Loading...
05/29/2003 - Minutes PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in a Work Session on Thursday, May 29, 2003 at 5:30 p.m. in Room 126, 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, Council Executive Director; Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer; Edwin Rutan, City Attorney; Russell Weeks, Council Policy Analyst; Steve Fawcett, Deputy Director of Management Services; Tim Harpst, Director of Transportation; Randy Hillier, CIP Admin/Budget & Policy Analyst; Laurie Dillon, Budget Analyst; Greg Davis, Public Services Finance Director; Michael Sears, Council Budget & Policy Analyst; Lehua Weaver, Council Constituent Liaison; Sylvia Jones, Council Research & Policy Analyst/Constituent Liaison; Steve Wetherell, Golf Manager; Susan Roberts, City Economist; Mary Johnston, City Courts Director and Chris Meeker, Chief Deputy Recorder. Council Chair Christensen presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:37 p.m. #1. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION ITEMS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. See file M 03-5 for announcements. #2 . DISCUSS THE SCHEDULE FOR THE MAIN STREET PLAZA HEARING AND RELATED MATTERS. View Attachment Mr. Rutan briefed the Council on the continuation of the schedule of the Main Street hearing and related matters. He said he had received letters from the Alliance for Unity and Mr. Sorensen regarding their contributions. He said these letters would be available to the public on the City's web site. He reviewed the letters. (See file M 03-4 for letters) . A discussion was held regarding funding for the community center. Mr. Rutan said the Alliance for Unity and Mr. Sorenson had limited their contributions to building the center. Councilmember Saxton asked how long the contributions could be held without dedication to the center. Mr. Rutan said that wad not addressed in either letter. He said this was not critical because funds could not be used for any other project. Councilmember Lambert asked if any funding was left could it be used as a trust fund to help pay for future operation and maintenance of the building. Mr. Rutan said in discussions with the Alliance for Unity they had no problem using extra funding for operation and maintenance. He said this was not stated in the letter and might need to be confirmed in writing. A discussion was held regarding the project being held up due to the court case. Mr. Rutan said the commitment by the Alliance of Unity to provide funding was good until September 30, 2003. Mr. Rutan said one of the proposed findings in the proposed draft ordinance was that the continued existence of the pedestrian easement was not necessary. He said the word "necessary" meant "indispensable" or "essential". He said if the transaction was approved there would be no guaranteed right of public access. He said when the Council made their decision of whether the continued existence of easement was necessary they could not assume the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS) Church would keep the easement open to pedestrian access. 03 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 Councilmember Buhler asked about the 30-day period when either party could back out of the agreement. Mr. Rutan said the reason for the 30-day period was because there were procedural irregularities subject to a 30-day statue of limitations. He said the controversy was what the irregularities were. He said this period of time allowed for fixing of defects before closing. A discussion was held regarding the vacation of the easement by the City and the authority of the Mayor and the City Council together. Mr. Rutan said the City was doing two things. He said the fist was the conveyance of the easement interest from the City to the LDS Church and the second was the amendment of the original deed. He said the original deed still had continuing validity. He said there were still three easements which the City reserved. He said the original warranty deed needed to have continual effect. Councilmember Jergensen asked if it would benefit the City to define the access and passage prior to vacation. Mr. Rutan said it would serve no purpose. A discussion was held regarding the public hearing schedule. All Council Members were in favor of holding the hearing as advertised. Councilmember Saxton encouraged Council Members not to vote on the subject until the Supreme Court had made a decision. #3. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET FOR GOLF FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004, INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDING GOLF COURSE GREEN FEES AND GROUP RESERVATIONS. View Attachment Michael Sears, Steve Wetherell and Rick Graham briefed the Council. A discussion was held regarding the 8% fee increase. Mr. Graham said the increase was over a two- year period and represented $1 per nine holes or $2 per eighteen holes played. He said other fees had also been adjusted equaling the 8% increase. A discussion was held regarding season passes. Mr. Graham said regular and junior passes would not be offered. He said other types of fee reduction programs had been provided to take the place of season passes. Mr. Wetherell said 2400 frequent player discount cards had been sold. He said 16% of the paid rounds in 2002 were paid with the frequent player discount card. He said the current charge for a frequent player discount card was $50. He said this was a 30% discount for a regular golfer. He said in addition senior and junior discounts could be used. He said a typical senior could play for 50% of the full rate price. Councilmember Love asked how much a round of golf cost. Mr. Graham said currently there was a tiered pricing of green fees. He said there were three high-end courses which charged $9.50 for nine holes or $25 for eighteen holes. He said the intermediate course charged $11 for nine holes and $22 for eighteen. He said the cost for nine- hole courses was $10. He said the fee increase would add $1 or $2 dollars to the green fees depending which course was played. Councilmember Love asked how the fees compared to other courses. Mr. Graham said fees were in line with other public golf courses in the metro Wasatch Front area. A discussion was held regarding which courses broke even and which courses carried the weight of the others. Mr. Graham explained management and staff for courses. Mr. Wetherell explained that Wingpointe and Mt. Dell courses needed help from other courses to pay bond debt. 03 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 Councilmember Jergensen said he was concerned an increase in rates would affect those in the community who were unable to pay the increase. He said these were the people who used the courses the most. Mr. Wetherell said additional discounts were being proposed. He reviewed several scenarios using more than one discount option. Councilmember Lambert asked if the fee increases put City golf courses at a higher rate than County courses. Mr. Wetherell said the shift would put City courses at approximately 50 cents above the County. Councilmember Lambert asked how much of the fee increase was attributable to the water rate increase. Mr. Graham said the operating increase was attributable to water rate increases, personal cost increases and increases to chemicals and supplies. A discussion was held regarding year around grounds workers and hours of operation and green usage. Councilmember Saxton asked what the national trend was for employment of golf professionals at municipal courses. Mr. Wetherell said typically, each municipal golf course employed a golf pro and a golf course superintendent. Councilmember Saxton encouraged creativity in creating fees. She said the responsibility was to the citizens of Salt Lake City. She said pricing and availability should go to City taxpayers. She said the high performance courses could raise fees but low performance courses should drop fees so City residents could afford to play golf. A discussion was held regarding water saving efforts made by Public Services. Mr. Wetherell said reduction of water areas at courses was a big consideration. He said the difficulty was with older water systems. He said mowing heights had been increased to reduce the stress on the grass. Councilmember Lambert said the Salt Lake City valley was not comparable to St. George with regard to golf. He said there was no value charging greater or lesser amounts for services because of residency. A discussion was held regarding free rounds of golf. Mr. Wetherell said professional courtesy was exercised for visiting golf professionals and golf course superintendents holding a Professional Golf Association (PGA) card. Councilmember Christensen suggested bonding for renovation to water systems at City golf courses and parks. Mr. Graham said a formal analysis would need to be done and that was something to look at. #4. CONTINUE DISCUSSION REGARDING THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (CIP) BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004. View Attachment Michael Sears briefed the Council. He said the City expected to receive a Federal Grant for the intermodal hub but the general fund balance made a contribution to the Intermodel Hub. He referred to the attached orange colored memo which was an accounting of the impact fee revenue and expenditures to date. He pointed out a negative balance for the Fire Department. He reviewed the projects and said Police, Fire, Parks and Streets loans would need to be made as projects were constructed. A discussion was held regarding the negative balance. Mr. Sears said the City had not collected any impact fees in the Northwest quadrant. He said fees might not be collected for 10 to 15 years. He said costs had been allocated to the area from studies. He reviewed the description of the areas. 03 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 A discussion was held regarding building infrastructure in the industrial area of the Northwest quadrant. Mr. Sears said other impact fee concerns were the Sugar House Rails with Trails project and the North Brickyard Neighborhood Park Design. He reviewed Table V11-2, labeled Open Space/Nature Preserves Inventory and Needs Assessment. He said this was a page from of the final impact fee study for the impact fee ordinance. Mr. Sears said one concern was creating a fund for open space. He said parks might not fit the definition for open space. A discussion was held regarding using park impact fee funds for open space. Councilmember Lambert said he and Councilmember Love were working on an open space initiative which included the ability to develop small neighborhood parks and trails. Councilmember Lambert said he understood impact funding could be used for the North Brick Yard Neighborhood Park. Mr. Sears said if Council agreed with the Administration' s interpretation of open space implementation, then funding from the impact could be used. A discussion was held regarding open space projects. Ms. Gust- Jenson said the Council could choose to fund the neighborhood park from the (CIP) fund. A discussion was held regarding the CIP request list and projects being eligible for CIP funding. Councilmember Buhler asked where the McClelland Trail fit in. Mr. Sears said he would research it. Mr. Sears said the Mayor' s recommended final budget for CIP was approximately $27,000,000. He said that included what was already appropriated for Community Development Block Grant, (CDBG) Class C funds, other governmental revenue and the Library debt service. He said that left approximately $13,881,000 to come up with 9%. He reviewed the debt service projects. Councilmember Jergensen suggested waiting to look at the larger budget before doing anything with the (CIP) budget. He suggested funding the debt service knowing that it was an obligation. Mr. Sears said an application for lighting in Sugar House had been made to the Redevelopment Board (RDA) and the CIP. He said the application was considered and recommended in both areas. He said if the Sugar House street lighting was funded by the RDA, the CIP portion could be applied to Rose Park lighting or other projects. A discussion was held regarding the commitment to fund 9%. Councilmember Buhler suggested designating $7 million to the CIP fund. All Council Members were in favor of discussion at a later date. Mr. Sears said the Liberty Park Project was a major project with several phases. He said the total cost was over $18 million. He said the line item was for the next phase. Councilmember Christensen asked staff to look for critical needs for projects that were ready to build. #5. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE MAYOR'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET FOR MANAGEMENT SERVICES FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-3004, INCLUDING INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (IMS) , THE JUSTICE COURT AND PROPOSED ORDINANCES. View Attachment • Enacting Section 14.32.425 of the Salt Lake City Code, relating to telecommunication right-of-way permits, and establishing annual fees therefore; • Amending Section 12.56.170, Salt Lake City Code, relating to parking meters - 03 - 4 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 rates (no longer recommended by the Mayor) ; and • Adopting the rate of tax levy upon all real and personal property within Salt Lake City made taxable by law. Sylvia Jones, Rocky Fluhart and Susan Roberts briefed the Council. Ms. Roberts said the County Assessor's Office had assigned the General Fund $1,255, 902.96, which was above what had been budgeted. She said the Library was assigned $212,745. She said the process needed to go to the State Tax Commission but the numbers would show in the current tax year revenue numbers. Councilmember Jergensen asked if the projections were conservative or aggressive. Ms. Roberts said she felt the projections were conservative. Councilmember Jergensen asked Ms. Roberts what her methodology was. She said she compiled data throughout the year and monitored economies. She said she paid attention to the housing industry, motor vehicle trends and what the consumer was buying. She said war and elections were also taken into consideration. She said she tried to take in every sociological and economic piece of information. Councilmember Jergensen asked what the percentage of increase in revenue might be. Ms. Roberts said revenue relied on the economy and currently there was a slight decline. A discussion was held regarding the tax rate. Councilmember Buhler asked if the next budget should be built from actual revenue data from the past year instead of projecting the tax rate. Ms. Roberts said that was a good conservative way to build the budget. She said she had done that for the current year. She said the law had changed and the calculated base was not the actual revenue received in the prior year but the amount of revenue budgeted in the prior year. A discussion was held regarding the advantages and disadvantages of the new law. A discussion was held regarding the collection of past due court fees. Mr. Fluhart said a discussion was underway with other cities and the State to make collections through the State. Councilmember Buhler asked for an accumulation of the last five years. Mr. Fluhart said he would get the numbers and take steps to improve collections. Councilmember Buhler suggested hiring a collection agency. Councilmember Lambert asked if the pro-tem judges had been used. Ms. Johnston said they were used for approximately 6 hours when filling in for another judge who had a full calendar. She said they anticipated using pro-tem judges more in the future because calendars of other judges were full. She said this would insure hearing cases in a timely manner. She said she anticipated starting a part-time calendar. A discussion was held regarding position transfers. Mr. Fluhart explained the transfers. A discussion was held regarding IMS two full-time employee requests (FTE' s) . Councilmember Christensen asked if networks had expanded sufficiently to warrant a network technician. He asked what the Web Program Administrator would do. Kendrick Cowley said IMS tried to maintain the industry average of one technician for every 100 computers. He said the Gardner Group had done several studies which indicated this was the maximum a technician should handle. He said currently IMS was at 117 computers for every technician. He said with anticipated growth that number would go up to 124 computers for every technician. Mr. Cowley said the Web Program Administrator was needed because IMS was responsible for its own success. He said 21 new systems needed to be maintained and the demand was greater than the successes. Councilmember Christensen asked for a list 03 - 5 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, MAY 29, 2003 of net needs. A discussion was held regarding the new Court and procedures. Councilmember Saxton asked about the Courts computer software. Ms. Johnston said the software program was called GEMS and it tracked all criminal cases from date of citation through disposition. Councilmember Saxton asked if information from the program could be accessed by other agencies. Ms. Johnston said all the data tracked was public information and other agencies could access data. A discussion was held regarding case dismissal rate and efficiency. Councilmember Christensen asked as a legislative intent that a quarterly report regarding collections be submitted to the Council. Councilmember Jergensen said he wanted to see further progress on collection agencies and work with the State for collection. #6. HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING POLICY DIRECTION AND OTHER ISSUES RELATED TO THE BUDGET. Ms. Gust-Jenson said Council staff had gather information and would brief each Councilmember on individual issues. She said a basic list had been developed and more discussion could be held. She said a review of all revenue sources would be provided to the Council. #7. RECEIVE A REPORT REGARDING A PROPOSED OLYMPIC LEGACY PROJECT FOR COUNCIL DISTRICT ONE. View Attachment Councilmember Christensen referred to a memo regarding the Olympic Legacy project for District One. He said he had met with members of the Community Councils in August. He said the idea came from the City's recent transfer of the Jordan River Parkway to the State and the desire to see up-grades. He said the area would start at North Temple and run north to 1000 North and included eight locations. He said the parkway ran through four of the primary Community Councils in District One. He said a station would be placed approximately every 600 feet and would have an Olympic theme. He said a 10-foot concrete pad would be constructed at each location with the Olympic logo and petroglyph figures for various event venues. He said light would also be constructed at each location. Councilmember Buhler up-dated the Council on the Olympic Legacy project for District Six. The meeting adjourned at 9:21 p.m. cm 03 - 6 • ALLIANCE FOR UNITY May 29, 2003 Jon M.Huntsman The Honorable Ross C. ("Rocky")Anderson Co-Convener 451 South State Street, Room 306 Mayor Ross C.Anderson Salt Lake City, UT 84111 Co-Convener Dr.Alexander B.Morrison Dear Mayor Anderson: Executive Director Robert"Archie"Archuleta I am pleased to confirm that the Alliance for Unity(the "Alliance")has Pamela).Atkinson received cash or legally enforceable pledges sufficient to meet its commitment to raise a total of$4 million for construction of the Glendale Unity Center(the Elder M.Russell Ballard "Unity Center") and,perhaps, other community facilities in the Glendale Reverend France Davis neighborhood of Salt Lake City. The cash is on deposit in an interest bearing, escrow account at a local bank. As a result, subject to satisfaction of each of the Spencer F.Eccles conditions set forth in this letter on or before the Closing, described below, the •ohn Hughes Alliance will deliver$4 million in cash(the "Funds")to Salt Lake City at the The Right Reverend Closing,provided the Closing occurs on or before September 30, 2003. Carolyn Tanner Irish Charles E."Charlie"Johnson Delivery of the Funds is subject to satisfaction, in the sole opinion of the Alliance, on or prior to the Closing, of each of the following conditions: Esther Landa President J.Bernard Machen 1. With respect to the real property constituting the "Main Street Plaza" (the "Plaza"): Norma Matheson The Most Reverend (a) The Salt Lake City Council shall have enacted and George H.Niederauer published a final ordinance vacating any pedestrian access and passage easement James"Jay"Shelledy (the "Pedestrian Easement") across, on, or associated with the Plaza. Harris H.Simmons (b) The existing Pedestrian Easement affecting the Plaza shall Shelley Thomas have been completely extinguished by an appropriate conveyance by Salt Lake Judge Raymond Uno(Retired) City to The Corporation of the Presiding Bishop of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the "Church"). (c) Salt Lake City shall not have reserved any right of public access or passage by the City or the public with respect to the Plaza, except for easements for public and private utilities and easements for emergency and public safety services (collectively,the "Utility and Service Easements"). 