backlog Projects , ��' Pro��ram.� ; �'��.:::: g ,Depth/Div.,,,, ryDestripfi ,, , ....�s-..,X .' . -s; „ lUs, 0 . I3e°ueste4By, y q. .,.. divisions the software engineering team is required to Management provide support to. The courts have required between 0.5 Employees City Justice Courts Support Services and 1.0 full time staff from the software engineering team in and Public Justice Courts Civilain Review Board Management Web page to allow public to request an investigation into an Employees Management , Services officers conduct or a specific incident. and Public Services Contract Processing Management Rewrite of contracts system to a web based environment Employees Management Services Services taken over by IBM. In the next few years, IBM intends to Management move all exiting Informix users to another product. As most Employees Database Migration Services of our information is stored in the Informix database,we will and Public IMS Management Modification of payroll and HR systems to comply with new Management HIPPA Services HIPPA regulatons. Employees Services Informix migration Management Migration of applications from Informix database tools to Employees Management Services more standard Microsoft and Oracle tools. Informix was and Public Services purchased by IBM and its future is uncertain. Online Fairness/Labor Issue Reporti Management Web page to allow employees to report labor fairness Employees Management Services issues in a less intimidating manner. Alos provide statistical Services reporting on cases closed. Management Modification of payroll calculationcodes to accommodate Management Payroll Updates Services new insurance,tax, and contract adjustments. Employees Services Telephone Directory Management Web page to allow users access to employee office phone Employes CityWide Services numbers Travel Request Reporting Management Web page to facilitate reconciliation of employee travel Employees Management Services information. Services Court Disposition Police Web page to allow officers access to information on courts Employees Police disposition from the police records system 4 , Attachment 1 System Backlog Projects Sa. ,ro ram , x 9 .. .. „ >> - p,,, a,.: .,, ,.. ,,.,R x.. , Ifs e0B %RequestedF Lost Items Report Police Web page to allow public to report lost items and check to Public Police see if an item has been turned in. Officer Line Sheets Police Web page to report an officer's activity as contained in the Employees Police police records system for a given time period. completed before the end of 2003. The first one is the early Employees warning system and the second is providing Police records and Other Police Grant Projects Police data to the State and other police jurisdictions. Agencies Police Traffic/Speeding Reporting Police Web page to allow public to report areas where speeding is Employee and Focus Group perceived to be a problem. Public Prosecutors/Courts Calendar Prosecutors Web page allowing prosecutors to see the courts docket Employees Prosecutors including defandant information ti Cost Accounting System Public Services System to track work orders, inventory, and cost accounting Employees Public Services for Public Services Enforcement Call Center Public Services Web page to track calls or complaints coming into the Employees Public Services parking enofrcement offices.Allows public to enter a and Public complaint on-line. Equipment Rentals Public Services Web page to allow public to reserve and rent sports Employees Public Services equipment in conjunction with a park reservation. and Public Kronos Extract Public Services Application to extract information from the City's payroll Employees Public Services system for import onto the time clocks. Meter Repair Public Services Web page to allow the public to report broken parking Employee and Focus Group meters. Public Neighborhood Cleanup Public Services Web page to provide information as to when and where Employee and Focus GRoup neighborhood cleanup is planned. Public 5 • • • Attachment I SystemBacklog Projects Pr Online Parks Reservation Public 8en/iceaVVeb site to allow the public to reserve a city park orfocNx Ernplovaao Public Services within the park. and Public . Online Request for Appraisals (50V5 Public Services Web page to allow the public to participate and receive an Employees Public Services cost estimate of the home owners share of the 5O/5O and Public concrete replacement program. Parking Enforcement System Public Services Rewrite ofexisting parking enforcement systems to provide Enop|uyoea Public Services more efficiency for enforcement officers issuing parking citations. ` Sign Repair Reporting Public Services Web page to allow public tn report a need for sign repair Employee and Public Services Public Signal Light Repair Public Services Web page to allow public to report a need for signal repair Employee and Public Services Public Xmas Tree Removal Public Services Web page to allow public visibility of chritmas tree removal Public Public Services schedules and locations. Change Water Rate Public Utilities Major programming changes to accommodate recent Employees Pub|ioUU|itmo changes in the water rate structure. ^ Cross Connect Rewrite Public Utilities Rewrite ofan application developed to track installation and Employees Pub|icUd|itea periodic inspection of water system cross connects and baokf low devices. Enhancements