11111 500 Huntsman Way • Salt Lake City, Utah 84108 Tel: 801.584.5775 • Fax: 801.584.5789 Mayor Ross C. ("Rocky")Anderson May 29, 2003 4111 Page 2 (d) Except for its rights pursuant to the Utility and Service Easements,the view corridor and fencing restrictions contained in the Plaza warranty deed, as amended, and the Church's obligations to use and maintain the Plaza as a landscaped space, Salt Lake City shall have relinquished,released, and disclaimed any right or authority to regulate any expression or conduct on the Plaza(other than pursuant to its police powers applicable to private property in general). 2. The other parties to the transaction proposed in your "A Turning Point for Peace"proposal (the "Proposal") shall have contributed the real property and cash set forth in your Proposal. Specifically: (a) The Church shall have conveyed fee simple title to Salt Lake City of approximately 2.125 acres of real property near the existing Sorenson Center in Glendale for construction of the Unity Center. (b) The Church shall have contributed the sum of$250,000 to the Alliance. (These funds shall be part of, and not in addition to the $4 million • committed by the Alliance.) (c) James Sorenson shall have delivered or otherwise made available for immediate release to Salt Lake City not less than an aggregate $1 million in cash and real property for expansion of the Sorenson Center and/or construction of the Unity Center, and/or for construction of a new parking lot for use in connection with the Sorenson Center and the Unity Center. 3. The closing of each of the transactions described in paragraphs 1 and 2 above(the "Closing") shall have occurred not earlier than 35 days after final action by the Salt Lake City Council to implement an ordinance vacating the Pedestrian Easement and to approve the transactions described in paragraphs 1 and 2, and in any event, not later than September 30, 2003. 4. At the Closing,the Salt Lake City Attorney shall have delivered a letter to the Alliance, in form reasonably acceptable to the Alliance, confirming that, after exercising reasonable diligence, as of the date of the Closing,no lawsuit or administrative appeal has been commenced against Salt Lake City, or its officers, agents or affiliates, seeking to reverse,modify or otherwise alter the transactions described in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, or the conditions set forth in paragraph 3 above. The Alliance acknowledges that after the Closing there is a risk of successful legal challenge to the proposed transaction between Salt Lake • • Mayor Ross C. ("Rocky")Anderson May 29, 2003 Page 3 City and the Church and, in the event of any such challenge,the Alliance acknowledges and agrees that the City will not be required to refund the Funds. 5. At the Closing, Salt Lake City shall have delivered a letter to the Alliance, in form reasonably satisfactory to the Alliance, confirming that the Alliance shall not be responsible for any costs relating to the construction, operation, and ongoing maintenance of the Unity Center or any other community facilities,beyond the donation of the Funds described above. 6. At the Closing, all costs and expenses of preparing and recording the documents necessary to accomplish each of the transactions described in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, and to meet each of the conditions set forth in paragraphs 3, 4, and 5 above, shall have been paid by Salt Lake City,the Church, or persons other than the Alliance, and the Alliance shall not be liable or otherwise responsible for any costs, fees, expenses or other amounts related to or incurred in connection with any of the transactions described in this letter, over and above its donation of the Funds described above. The Alliance reserves the right to revise or augment these conditions after • its review of the final settlement agreements and conveyancing documents contemplated between Salt Lake City and the Church regarding extinguishment of the Pedestrian Easement. Sincerely, ALLIANCE FOR UNITY Jon . Huntsman Co- nvener JMH:vls SaltLake-201035.3 0099880-00369 • DRAFT 5/2023/03 i SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT This Settlement Agreement is entered into as of the day of , 2003, between SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION(hereinafter the"City") and the CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDING BISHOP OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER-DAY SAINTS, a Utah corporation sole (hereinafter"COPB"). Collectively, the City and the COPB will constitute and be referred to as the"Parties." Recitals The Parties jointly represent and acknowledge: A. On or about April 27, 1999,the City executed a Special Warranty Deed (hereinafter the"Special Warranty Deed")to the COPB conveying surface rights in property described in Exhibit A to the Special Warranty Deed(hereinafter the"Main Street Plaza Property"). The Main Street Plaza Property formerly constituted a segment of Main Street in Salt Lake City, Utah,between South Temple Street and North Temple Street. In the Special Warranty Deed, the City reserved several easements on and under the surface of the Main Street Plaza Property,including an easement for pedestrian access and passage only, subject to certain limitations designed to assure that the Main Street Plaza Property would not be dedicated to public ownership or constitute a First Amendment forum of any kind under the United States • Constitution. (The pedestrian access and passage easement, as established and limited in the Special Warranty Deed, will hereafter be called the"Pedestrian Easement.") B. The Special Warranty Deed provided that nothing in the Pedestrian Easement was to be deemed to create or constitute a"public forum"on the Main Street Plaza Property. The Special Warranty Deed also provided that the City and the COPB could terminate the Pedestrian Easement without the joinder or consent of any other person. The parties to the Special Warranty Deed explicitly intended for the COPB to have the right to regulate or prohibit conduct and activity of persons visiting or passing over the Main Street Plaza Property. C. In June 2000, the First Unitarian Church of Salt Lake City,Utahns for Fairness, the Utah National Organization for Women, and Craig S. Axford filed suit in the United States District Court for the District of Utah against the City to challenge, among other things,the Special Warranty Deed's restrictions on the Pedestrian Easement. The suit, entitled First Unitarian Church of Salt Lake City, et al. vs. Salt Lake City Corporation,will hereinafter be referred to as the"Federal Litigation." The COPB intervened as a party defendant in the Federal Litigation. D. On or about May 4, 2001,the United States District Court for the District of Utah entered summary judgment for the City and the COPB in the Federal Litigation,holding that the restrictions on the Pedestrian Easement in the Special Warranty Deed did not violate the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. • • E. On or about October 9, 2002,the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit issued an order reversing the district court's decision in the Federal Litigation and holding that the Pedestrian Easement created a public forum for First Amendment purposes and, as a result, that the City and the COPB may not prohibit protected speech on the Pedestrian Easement. The Tenth Circuit's decision suggested that the City's relinquishment of the Pedestrian Easement would eliminate the public forum and, therefore, the First Amendment issues associated with the Pedestrian Easement. The COPB has filed a petition for certiorari with the United States Supreme Court in which it seeks review of the Tenth Circuit's decision. F. Following issuance of the Tenth Circuit's decision in the Federal Litigation, the City and the COPB disagreed concerning the decision's impact on the Pedestrian Easement and the right of the COPB to regulate or prohibit conduct on the Main Street Plaza Property. The City took the position that the Pedestrian Easement remains in effect without any of the limitations set forth specifically in the Special Warranty Deed. The COPB took the position that, as the result of the Tenth Circuit's opinion in the Federal Litigation, the Pedestrian Easement is void and, in any event, should be vacated so that the COPB may constitutionally regulate the use of the Main Street Plaza Property in accordance with the original intent of the parties to the Special Warranty Deed. In the face of these differences, the City and the COPB sought a mutually acceptable compromise to avoid protracted and costly litigation between them concerning the future of the Main Street Plaza Property. G. On January 8,2003,the Mayor of the City(the"Mayor") filed a petition with the • City's Acting Planning Director for approval of a proposal to resolve the disputes referenced in paragraph F of these recitals(all of which disputes are hereinafter referred to collectively as the "Disputes"). A copy of the Petition is annexed hereto as Exhibit 1. On , the City Council approved the Mayor's proposal by Ordinance, a copy of which is annexed hereto as Exhibit 2 (the"Ordinance"). The purpose of this Settlement Agreement, the terms of which have been approved by the City Council, is to avoid litigation and resolve all of the Disputes, including without limitation, all disputes between the City and the COPB relating in any way to pedestrian access,pedestrian passage, and the right to control conduct on the Main Street Plaza Property. It is the intent of the Parties for the City to close,vacate, abandon, and convey to the COPB the Pedestrian Easement in return for consideration including the promises, covenants and agreements set forth herein. H. In implementation of the proposal set forth in Exhibit 1, the Parties and other interested persons intend to undertake a series of transactions and donations that will enable the City to establish one or more community facilities (hereinafter collectively the"Community Facility") located in the Glendale neighborhood for Salt Lake City residents. The land to be conveyed to the City pursuant to paragraph 2 of this Settlement Agreement will provide a location for one such facility. The Alliance for Unity will provide to the City a total of at least Four Million Dollars ($4,000,000)for construction of the Community Facility and, in the City's discretion, furnishings, fixtures, equipment, and maintenance therefor. James L. Sorenson will donate to the City cash and/or land having a value of at least One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) for the same purposes. The Foundation of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has • 2 2 • contributed Two Hundred and Fifty Thousand Dollars ($250,000) to the Alliance for Unity toward its donation. I. By adopting the Ordinance, the Salt Lake City Council has considered this Settlement Agreement and all instruments and transactions referenced by this Settlement Agreement as well as the public comments regarding the Mayor's proposal. Agreement In consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth below, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Mutual Release of All Claims—Effective at"Closing," as defined in paragraph 8 below, and subject only to the obligations arising from this Settlement Agreement, the City and the COPB shall release, forgive, and forever discharge each other of and from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, liabilities, damages or losses of any kind whatsoever relating in any way to the Disputes, including, without limitation,those relating to the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit in the Federal Litigation, the Pedestrian Easement and limitations thereon in the Special Warranty Deed,use of the Main Street Plaza Property as a public forum, and the COPB's regulation or prohibition of conduct and activity on the Main • Street Plaza Property. 2. Transfer of Glendale Property—At Closing, the COPB will convey 2.125 acres of property(hereinafter the"Glendale Property")located at 1385 South 900 West, Salt Lake City, Utah,by executing,delivering and recording a Special Warranty Deed in substantially the form annexed hereto as Exhibit 3 (the"Glendale Special Warranty Deed"). 3. Vacation and Conveyance of Public Access Easement—At Closing,pursuant to the Ordinance, the City will close,vacate, abandon, and convey to the COPB the Pedestrian Easement by executing, delivering and recording a"Deed Conveying Easement Rights and Amendment to Special Warranty Deed"substantially in the form annexed hereto as Exhibit 4 (the"Deed Conveying Easement Rights"). By virtue of the passage of the Ordinance and the execution, delivery and recording of the Deed Conveying Easement Rights,the Parties intend to effectuate the complete extinguishment of the Pedestrian Easement in return for all promises and covenants by the COPB in this Settlement Agreement and all donated funds and land received from the Alliance for Unity and James L. Sorenson. It is further the intent of the Parties that, following implementation of this Settlement Agreement, the City will own no interest whatsoever in the Main Street Plaza Property except those interests arising from the COPB's obligation to use and maintain the Property as a landscaped space and the easements for emergency and public safety services and public and private utilities and the view corridor restrictions, as set forth specifically in Paragraphs 1.1, 1.2 and 1.4 of the Special Warranty Deed, as amended pursuant to this Settlement Agreement. 2 3 • 4. Other Consideration. The COPB acknowledges that the receipt by the City of the consideration to be provided by the Alliance for Unity and James L. Sorenson is material to the City's decision to enter into this transaction. 5. Amendment of Special Warranty Deed—At Closing, the City and the COPB will execute, deliver and record the Deed conveying Easement Rights, which will amend the Special Warranty Deed as follows: (a) Paragraphs 1.3, 2 (including all subparagraphs thereof), and 6.3 of the Special Warranty Deed will be deleted in their entirety and shall have no further force or effect whatsoever. (b) Paragraph 1.4 of the Special Warranty Deed will be amended to add the following: "To ensure the preservation of the view corridor established in this paragraph 1.4 and the aesthetics of the property and surrounding areas, Grantee may not erect fences, walls or gates on the Property without the written approval of Grantor, which approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. Grantor's approval authority shall be exercised based on aesthetic, safety, and security considerations and the need to preserve the view corridor established in this paragraph. All fences, walls and gates currently in place on the Property have been approved by Grantor. If a court of competent jurisdiction holds (without regard to any right to appeal) that the provisions in this • paragraph 1.4 relating to fences, walls and gates, alone or in combination with any other factor, create or establish the basis for a First Amendment forum of any kind, then and thereupon the requirement that Grantee must obtain approval from Grantor to erect fences, walls or gates shall automatically terminate and be of no further force or effect whatsoever." (c) Paragraph 4 of the Special Warranty Deed will be amended in its entirety to read as follows: 4. Right of Reverter. In the event that Grantee fails to use and maintain the Property as a landscaped space or to permit Grantor access to the Property pursuant to the easements reserved in Paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2, or violates the view corridor and fencing restrictions in Paragraph 1.4, then the Property shall, at Grantor's option exercised in accordance with Paragraph 5, revert to Grantor. Notwithstanding the foregoing, none of the provisions of this paragraph 4, alone or in combination with any other factor, shall be interpreted to create or establish the basis for a First Amendment forum of any kind. (d) Paragraph 6.1 of the Special Warranty Deed will be amended in its entirety to read as follows: 6.1 Integrated Agreement. This instrument is complete and integrated, and constitutes the entire understanding between the Parties with respect to the • subject matter contained herein and supersedes all previous and contemporaneous 2 4 • agreements, understandings,promises, warranties, representations, inducements or conditions, oral or written, except as contained herein and in the Settlement Agreement between the Parties entered into on , 2003. The express terms hereof control and supersede any course of performance inconsistent with any terms hereof. Any revisions, amendments or modifications to this instrument must be in writing and signed by all parties. Any implied and/or oral revisions, amendments or modifications will not be binding on any of the parties. (e) Paragraph 6.2 of the Special Warranty Deed will be amended in its entirety to read as follows: 6.2 Severability. If any term, condition, or provision of this instrument is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable for any reason, all other terms, conditions and provisions of this instrument shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect so long as the primary purposes of the instrument are not thereby affected in any manner materially adverse to any party. Upon such determination that any term, condition or other provision is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the Parties hereto shall negotiate in good faith to modify this instrument so as to effect as closely as possible the original intent of the Parties in a mutually acceptable manner to the fullest extent permitted by • applicable law. (f) The Special Warranty Deed will be amended by adding the following paragraphs: 6.7 Intent of the Parties. Termination of Right of Reverter. The parties expressly intend and agree that the Property be private property and that Grantee shall have full, complete and absolute control over all activities on and uses of the Property, subject only to its obligation to use and maintain the Property as a landscaped space with the easements reserved in Paragraphs 1.1 and 1.2, the view corridor and fencing restrictions in Paragraph 1.4, and Grantor's police powers applicable to private property in general. Nothing in this Special Warranty Deed, alone or in combination with any other factor, shall be interpreted to create or establish the basis for a First Amendment forum of any kind. If a court of competent jurisdiction holds (without regard to any right to appeal) that the right of reverter in paragraph 4 alone or in combination with any other factor creates or establishes the basis for a First Amendment forum of any kind,then and thereupon the right of reverter shall immediately and automatically terminate and be of no further force or effect whatsoever. If, however, the court's holding is reversed, the reverter clause shall immediately and automatically revive. Any termination of the reverter clause shall not impair the right of Grantor to obtain equitable or other relief should Grantee's obligation to use and maintain the Property as a landscaped space or the provisions of Paragraphs 1.1, 1.2, or 1.4 be • violated, provided that no such right in favor of Grantor , alone or in combination 2 5 IP with any other factor, shall be interpreted to create or establish the basis for a First Amendment forum of any kind. 6.8 Notices. Notices will be in writing and will be given by personal delivery or by express delivery service(such as FedEx), freight prepaid. Notices will be delivered or addressed to Grantee and Grantor at the addresses set forth on the first page of this Amendment Deed or at such other address as a party may designate in writing;provided, however, that if the notice is given by personal delivery, delivery, in the case of Grantee, must be to one of the following: and in the case of Grantor,must be to one of the following: . The date notice is deemed to have been given, received and become effective will be(a) the date on which the notice is delivered, if notice is given by personal delivery, (b)the date of actual receipt, if the notice is sent by express delivery service. 6. No Right of Public Access—It is the intent of the Parties to eliminate any right of public access or passage enforceable by the City or by members of the public in relation to the Main Street Plaza Property, and nothing in this Settlement Agreement should be construed otherwise. The Parties do not intend to create any obligation,promise, dedication, servitude, or easement of any kind that would require the COPB to permit public access or passage. 7. Division of Litigation Costs—All costs and attorneys' fees awarded at any time • against the City in the Federal Litigation shall be paid one-half by the City and one-half by the COPB regardlessof the parry + h t, th + b t a 8. Closing—The closing of all of the transactions and deliveries contemplated hereby(the"Closing") shall be held at the offices of Mayor Ross C. ("Rocky")Anderson, 451 South State Street, Room 306, Salt Lake City,Utah 84111, at 10:00 a.m., Salt Lake City time, on or before a date that is no earlier than thirty five(35)days, nor later than sixty(60) days, following(a)the date on which the Ordinance shall have been finally published, or(b)the date on which the Mayor and the COPB execute and deliver this Settlement Agreement, whichever is later, or at such other date and time upon which the parties mutually agree in writing. 