to Address Vehficedi Public Utilities Enhancements to Address Verification report toprovide Employees Pub|ioUti|iteo . better information to public utilities employees. Final Meter Reads for Closing Accot Public Utilities Web page to allow public to request a final read onawater Employees PubUoUti|iteo account. and Public Inspections and Investigations Public Utilities Web page to allow public utilities inspectors tnenter Employees PubUoUU|itea information on line in real time. ` 6 Attachment 1 System Backlog Projects Prrpgram >;. -:15e t;/Div Desc'iptiion r. p - , P, . . ,;.;;,,?yr,,„ , - :; :, ,.:v.;�::�„ .; ;,%,>:;:>',:;;" � ��edrgy,r:, .. ,r �R01gwgstedpy, Recycle Bins Public Utilities Web page to allow public to request pickup or delivery of Employee and Public Utilites recycle bins. Public Reporting Service Problems Public Utilities Web page to allow public to report water service problems. Public Public Utilites Rewrite of 4GL Programs Public Utilities Long term project to facilitate migration from a old Employees Public Utilites proprietary application development tool to current technology. Shares Public Utilities Enhancement of the existing PUBS application to more Employees Public Utilites effectively manage the water share information. Sign-up for Equal Pay Program Public Utilities Web page to allow users to sign up to participate in Public Public Focus Group Utilities Equal Pay program. Trash Can Maintenance Public Utilities Enhancement to the existing pubs application to provide Employees Public Utilities management of trash can maintenance requests. RDA Application RDA Web page to allow public to download applications for RDA Public Focus Group loans and programs. City Parking Permits Transportation Web page to allow the public to apply for and renew Employees Public Services residential parking permits. and Public Residential Parking Transportation Rewrite of existing residential parking application to intranet Employees Transportation based application. 7 • • Message - - Page 1 of 1 Weaver, Lehua IIIFrom: Gust-Jenson, Cindy Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 11:18 AM To: Llewellyn, Don Cc: Sears, Michael; Mumford, Gary;Jones, Sylvia; Weaver, Lehua Subject: RE: Requested information regarding Youth and Family Specialist case assignments Categories: Program/Policy Thanks! Original Message From: Llewellyn, Don Sent: Friday, May 23, 2003 9:10 AM To: Gust-Jenson, Cindy Subject: FW: Requested information regarding Youth and Family Specialist case assignments Cindy, Here is the YFS information as per City Council request. Don Original Message From: Simonson, Laura Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 11:31 AM To: Llewellyn, Don • Cc: Ewell, Lamar; Burton,Jerry Subject: Requested information regarding Youth and Family Specialist case assignments Sir, Provided are approximate numbers for new cases assigned to Youth and Family Specialists for the past several years as requested by the City Council. It should be noted that there have been several changes and increases in job responsibilities assigned to YFS personnel during the past two years in addition to the reduction in staff. In 2001,with five Youth and Family Specialists working for the department, there was an average of 21 new cases assigned to each worker per month. In 2002,the average monthly assignment of new cases per worker with four YFS staff members was 38. During 2003, the average number of new cases per YFS worker has been 54 cases per month. It is estimated that the average monthly assignment of new cases for Youth and Family Specialists during the fiscal year 2004 with three staff members will be approximately 72 per month. Management of these cases over time often requires multiple contacts, screening, and follow-up after the initial contact and referrals. In addition to these case management duties, Youth and Family Specialists also participate in multiple meetings and committees including:weekly CAT team meetings, Methamphetamine Initiative partner's work groups, child protection case screenings, Community Action Board meetings, the Child Abuse and Neglect Council, as well as other community and collaborative efforts as needed. • 6/4/2003 USE AND ADDITIONS TO FUND BALANCE • Beginning Fund Use of Addition to Ending Balance Fund Balance Fund Balance Fund Balance FY1994-95 $ 14,113,000 $ 1,476,000 $ 12,637,000 FY1995-96 12,637,000 692,000 11,945,000 FY1996-97 11,945,000 5,520,000 17,465,000 FY1997-98 17,465,000 351,000 17,114,000 FY1998-99 17,114,000 3,285,000 20,399,000 FY1999-00 20,399,000 6,299,000 26,698,000 FY2000-01 26,698,000 1,209,000 25,489,000 FY2001-02 25,489,000 2,398,000 8,061,000 31,152,000 Average increase in fund balance $ 2,130,000 • • Potential Retirees • 60+Years of Age w/20+Years of Service 30 15010-Attorney 0 11200-Management Services 3 03000-Public Services 11 54000-Airport 6 04050-CED 3 11400-Public Utilities 7 62+Years of Age w/10+Years of Service 13 15010-Attorney 1 11200-Management Services 1 03000-Public Services 3 54000-Airport 5 04050-CED 0 11400-Public Utilities 3 65+Years of Age w/4+Years of Service 14 15010-Attorney 0 11200-Management Services 0 03000-Public Services 2 54000-Airport 4 04050-CED 2 11400-Public Utilities 6 • Any Years of Age wl 30+Years of Service 45 15010-Attorney 2 11200-Management Services 1 03000-Public Services 14 54000-Airport 4 04050-CED 2 11400- Public