9. Conditions and Events of Closing (a) Conditions and Deliveries. For the Closing to occur, each of the following conditions must be met, and each shall be considered a condition precedent to the others: (i) The Ordinance shall have been enacted by the City Council and finally published. (ii) No law suit or administrative proceeding shall have been commenced against the City, the COPB, or the officers, agents or affiliates of either challenging the Ordinance, this Settlement Agreement, or any of the • transactions or instruments contemplated in this Settlement Agreement, unless 2 6 • • satisfaction of the foregoing condition shall have been waived by the Mayor on behalf of the City and by the COPB. (iii) First American Title Insurance Company("Escrow Holder") shall be in receipt from the Salt Lake Alliance for Unity and James L. Sorenson of cash (in collected funds)and land with a total value(as determined by the City in its sole discretion,based on an M.A.I. appraisal) of at least Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000)(the"Cash and Land") for construction and, in the City's discretion, furnishings, fixtures, equipment and maintenance therefor. (iv) The City and the COPB shall have executed and delivered to Escrow Holder the Deed Conveying Easement Rights. (v) The COPB shall have executed and delivered to Escrow Holder the Glendale Special Warranty Deed. (vi) Escrow Holder shall be irrevocably prepared to issue to the City an ALTA standard coverage owner's policy of title insurance, Form 10-17-92, in the amount of$ (the"Glendale Title Insurance Policy"),naming the City as the insured and insuring all of the City's right, title and interest to the property described in the Glendale Special Warranty Deed, subject to the normal • printed terms and conditions of such policy. The COPB shall pay the premium for the issuance of the Glendale Title Insurance Policy. (b) Costs; Closing Events. All recording costs for the Deed Conveying Easement Rights and the Glendale Special Warranty Deed shall be paid by the COPB. Escrow Holder's escrow fee shall be divided equally between the City and the COPB. At the Closing, Escrow Holder shall simultaneously(i)record with the Salt Lake County Recorder the Deed Conveying Easement Rights an the Glendale Special Warranty Deed, and (ii) deliver to the City the Cash and Land(with the land portion to be conveyed by Special Warranty Deed in form acceptable to the City in its sole discretion) without condition. As soon as practicable following the Closing, Escrow Holder shall deliver to the City the original Glendale Title Insurance Policy. 10. Miscellaneous (a) The Parties each represent and acknowledge that, in executing this Settlement Agreement, they do not rely and have not relied upon any representation or statement made by each other(except as expressly set forth in the recitals in this Settlement Agreement)or by any agents, representatives, or attorneys of the other with regard to the subject matter,basis, or fact of this Settlement Agreement, or otherwise. (b) Each of the Parties represent and warrant that the persons signing this Settlement Agreement in their representative capacities have been duly authorized to do • so by the party for whom he or she has signed. 2 7 • (c) This Settlement Agreement is complete and integrated, and constitutes the entire understanding between the Parties with respect to the subject matter contained herein and supersedes all previous and contemporaneous agreements, understandings, promises, warranties,representations, inducements or conditions, oral or written, except as contained herein. The express terms hereof control and supersede any course of performance inconsistent with any terms hereof. Any revisions, amendments or modifications to this Settlement Agreement must be in writing and signed by all Parties hereto. Any implied and/or oral revisions, amendments or modifications will not be binding on any of the Parties. (d) The Parties each acknowledge that they are entering into this Settlement Agreement having fully reviewed the terms hereof, and they are signing this Settlement in consultation with their respective legal counsel. By signing below, the Parties' respective legal counsel each acknowledge that they have reviewed and approved the form and content of this Settlement Agreement in consultation with their respective clients. (e) The Parties each acknowledge and understand that this is a legally binding contract and further acknowledge that prior to signing below they have each fully read and understood all of the terms of this Settlement Agreement. (f) The Parties also acknowledge that they have signed this Settlement • Agreement freely and voluntarily, and that they have not been threatened or coerced into making this agreement or releasing any rights hereunder. (g) This Settlement Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of all of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. No party to the Settlement Agreement may assign its rights or obligations hereunder without the prior written consent of the other party hereto. (h) No forbearance of any party to enforce any provision hereof or any rights existing hereunder shall constitute a waiver of such provisions or rights or be deemed to effect an amendment or modification of this Settlement Agreement. (i) This Settlement Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the state of Utah without regard to the principles choice of law of Utah or any other state. (j) In the event any suit is brought to enforce any of the provisions of this Settlement Agreement, in addition to any damages that may be claimed, the prevailing party shall be entitled to an award of costs and reasonable attorney fees incurred in connection with the prosecution of such action. (k) If any term, condition, or provision of this Settlement Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable for any reason, • 8 • all other terms, conditions and provisions of this Settlement Agreement shall nevertheless remain in full force and effect so long as the primary purposes of the Settlement Agreement are not affected in any manner materially adverse to any party. Upon such determination that any term, condition or other provision is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the parties hereto shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Settlement Agreement so as to effect as closely as possible the original intent of the Parties in a mutually acceptable manner to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law. (1) Unless mutually agreed otherwise, the Parties agree to cooperate in the defense of or prosecution of claims, thorough all levels of appeal,brought by or against the Parties, or either of them, regarding the enforceability of this Settlement Agreement and all covenants and promises made hereunder. Each Party consents to share with the other Party such common communications and other litigation material related to such an action as each Party deems appropriate. The sharing of common communications is not intended to, and shall not be deemed to, constitute a waiver of any privilege or other protection that may pertain to such common communications and other litigation material. (m) This Settlement Agreement may be executed in counterparts. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have each executed this Settlement Agreement as • of the date written below. SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION By: Ross C. "Rocky"Anderson Mayor ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN CORPORATION OF THE PRESIDING BISHOP OF THE CHURCH OF JESUS CHRIST OF LATTER- DAY SAINTS,a Utah corporation sole By Kendrick Cowley Salt Lake City Recorder By: H. David Burton Presiding Bishop • 2 9 • List of Exhibits 1 Mayor's Petition 2 City Council Ordinance 3 Glendale Special Warranty Deed 4 Deed Conveying Easement Rights • • 2 10 • • Document comparison done by DeltaView on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 08:19:56 hipLit = :: Document 1 pcdocs://slc/235783/8 Document 2 pcdocs://s1c/235783/9 Rendering set S&W Standard z 04-71y. Insertion Deletion Moved from Moved to Format change Moved deletion Inserted cell Deleted cell Moved cell • Split/Merged cell Padding cell - = • $to tf Orks: Count Insertions 4 Deletions 4 Moved from 0 Moved to 0 Format changed 0 Total changes 8 Ida , - • • • The Boyer May 29, 2003 Company Carlton Christensen SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL 451 South State Street,Room 304 Salt Lake City, Utah 84111 Dear Council and Redevelopment Agency Board Member: I'm looking out my office window here at The Gateway and see several yellow buses parked on the street, two of them from out of state. This is a daily occurrence now that the Clark Planetarium and Imax have opened. The planetarium management claim they have had over 86,000 visitors from April 11 to May 20, far exceeding their expectations. As we didn't get a chance to give you a Gateway update on May 15, I thought I should write to give you a quick"state of the project". I am enclosing an article that appeared this past month in Shopping Center Business. We continue to get national attention for the project and we hope you will share our pride in The Gateway and • the significant multiuse development that it represents. Almost three hundred million dollars have been spent in the project thus far. The first phase of the project is nearly complete at this point with the third office building and the 152 unit condominium under construction. They will be complete in the first half of next year. This first phase will represent 650,000 square feet of retail, including a restored Union Pacific Depot Building open to the public, a 55,000 square foot planetarium/Imax, a 68,000 square foot children's museum, 330 residential rental units over 90% occupied, 152 residential condominium units, over 350,000 square feet of office space, and approximately 3000 parking stalls. Since May 15, we have decided to proceed with the planning and zoning process for Target and Nordstrom as requested by some of you. You will obviously be a part of this process at the appropriate time. We have also received a construction timeline from Nordstrom should they build at The Gateway and are impressed by how tight the schedule will be. We will proceed as quickly as we can with planning and zoning, keeping all options open, and hope that you will give us constructive guidance as you see fit. Please call if you have suggestions, criticism, or questions. Sincerely, Gateway Associates, Ltd. By: 14 Roger Boyer 90 South 400 West, Suite 200 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101-1365 ACCREDITED a 801 521-4781 MANAGEMENT Fax (801) 521-4793 ORGANIZATION® 'a...,,.,,F' f dSe ( u 1 1jr*nit take gribune WEDNESDAY May 28, 2003 • tore Retailers Moving to Gateway By Lesley Mitchell RFT1 The Salt Lake Tribune =, f The Gateway's developer on Tuesday said five new fast-food outlets or stores will open this summer, bringing the open-air center's occupancy rate �� j� ' to about 90 percent. The project west of downtown Salt Lake City, which opened Nov. 1 '}` 2001, with about 60 retail outlets and restaurants,now has 22 food outlets, including nine sit-down restaurants, 81 retail shops and 12 kiosks, The ' � � 73, Boyer Co. said. Since its opening, fewer than a half-dozen retailers have left The Gateway. Robyn Todd, which sells personal care and of The Boyer cosmetic products, is scheduled to open this "We're very pleased with our progress," said Jake Boyer Y summer at The Gateway in Salt Lake City. (Paul Co. "In this economy, being 90 percent occupied is certainly nothing to be Fraughton/The Salt Lake Tribune) ashamed of. We have a good momentum here." The Gateway is working to fill the remaining available space with an additional 10 to 15 retailers or restaurants before it begins developing the project's second phase. New fast-food outlets set to open this summer include Taco Time, Sbarros and Subway. A new specialty food retailer-- Ben's Cookies of Oxford-- will open next to Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory. .Robyn Todd, which sells personal care and cosmetic products, also will open this summer. Boyer continues to work with Salt Lake City to allow upscale retailer Nordstrom to move from Crossroads Plaza on Main Street. For Nordstrom to move, the city must waive a limit on the size of stores in The Gateway. A number of downtown business people are trying to persuade city leaders to prevent Nordstrom from moving because they believe it will hurt not only struggling Crossroads,but neighboring ZCMI Center as well. Nordstrom,has said it will close its downtown store when its Crossroads lease expires in 2005, whether it is allowed to move to The Gateway or not. Even if Salt Lake City blocks Nordstrom's move, "We still have other things that we are working on," Boyer said. A commercial real estate broker agrees. "Even without Nordstrom, Gateway will be fine," said Bill Martin of brokerage Colliers Commerce CRG in Salt Lake City. "The restaurant sales at Gateway are phenomenal and the theater is doing extremely well," Martin said. "Many of the retail tenants are lagging behind their sales expectations but a lot of that has to do with the economy." Plus, the development has finished with a siz able apartment complex and has started building condominiums, Martin said. With the recent opening of the Clark Planetarium, The Gateway also is adding to its entertainment attractions. Malachy Kavanagh, spokesman for the New York-based International Council of Shopping Centers, said so-called lifestyle centers such as The Gateway will continue to attract retailers and shoppers away from traditional malls. "When most malls struggle and go out of business, it's usually because a new type of mall concept like the lifestyle center has come into their market area pulling its customers away," he said. "Consumers are fickle. They want something fun, exciting and different. And they vote with their wallets." lesleyisltrib_com • http://www.sltrib.com/2003/May/05282003/business/business.asp?display=print 5/29/03 CENTER'•REVIEW ID The Gateway Continues To Grow Salt Lake City center continues to excite after its Olympic debut. Tie Gateway, a more than 2 with another 200,000 square feet of 1 1 '' " ,5f, million-square-foot mixed-use t retail. Plans also call for building a a' 3 ;. ' development in downtown . hotel, once the market picks up. c r`y Salt Lake City, is one of those proj- ' Currently,The Boyer Company is . - a ki i, = �37,4 i0� i ects that keeps on growing. In fact, starting construction of The Parc at : ,y,•-<z � _ i ; 4 -,F the development, which broke Gateway Condominiums,which will ' ,; r , ;-• ground in December 1999, is still sit atop a string of retail space and ,,,,:,=-'1-4 . Viz : without a projected completion date. are 25 percent pre-sold. The North- -,‹=-, "We've already acquired ground , gate Apartments are approximately r„� surrounding the project because as it 68 percent occupied and are antici- -- , continues to be successful, we want pated to be fully leased by the end ., . to continue to grow it," says Jake of the year. Other developments in (=�1l` Boyer, project manager and partner the works include a state-of-the-art , AI, �t r ...,..-faun+! with The Boyer Company, the de- planetarium and IMAX theater that . ' Ys. '.- '!", f .-•- - veloper and management company is scheduled to open this month, as I' x '_, ,,:, . for The Gateway. well as a 70,000-square-foot chil- 4..:- = 4.�,J- - � •. a#• ,�t . The first phase of The Gateway dren's museum. y ta !` � 1;• a consists of 650,000 square feet of re- The center's largest retailer is iti, ,r.. -,'�j_; .; , ,. - �' tail space, 400,000 square feet of of- , Galyan's Sporting Goods with about fice space, close to 150,000 square 90,000 square feet. Other anchors shops and restaurants,the center has feet of cultural space, 350 apartment , include a 74,000-square-foot more than 40 stores that are new to units and 150 condominium units. . Megaplex 12-screen movie theater the Salt Lake City market. The company plans to develop a sec- ; and a Virgin MegaStore that opened "It's kind of a non-traditional an- ond phase in the next couple of years • in November 2002. With over 90 chored center with a lot of restau ,;�, „� ` rants and great retailers who have • -,.777 1-1.17 x. Ecr _ * 1,-`" never before entered the Salt Lake , , Nv. _�: _ 4 a "` City market such as Abercrombie & .—.. § y 43. 1. .-,•c !,gam :_. Fitch, J. Crew, Coldwater Creek, J. �1`r t \so", = Jill, California Pizza Kitchen and ' / Flemings Prime Steakhouse," notes it tom- <. - { I I Boyer. c F Y i • c P.'a,t (-, , 7,}- 3 I J ' —- The Boyer Company is based in �t G �`�� 1. Salt Lake City and has developed d I f rmatr4vie more than 15 million square feet of :-:, v` s; • . :- 1 t > 1`t' �I'�n� _ commercial projects throughout the fi�`z�xls �� r 3 � `r ' � `f� NI '. r _ several state region known as the In { j 7 R 'E • t1, termountain West, including office ' ' i, . <'" r,l` ti A 4:;.in, i ' ik.-:- buildings, shopping centers, medical t ,v'" _ offices, hotels, apartments ands e- r S z t '�', , , �' cial use facilities. The company cur- i�� 1�;1 or • --' • E ;`'�I .LI, ( rently manages more than 11 million titID wg.- " • i ,; - L -\ ` � - 1%%e,� square feet. SCR r r ;. _ F' e•^ ,}' - Susan Hayden 150 • SHOPPING CENTER BUSINESS • MAY 2003 The Sorenson Companies S Weil Temple Sell Luke Ciy,Utah di,15 Ph (801)461-9700 Fx:(801)461-9722 May 28, 2003 Mayor Ross C. Anderson Salt Lake City Corporation 451 S. State Street, Room 306 Salt Lake City,Utah 84111 Re: Sorenson Unity Center at Glendale Dear Mayor Anderson: Pursuant to your current proposal to the Salt Lake City Council, I am pleased to pledge to Salt Lake City the following: (1) land in the Glendale neighborhood totaling approximately 2.37 acres (estimated value$500-$650,000) and(2)Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($500,000), for creation of the Glendale Neighborhood Center, as an expansion of the Sorenson Center, or for other community facilities to be determined by the City in the Glendale neighborhood of Salt Lake City. At your request, the deed to the land and the funds will be deposited in escrow for delivery to the City on satisfaction of the following conditions, each of which must have • occurred prior to, or must occur contemporaneously with,the release of the deed and the funds: (a) The easement for pedestrian access and passage across the real property constituting the "Main Street Plaza" (the "Plaza") shall have been extinguished by an appropriate conveyance by Salt Lake City to The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (the "Church"); (b) Salt Lake City shall not have reserved any rights of access to the Plaza other than customary utility and service easements and view corridor or other aesthetic restrictions; and (c) the Church shall have the exclusive right to determine who may have access to the Plaza and what activities will be allowed on the Plaza. Sincer .r►_ Pfl !gss 410 cc: Elder David E. Sorensen Donald E. Wallace fit Lake City Corporation • • Departmental 6 Year Business Plan Department of Public Services, Golf Division • 59-01000 Golf Administration • Golf Equipment Maintenance • Bonneville Golf Course Pro Shop • Bonneville Golf Course Maintenance • Glendale Golf Course Pro Shop • Glendale Golf Course Maintenance • Forest Dale Golf Course Pro Shop • Forest Dale Golf Course Maintenance • Mountain Dell Golf Course Pro Shop • Mountain Dell Golf Course Maintenance • Nibley Golf Course Pro Shop • Nibley Golf Course Maintenance • Rose Park Golf Course Pro Shop • Rose Park Golf Course Maintenance • Wingpointe Golf Course Pro Shop • Wingpointe Golf Course Maintenance • Jordan River Par-3 Golf Course Pro Shop • Jordan River Par-3 Golf Course Maintenance Steven L. Wetherell, Golf Division Manager Mission Statement To provide outstanding, competitively-priced, golf recreational experiences accessible to the entire Salt Lake valley community and its visitors, while enhancing the quality of life by contributing to the attractiveness of the community, conserving the recreational environment, and managing the resources responsibly on a self-sustaining basis. Salt Lake City Corporation Departmental 6 Year Business Plan Goals and Objectives Excel in Municipal Services and 1. Survey Results: Customer service satisfaction 92% 94% 94% 95% 95% 95% Continuously Improve Service survey ratings. Delivery: Promote well-being of the public by continuously improving municipal service delivery. Protect and Enhance the 1.Reduce the amount of energy used by the City 11% 13% 15% 15% 15% 15% Environment: Conserve resources and by 15%by FY05-06. proactively manage environmental issues. 2. Increase the amount of alternative fuel used by 20% 25% 30% 30% 30% 30% Fleet by 30%by FY05-06. 3.Reduce the amount of water used for city 14% 16% 18% 18% 18% 18% landscaping by 18%by FY05-06. • • t Lake City Corporation • • Departmental 6 Year Business Plan Goals and Objectives-continued Budget Responsibly:Revenue 1. Actual revenue to be equal to or greater than 100% 1 00% 1000/. 