Utilities 22 **Any Years of Age w/25+Years of Service 61 15010-Attorney 0 11200-Management Services 10 03000-Public Services 18 54000-Airport 9 04050-CED 4 11400-Public Utilities 20 Total Fire 95 Fire Employees with 20+Years 54 Fire Employees(including Civilian)with 30+Years of Service 38 **Fire Civilian Employees with 25+Years of Service 3 Total Police 44 Police Employees with 20+Years 20 Police Civilian Employees with 20+Years of Service and 60+Years of Age 5 Police Civilian Employees with 4+Years of Service and 65+Years of Age 1 SPolice Employees(including Civilian)with 30+Years of Service 8 **Police Civilian Employees with 25+Years of Service 10 **These employees will have actuarial reduction of monthly retirement benefit SLC HRM JS 5/15/03 June 5th Discussion re FY04 Legislative Intent Statements Based on Council Members'discussions and comments, following are potential Legislative Intent • Statements for fiscal year 2003-2004. Does the Council Potential Legislative Intent Statements wish to consider for Fiscal Year 2003-2004 this statement or any others? A. Bonding for Efficient Irrigation Systems for Parks and Golf Courses - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration investigate the possibility of bonding for improving the water efficiency of some of the City's golf courses, parks and other green space. Efficient systems should include secondary water systems using reclaimed water, springs, shallow ground water, or other water sources. It is the intent of the City Council that the study include the repayment of the bonds through savings in the cost of water including projected future increase to the cost of culinary water. B. Grant Writing Team — It is the intent of the City Council that the grant writing team serve a wide variety of City needs, rather than focusing so heavily on youth programs. Specifically, it is the Council's intent that the grant writing resources are allocated so that writers spend at least % of • their time seeking grants for programs other than youth- oriented grants. (or that the total dollar amount of grants submitted for youth programs shall not exceed the total dollar amount of grants submitted for housing, law enforcement and other programs.) C. Retirement Payouts - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration consistently budget for payments of vacation leave and other retirement payouts. The Administration should consider budgeting for these payments in a separate fund or account rather than requiring departments to leave positions vacant or otherwise make cuts in operations to finance these payments, D. Collection of Fines - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration report quarterly on the successfulness of its special collection effort. This report is to include quantitative information as well as progress regarding the City's efforts to work with the State and with collection agencies. The report information is to be separated based on the age of the fine (6 month, 1 year, etc.) per the information available from the Justice Court GEMS computer program. • E. SLC Resident Golf Discount Pass — It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration develop a discount pass system that enables City residents to play on City Golf Courses at a reduced rate. • F. Actual Vehicle Expenses — It is the intent of the City Council that the Fleet Division develop and implement an operating and billing system that charges users (General Fund and Enterprise Fund Departments) the actual costs incurred for the vehicles utilized by each department. G. Library Fiscal Controls— It is the intent of the City Council that the Library Fund follow all of the ordinances, policies and fiscal controls in place for other City departments. Further, it is the intent of the Council that controls be put in place to require that any transfer of funds between the basic Library budget and the Library contingency and capital funds be approved by the City Council._ H. Semiannual Reports on the Status of Legislative Intent Statements and Action Items - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration provides reports regarding the status of all active legislative intent statements (including unresolved statements from previous years and statements adopted outside of the official budget process) and all active legislative action items. The semiannual reports are to be submitted to the Council Office by January 31 and the first • Tuesday in May each year. I. City Management Consolidation — It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration, through the implementation of the City Council adopted Early Retirement Program and staff attrition, evaluate the City's mid- management structure and attempt to identify and eliminate management positions with the City that can be consolidated. J. City Policy Coordination — It is the intent of the City Council that the policies adopted by the City Council be noted by Redevelopment Agency of Salt Lake City employees and incorporated in staff reports to the Redevelopment Agency Board of Directors as relevant so that funding decisions remain consistent between the two organizations. • June 5th Discussion re FY04 Legislative Intent Statements • Does the Council wish Legislative Intent Statements to reiterate,amend Adopted for Fiscal Year 2002-03 or close this statement? 1. Funding of Governmental Immunity Reserves - It is the intent of the City Council to support the Administration's proposal to accumulate a reserve in the Governmental Immunity Fund equal to three times the rolling average claim payout. (Attorney) 2. Encourage Safety and Accountability - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration considers adding more departmental accountability to the City's loss control program that encourages and promotes safety. It is also the intent of the City Council that the Council be provided with periodic reports on losses by departments. (Attorney) 3. Home-Buyer Incentive Program - It is the intent of the City Council that a proposal be prepared and submitted to the Council for consideration regarding the development and implementation of a home-buyer incentive program for City employees based on programs ioffered by other cities and organizations, in collaboration with and in addition to Federal programs or opportunities. (Management Services) 4. Constituent Tracking System - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration investigates the feasibility of a customer service/work order tracking system. (Management Services) 5. National League of Cities Conference - It is the intent No longer applicable of the City Council that the Administration develops a budget and staffing plan to address the impact of the National League of Cities conference to be held in Salt Lake City. The plan should be presented to the Council no later than October 2, 2001 and include the City's host duties, anticipated staffing, benefits associated with hosting the conference, estimated expenses to be incurred by Salt Lake City, a proposal to fund the expenses, and a comparison of anticipated expenses in respect to anticipated revenues. 6. Channel 71 - It is the intent of the City Council that the This is now channel Administration uses Channel 71 to promote City programs 1L and functions including those events sponsored by other organizations that receive City financial support. More 1111 emphasis should be placed on making the promotional segments more dynamic and interesting. Further, it is the intent of the City Council that the Administration explore opportunities for partnering with schools in this endeavor. (Management Services) 7. Water Fund - It is the intent of the City Council that the Department of Public Utilities continues developing secondary water systems for parks and golf courses and considers including a secondary parallel water system in new developments within the Northwest Quadrant. (Public Utilities) 8. Street Reconstruction - It is the intent of the City Council that local street reconstruction be funded within the Capital Improvement Program on an annual basis in accordance with the Council's adopted Five-Year CIP Plan. (Management Services) 9. Set Aside Money for Severance Pay - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration sets aside a portion of severance pay that is estimated to eventually be paid on historical experience or other factors. These • moneys should be expensed in the years accrued and recorded as fund liabilities. (Management Services) 10. Biennial Budget Submission - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration presents a biennial budget that is balanced in both fiscal years using one-time funds for one-time expenses, with no less than nine percent of ongoing General Fund revenues invested annually in the Capital Improvement Program fund. It is further the intent of the City Council to maintain a healthy fund balance of at least 10% of General Fund revenue. Finally, it is the intent of the City Council that the Administration presents comprehensive budget information to the City Council by the first Tuesday in May of the current fiscal year regarding the second fiscal year of a biennial budget. (Management Services) 11. Fiscal Note on Proposed CIP Projects - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration provides the Council with a fiscal note on proposed capital improvement projects that require additional ongoing operations and maintenance (new parks, additional buildings, etc.). (Management Services) 12. Submission Format for Proposed CIP Projects - It is the intent of the City Council that information relating to proposed Capital Improvement Program projects be submitted in a format similar to that of the comprehensive CDBG reports, including all applications, CIP Citizen Board recommendations, and the Mayor's final CIP recommendations. (Management Services) 13. CIP Budget - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration submits the Capital Improvement Program budget at least thirty days in advance of the General Fund budget to allow ample time for review, and to ensure that the Council's policy of 9% of ongoing revenue is followed. (Management Services) 14. Street Lighting District - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration briefs the Council regarding the possibility of using accumulated reserves in the street lighting districts for converting assessment districts to the privately-owned streetlight program (at the option of the neighborhood), for upgrading streetlights to more decorative residential oriented lighting, or for reducing assessments to property owners. (Community & Economic Development) 15. Radio-Reading Water Meter Pilot Program - It is the • intent of the City Council that the Administration