100% 100% 100% projections are based on conservative, revenue projections. yet realistic,assumptions. Expenditure estimates are derived from a zero-based budgeting approach and linked to effective performance goals. 2. Actual expenditures to be equal or less than 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% expenditure projections. 3. Implementation of zero-based/activity-based N/A N/A 100% 100% 100% 100% costing approach to budgeting. 4. Percent of achieved"Goals and Objectives" 85% 90% 95% 100% 100% 100% established during the five-year business planning process. Maintain Financial Stability:Ensure 1.Perform quarterly analysis of Division actuals to 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% each Salt Lake City fund is financially budgeted expenditures and revenues. secure. Salt Lake City Corporation Departmental 6 Year Business Plan Goals and Objectives- continued Create High Performance 1. Golf Administration: Annual net >$1.6 mil > $1.6 mil >$1.6 mil > $1.6 mil > $1.6 mil > $1.6 mil Services: Provide customers operating income with best-in-class services. 2. Golf Administration: Annual average > 18% >20% >20% >20% >20% >20% operating margin 3. Golf Administration: Personal Services <43% <43% <43% <43% <44% <44% as%of total operating expense 4. Pro Shops: Merchandise Cost of Goods <75% <75% <75% <75% <75% <75% Sold% 5. Pro Shops: Merchandise Sales per:Round >$1.25 >$1.27 >$1.30 >$1.32 >—$1.35 >$1.37 6. Pro Shops: Lesson Sales per Round >$0.07 >$0.07 > $0.08 >$0.08 > $0.09 >$0.09 7. Course Maintenance: %of Golf Course >95% >95% >95% >95% >95% > 95% Maintenance Completed as Scheduled 8. Course Maintenance: %of Actual Paid > 100% > 100% > 100% > 100% > 100% > 100% Rounds compared to Targeted Paid Rounds 9. Course Maintenance: %of Actual Greens > 100% > 100% > 100% > 100% > 100% > 100% Fees compared to Targeted Greens Fees a • • OIt Lake City Corporation • • Departmental 6 Year Business Plan Create High Performance Services: 10. Course Maintenance: %of Actual Cart > 100% > 100% > 100% > 100% > 100% > 100% Provide customers with best-in-class Rental Fees compared to Targeted Fees services. 11. Implement process improvement teams 0 1 0 0 0 0 and continuously improve the process. Promote Professional Customer 1.Train 1/3 of division employees in customer 67% 100% 33% 67% 100% 100% Interactions: Provide city service skills yearly. employees with customer service training to raise customer satisfaction level. 2. Improve upon the baseline for customer +1% +2% +3% +4% +5% +5% satisfaction by 5%over five years. Promote Community-Based 1. Improve upon the baseline for community +5% +10% +15% +10% +25% +25% Problem Solving: Increase participation by 25%over five years. participation in municipal activities and decision-making processes. Improve Infrastructure Condition: 1. Golf and Sanitation will make capital 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Balance between new opportunities investments in accordance with their five-year and maintenance of existing CIP. infrastructure--transportation, utilities,building&parks and recreation facilities. Salt Lake City Corporation Departmental 6 Year Business Plan Goals and Objectives- continued • Attract and Retain Qualified 1.Maintain employee satisfaction survey ratings of at 80% 80% 85% 85% 85% 85% Employees: Attract and retain qualified least 80%. employees to ensure effective delivery of municipal services in a cost-effective manner. 2.Ensure 90%of new hires are rated satisfactory or 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% 90% above on their five-month new employee performance appraisal. 3.Ensure that the ratio of applicants remains higher 25 25 25 25 25 25 than ICMA's benchmark per year.(25 applicants per job) 4.Maintain turnover rate below 10%per year. <10% <10% <10% <10% <10% <10% Improve Employee Job Skills and 1. Completion of employee training as set forth in the 90% 91% 92% 93% 94% 95% Knowledge:Identify organizational- strategic training plan. wide training priorities for the next two years to sharply focus training resources on skills and competencies required to excel at providing municipal services. 2. Percent of division training and technology targets 80% 80% 85% 85% 85% 85% met. Increase Diversity: Increase diversity 1. Increase total percentage of minority employees +1% +1% +1% +1% +1% +1% of the City's workforce to match or within the department(FY02 total was 14.93%). exceed the labor force of the Wasatch Front. • • • et Lake City Corporation • • • Departmental 6 Year Business Plan Goals and Objectives—continued Increase Diversity: Increase diversity of the 2. Increase total percentage of female employees +1% +1% +1% +1% +1% +1% City's workforce to match or exceed the within the department(FY02 total was 18.1%). labor force of the Wasatch Front. 3. Increase outreach and recruitment of disabled +.25% +.25% +.25% +,25% +.25% +.25% individuals.Establish baseline and improvement goals. Educate Employees Regarding Diversity: 1. Increase participation in diversity training at all 40% 60% 80% 100% 100% 100% Provide training for all managers, levels of the organization. Train all employees supervisors and employees regarding the within five years. value of a diverse workforce. Involve Employees in Performance 1. Update Employee Performance Plans annually. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Planning&Goal Setting:Involve employees in performance planning and goal setting to establish clear job related expectations,link employee's goals to corporate goals and improve communication. Measure and Evaluate Employee's 1.Evaluate full time employees semi-annually. 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% Performance: Conduct semi-annual performance evaluations. Provide Tools and Technology:Provide 1. Complete 100%of the Infrastructure 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% technology enhanced services to the Replacement Schedule per year. Citizens and the City staff. 2. Complete identified internal business services via 1 1 1 1 1 1 the web. Salt Lake City Corporation Departmental 6 Year Business Plan Narrative In the past decade,the number of golf courses in the Salt Lake-Davis County metropolitan statistical area grew by 56%, while the The Golf Fund operates and maintains nine municipal golf courses, population grew by only 25%. Additionally, several other area golf covering 1,181 acres. The Golf Fund supports the City's Strategic courses are either under construction or in the planning stage. This Vision of preserving open green space and enhancing the quality of has created a highly competitive business climate among the area's life of residents of and visitors to Salt Lake City. golf courses. While these circumstances have resulted in a general flattening in demand for golf within the region,the Salt Lake City Each golf course pro shop and maintenance program,while their Golf Fund has maintained relatively stable quantities of paid golf own individual cost center, function in parallel to provide customer rounds each year. Weather permitting, the Golf Fund anticipates service to the Salt Lake Valley area's resident and visiting golfers. continuing to provide approximately 475,000 to 525,000 paid 9-hole The pro shop is largely concerned with customer retail operations equivalent golf rounds per year. while the maintenance program ensures that the golf courses are maintained in accordance with industry standards and meet the The over-supply of golf courses and flat consumer demand is a customer's expectations. widely recognized industry phenomenon on a national scale. It will The Golf program operates as an enterprise fund. All operating and be quite a number of years before player demand catches up with the capital expenditures are funded by user fees. growth in golf courses, both locally and nationally. Therefore, in order to keep pace with the projected growth in expenses, increases in golf user fees have been scheduled for Fiscal Year 2003-04, 2005- A look-ahead addressing the questions below follows: 06 and 2007-08. The revenue increases were calculated using an • What anticipated changes in demand, customers, and/or average of 8% in user fee increases in FY04 and 5%each in FY06 services are expected? and FY08. The rate increases in Fiscal Year 2003-04 are anticipated • What is the relationship between the services provided by to increase revenues by $386,000 for the six month period beginning this division and other programs, either within or outside of January 1, 2004. the City? • What is the anticipated increase or decrease in funding, For most of the areas in the revenue stream, unit volume has been staffing, and/or expenses, and what is causing the change? held constant throughout the 6-year cycle, with the exception of • What assumptions have been made and what sources of slight increases in sales of frequent player discount cards and golf car information are used? rentals. Revenue from season passes have been incrementally • What comparisons to national/local standards and other decreased each year due to policy changes in this program. The benchmarks are used? Golf Fund has adopted the following initiatives to increase the • Is there any additional information that explains what is competitiveness of Salt Lake City courses and the numbers of rounds anticipated, and why it is reasonable to expect that change? paid, and expand the revenue streams supporting the Golf Fund: • • • . , et Lake City Corporation • • Departmental 6 Year Business Plan • Implement the advertising and marketing initiatives courses on expensive culinary irrigation sources, costs for irrigation identified in Golf Division Marketing Plan throughout the water have increased rapidly over the past decade and are projected six-year planning cycle. to continue to increase throughout the next six year cycle due to • Expand customer access to City's golf course tee times increased demands on the delivery infrastructure. Based on o through utilization of an Internet reservation system that was information provided by the Department of Public Utilities, a 15% implemented in Fiscal Year 2002-03. Provided as an increase in costs for water has been scheduled in FY04. This is 5/o upgrade component of the current golf management software less than the Public Utilities proposed rate increase, and reflects anticipated additional positive action to conserve approximately 5% system contract, costs to implement the Internet reservation in water usage on the city's golf courses system wide. In response to system were minimal. While this feature may not extended drought conditions, through enactment of various water immediately increase revenues directly, it will incrementally conservation measures in calendar year 2002, Golf Division water increase customer convenience and thus the competitiveness usage was decreased by 10%from calendar year 2001. The of the Salt Lake City golf program, ultimately resulting in proposed budget anticipates a 2.5% increase in water rates for the more rounds played in City courses. years after FY2004. • Encourage greater participation in the game of golf through Other expenses within the Golf Fund are anticipated to increase by expanded emphasis on instructional programs for youth and approximately 2.5%annually, consistent with increases in the cost of women. Significant programmatic changes intended to increase golf rounds among junior golfers are anticipated to living. realize$32,000 in revenues in Fiscal Year 2003-04, The debt service for the renovation of Forest Dale Golf Course is reversing a junior golf program which had previously scheduled to end with the FY03 budget. The retirement of this debt operated as an annual expense. will free up $100,000 per year to address capital improvements • Address slower golfer participation rates during off-peak needed to further improve the courses in order to remain competitive hours through the development and implementation of off- in the local golf market. The revenue bonds used to build peak discount user fee programs in Fiscal Year 2003-04. Wingpointe Golf Course and expand Mountain Dell Golf Course The rate discounts are designed to increase the number of from 18 to 36 holes are scheduled to be retired in FY09. This rounds played during historically slower blocks of time. retirement of this debt service obligation will free up approximately $720,000 per year for other large capital improvement projects, such Personal services expenses are projected to increase an average of as the conversion to secondary-water irrigation systems. 4%per year over the next six years due to increases in insurance costs and cost of living. No increases are projected in staffing. The Golf Fund continually compares its operations and performance with the National Golf Foundation benchmarks, both national and While the Golf Fund is taking aggressive steps to conserve water and regional. It is an objective of the Golf Fund in Fiscal Year 2003-04 exploring future opportunities to reduce the dependency of the golf to obtain current customer satisfaction survey data, and benchmark Salt Lake City Corporation Departmental 6 Year Business Plan with national data,through use of the National Golf Foundation's have long recommended that certain existing inequities be addressed. Customer Loyalty and Satisfaction Program(CLASP). The cost of Due to the seven-day-a-week and seasonal aspects of their work, Salt Lake City's participation in this program is $5,000 per year. these employees are not able to avail themselves of typical vacation The Golf Fund has entered into a two-year contract with the National and holiday usage benefits as experienced by other City employees, Golf Fund to provide these services. among other employee compensation issues specific to the Golf Fund. The Golf Fund has included$80,000 in one-time expenses in The Golf Fund also proposes to address compensation plan inequities the Fiscal Year 2003-04 budget to buy out remaining time from the for 100 and 200 series Golf Division employees in Fiscal Year 2003- employees in question and bring them within proposed new 04. The Citizen's Compensation Committee and Human Resources compensation guidelines. • • SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE • No. of 2003 (Amending Golf Course Green fees and group reservations) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTIONS 15.16.031 and 15.16.035, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, RELATING TO GOLF COURSE GREEN FEES AND GROUP RESERVATIONS. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City: SECTION 1. That Section 15.16.031, Salt Lake City Code, relating to golf course green fees be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 15.16.031 Golf courses-Green fees. A. Fees Imposed: There are imposed on any person playing golf at any of the City golf courses the following fees: 1. Green Fees-Weekdays (Monday Through Friday,Excluding Legal Holidays): 9 Holes 18 Holes • a. Regular Golfers Nibley $ 10.00 n/a Forest Dale $ 10.00$11.00 n/a Glendale/Rose Park $ 11.00$12.00 $22.00$24.00 Jordan River Par-3 $5-.50$6.00 n/a Mountain Dell Lake/ $12.50S13.50 $25.00$27.00 Wingpointe/Bonneville Mountain Dell Canyon n/a $25.00$27.00 Twilight n/a $20.00$22.0O Evening $12:5-OS13.50 n/a 9 Holes 18 Holes b. Senior Golfers Nibley $8.00 n/a Forest Dale $8.00$9.00 n/a • Glendale/Rose Park $9.00S10.00 $18.00$20.00 Jordan River Par-3 $ 1.5OS5.00 n/a Mountain Dell Canyon n/a $19.00$21.00 • Twilight n/a $15-0OS 17.00 Evening $9.50$10.50 n/a Mountain Dell Lake/ $-9-�-0$10.50 $-f9 80$21.00 Wingpointe/Bonneville 9 Holes 18 Holes c. Junior Golfers All courses excluding Jordan River Par-3 $6,5 $7.00 $13.00$14.00 Jordan River Par-3 $4,5-0$5.00 n/a 2. Green Fees-Weekends (Saturday & Sunday) And Legal Holidays: 9 Holes 18 Holes Nibley $ 10.00 n/a Forest Dale $10.00$11.00 n/a Glendale/Rose Park $11-99$12.00 2 -0 $24.00 • Jordan River Par-3 $6.50$6.00 n/a Mountain Dell Lake/ $-1-2:0$13.50 $2-5,00$27.00 Wingpointe/Bonneville Mountain Dell Canyon n/a $25.00$27.00 Twilight n/a $20.00.$22.00 Evening $12.50$13.50 n/a 3. Green Fees-Weekend Twilight a. Riding June 1 through August 31, after three o'clock (3:00) P.M.. Saturday and Sunday. includes golf car 9 Holes 18 Holes Niblev $10.00 nia Glendale/Rose Park $12.00 $24.00 Wingpointe $13.00 $26.00 • 2 b. Walking• June 1 through August 31, after three o'clock (3:00) P.M., Saturday and Sunday. walking 9 Holes 18 I-toles Nibley $6.00 n%a Glendale/Rose Park $10.00 $20.00 \\'ingpointe $11.00 $22.00 4. Green Fees-Off-Peak Discounts • 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. a. Riding July 1 through August 31. on the indicated days. from eleven o'clock (11 :00) A.M. to two o'clock (2:00) P.M.. includesgolf ear rental. 9 Holes 18 Holes Nibley $12.00 n/a Monday-'1.hursday Glendale $14.00 $28.00 Monday-Thursday • Rose Park $14.00 $28.00 Monday-Tuesday Winapointe $15.00 $30.00 Monday-Tuesday b. Walking July 1 through August 31, on the indicated days, from eleven o'clock (11:00) A.M. to two o'clock(2:00) P.M. 9 Holes 18 Holes Nibley $6.00 n/a Monday-Thursday Glendale $10.00 $20.00 Monday-Thursday Rose Park $10.00 $20.00 Monday-Tuesday Wingpoi me $11.00 $22.00 Monday-Tuesday 5. Green Fees-Weekend Twilight Junior Special Juniors golf free of charge if accompanied by a minimum of one (1) fgie-paying adult per foursome: effective only after six o'clock (6:00) P.M. on Saturday and Sunday. from June 1 through October 31. at Glendale. Rose Park. Wingpointe and Jordan River Par-3.• b. Green Fees-Off Season Fee at Mountain Dell Golf Course 3 Effective October 1 through last day of February: includes golf car rental. 18 holes only • 9 Holes 18 Holes Mountain Dell Lake/Canyon n/a $25.00 37. All-Day Green Fees Pass (Multiple Holes) At Jordan River Par-3: These pass rates are available for tee times Monday through Thursday from nine o'clock (9:00) A.M. to four o'clock (4:00) P.M., excluding legal holidays. Regular $11.00$12.00 Senior 700$10.00 Junior 9.00.$10.00 8. Punch Pass For 1() Rounds At Jordan River Par-3: Regular $54.00 Senior $45.00 Junior $45.00 49. Season Golf Passes: Season passes for calendar years subsequent to 1997 will be available solely to those individuals who had purchased calendar 1997 season passes on or before June 30, 1997. No other season passes shall be issued. Current season pass • holders shall renew their passes annually in order to remain eligible for a season pass. Any season pass holder who fails to renew a pass for any year shall not be eligible for any further season pass. Season passes for individuals who are neither junior nor senior golfers will be discontinued on December 31, 2003 and no season passes will be issued for years after calendar year 2003, for individuals who are neither junior nor senior golfers. As per the schedule in subsection A3-9eb of this Section, on and after January 1, 1998, a surcharge will be assessed on the date of play, on each round played using a season pass. a. Regular rate, five hundred dollars ($500.00). ab. Senior/junior rate, four hundred dollars ($400.00). S 4 • be. Surcharge on all pass rounds January-1. 2 3?Decem-bcr 31. 2002 _......_.-.---...--____._9.Holes...._...____.__.._..-18-1-toles Resident $2.00 S1.00 Non-R s ident January 1, 200,--i-)eeer lx 31. 2-004 9 Holes 18 Holes Resident $3.00 $6.00 Non Resident $4.00 $8.00 l r• err -a ter calendar Star _r'0'"� the-surcharge rates will-be-adjusted in ae cerdanee-witl•Fgeneral--fee.inefeases: . The use of fiends collected via the surcharge will be solely dedicated to physical improvements at City golf courses. ed. St-andards in effe t-as--o-the effective date hereof for using season--golf passes en-Ff=id-a\=:-until-.twelvt-e!clock.44- 04)...froon...cfff-:speLifed-Course:-sal.l....rern inin effect up7 to a „a cl, ding-13c-eeni e -1 1�'o— etivc January 1. !998, .;Season golf passes may not be used Fridays through Sundays, on legal holidays, or for group reservation play. 510. School Team Special Play: 9 Holes 18 Holes $6.00 $12.00 Participants may also purchase large buckets of range balls at the price of small buckets. 611. Golf Cart Rental: 5 9 Holes 18 Holes a. Regular rental $1 2.00S 13.00 $21.00526.00 • Single rider 0056.50 S 1 2.0051 3.00 b. Mountain Dell Canyon Twilight n/a $10.00$11.00 per rider Private cart, trail fee $-a:00$5.00 $8.0OS 10.00. 712. Range Balls: a. Small, fo urthpee dollars ($3.00$4.00). b. Large, sevensix dollars ($6700$7.00). c. Driving range punch pass (valid for 10 large buckets of balls), fifty dollars ($50.00). 1313. Advanced Tee Time Reservations (Minimum 18 Holes): a. 0 to 7 days in advance $0.00 i b. 8 days to 1 year in advance $5.00 per player The Department of Public Services, with concurrence of the Mayor, may set reasonable regulations with regard to amounts of refunds for cancellations and time in which cancellations must be made. 414. Miscellaneous: 9 Holes 18 Holes Golf Cart Cover Rental $5.00 $10.00 Golf Club Rental excluding Jordan River Par-3 56.0086.50 512.00$13.00 Golf Club Rental Jordan River Par-3 $3.00 n/a411 6 Premium Golf Club Rental S 12.50$13.50 $25.00S27.00 • Pull Cart Rental excluding Jordan River Par-3 $1 5-0$2.00 .00S4.00 Pull Cart Rental Jordan River Par-3 $1.00 n/a Frequent Player Discount Card (Non-transferable) • d Monday'through Friday all da --=r'ul t r-celoy-k-(7:0c-r7-11.