briefs the Council on the effectiveness of the radio-reading water meter pilot program after approximately 4,000 hard-to- read meters are replaced with radio reading devices and the Administration calculates the cost versus the benefits of the program including long-term benefits. (Public Utilities) 16. Grant Writing Team - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration evaluates creating a centralized grant writing function that includes all General Fund employees who perform grant writing duties. (Management Services) 17.Community Education in the Fire Department - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration explores the feasibility of training non-sworn civilian staff or volunteers to perform community education services to Salt Lake City schools. (Fire Department) 18. Economic Development Corporation of Utah - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration coordinates with the Economic Development Corporation of Utah to provide semiannual written information to the Council regarding the accomplishments of EDCU that benefit Salt Lake City. (Community & Economic Development) 19. Impacts of Special Events - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration explores the feasibility of charging reimbursement fees for the use of police officers or other City services at special events where a fee is being charged to participants, and in other circumstances as appropriate. (Management Services) 20. Golf Program - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration briefs the Council during a Work Session meeting in September on the marketing plans for the golf program, including the new incentives created during the fiscal year 2001-02 budget process. (Public Services) 21. Emergency Response Employees - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration present options to the Council regarding a requirement that, as a condition of employment, any emergency-response personnel hired after August 31, 2001 be required to live within a 10 mile • radius of the City & County Building. (Management Services) 22. Semiannual Reports on the Status of Legislative Intent Statements and Action Items - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration provides semiannual reports regarding the status of all active legislative intent statements (including unresolved statements from previous years and statements adopted outside of the official budget process) and all active legislative action items. 23.Funding of Compensation Liability - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration work with the Council to begin to accumulate a reserve in a separate fund or account to fund the City's accrued compensation liability for vacation and other payments that employees may receive upon retirement. Further, it is the Council's intent that the Administration provide estimates on the potential annual financial impact for the next ten or more years. • • 24. Retirement Payouts - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration consistently budget for payments • of vacation leave and other retirement payouts. The Administration should consider budgeting for these payments in a separate fund or account rather than requiring departments to leave positions vacant or otherwise make cuts in operations to finance these payments. 25. Overtime within the Police Department - It is the intent of the City Council that the Police Department make every effort to keep within its overtime budget ($716,000 for fiscal year 2002-2003) and submit a written report to the Council quarterly on actual overtime incurred and steps taken to reduce reliance on overtime. Specifically, the Council requests that the Administration complete a detailed analysis on approaches to reduce overtime. This analysis should include but not be limited to: a. All options to reduce the number of vacant positions . (i.e. hiring officers more frequently; b. All options of workforce scheduling; c. Opportunities to anticipate and accommodate the natural and consistent level of turnover that occurs in the initial months after hiring (including the potential 0 to train more officers than the actual number of positions available); d. Ways in which the Legislative Branch could help address the issue, including the potential of adding positions to allow the Police Department to take approaches as outlined in item "c" above. e. The extent to which the Police Department believes it is beneficial to use overtime in place of regular full time employees in order to manage costs (expenses for cars, equipment, benefits vs. overtime pay) the extent to which holding positions open and using overtime could have a service level impact or policy impact. 26. Overtime within the Fire Department - It is the intent of the City Council that Fire Department continue to take measures to reduce the reliance on overtime and submit quarterly reports to the Council outlining total amount spent for constant staffing at a straight-time rate and amount spent at an overtime rate. • 27. Parking Meter Collection - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration consider collecting parking meter revenue using bonded agencies or employees rather than paying overtime rates. 28. Volunteers - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration investigates ways to expand the use of volunteers and/or retired personnel for providing City services. 