-,i=i. on-Saturdays and-Sundays. Ns t-vaiicl-on-hc€rli i L-vs • Valid at-all City golf courses. •---^n nua r hase price of$.50.00. • When valid-Ff3 cardhoklers receive a thirty-per-eel-It (30%) discount--from the prevailing green fee rate for which the-Czriho 3de, ,u,li„ias-Cn Lhe Cay of—play, • FP-D-eard holders ree i ii thirty-pere•eut (30%-)-diseeunt&wra ge44al : • Annual purchase price of card is $75. • Card is valid at all City operated golf courses. • Card is valid for one calendar year from date of purchase. • When valid. cardholders receive a thirty percent(30%) discount from the • prevailing green fee rate for which the cardholder qualifies on the day of play. • Card is valid for green fee discounts all day Monday through Friday and Saturday and Sunday after two o'clock (2:00 p.m.). • Cardholders receive a thirty percent(30%) discount on the purchase of range balls at any time. • Junior cardholders (17 Years of age or younger) and senior cardholders (65 years of age and older) will receive a thirty percent (30° 1 discount IN ADDITION TO prevailing junior and senior weekday discount green fee rates. • Card must be presented at time of play in order to receive green fee or range ball discounts. • Except for junior and senior weekday discounts, the card is not valid when presented with any other discount offer or during any listed City off-peak discount time block. • Card is not valid on legal holidays. • Card is not valid for use during tournament play. Lesson fees shall be established by individual teacher. B. Eligibility For Season Pass: Only persons whose principal place of residence is • within the State and who, at the time of pass purchase, have a present expectation to 7 continue residency within the State throughout the term of the pass, shall be eligible to purchase or use season golf passes. • C. Use Of Junior/Senior Discount Fees: Junior/senior discount fees provided for in this Chapter may not be used Saturdays or Sundays, legal holidays, or for group reservation play. D. Time For Twilight And Evening Play: Time for twilight and evening play at Mountain Dell shall be set each week on Monday morning by the golf professional or its designee. E. Issuance: No season golf pass shall be issued without payment to the City of the appropriate fee listed in subsection A39 of this Section. F. Definitions: 1. A "junior" is any person seventeen (17) years of age or younger. 2. A "senior" is any person sixty five (65) years of age or older. • G. Adjustment Of Fees: The Director of Public Services, with approval of the Mayor, shall have the authority, at any time, to reduce the fees listed in this Section for any City golf course, if the Director deems it necessary to reduce fees in order to increase the use of the golf course. SECTION 2. That Section 15.16.035, Salt Lake City Code, relating to golf course group reservations be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 15.16.035 Golf courses group reservations. Reservations for exclusive use of a course for group play, tournaments, etc., will be allowed in accordance with the following guidelines: A. Payment at least ten (10) days in advance of: • 8 1. A per person minimum tournament fee as follows: a. Eighteen (18) holes, ten dollars ($10.00), b. Nine (9) holes, at all courses except Nibley Park and Jordan River par 3, five dollars ($5.00); and c. Nine (9)holes at Nibley Park, three dollars ($3.00). 2. All green fees and rentals, with no green fee discount allowed. B. Appropriate green fees as set forth in section 15.16.031 of this chapter, or its successor, shall be charged for each participant. C. The department of public services, with concurrence of the mayor, may set reasonable regulations with regard to: 1. How many days in advance of the date for which the facility is • reserved that all reservation and/or green fees must be paid; 2. Amounts of refunds for cancellations and time in which cancellations must be made; 3. Rescheduling "rainouts"; 4. Minimum and maximum numbers of golfers; 5. Cart reservations; 6. Minimum and maximum number of holes to be reserved for group play; 7. Dates and times for taking group reservations; 8. Golf courses for which group reservations may be made; • 9 9. Costs for special services requested of the city over and above services normally provided; however, such costs shall reflect actual city costs, including overhead; 10. How many group reservations a person and/ or group can make each year; 11. How many group reservations a person can make per each request; 12. Regulations for making reservations by phone or in person. D. _ Adjustment Of Fees: The Director{ of Public Services. with approval of the Mayor, shall have the authority. at any time. to reduce the fees listed in this Section Ior any City golf course, if the Director deems it necessary to reduce fees in order to increase the use of the golf course. SECTION 2,3. This ordinance shall take effect on January 1, 2004. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of • , 2003. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. • 10 MAYOR ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER (SEAL) Bill No. of 2003. Published: • G\Oi durance 03\Amending Golf Course Gi eels Fees-4-17-03 draft • 11 i SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT 0 BUDGET ANALYSIS-FISCAL YEAR 2003-04 DATE: May 27, 2003 SUBJECT: GOLF ENTERPRISE FUND STAFF REPORT BY: Michael Sears CC: Rocky Fluhart, David Nimkin, Rick Graham, Kevin Bergstrom, Steve Wetherell, Greg Davis, Steve Fawcett, Laurie Dillon, DJ Baxter The City has provided golf facilities for over 80 years. The main policies that guide the division are to offer an accessible, reasonably priced, recreational opportunity to all sections of the golfing public and to preserve open spaces in an urban setting. Golf participants pay fees that underwrite the cost of providing these services. The Council traditionally sets golf fees at a level necessary to ensure the long-term financial stability of the Golf Fund while maintaining the golf program's competitiveness within the market. The budget for fiscal year 2003-2004 is proposed to increase by $135,386 or 1.6% • over fiscal year 2002-2003. GOLF ENTERPRISE FUND PROPOSED BUDGET Adopted Proposed Difference Percent 20024003 2003-2004 Change Revenue& other sources Green fees $5,073,726 $5,294,839 $221,113 4.4% Golf car and club rental 1,902,632 2,004,935 102,303 5.4% Retail sales 823,180 709,500 (113,680) (13.8%) Driving range fees 434,257 425,827 (8,430) (1.9%) Concessions 134,598 115,930 (18,668) (13.9%) Advertising fees 110,000 110,000 Intergovernmental revenue 50,000 0 (50,000) (100%) Interest income 50,000 41,200 (8,800) (17.6%) Miscellaneous 39,859 26,763 (13,096) (32.9%) Appropriation of reserves 85,355 (85,355) (100.0%) Total revenue&other sources $8,593,607 $8,728,993 $135,386 1.6% Expenses&other uses Operating expenses $6,592,342 $7,114,072 $521,730 7.9% Debt and interest 1,051,068 1,211,180 160,112 15.2% Capital outlay 950,197 399,999 (550,198) (57.9%) Increase of reserves 3,742 3,742 Total expenses& other uses $8,593,607 $8,728,993 $135,386 1.6% • POTENTIAL MATTERS AT ISSUE The major changes reflected in the proposed budgets for the Golf Course Fund include: • User fees - The user fees for individuals playing golf at the City courses are proposed to increase. The increases only affect Forest Dale, Glendale, Rose Park, Jordan River Par-3, Mountain Dell Lake and Canyon, Wingpointe and Bonneville. Nibley Golf Course fees are not proposed to increase. Jordan River Par-3 is proposed to increase by $.50 per 9-Hole round, and other course fees are proposed to increase by $1.00. These increases apply to regular golfers and senior golfers. Junior golfers have an increase of $.50 at all City golf courses. The attached ordinance lists the specific fee proposal. • Weekend Twilight / Off-Peak Discounts - The Administration has included several different fee proposals to encourage play during the twilight hours and off-peak times of the week. The attached ordinance lists the specific fee proposal. Season pass surcharge - The Administration is continuing the policy of phasing out the Season Golf Passes. After December 31, 2003 individuals who are neither junior nor senior golfers will not be able to purchase a season pass. Season passes will still be available to seniors who have held passes continuously for the past several years (since the beginning of the phase-out). Passes will continue to available for junior golfers. Season pass holders can not use the passes on Fridays through Sundays, on legal holidays or for group reservation play. The Golf Enterprise Fund operates without assistance from the General Fund. All operating and capital • expenditures are funded by user fees. User fees are proposed to increase an average of 8% in fiscal year 2003-2004, 5% in 2005-2006 and 5% in 2007-2008. The demand for paid 9-hole equivalent golf rounds is anticipated to remain steady at approximately 475,000 to 525,000 rounds per year. Nationwide, there is an over abundance of golf courses and a flat consumer demand. Locally, the increase in golf courses has been greater than the increase in population to play the courses. Salt Lake City's golf rounds have remained stable amid this overbuilding of competing golf courses. There are two significant factors that are contributing to increased operating expenses for the Golf Enterprise Fund; higher water rates and increased personnel costs (no addition of positions, merely from the usual cost-of-living adjustments, rising pension and health insurance costs, etc.). The Golf Division is addressing inequities within compensation plans for the 100 and 200 series golf employees. A one-time budget expense of$80,000 has been included in the budget to address the seasonal and seven-day-a-week aspect of the division. The Golf Division is continuing the implementation of the Golf Marketing Plan and is following the advertising, marketing, and discount programs identified in the plan. i 2 • Additional Information FIVE-YEAR BUSINESS PLAN The Department of Public Services prepared a five-year business plan for the Golf Fund in 2001 to help guide the budgeting process and provide a means for management to better evaluate overall department performance. The business plan identifies goals and objectives of the Department. The plan was updated for fiscal year 2003-2004 to include targets through fiscal year 2008-2009. In order to assist the Council in evaluating progress, Council staff has attached the Golf portion of the Administration's 6 Year Business Plan. MARKETING PLAN • In 2002, the Golf Fund prepared a marketing plan with the following goals and objectives: 1. Establish a Frequent Player Discount Card program that rewards golfers that play Salt Lake City courses on a regular basis. Results/steps taken: • Nearly 2,400 new Frequent Player Discount cards were sold in calendar year 2002. • More than 75,000 9-hole equivalent rounds were played by FPD cardholders. This equates to 16% of all paid rounds that were played on City courses. • Response from FPD card holders has been overwhelmingly positive. 2. Develop a marketing program targeted at Salt Lake area businesses that do a significant amount of corporate entertaining and "business golf." Results/steps taken: A Corporate Voucher program has been fully developed and is being released to the public beginning June 2003. The program provides local businesses with a means to save up to 30 percent on business-related golf. The goal of this program is to provide incentives to local businesses to direct their business golf activities to City courses. 3. Follow up after corporate golf tournaments to attempt to reserve return bookings in the following season.. Results/steps taken: Each course is in the process of creating an accessible. database of current and past corporate tournament participants to employ for this purpose. In addition, the Golf Division is currently working with its interested food 3 concessionaires to coordinate a joint marketing effort to solicit and capture additional corporate tournaments. 4. Establish a hotel voucher program to provide a discount incentive to visitors staying in area hotels. Results/steps taken: • A Hotel Voucher program is currently being promoted to area hotels. The program offers a $5 discount on 18 holes of golf to the contracting hotel. • Marketing, including mailing packages and phone follow-ups, is ongoing to future convention event participants listed by the Salt Lake City Visitors and Convention Bureau. 5. Development of four introductory programs targeting juniors, young women, women, and minorities. Provide beginning young women golfers in the City's junior program a comfortable learning environment by placing them with members of their own peer group under the guidance of a female golf instructor. Partner with the Sorenson Multi-Cultural Center, the University of Utah, and other organizations to develop a youth outreach program involving golf. Participate in The First Tee program. Partner with the Utah High School Activities Association to develop a program designed to introduce young women (ages 14-18) to golf. Results/steps taken: Junior Golf The City has completely revised its Junior Golf program and has now partnered with the Salt Lake County to develop a jointly-operated program to benefit all the junior golfers in the area. The joint goal for the City and County is to create an "all- encompassing"junior golf program for all levels of junior golfers, with the following areas of emphasis: • Clinics - for beginning golfers - 1 1/2 hour clinics for 4 consecutive days with an 8-1 instructor to student ratio. • Camps - for more advanced golfers - 4 hours of instruction for 4 consecutive days with 5-1 instructor to student ratio. • Leagues - to transition student golfers from instructional phase to playing. • Tournaments - competitive 9 and 18-hole tournaments, which will rotate from City to County courses throughout the summer. 4 Women's Golf The City now employs two full-time salaried female assistant golf professionals. They are leading a series of female- • only, female-instructed golf introduction clinics which are now underway and will run throughout the summer. For more advanced players, the City is also offering a number of women-only instruction clinics throughout the summer. The City is also now offering several couples clinics and leagues, in addition to the long-established women's leagues. At Risk Youth and Minorities • The City has entered into an agreement with Youth On Course, Inc., a non-profit 501(c) (3) corporation, to implement and manage Utah's initial First Tee program at the Rose Park and Jordan River Par-3 golf facilities. • The focus of the First Tee program is to promote the game of golf to youth, particularly to disadvantaged and minorities, and to teach life skills to the students using the game's inherently positive values, such as honesty, integrity, respect, discipline, confidence and sportsmanship. • In an ongoing program now several years old, Glendale Golf Course provides a popular golf instructional program for "at-risk" youth and • minorities every summer, jointly coordinated with the Sorenson Multi-Cultural Center. • Last season, the Golf Division partnered with the Sorensen Multi- Cultural Center, the University of Utah and other contributing organizations to sponsor a youth outreach program intended to teach "at-risk" ninth-grade students from West High School various life skills using positive adult mentoring coupled with golf as a teaching vehicle. 6. Develop and refine a full sponsorship package. Evaluate, submit bid proposal, purchase and install necessary sponsorship items by spring of 2003. Fill 40% of program offering by January 2003. Fill 90% of program offering by January 2004. Results/steps taken: An on-course sponsorship package has been under development for the past year: • One hundred and fifty benches have been purchased and are in place at all City courses. • One hundred and thirty-five tee signs have been ordered and should be installed on all courses by the end of July 2003. • Scorecards have been completely redesigned and a bid for printing them has been finalized in anticipation of the addition of a sole sponsor. • A sponsorship contract has been developed and completed. 5 • Policies and guidelines for on-course advertising are currently being reviewed by the Attorney's Office and should be implemented in the ID near future. 7. Create a new Internet site devoted to marketing the Division's golf program. Results/steps taken: • A new web site, www.slc-golf.com, was developed by the Golf Division and has been in continuous use since April 2002. • A new online tee-time reservation system has been developed for this web site in cooperation with the reservation system software provider and has been in operation since mid-April of 2003. 8. Develop on-course advertising opportunities. Results/steps taken: Promotion of these opportunities is ongoing in tandem with the steps indicated in item number 6 related to the sponsorship package development. AUDIT REPORT The Council's contract auditor has audited the Golf Program. The audit has been reviewed by the Administration and will be available within the next few days. LEGISLATIVE INTENT STATEMENTS No legislative intent statements are outstanding for the Golf Course Fund. During the briefing on the proposed budget, the Council may wish to identify legislative intents relating to the Golf Division of the Public Services Department. S 6 • To: Rocky Fluhart Chief Administrative Officer From: Laurie Dillon Subject: Justice Court Revenue Compared to Projections Date: April 30, 2003 CC: Steve Fawcett,L.Zane Gill,Mary Johnston The City Council has recently requested information about the revenue and expenses of the Salt Lake City Justice Court. The revenue from the Justice Court has gradually increased since it opened on July 1, 2002. Revenue collected as of March 31, 2003,was $3,118,250(not including parking revenue). Expenses as of March 31, 2003,were $1,465,868 (again, not including parking expenses). These expenses do not include the annual debt service of$500,000 for the Justice Court building and$82,000 annually for building operating expenses that was transferred to Public Services. For the entire fiscal year of 2003, the total revenue expected is about $4,240,000(based on the average • monthly amount for traffic cases and assuming that monthly revenue from criminal cases will be at least equal to the revenue collected in March 2003). Total FY 2003 expenses are expected to be$2,620,000/$2,495,600 when adjusted for actuals in debt service and fees($2,038,000 for personal services, operations, charges and services, and small capital expenditures; $500,000 for debt service [actual amount is$375,600 including debt service and fees for trustee and arbitrage]; and $82,000 for building operation and maintenance). If Salt Lake City had not chosen to establish a Justice Court, we would have received about$1,357,000 from the District Court($1,284,000 from the 50/50 split when they adjudicated all of the city cases, based on the revenue collected from July through December 1999 before the Administrative Enforcement Division was established; and $73,330 from court collections, based on the highest annual amount received in FY 2000-01). The net revenue for FY 2003, after adjusting for revenue that would have been received had the Justice Court not been established, is expected to be about $263,000. When adjusted for actual amounts for debt service, the net revenue is expected to be$387,400. The revenue from small claims cases and criminal cases continues to increase each month. For the criminal cases in particular,this can be expected since they take longer than traffic cases to be adjudicated and many of the fines and court costs are set up to be collected via monthly payment schedules. For example, the amount collected from criminal fines and court costs increased by 19.5%from December 2002 to January 2003 ($28,371 to$33,894),by an additional 18.5%from January to February($33,894 to 411111 $40,179), and by an additional 28.7% from February to March($40,179 to$51,727). This increase will gradually level off as new payments replace old payments that are completed. The revenue from traffic citations has increased from FY 2002 to FY 2003,but the number of citations increased as well. That-increase was expected since all citations issued within Salt Lake City boundaries are adjudicated in the Justice Court, and because Salt Lake City took on the adjudication of the District Attorney misdemeanor cases. Under the Administrative Enforcement division, only the citations issued by the Salt Lake City Police Department were addressed. The revenue projections for the Justice Court made in October 2000 indicated that $4,600,000 in total revenue could be expected. The monthly amount currently being collected for traffic cases is $322,700(average for FY 2003), for criminal cases is $51,700(March 2003 amount), and small claims cases is$1100(average for February and March 2003). These monthly amounts can be expected to be maintained, which would result in$4,500,000 annually. If criminal case revenue continues to increase, it is likely that at least $4,600,000 could be received annually, with the exception of the loss of about $150,000 because of the recently required change in late fee collections. Using the lower revenue projection of$4,350,000($4,500,000 less$150,000)and accounting for$1,357,000 in revenue that would have been received from the District Court had the Justice Court not been established, the new annual revenue is$2,993,000. This compares to current annual expenses of$2,620,000[$2,495,600 when adjusted for the actual debt service and fee amounts]. •Based on the revenue, it appears that the Justice Court is collecting fines and fees to a greater extent than what the District Court did. Doubling the$1,357,000 that would have been received for the 50/50 split and collections results in$2,714,000 in total revenue. This can be compared to the Justice Court's anticipated revenue of$3,380,500 in comparable fines and collections. [The$4,500,000 in revenue has to be adjusted for late fees($260,807 in FY 2002),traffic school ($308,490 in FY 2002),traffic mitigation ($296,970 in FY 2002), court costs(estimated at$240,000 per year), and small claims filing fees(estimated at$13,200 per year)because these funds would have been retained by the District Court. This results in an amount of$3,380,500 which is comparable to the 50/50 split and collections amounts, or an increase of$666,500 over what the District Court was collecting.] Regarding dismissals, information received from the District Court for traffic cases from July 1, 1998,through December 31, 1998, indicated that 34%of the cases were dismissed. For the current fiscal year, the Justice Court has dismissed 3%of the tickets issued. Records are not available regarding the number and/or amount of fines that are reduced. Regarding the number of violations, 46,532 traffic violations(violations, not citations) have been issued since July 1, 2002. The attached spreadsheet shows the breakdown of the types of violations and how many of each were issued. By far,the most common violation is speeding, followed by expired registration/improper display and/or location • of plates, failure to obey traffic control devices, insurance violations, seat belt/child • restraint violations, and driver licensing violations. The total number of parking tickets issued since July 1, 2002 is 105,824. • • APR 2 9 2003 • SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2003 (Adopting the rate of tax levy upon all real and personal property within Salt Lake City, made taxable by law for fiscal year 2003-2004) AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE RATE OF TAX LEVY UPON ALL REAL AND PERSONAL PROPERTY WITHIN SALT LAKE CITY MADE TAXABLE BY LAW FOR FISCAL YEAR 2003-2004. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City: PREAMBLE Chapter 2, Title 59 of the Utah Code Aim. states that the governing body of each city shall, by ordinance or resolution, adopt a proposed tax levy or, if the tax rate is not more than the certified tax rate, a final tax levy on the real and personal property for • various municipal purposes. Chapter 2, Title 59, of the Utah Code Aim. provides for certain notice and hearing requirements if the proposed tax rate exceeds the certified tax rate. It is the intent of Salt Lake City to comply with the mandate of the Utah Legislature, but reserve in itself the power to amend the tax rates set herein to guarantee, after final appraisal figures have been determined, that it does not exceed the amount required for its governmental operations and taxing authority granted by the Legislature. Further, it is the intent of the City to levy an additional tax, if necessary, to cover costs of State legislative mandates or judicial or administrative orders under Chapter 2, Title 59 of the Utah Code Ann. • SECTION 1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this ordinance is to adopt a tax levy upon all real and personal property within Salt Lake City made taxable by law in the year • 2003 to defray the necessary and proper expenses of Salt Lake City to maintain the government thereof and for operating and maintaining its libraries and reading rooms and to pay for costs of State legislative mandates or judicial or administrative orders under Chapter 2, Title 59 of the Utah Code Ann. SECTION 2. TAX LEVY: 2003-2004. The City Council hereby levies upon all real and personal property within Salt Lake City made taxable by law in the year 2003, for the fiscal year of Salt Lake City ending June 30, 2004, as revenue in the general fund and as revenue in the library fund, a tax of percent on each dollar of taxable valuation of said property apportioned as follows: (a) percent shall be credited as revenue in the general fund; (b) percent shall be credited as revenue in the general fund to be • used for repayment of court ordered judgments; (c) percent shall be credited as revenue in the special library fund; (d) percent shall be credited as revenue in the special library fund to be used for repayment of court ordered judgments; (e) percent shall be credited toward repayment of the Block 37 General Obligation Bonds for the construction of a new City library building and other improvements; and (f) percent shall be credited as revenue in the City's Governmental Immunity Fund. • • The City Council hereby further levies a tax to cover the costs of State legislative mandates or judicial or administrative orders under Chapter 2, Title 59 of the Utah Code Ann. as determined by the Utah State Tax Commission and the Salt Lake County Auditor's Office. Said tax levies in this Section 2 shall be subject to Mayor approval and City Council reconsideration pursuant to § 10-3-1214 of the Utah Code Ann. SECTION 3. CERTIFIED TAX RATE. The proposed tax levies do not exceed the certified tax rates and, therefore, the City is not required to publish notice or hold a public hearing pursuant to Chapter 2, Title 59, of the Utah Code Ann. SECTION 4. CERTIFIED TO AUDITOR. The tax levies hereinabove deteiiiiined and levied shall be certified by the City Recorder to the Auditor of Salt Lake • County, State of Utah before the 22nd day of June 2003 pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 2, Title 59 of the Utah Code Ann. SECTION 5. RESERVE POWER AND RIGHT TO AMEND. The City hereby expressly reserves the power and right to amend any property tax levy made herein as it may deem just, proper and appropriate under the law. SECTION 6. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect on July 1, 2003. • 3 Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this day of , 2003. • CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER Transmitted to the Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. MAYOR • ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER �y ?-03 11"^- ._•W (SEAL) Bill No. of 2003. Published: G.\Ordinance 03\Budget\adopting tax levy doc • 4 APR 2 9 2003 • SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE No. of 2003 (Parking Meter Rates) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 12.56.170, SALT LAKE CITY CODE, RELATING TO PARKING METERS - RATES. Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: SECTION 1. That Section 12.56.170, Salt Lake City Code, pertaining to parking meters - rates be, and the same hereby is, amended to read as follows: 12.56.170 Parking Meters-Rates: Parking meter rates shall not exceed twenty five cents ($0.25) per fifteen (15) minutes of parking within any parking meter zone. A parking meter token may be used in parking meters • installed by the City at a rate not to exceed one hour of parking per token. Parking meter tokens shall not be used as legal tender to satisfy any debt to the City and shall only be used in connection with a downtown parking and transit token program. SECTION 2. This ordinance shall take effect August 4, 2003. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah this day of 2003. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER • Transmitted to Mayor on Mayor's Action: Approved. Vetoed. • MAYOR ATTEST: AdHF F1VFJ AS TO FORM CHIEF DEPUTY-CITY RECORDER Salt Lake Ci ,ttarneys Office Date A ( By 1_. (SEAL) Bill No. of 2003. Published: • G\Ordinance 03\Parking meter rates 4-1 1-03 clean 2 SALT LAKE,CITY COUNCIL STAFF,REPOIRT 411 BUDGET ANALYSIS-FISCAL YEAR 2003-04 DATE: May 27, 2003 SUBJECT: INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT BY: Sylvia Jones CC: Rocky Fluhart, David Nimkin, Ken Cowley, Mike Freeland, Steve Fawcett, Laurie Dillon, DJ Baxter Information Management Services provides citywide computer and network support, maintenance, software development, and telephone services and repair. The Division also oversees the Copy Center Fund, which is a separate internal service fund. The Copy Center provides the City with document duplication and mail courier services. The Copy Center budget was provided in the Budget Overview paperwork. The budget for the Information Management Services Fund for fiscal year 2003- 2004 is proposed to increase by $268,293 or 3.6% over fiscal year 2002-2003. INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SERVICES FUND 411 PROPOSED BUDGET 47t '�.-.AP4�� �� � � ._ � mow...._.. Revenue&other sources Network/infrastructure fees from $1,806,979 $1919,87, $112,893 6.2% de p artments/funds xa. Telephone fees from departments/funds 727,386 '734 40, 6,754 0.9% Interest 36,367 gT81 55,314 152.1% Miscellaneous revenue 55,186 2,042 (53,124) (96.3%) Transfer from General Fund 4,886,786 413-1:1 146,456 3.0% Total revenue $7,512,704 ? 80A ; $268,293 3.6% Ex'enses&other uses r, == ,'A&, Network/infrastructure $4,402,635 %:.$036 40, $133,928 3.0% Software en:ineerin: 1,202,744 RIME 'n0;7 (6,019) (0.5%) Web services 462,902 f t21121, (35,881) (7.8%) Tele shone services 929,461 9279 79' (1,582) (0.2%) Administration 514,962 6927::M9 177,847 34.5% Total ex i enses $7,512,704 $7,780;.1.!7. $268,293 3.6% POTENTIAL MATTERS AT ISSUE Matters at issue reflected in the proposed budget include: • Addition of 2 FI'E's - Information Management Services (IMS) is proposing a • budget increase in the amount of$75,936 for the addition of one network technician, and an increase of$75,936 for one software engineer. The Council staffs understanding is that the industry standard is one network administrator for a maximum of 100 computers (1:100). The City's current ratio is one technician for every one hundred seventeen computers (1:117). The ratio will increase to 1:124 during FY 2003-2004 based upon the • anticipated growth of computers citywide. This will result in each technician maintaining and supporting an additional 7 computers (or 6% increase in workload during the year for each technician). If IMS receives approval for the additional technician, the City's ratio will be reduced to 1:118. The additional software engineer will assist with the City's efforts to provide new online services and maintain the current systems for residents, including paying parking tickets and utility bills, renewing business licenses, accessing Council agendas and minutes, viewing ordinances, and obtaining general information about the City. • Increase in Capital Expenditures -The proposed budget for IMS includes a $50,000 increase in capital expenditures for scheduled infrastructure replacement (switches and routers ) located in the City/County Building as part of the building re-wiring. These units are at the end of their scheduled life-expectancy. The IMS infrastructure budget reflects swings in spending due to the projected infrastructure plan such that in FY05, expenditures are anticipating a decrease of$168,959. • Increase in Interest Income - In prior years, the projected interest income for IMS was substantially underestimated. The increase in the budgeted interest for revenue in FY 2003-2004 will more accurately reflect that interest based • upon the last ten month's interest earnings. • Miscellaneous Revenue -This revenue consists primarily of the sale of used equipment. Actual proceeds have been much less than the budgeted revenue. This figure will more accurately reflect true anticipated revenue. • Administrative Services -This function/cost center is proposed to increase primarily because of the transfer of costs between functions. • Televised City Council Meetings - IMS has been televising some of the City Council meetings, per the Council's request. The Council may wish to discuss whether it would like to maintain the current level of televised meetings, or enhance that ability. If Council Members desire to have more meetings televised, they may wish to appropriate additional resources for this service within the IMS budget. • 2 • Additional Information FIVE-YEAR BUSINESS PLAN Information Management Services prepared a five-year business plan in fiscal year 2000-01 to help guide the budgeting process and provide a means for management to better evaluate overall department performance. The Administration has updated the plan to include measures and targets through FY 2004-2009. Council Staff has asked the Administration to provide the Council with a summary of goals/objectives, and the results/steps taken for FY 2002-2003. In order to assist the council in evaluating progress, the goals and steps taken by the Department during FY 2002-2003 are summarized below: 1. Goal/Objective: Create one additional online service for the City's web every six months beginning with September 2001 until all online services identified by a customer-oriented focus group are complete. Results/steps taken: IMS has met and exceeded the goal. The following chart shows the progress: . Date Period Cumulative Completed Cumulative Target Completed _ Prior to Sept N/A 7 7 01 Sept 01-Mar 1 3 10 02 Mar 02-Sept 2 4 14 02 Sept 02 - 3 5 19 Mar 03 2. Goal/Objective: Additional personnel will be needed in two years to keep up with the demand for website-related services. Also, hardware and software costs will continue to escalate. Results/steps taken: Web service requests continue to increase. The growth of wireless services is fueling a higher demand for web applications that are available to City employees who are serving the public in the field. Wireless access for inspectors, permits and other services will continue to increase the demand. IMS is keeping ahead of the goal but the goal is well short of the demand. • 3. Goal/Objective: Provide a high-speed,state-of-the-art network by the end of fiscal year 2006 to increase network accessibility and performance. . Results/steps taken: The Department's ability to provide a secure,fast and reliable network is progressing on schedule. Wireless requests have placed an added demand to the projections but adjustments have been made and costs for some of the infrastructure have dropped. This allows us to continue forward within the budget projections. *Internet access lines were added to better manage the increased load and provide added redundancy. *The infrastructure replacement schedule is on target;new servers and other infrastructure were added where needed. *The Department met its goal for rewiring the City and County building. The project is 50%complete. *The Department is ahead of schedule in wiring replacement at the Public Safety Building. *Plaza 349 has been rewired to meet these standards during remodeling for the addition of DOT,Prosecutors and Engineering to the building. 4. Goal/Objective: Replace infrastructure according to a plan schedule. Results/steps taken: Each year IMS creates a schedule for replacement and new infrastructure • planned during that year. Progress is monitored monthly. The scheduled plan is on target for FY 2002-2003. LEGISLATIVE INTENT STATEMENTS No legislative intent statements are outstanding for the Information Management Services Fund. During the briefing on the proposed budget, the Council may wish to identify legislative intents relating to the Information Management Services Fund. During the briefing, the Council may wish to identify potential programs or functions to be added to the Council's list for future audits. • 4 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT 0 , BUDGET ANALYsrs—FISCAL YEAR 2003-04 DATE: May 27, 2003 BUDGET FOR: DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT BY: Sylvia Jones cc: Rocky Fluhart, David Nimkin, Steve Fawcett, Tracey Stevens, Gordon Hoskins, Dan Mule, Brenda Hancock, Mary Johnston, Laurie Dillon, DJ Baxter The proposed budget for the Department of Management Services for fiscal year 2003-2004 is $8,915,333, representing a decrease in expenditures of$27,555 or .31%, as compared to FY 2002-2003. The proposed budget for the Information Management Services and Risk Management will be analyzed in separate reports. go „ .,..v„--4,..!L1/4, 'f,<, ,u;oitit,- ,P,cykif , ,we -.441;iir.04:: , ,,v4:41,40:440,:i1.0-:‘,0;47"J:.-.:41 ,,, ,.6_V1t-e,-rv '4ilIZIW• IP't-:,41(4 , ii " r. Tat a ,r F,...°1;:!:40, <ii•-. A":'!:.,:ri Va.:;.:,..Ino:L'-i p Office of the Director (budget development,emergency k management,environmental management,corporate . communications,demographic resource center,labor relations) $1,321,754 .is- $64,132 1111/1 Accounting(monitors revenues and accounts payable; 1,403,434 $(289,816) (20.65%) prepares quarterly and annual financial statements;processes r ,,• .a roll Treasurer(collects,mana.es and disburses Ci funds $669,768 RIF.:711STAEP $47,258 7.06% Purchasing/Contracts/Property Management $1,131,880 � i $36,305 3.21% (provides purchasing,contract development/process and property • :° ' mans.ement services IC s Justice Court $2,868,483 Evauam, $276,871 9.65% Human Resource Management(develops and oversees : i<: programs that attract,motivate,and retain a skilled,productive $1,090,386 ;_ $(67,995) (6.24)% work force .7; Total $8,942,888 ^ti $(27,555) (.31) POTENTIAL MATTERS AT ISSUE Some of the major changes reflected in the proposed budgets include: • Elimination of positions -Two positions were eliminated by budget amendment including one cashier position in the Treasurer's Office, and one vacant human resource associate position in Human Resources. • • Addition of positions - The Management Service's budget is showing an increase of an additional .65 F 1'E resulting from moving .25 of a Human Resource position from the Insurance and Risk Management Fund, adding .50 • FTE P/T Office Technician in Human Resources, and shifting .10 FTE to 100% IMS Funded. • CDBG Reallocation- In the past, salary expense for positions within the general fund that were funded by Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) revenue were recorded as general fund expenditures and general fund revenue. The Administration proposes budgeting for these positions directly within the CDBG Fund thereby eliminating the expenditures within the general fund and the offsetting interfund revenue. The department has not parceled out funding as a percentage of each employee but rather by function or service within the accounting division. • Justice Court Revenue and Operating Costs - Management Services projects that the Justice Court revenue for FY 2003 will be approximately $4,240,000 (based on the average monthly amount for traffic cases, and assuming monthly revenue from criminal cases will be at least equal to the revenue collected in March 2003). Expenses for FY 2003 are expected to be approximately $2,620,000. The budget for the Justice Court for FY 2003 was $2,868,483. (For additional details concerning projected revenue and expenses, please refer to the attached memo from the Administration.) • Collection of Outstanding Accounts - Currently, the City has $16.8 million dollars of outstanding accounts receivable from past due parking tickets and moving violations (including $10.3 million for parking tickets, $5.8 million for • moving violations, $500,000 for zoning issues, and $200,000 for miscellaneous violations). One revenue auditor position is being dedicated to collecting outstanding accounts. Several other employees from Finance are assisting in this collection process. The collection procedures include requesting credit reports, sending letters, and setting up garnishments. The hard cost per delinquent account (including postage, supplies and credit review) is approximately $2.00. (Additional details are included in the attached memo.) Management Services suggests that the City partner with the State of Utah to require that outstanding tickets be paid prior to allowing individuals to register their vehicles. A portion of recovered accounts could be given to the State. Legislation may be required to implement this revision. Some Council Members have expressed concern about budgeting potential revenue for which the potential success cannot be reliably documented. The Council may wish to discuss with the Administration the basis for their revenue projection. • Justice Court Pro Tern Judges - Management Services is proposing that the appropriation for the use of part time pro tem judges is reduced by 50%, decreasing the Justice Court budget by $28,701. The Council may wish to ask about the current use of part time judges to date. • 2 • Parking Meter Collection Costs -The Administration has proposed placing 350 new parking meters on 300 East, 300 South, near Gateway and Franklin Covey iField. It is anticipated that coin collection costs will be covered within the current budget. Council staff has asked the Administration for further clarification on the full costs to install the meters. • Employee Parking/Patron Parking at the Library-The Administration is negotiating a Landlord/Tenant agreement with the Library, which will include management of the parking operation. A draft is being reviewed. The Council may wish to update the ordinances that relate to City employee parking at the old parking garage on 200 East and 400 South and codes employee parking and patron parking at the City-owned parking structure located under the City's Main Library building. • Telecommunication Right-of-Way Ordinance - Several questions have surfaced regarding the proposed changes to the ordinance fee structure. 