29. Process Service - It is the intent of the City Council that the Department of Management Services investigates or tests the service of documents using mail similar to the success reported by the City Prosecutor. 30. Grant Writing Team — It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration complete the centralization of the grant writing function by transferring any remaining grant writer positions to the central team in the Department of Management Services. Further, it is the Council's intent that the Administration provide a quarterly report on the grants submitted and grants received. 31. Grant Monitoring— It is the intent of the Council that the Administration confirm that the grant application and the grant monitoring / management function are appropriately separated in different divisions, to ensure that the grant monitoring and management is conducted by individuals • other than those submitting the grants. Further, it is the Council's intent that all grants and requests for funding be tracked in a central location to ensure that the requests are consistent with the City's policies, and to ensure that the applications are submitted in a manner that leaves the City maximum flexibility in determining how the grants will be used. Further, it is the Council's intent that the Administration provide a quarterly accounting of grant monies received and the specific manner in which they were spent. 32. Economic Development Promotion - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration coordinate economic promotion with other entities that provide these services. The Council requests a written report on the overall economic development activities including the Economic Development Corporation of Utah (EDCU), the State Department of Community and Economic Development, the Salt Lake Chamber of Commerce, the Downtown Alliance and the City's Department of Community and Economic Development. The Council urges the Administration to review the funding formula and • staffing needs of the EDCU and report the findings to the Council. • 33. Impacts of Special Events - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration continue to explore the feasibility of charging reimbursement fees for the use of police officers or other City services at special events where a fee is being charged to participants and in other circumstances as appropriate. The Council requests a quarterly report listing special events approved by the City, including police and other City services that are provided. The listing should include: a. Services provided for which a fee was charged, and the amount of the fee; b. The actual cost of the service to the City; c. Services provided for which no fee was charged; d. Other relevant information. e. Further, the Council requests a listing of special City services provided for events that do not require a permit, including large gatherings at established venues. In approving this Legislative Intent the Council is not expressing opposition to special events, but is seeking more information with which to consider policy options. • 34. Speed Boards— It is the intent of the City Council that all seven speed boards be placed on City streets at least five days per week from 6:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. (except when boards are out of service waiting for parts or otherwise not available). It is the intent of the Council that the Administration consider contracting for this service. _ 35. Privatization of the Citv's Impound Lot Operations — It is the intent of the City Council that the request for proposals to privatize the impound lot operations be broad enough to allow the existing employees to bid as a group, if they so desire. 36. Engineering Costs — It is the intent of the City Council the cost of engineers and architects within the Department of Public Services be more fully allocated to capital improvement projects. The Council requests that the Administration provide a quarterly report to the Council regarding the costs that were allocated compared to total costs. Jones, Sylvia From: Timothy, Craig • Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2003 9:45 AM To: Jones, Sylvia Cc: Dobbins, David; Harpst, Tim; Gust-Jenson, Cindy; Sears, Michael; Mumford, Gary; Aramaki, Jan; Vaterlaus, Scott; Love, Jill; Weyher, Alison;Timothy, Craig Subject: FW: follow up to Jill's questions Categories: Program/Policy Sylvia —I've been asked to respond to your questions regarding traffic calming. To make things easier to follow the answer to each question is located underneath the question. Craig Original Message From: Jones, Sylvia Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 4:02 PM To: Weyher, Alison Cc: Dobbins, David; Harpst,Tim; Gust-Jenson, Cindy; Sears, Michael; Mumford, Gary; Aramaki, Jan Subject: FW: Jill's follow up questions on traffic calming Hi, Alison. Council Member Jill Love called me yesterday as a follow up to her traffic calming questions during Tuesday night's CED budget discussion. She asked if Transportation could respond to the following requests/questions: 1) City-wide map indicating (by dots)the locations of all temporary and permanent • speed bumps by street. See Attached Map and spreadsheet. The attached map shows the location of the various projects that we have worked on and the spreadsheets show what type and how many traffic calming measures were installed on each project. The projects have been broken up into five categories. "Completed Projects with traffic calming measures". These projects went all the way to construction. The spreadsheet shows the type and the amount of traffic calming measures were installed on each project. "Engineering Projects that included traffic calming measures". We have teamed up with City Engineering on several street reconstruction projects where residents had requested that we install some kind of traffic calming measures on them. We do this to take advantage of the cost savings resulting from the street being rebuilt and the desire to impact the neighborhood only once with construction. Normally we don't have the time to test the traffic calming measures before they are installed so we work very closely with the residents who live on the street to identify a plan we are confident will work and that the residents agree upon. "Completed Projects without traffic calming measures." There are times when we will start working with a neighborhood to develop and even test a calming plan on their street only to result in residents not agreeing to a permanent installation or that a successful plan could not be achieved. "Completed Projects waiting for construction of traffic calming measures". We have two projects that have gone all the way through the process and are awaiting to have construction work completed. "Active Projects". We are currently working on eight projects which are at various stages in the process. Two of these projects are City Engineering projects and six of them are ones we are working directly with the residents of street where the traffic calming measures will be installed. 2) History of speed bump usage, for instance, how long has the City been using speed bumps as a traffic calming measure? How many streets use them now, and how many streets are planned for future usage? The first speed humps were installed on Menlo in July 1998. This is a very narrow street that City Engineering was reconstructing at the time. Since that time we have received over 290 requests for traffic calming. We have completed 41 projects and of those projects 24 of them have had some kind of traffic calming measures installed on them with speed humps being the most popular traffic calming measure. We have . 107 requests that are currently eligible for traffic calming and 145 of the requests that did not meet our eligibility requirements which is based upon points received from speed, traffic volume and several other criteria. 3) How much as the City spent so far on speed bumps? 1 Approximately$662,000 has been spent so far for traffic calming implementation including, but not limited to, speed humps and speed tables. Approximately$250,000 has been spent for testing equipment and other supplies. 4) Are there any studies demonstrating speed bump effectiveness? (i.e.: That traffic speed actually slows as a result of the bumps?) Yes, before we start any project we will conduct a traffic study to gather the speed III and the volume in that area to serve as a baseline for that street. During the testing period we will conduct another traffic study to determine whether or not we have been effective in reducing the speeding on that street. The results of the second study is compared to the results of the first study to help us determine if we need to make adjustments in the traffic calming plan or if we should consider constructing the traffic calming plan. You'll notice on the spread sheet that there are times when we start a project, but we end not installing any traffic calming measures on the street. Often this happens when we have not seen a significant change in the speed on the street. 5) Are there any indicators detailing whether traffic patterns change after temporary or permanent speed bumps are installed? For instance, temporary speed bumps were placed on 1500 East. What is the change in traffic flow or pattern on 1700 South, Harvard, Michigan & Laird as a result of the temporary speed bumps on 1500 East? We are currently testing five speed tables on 1500 East. Prior to the testing period we placed traffic counters on 1500 East, 1600 East, 1700 East, 1800 East and 1 900- East to see what the traffic was before we installed the speed tables on 1500 East. Now that the testing period has begun we will place traffic counters on each of these streets again to see what if any changes have occurred. 6) Do we have anything to show what the traffic patterns are pre and post speed bump placement? At the beginning of each project we look at the entire area to determine if there are streets that traffic might divert to. When we feel that there is a possibility of diverting traffic from one street to another we will conduct a traffic study on that street at the same time that we conduct the traffic studies on the primary road. If we see that traffic has been diverted onto another road we work to find a solution to that problem. We can either change the traffic plan on the primary road or we work with the residents who live on the road where the traffic has been diverted to install traffic 411 calming measures on their street. 