1) What is the Administration's policy basis for this recommendation, and what is the general background information? 2) Did the Administration notify the telecommunications companies of the proposed ordinance changes and fee structure increases? 3) Is there any legal conflict with current state or federal telecommunications regulations? 4) Are some companies using the City's rights of way without being charged? 5) Is the City proposing to charge fair market value for the use of its rights of way? How does this differ from the way the City currently charges for its rights Sof way? 6) How do the proposed fee changes compare with other cities in Utah? 7) Is the fee structure tied to direct City costs? Council Members have expressed interest in meeting with the Administration and members of the industry to discuss these issues. The meeting is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, June 5, 2003. • 14'1'E Transfers -The Administration is proposing to transfer the CIP coordinator's salary and benefits from the General Fund to the CIP Fund. This transfer would represent a service level increase to the CIP fund, since the position currently performs other functions. The position will still be supervised by the Finance Division. The labor relations representative position will be transferred from Human Resources to the Office of the Director. The IFAS coordinator's salary will be transferred to the IFAS cost center. Currently, Management Services employs a data/demographic planner to provide the City with housing, economic development and census data. The Police Department also provides crime and accident statistics for its divisions; however, the resources for this function are very limited. The Council may wish to consider transferring the Management Services data/demographic planner FTE to the Police Department, including the cost of.75 FTE, and transferring .25 FTE • to CED for housing, census and economic development data. 3 • Salary and health insurance increases - Personal service costs assumes increases in base salaries plus merit increase for employees covered by union contracts. Health insurance rates are projected to increase by 2%. Pension • costs will increase by 8.7% and 10.7%, depending on the plan. • Strategic Plans/Balanced Scorecard/Performance Measures The Balanced Scorecard and the six-year business plans are tools used by the Administration to measure. It appears that a significant amount of resources are invested in these two processes. The Administration indicates that the FY2004 budget process combined the balance scorecard and the six-year business plans into one approach, called the Six-Year Business Plan (Balanced Scorecard). City departments, however, have indicated that they are still spending significant time tracking both approaches separately. Additionally, the information for the six-year plans was not prepared in advance of the budget process to be used as a tool, but was completed by Administrative departments after their budget submittals. The six-year plans do not contain financial information. Last year when the Council considered eliminating a position in Management Services that, among overall City training and organization development, was overseeing the balanced scorecard, the Administration indicated that the information was key to the budget development process. This same staff person is currently working with each department to complete the final phase of the alignment process, that of individual employee alignment and evaluation. FIVE-YEAR BUSINESS PLAN (Goals and measurable results) • Balanced Performance Measurement Scorecard 2003 Target March 2003 measure :fg: -._ 5:-. Conduct internal customer surveys and implement improvements each year T " : °= 1 Create the greater of 20%of total or one additional on-line e-ottatet Ot 20% service setup on the City's WEB page each six months(started in 2001)until all identified on-line services are completed <zl10 4 tir', Conduct environmental audits at city departments 2 's-ry' ., ;.," ,�'::`° a''�`;.?.� ,,;�:.�. �cyY w��NY 3 j x:nW=';'.'; :->z -�-m+t,.. ..z< .-..,�����.s`=��.�-��.�.>E _=�t.�,r=':� _.--u.�+-,z.,,r.�,3;..,..-� <... 3-':.''.-tr= :�:.;;-� ,.; +`�-fir»-, ;."� ..,' �•.... -xs,3-,:'.. . Actual revenue will be equal to or greater than revenue projections :,1 ` ' 105.3% Implement a zero-based/activity based costing approach to fl% 15% budgeting Year to date Internal Service Fund operating expenses as%of budget measured quarterly(IMS Fund) s } `' 107.6% Year to date Internal Service Fund operating expenses as%of 100% 113.1% budget measured quarterly(Risk Insurance Fund) • y.=. 4 Year to date General Fund operating expenses as%of budget ; K \ measured quarterly = yy `�O 97% • Achieve a maintain a fund balance of 18% in the x" General Fund ; : iao 14.46% General obligation bond ratings will be equivalent to Moody's -- - Aaa/AAA Aaa/AAA Aaa or Fitch's AAA or equivalent 4;iN!'; ,. Identify one significant service to benchmark service standards 3 against yearly j'_„ Performance Measurement 2003 target Mar 2002 Train 1/3 of employees in customer service skills by January 31, ':"zsk 2003 and each year thereafter. Refresher courses every three --` ' ° 33% .08% years 9, ; Ensure through the budgeting process that an amount equal to t 9%of the General Fund revenue is dedicated to the Capital :99a-" >9° Improvement Program each fiscal year 434 _--_..- -.�:..-»_ . :':1v- ,a}f3� �3,''ty�.... --7. »„, 3„R•.�,;,,?;= -��=� =.�t'''''Y -y�'i11�?'".^ _.. , Maintain turnover rate at<10%per year <10% 6.5% Establish baseline and then increase outreach and recruitment of - , , yr., Baseline not baseline minority and women employees complete Complete employee performance plans setup by June 2003 and 100%,` 12.3% thereafter for all new employees 411 Add one new service provided through the WEB per year 3 -.mot Identify one internal business service to be added to the WEB .'.-u. per year 1' 3 LEGISLATIVE INTENT STATEMENTS The Council issued the following legislative intent statements that relate to the Management Services budget: 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). Results/Steps Taken: The Department has been providing the operational impact on the budget amendments throughout the year. The Department provided impact statements on the proposed CIP schedule for the upcoming budget of 2003-04. • 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 5 condition of employment, any emergency-response personnel hired after August 31, 2001 are required to live within a 10 mile radius of the City & County Building. • Results/Steps Taken: The Department has no additional information to provide, other than the study completed and presented earlier regarding the CCAC's recommendations about residency requirements for Public Safety personnel. Funding for 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. Results/Steps Taken: The total liability for the governmental activities is reported yearly on the financial statements. For fiscal year ending 6/30/02 it is reported on page 15, line titled "Long Term Compensation Liability". It includes vacation, sick leave, comp time, personal leave and the severance accounts. The total amount reported is $13,347,289. Department staff has not provided a forecast for future years at this point. Department staff has met with Council staff and now has a better understanding about what this intent is trying to accomplish. The Department will continue to examine this suggestion and as funds permit could begin to build a fund to • accumulate reserves to accommodate future payouts. Retirement Payouts - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration consistently budgets 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. Results/Steps Taken: Management Services staff budgeted funds in the non- departmental account for retirement payouts for the fiscal year 2002-03. The budget was established at $650,000. All of the funds have been expended at this point. Department staff has met with Council staff and now has a better understanding about what this intent is trying to accomplish. The Department will continue to examine this suggestion, and as funds permit, may begin to build a fund to accumulate reserves to accommodate future payouts. Parking Meter Collection - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration considers collecting parking meter revenue using bonded agencies or employees rather than paying overtime rates. Results/Steps Taken: Since July 1, 2002, parking meters have continued to be collected by the Police Department while an RFP was developed and distributed • 6 and a Selection Committee established to review the proposals. Asa result of the meter collection budget being reduced by $25,000 from FY 2002 to FY 2003, it was necessary to revise the collection schedule from 3 days per week to 2 days per week. With only $52,000 budgeted for FY 2003 and an estimated cost of$60,000 for the Police Department to collect the meters, $8,000 was taken from the meter repair and replacement budget to make up this difference. The cost proposed by the number one ranked Offeror was more than we are currently paying the Police Department. The number two ranked Offeror's pricing was well below the current budget for meter collection services, but they ranked the lowest in qualifications and approach. The Selection Committee recommended that the Administration continue to use the Police Department since the number one Offeror's bid was more than what the City currently pays the Police Department. The Police Department is estimating that the cost will remain at $60,000 to collect the meters twice per week during FY 2003/2004. 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. Results/Steps Taken: The Administration will investigate ways to utilize volunteers and/or retired personnel to provide City services. No coordinated effort has been implemented as yet. Human Resources is working with the Mayor's Office to establish policies, procedures, tracking systems and job descriptions for unpaid interns (student volunteers). There should be some transferability of these systems for use with other City volunteers. 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. Results/Steps Taken: The Administration decided the best way to test this was to take 100 parking affidavits, and 100 traffic affidavits, divide them up into groups of 50 each, mail half and give the other half to the process server for service. The Department will track the difference in the number of clerk hours used in preparing the cases, the cost of mailing as opposed to being served and the number of actual services from each method. After the affidavits are printed, they are given to the clerk to sign. Once signed, the original copy (white) is filed with the court and the other two copies (pink and yellow) are given to the process server for service. Clerks separate the copies; however, the clerk must do this no matter which method of service is used, so I will only calculate the difference in staff hours in each case. After the affidavit is given to the Process server for service, nothing is done until the service is returned from the Process server. It will be returned for several reasons: 111 a) It was successfully served ($7.00 to $12.00 fee depending on the distance the defendant lives to the Courthouse) 7 b) .The addressee moved and the Department is unable to identify a new address. (No charge) c) If the address moved and either the Process server or our office was able to find . a new address it would be sent out for service again (No charge unless successfully served, then the fee would be $7.00 to $12.00 depending on the distance from the Court the defendant lives) d) The addressee may not have moved, but the Process server was unsuccessful in serving the paper to someone at the home. (No charge) e) It was paid or bankruptcy was declared prior to service and our office recalled the service (No charge.) Court rules allow service to individuals other than the defendant if they are "of suitable age and discretion there residing", so a co-resident (parent, sibling, etc) may be served. (See attached Rule 4) If the service was successful it will be returned from the Process server with a "Proof of Service" which is a form that the process server fills out stating who was served, date of service and place of service. The process server who is swearing that the information on the proof of service is correct then signs it. This is included in the $7 to $12 service fee. Total costs and services are as follows: Successful services (100 affidavits) -38 $422.00 Moved - 26 $0.00 Unable - 8 0.00 Recalled - 20 0.001111 Pending- 8 0.00 Clerk Hours (calculated at 215 (D) step $11.63 hr) - 0 Total Cost to City $422.00 Mailed Service: After the affidavits are printed, they are given to the clerk to sign. Once signed, the original copy (white) is filed with the court, the pink copy goes in the file (and will be filed with the proof of service if successful) and the yellow copy is mailed to the defendant. The clerk must fill out two certified mail forms, which are attached to the envelope. Because Rule 4 requires that the defendant sign the return receipt, these affidavits must be sent out certified, return receipt requested and restricted (defendant endorsement required) for a total of$7.92 per Affidavit. After the affidavit is mailed nothing is done until the service is returned from the post office. It will be returned for several reasons: a) It was successfully picked.up ($7.92 fee) b) They have moved and we are not able to find a new address. ($7.92 fee) c) If they have moved and the letter is returned with a forwarding address, our records would be updated and it would be sent out for service again. Another registered mail form must be filled out and then mailed out. (A second $7.92 fee • for a total of$15.84) 8 d) Unable, meaning they moved but left no forwarding address. ($7.92 fee) e) They may not have moved, but they do not pick up the envelope it will be returned "unclaimed" in 10 days. ($7.92 fee) f) They go to the post office and before signing for the letter, refuse it. The post office would then return it "refused". ($7.92 fee) If it was successfully picked up and signed for by the defendant (no other person can sign for it) our staff must fill out a "proof of service form" attach the signature card and send to the court. Total costs and services are as follows: Cost Successful services (100 affidavits) -23 $229.68 Moved - 16 245.52 Unable - 33 269.28 Refused - 3 39.60 Unclaimed - 38 356.40 Clerk Hours (calculated at 215 (D) step $11.63 hr) - 12.93 hours (only salary was calculated, not salary plus benefits) 150.38 Total Cost to City 1290.86 Summary • Because of having to pay for all mailed affidavits as opposed to just the successfully served affidavits services, as with the process server's office, it is clear that having the defendant served by a process server is much more cost effective and results in a higher percentage of successful services. Without a successful service, the City would be unable to get a judgment, allowing the City to garnish income tax returns, wages and be reported on credit reports. By the time a ticket reaches the affidavit stage, a defendant has received a ticket and at least two follow up notices requesting an appearance or payment. It is not likely that these individuals will respond to a mailed service. The City Prosecutor is dealing with criminal cases, and the defendant is aware of the court date (by arrest or citation). The majority of services by the Prosecutor are witnesses and, in the majority of cases, they are willing participants. These are the cases that use to be served by a process server. Unless there is something to indicate that the witness will not appear, the subpoena is sent via regular mail. There are no court rules requiring registered, certified mail on witnesses. The Prosecutor is still using a process server on cases that may require an expert witness, and in domestic violence cases where the witness is also the victim and after the fact may be hesitant to testify. Grant Writing Team - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration completes the centralization of the grant writing function by transferring any • remaining grant writer positions to the central team in the Department of 9 Management Services. Further, it is the Council's intent that the Administration provides a quarterly report on the grants submitted and grants received. • Results/Steps Taken: The grant writer team reports to the finance director. One of these grant writers is still located in the public safety building, but is coordinating all of their activities with the finance director and the other grant writers. Because of the interaction with the public safety personnel we found it easier for them to be located in that building. The grant team meets every week. The grant team is providing a monthly report to both the Mayor and the Council on the status of all the grants that the City has applied for in the past two years. Grant Monitoring - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration confirms that the grant application and the grant monitoring/management function is 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 insure that the requests are consistent with the City's policies, and to insure 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 provides a quarterly accounting of grant monies received and the specific manner in which they were spent. Results/Steps Taken: All grants are monitored on a common computer database. We have separate spreadsheets for grants that: • 1. Still needing research 2. Sent and pending the results 3. Funded and the amount received 4. Those not funded The Department has not developed a system to report the results of the grant spending compared to the grant application. We will continue to pursue this reporting request. Impacts of Special Events - It is the intent of the City Council that the Administration continues 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 provided. The listing should include: Services provided for which a fee was charged, and the amount of the fee a. The actual cost of the service to the City b. Services provided for which no fee was charged c. Other relevant information Further, the Council requests a listing of special City services provided for events that • 10 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. Results/Steps Taken: The Administration has been working with the Council's internal auditors on this subject. AUDIT REPORTS The Council's contract auditor has conducted three audits relating to the Department of Management Services: (1) Human Resource Management Services, (2) property appraisal and disposition, and (3) grant funds. The audit reports will be available within the next few days. During the briefing on the proposed budget, the Council may wish to identify legislative intents relating to the Department of Management Services. During the briefing, the Council may wish to identify potential programs or functions to be added to the Council's list for future audits. • 4111 ii • Fiscal Year 03-04 CIP Project:Indication Rankings • o• n CIP Board Mayor FY 2003.2001 FY 2003-2004 T. '.` FY 2003-2001 Staff Proposed Proposed Recommended Cumulative Total Cumulative Total Operating Budget in• e0 2 r< Tale of Protect Request Estimated Cost Amount Amount Amount Adj Board Cost Council Amount Adj Board Cost Impact MBA&MFET(Class C)CIP Bond Debt Service $4,221,474 $3,787,314 $3,787,314 $3,787,314 $3,767,314 $3,787,314 $3,767,314 Negligible Debt service for several MBA and MFET bonds used to Portion Is Impact Fee Eligible complete various capital Improvements throughout the 011Y. c City&County Building Debt Service $2,401,967 $2,401,987 $2,401,967 $2,401,967 $6,189,281 $2,401,967 $6,189,281 Negligible o Debt service payment on the bond used to rehabilitate w and refurbish the City&County Building. This bond n will mature in 2011. O Police/Fire Radio'800 Trunked Radio System $540,794 $540,794 $540,794 $540,794 $6,730,075 $540,794 $6,730,075 Negligible To pay the lease purchase on radio equipment for Police and Fire.This is the final payment Pollee/Fire Radio'800 Tower Repeater System $81,717 $61,717 $61,7/7 $61,717 $6,791,792 $61,717 $6,791,792 Negligible To pay the lease purchase for the tower repeaters associated with the 800 trunked radio system. Final payment will be in FY 2005. Percent for Art $60,000 $60,000 $6,851,792 $60,000 $6,851,792 Negligible Provide enhancements such as decorative pavement, railings,scultures,fountains,and other works of art. 24 7 1 Rose Park Lighting Project $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $300,000 $7,151,792 $6,851,792 Negligible To remove all existing over head street lighting and install new decorative poles with underground wiring throughout the Rose Park Community Council District. • An additional$561,000 is being provided through a special Improvement district(SID)bond. 10 10 2 Quayle Avenue from Oth W to 10th W $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 $7,271,792 $6,851,792 NegligibleIII To design end construct curb,gutter,sidewalk and a roadway on Quayle Ave near 900 West and 1700 South.