7) Have we allowed the neighborhoods to be creative with their own traffic calming solutions? If so, how? Yes! The residents play a big part in determining what type of traffic calming measures are tested and installed on their street. The program begins with a neighborhood meeting where the residents are invited to participate in a neighborhood traffic calming committee (NTCC). The NTCC work very closely with us in designing a traffic calming plan for their street. A survey is then sent to all of the residents and property owners of that street to see if there is enough support to test the traffic calming measures. We will only test the plan if there is enough support for the plan. During the testing period we will survey the residents and property owners again to see if there is enough support from them to construct the traffic calming plan. Speed humps are the most commonly requested/desired devices from residents. This is generally because they are the most effective. Because of the growing negative feedback,we are more heavily promoting a mix of traffic calming devices in any one plan as well as using more speed tables instead of humps since they are a"kinder, gentler"speed hump. Also, if there are aspects of a plan that we feel strongly about needing to remain in a plan, we so indicate to the neighborhood. For example, we have had some neighborhoods want to keep tested speed humps, but remove pedestrian bulbouts at crosswalks. They shorten pedestrian crossing distances and are generally safer, but also make it more difficult for drivers to make right hand turns. Thanks. Sylvia • 2 iki J'� ,��F;=;i:� Baca „ :;41 '`'3"—.. , I- I El I wok Ill" ' - - = , l,,:,,J,: 4,190 -, i j -- linen^' ‘" i . h Salt Lake City • . a y�riya'° 1 ■:' ■�■' P �+.. Traffic Calming .:i,. ..... ..,,NT�,i fol, imi. .maidlicw\ -.r.mg ■■■- 1■• A •llf !IEiil l l N �a��i,��" .:i::rj::. �'*- 1=111 ia VI tE`r•7: 1rp'v ..■■o%-■...rb s. ■■ . j� :;5,, w;; ` . � lkel ■i■■■■.■■■■■■■s1✓• umm:iilalul L . . �'Jy. r��r�.-- � ` �.'Y „. ..,. '�:r„-ate■■ t_■��.� 1%--6l-o.. 11 ■�� -'' 'Jp 1 - : 0 0',1 !MIMI 2...,_ ■l11iTi B . IE1M1a lii :ii! iL__ ,i,,, h\l;( aIr- lipIa21M11• " iiimmo 29 \ 'i _ - .1. , ,dill ` r--,. _C �- S ti9111 r — m— lt• � . iL A . . w'7' sash_ • "' _a lal =�� ^„ =►•• RIM a .. RIM - 1.1.111 MIN=owniiihmerie um emmit assimum 1 HE Nak 7 ,, Ill N —I =1:"AlIMINIMilli--Mr...271INImein •INN a *.mi :MI m nuis=wors, ...i. zsiiiih77,,,. ti.1 Mall all. 41.617E11.11.1111111"Lue 1.11.Wal161:r1:7 11114;innossigiL! 111Wilerilli 13''''' '' -:4" N ME,I IM alt : --w "—A'11 !::._::::F'-:,f'?„—,A,-„,'! _ • 1,24440 � Project statustii....._ � . _ i. f • Completed Projects with traffic calming meeeures = — -I - .al: teaurlr::'k;'• En ineerl Pro thatIncludedtrafccalmin measures ✓ IiiiiiiP -� ` ` ® Completed Projects without traffic calming measures ti t P f "IIIIII11111111-4, +6 Qplated rojeda waking for construction of traffic calming - ,,..,l� Completed pti SALTLAKE OF Y TRANSPORTATIONPORATION n. � DIVISION • Active Projects ' l �� 349 8OUfN 200 EAST,SUITE ISO rr e— 1}, aR1r, DRAWN BY:K.BELL e128/2003 41111 S III • Provide Council Members with a listing of the new computers (117 to 124 per tech) and their proposed location? Citywide computers (PCs) have shown a consistent growth over the past several years (Please see attached Department PC Count document for details),. Presently, IMS is maintaining 2,461 computers (PCs) citywide with a staff of 21 Network Technicians. This results in each Network Technician being responsible for an average of 117 PCs. The industry standard for effective and competent support is 1 Network Technician per a maximum of every 100 PCs, IMS Technicians have been able to effectively support a slightly higher average without deterioration of service quality. Based on the historical growth patterns of the City, CED, Fire, Police, and Public Services have shown fairly consistent annual increases in PCs (Please see attached Department PC Count document for details). This is a direct result of improving technology, the City's overall drive for less paper (use electronic files), and improved customer service. Although it is difficult to determine the exact departmental growth for subsequent years, based on this historical data and communications from the Departments, IMS is anticipating the growth patterns shown on the attached document. This will result in a demand for an increase in staffing to effectively support a greater number of PCs. If the anticipated growth does not materialize . during FY04, the increased staffing will result in an improvement in the support ratio. However, based upon even the most conservative analysis and trends, the ratio will not fall below 110 to 115 computers for each Network Technician. Based on current trends, if IMS staffing remains status quo, there will be an increase in workload per Network Technician resulting in each Network Technician being responsible for an average of 124 PCs (21 Network Technicians handling an estimated FY04 PC count of 2,593). To alleviate the negative impact this would have, IMS is requesting the approval of one additional Network Technician position. This would bring the ratio back into line, with each Network Technician being responsible for an average of 118 PCs. • Provide Council Member Christensen a list of the pending projects (backlog) of projects for a web-programmer position - justify need for an additional programmer. Include origin of request; which City department or whether an external/constituent based. Please see attached System Backlog document. •