$75,000 will be contributed through an area special improvement district(SID)bond. . _ 14 2 3 Sugar House Rails w/Toils $264,000 Impact Fee Eligible None To develop a paved bike/pedestrian trail in shared right. To be maintained by of-way with commuter light rail development on the --- the County UTA Sugar House spur,500 East to Highland Drive. Various other improvements will be made as well. ---_ 3 4 4 Liberty Park Improvements $2,990,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $9,271,792 $6,851,792 Negligible To provide for the fourth phase of master planned improvements for the park. Some of the items included are:the Merry-Go-Round roof;the Horseshoe Area&Duck Pond;Rice Terrace Pavilioin up-grade; Chase home fountain rebuild;park-wide culinary water. 23 1 8 13th E Street Crossing $420,000 $420,000 $420,000 $420,000 $9,691,792 $6,651,792 Negligible To create a passage across 1300 East Street,south of Estimated that O&M the 2100 South intersection,connecting Sugar House Costs will be$1,000 Park with Hidden Hollow Natural Area and the Sugar in FY 04-05 House Business District. $120,000 of this funding wilt cover 10D%of the construction design cost 1 3 6 Irrigation System-Sugar House Park I Phase III $80,000 $80,000 880,000 $80,000 $9,771,792 $6,651,792 None To partially fund phase III of the Sugar House Park Park is maintained by irrigation refurbishment to bring the entire park the County irrigation system up to date with a more efficient irrigation equipment. The portion of the irrigation . system that has not been refurbished is currently III ¢r' c CIP Board Mayor FY 2003-2004 FY 2003-2004 • = `o x FY 2003-2001 Staff Proposed Proposed Recommended Cumulative Total Cumulative Total Operating Budget ;o m .'L' Title of Project Request Estimated Cost Amount Amount Amount Atli Board Cost Council Amount Adj Board Cost lm pact 13 6 7 Stratford Park ADA Playground $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 9100,000 99,871,792 $6,851,792 Negligible To replace the existing playground equipment In the park,located at 20th East and 2600 South,which is not ADA accessible.Also,to redo the existing landscape to be In harmony with the new playground equipment and layout. 21 6 8 North Brickyard Neighborhood Park Design $30,000 Impact Fee Eligible Negligible To design a park on a half-acre site owned by Salt Once constructed, Lake City located on the Jordan Canal corridor Parks 0&M costs will between Crandall and Zenith Ave,at 1140 East 2905 increase$2,000 to South. $3,000 26 12 8 Steenbllk Mini Park ADA Playground $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 910,021,792 $6,851,792 Negligible To replace the existing non-ADA accessible playground equipment in the park,located at 1069 West and 800 North,as well as up-grades to the ' irrigation system. 18 16 10 Pedestrian Safety Devices $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 $150,000 910,171,792 $6,851,792 Negligible To provide for the installation of pedestrian safety devices throughout the city.These include pedestrian signals with countdown timers,In-pavement or overhead crosswalk lighting,or Improved pavement markings.These devices are Installed throughout t 17 19 11 Jordan River Trail Security Lighting $165,000 S165,000 $165,000 $165,000 910,338,792 $6,851,792 Negligible To add security lighting to the 1300 South to 1700 South portion of the Jordan River Trailway System. , This is a continuation of the lighting system. , 22 20 12 Rosewood Park Master Plan $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 $10,386,792 $8,851,792 Negligible To create a master plan for Rosewood Park including a plan for use of the 40 acre parcel to the north of the • park. Rosewood Park is located at 1400 North end 1200 West.28 24 13 Constitution Park ADA Playground 8 Tennis $200,000 $200,0001 $200,000_ $200,000 $10,588,792 $e,851,792 Negligible Spored. To replace the existing non-ADA accessible playground equipment,upgrade the tennis courts and modify the Irrigation system.Constitution Park Is located at 1300 West 300 North. 4 8 14 ADA RampelComer Repairs $300,000 $300,000 $250,000 $250,000 $10,836,792 $6,851,792 Negligible To construct various ADA pedestrian ramps and related repairs to comers,Including sidewalk,curb and gutter. 16 9 16 Pedestrian Blke Path Development $100,000 $100,000 $50,000 $50,000 $10,886,792 $8,851,792 Negligible To develop,design and construct pedestrian and bike paths,routes,and facilities throughout the city as opportunities arise. 16 14 16 Local Street Rehabilitation $1,500,000 $1,500,000 $1,000,000 $1,019,483 $11,906,275 $8,851,792 Negligible To reconstruct or rehabilitate deteriorated local streets to Include replacement of street pavement, replacement of defective sidewalk,curb and gutter end improvement to drainage.Streets rehabilitation Is done and an as needed basis according to the pa 6 15 17 Sidewalk Replacement SID $600,000 $600,000 $400,000 $400,000 912,306,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To replace defective sidewalk and remove tripping hazards in the designated special improvement district (SID)area.This project will also install ADA pedestrian ramps,provide some tree replacement where tress have damaged sidewalk,and improve drainag III • • • a CIP Board Mayor FY 2003-2004 FY 2003-2004 _ o•E FY 2003-2004 Staff Proposed Proposed Recommended Cumulative Total Cumulative Total Operating Budget in in Co' s Idle of Protect Request Estimated Cost Amount Amount Amount Adj Board Cost Council Amount Adj Board Cost Impact IC 13 18 New and Replacement Streetlights $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60.000 $12,366,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To replace existing streetlights that are no longer eervicable or Install new streetlights on and as needed basis.To be coordinated with other city projects. 27 11 18 Sugar House Lighting Project $675,000 $675,000 $675,000 $675,000 813,041,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To remove all existing over head street lighting and Install new decorative poles with underground wiring. Street lights would be replaced on 2100 South from 700 East to 1300 East,and Highland Drive from Ramona to I-80 and Wilmington. _ 11 18 20 Sidewalk Rehabilitation-Concrete Sawing $200,000 $200,000 $150,000 $150,000 $13,191,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To provide sidewalk rehabilitation and a reduction of tripping hazards through a relatively new concrete sawing technique.This process eliminates existing sidewalk displacements of up to one Inch through use of a specialized saw which slices off the dis 2 17 21 Traffic Signal Upgrade $625,000 $625,000 $500,000 $500,000 S13,691,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To remove existing traffic signal equipment and upgrade with mast arm poles,new signal heads, pedestrian signal heads with countdown timers, Improved loop detection and left turn phasing. Planned upgrades wtl take place at 300 West and 1700 South,400 20 21 22 Jordan Park Peace Garden-Irrigations System $190,000 $190,000 $190,000 $190,000 $13,881,275 $6,851,792 Negligible Phase 1l To provide for the second phase of Peace Gardens -- Irrigation construction.The Irrigation system Is being • replaced to maximi ze water efficiency end to attach it to the Central Control System.Jordan Park Peace Garden Is located 1000 West 1000 South. 26 23 23 200 S Reconstruction $3,250,000 $3,250,000 $3,250,000 $13,881,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To reconstruct deteriorated and substandard street on 200 South,from 400 West to 900 West,to include pavement reconstruction,Installation of new curb, gutter and sidewalk,storm drainage,street lighting, street landscaping and traffic control features 12 22 24 Traffic Calming $250,000 $250,000 $200,000 $13,881,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To Install traffic calming devices such as bulb-outs, speed humps,raised crosswalks,traffic circles, medians,etc.,on streets where these types of devices are deemed appropriate in eligible areas of the City. 31 25 Henn Franks Park-Parldng and Storage $130,000 $130,000 $130,000 $13,881,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To plan and construct new landscape along the 700 East frontage.Also,to make changes to the irrigation system and to add security lighting. Herm Franks Park is located at 1350 South 700 East. 32 28 EX/Training Center $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $8,000,000 $13,881,275 $6,861,792 Unknown To provide for the completion of a building through a joint venture with the area Red Cross to build an Emergency Operations Center(EOC)/Training Center. 3 c v C, .o x CIP Board Mayor FY 2003-2004 FY 2003-2004 o ?• FY 2003-2004 Staff Proposed Proposed Recommended Cumulative Total Cumulative Total Operating Budget or m rc Title of Project Request Estimated Cost Amount Aero�.r nt Amount Adj Board Cos; Council Amours' Adj Board Cost Impact 30 27 700 E Street Lighting Upgrade $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $2,000,000 $13,881,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To remove all'Waling over head street lighting on 700 East from South Temple to 2700 South,and Install new decorative poles with underground wiring. 8 28 ADA Transition Plan Improvements-City Wide $100,000 $100,000 6100,000 313,881,276 36,851,792 Negligible To design end constuct In parka,city-wide,that have been Identified as accessibility Issues as defined by the Americans with Dlsablltlea Act.6 29 SMCC Chlorine Tank $70,000 $70,000 $70,000_ $13,881,276 $8,851,792 Negligible To prolong the normal service life of the boiler at the Sorenson Multi-Cultural Center,the chlorine tank needs to be moved from the room where the boiler Is located,due to the corrosive nature of chlorine fumes. • The Sorenson Canter is located at 855 We • 33 30 Popperton Park ADA Playground&Master Plan $120,000 $120,000 $120,000 313,881,275 $8,851,792 Negligible To replace the existktg non-ADA accessible playground equipment as well as up-grades to the Irrigation system. 28 31 Sugar House Ramp and Paver Replacement $400,000 $400,000 $400,000 313,881,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To replace substandard ADA pedestrian ramps and sidewalk pavers In the Sugar House business district. 36 32 CIP Grants Matching Funds $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 $13,881,275 36,851,792 Negligible To provide funds to be available for use as DIP grants matching money. . 38 33 Lindsay Garden Park•Master Plan 350,000 $50,000 $50,000 $13,881,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To create a master plan for Lindsey Garden Park to determine the best future use of the park. 411 38 34 Main Pollee Station $44,174,300 $44,174,300 $44,174,300 $13,881,275 $6,851,792 Unknown To provide for the purchase of approximately 1/3 of an acre contiguous to the existing Public Safety Building, to demolish the existing apartment building,the Public Safety Building,the parking structure and the annex, and to construct a new main police 7 35 Traffic Signal installation $375,000 $375,000 $375,000 $13,881,275 $6,851,792 $270 To install new traffic signals at intersections where they am warranted. 37 36 Westminster ADA Playground&Parking Turn- $200,000 $200,000 $200,000 313,881,275 $6,851,792 Negligible Around To replace the existing non-ADA accessible playground equipment,to up-grade the Irrigation system,end to modify the existing parking turn-around to allow easier access and exit.Westminster Park is located at 990 East 1700 South. 9 37 Fire Station Repairs and Improvements $70,000 $70,000 $70,000 313,881,275 $6,851,792 Negligible To provide for necessary repairs to all City fire stations. 34 38 1208E Street/Median Rehabilitation 3805,000 $805,000 $805,000 $13,881,275 36,851,792 Negligible To provide street and median island rehabilitation to 1200 East,from 300 South to 500 South,to include • replacement of deteriorated street pavement,curb and gutter,median curb,median irrigation and landscaping. • 4 • cc CIP Board Mayor FY 2003-2003 FY 2003-2004 o m FY 2003-2004 Staff Proposed Proposed Recommended Cumulative Told Cumulative Total Operating Budget Title of Protect Request Estimated Cost Amount Amount Amount Adj Board Cost Council Amount Adi Board Cost Impact Withdrawn Jordan River Trail Railroad Crossing Design $65,000 Withdrawn To design the railroad crossing and to study the costs associated with building a bridge over,or a tunnel under the tracks at this section of the Jordan River Traliway Project.(Request is being withdrawn since Tran•• -hen determined that available fun • 150 W Quince Street $135,000 Curb Bale and t for ne Ave Withdrawn $0 $0 Curb Realignment for Intersection of Military Dr.and Withdrawn m $0 1700 East Railroad Overpass Withdrawn $0 i0 Class C 10 10 Class C $0 $0 Class C W $0 Claes C 10 $0 Class C $0 $0 To upgrade pavement,and sidewalk,curb and gutter on this section of street (Recommended that this street be included In the 2004/2005 CIP Local Streets Reconstruction project,pending funding approval for the•roect • Roesayn Heights-1900 East Street Improvements $364,000 To reconstruct 1900 East between 2100 South and Parley's Way,also Improving sidewalk,curb and utter traffic:calmin, and street l'htine. ••CIP Board Members determined that these Issues would require going through the Special Improvement District(SID) lisc•nl Fear(l3-114 Iinprict Fee/iligihle Project.-tpplicrrtiun.c Impact Fee Projects $425,000 $425,000 S425,000 Construct various Police,Fire,Park and Street capital Improvement projects identified in the Impact Fee Analysis,Capital Facilities Plan. MBA Debt Service for Pioneer Prsolnot Bond $434,160 $434,160 S434,160 Debt service for the MBA bond used to complete the Pioneer Precinct. Impact fees may be used to pay for 19%of the cost of the facility. 14 2 Sugar House Rails wt Trails 5264,000 $264,000 $264,000 To develop a paved bike/pedestrian trail in shared right of-way with commuter light rail development on the UTA Sugar House spur,500 East to Highland Drive. Various other Improvements will be made as well. 21 a North Brickyard Neighborhood Park $30,000 $30,000 $30,000 To design a park on a halt-acre she owned by Salt Lake City located on the Jordan Canal corridor between Crandall and Zenith Ave,or 1140 East 2905 South. Plaza 349 EOC Construoton $50,000 $50,000 $50,000 To complete the construction of an Emergency Operations Center in Plaza 349 $1,203,160 $1,203,160 • • 5 MEMORANDUM DATE: May 27, 2003 TO: Salt Lake City Council Members FROM: Michael Sears. Budget & Policy Analyst RE: Salt Lake City Open Space Implementation / Impact Fee Clarification The Administration has forwarded a recommended Capital Improvement Program budget that includes proposals for Impact Fee funded CIP projects. The specific projects are Sugar House Rails with Trails and North Brickyard Neighborhood Park Design. The Administration has indicated they have included the projects as part of the Open Space Implementation section established through the Impact Fee Ordinance. Council staff has noted that these projects are not specifically listed in the Impact Fee Ordinance and Impact Fees have not been collected for these specific projects. The Open Space Implementation category of the Impact Fee Ordinance refers to the Salt Lake City Parks and Recreation Recovery Action Plan (un-adopted May 2001) and Open Space Master Plan (adopted October�92). The definition of Open Space as noted in the plans is as follows: • "Open, space is defined as predominatelyundeveloped P P de eloped land primarily left in its natural environment with recreation uses as a secondary objective. It is usually owned or managed by a governmental agency and may have public access. In some cases, environmentally sensitive areas are considered as open space and can include wildlife habitats, wetlands, stream and creek corridors, or unique or endangered plant species." The Council may wish to clarify the definition of open space and determine if the recommended funding for these two proposed projects is consistent with the Council's intent regarding open space implementation. Council staff has attached page VII-2 of the Impact Fee final report, the Open Space/Nature Preserves Inventory and Needs Assessment page from the Salt Lake City Parks and Recreation Recovery Action Plan and an accounting of the Impact Fee Revenue and Expenditures to date. cc: Cindy Gust-Jenson, Rocky Fluhart, David Nimkin, Steve Fawcett, Gordon Hoskins and Randy Hillier 111111 • driven by new growth, so 50 percent of the costs are recovered by this ice The consulting team worked closely with City staff in estimating the percent of each facility attributable to growth. Construction and acquisition costs of new, growth facilities are estimated at $5.4 million. The costs in Table VII-1 include the debt service costs that the City will have to bear under the likely scenario that they debt finance these items. Debt service costs are estimated as 2.7 percent of asset costs for issuance fees and 28 percent of asset costs for interest, as detailed in Section IV. After including this debt service, total infrastructure costs increase to $7.0 million. Table VII-1 Parks Service Growth-Related Capital Infrastructure Growth Shared Portion to Related Facility Include in Allocated Description (i'c (I) Portion Portion Impact Fee Value Parks Gateway Park $2,000,000 100% 100% 100% $2,000,000 Memory Grove Neighborhood Park 255,000 Crandall Avenue Park 500,000 Acq. & Dev. Community Parks . 5,000,000 Sports Field @ W. Capitol Hill Boys Club 22,5,000 • 500 North & Cortez Park 2,50,000 400 N., 400 W. Basin Park 200,000 Open Space Jordan River Parkway 1,750,000 50% 100% 50% 875,000 Implementation 9,500,000 25% 100% 25% 2,375,000 Buildings Fleet Maint. Facility 20,800,000 13% 5% 1% 124,384 Fee Related Research Citygate Study 180,000 42% 9% 4% "6,710 Impact Fee Study 230,000 100% 9% 9% 20,414 Debt Costs Cost of Issuance 122,145 100% 100% 100% 122,145 NPV of Interest Payments 1,510,567 100% 100% 100% 1,510,567 Total $42,522,712 17% $ 7,034,220 Notes: (1)Based on the Salt Lake City 20-Year Inventory of Capital Needs. ,A./ BBC Research & Consulting VII-2S Open Space/Nature Preserves inventory and Needs i Ssessment Open space is defined as predominately undeveloped land primarily left in its natural environment with recreation uses as a secondary objective It is usually owned or managed by a governmental agency and may have public access. In some cases,environmentally sensitive areas are considered as open space and can include wildlife habitats,wetlands. stream eni cree'F .cr'..:Orscrendangered plant species City Creek Canyon 800 cc. A road winds it's way up City Creek Canyon with a series of picnic sites with restrooms coning the dive tc the top A large picnic shelter and restrooms are toe destination Several trails emanate from this virtually undeveloped landscape. The watershed and City Creek are an important par', of Salt Lane CitV's trail system Ensign Peak Nature Park Completed in 1996,this historic city peak has been partially developed with trails and small plazas The site conditions were deteriorating without distinct trails. Funded by toe Ensign Peak Foundation and maintained by the city the revegetated site provides a foothill ecosystem for everyone's enjoyment. Hidden Hollow Natural Aree 2.8 cc (2160 South 1255 East) • Hidden Hollow was once the original Sugar House Park.Through the efforts of Salt Lake City schoolchildren known as the Kids Organized to Protect our Environment(KOPE Kids),the park was restored as an utd0or classroom where students may study Utah plants and animals. • F Y f •t lf ". '. ' ' �t1' i t-, '�. I 29 An Accounting of the Impact Fee Revenue and Expenditures To Date Impact Fee and Gateway Fire/Red Cross EOC Land • Fund Description Total Amount Received Study Purchase Current Balance 83-83761 Impact Fee Infill Police Facility 413,582.39 12,421.00 A01,161 39 93-83762 Impact Fee Infill Fire Facility 454.276.01 13,386 00 250,000 00 190.890 G1 83-83763 Impact Fee''fill Parks 354,676 10 36.390 00 318 286 10 83-83765 Impact Fee Westside Police Facility 115 855 39 12 421 00 103 434 9 83-83766 Impact Fee Westside Fire Facility 121 271 81 13 386 00 ;:,0 000 C; - 83-83768 Impact Fee ,Vestside Streets 625 917 88 140 129 00 485 72- "5 83-83769 Impact Fee NW Quadrant Police Facility 0 00 12 421 00 , 83-83770 Impact Fee NW Quadrant Fire Facility 0 00 13 386 00 '50 000 G.. . , 83-83771 Impact Fee NW Quadrant Parks Facility 0 00 34,184 00 .351 83-83772 Impact Fee NW Quadrant Streets Facility 0.00 121,876 00 (124 84, Total 2,085,579.58 410,000.00 750,000.00 917,886.91 As of: 5/27/2003 Total(Including NW Quad) Police Total 491,872 41 Fire Total (218 201 82) Parks Total 283,270 01 Streets Total 360,946 31 Total 917,886.91 The March 2002 budget amendment included the transfer of$410,000 from impact fees to the General Fund for the cost of the impact fee and Citygate Studies The September 2002 budget amendment included the use of$750,000 from fire impact fees for the purchase of land for the Fire/Red Cross EOC The funds were taken equally($250,000)from each of the 3 fire impact fee cost centers. III • • S'-� '�'! ATi GIRPro° CIO ROCKY J. FLUHART ...,o, j,d(.ews�R maw aee_.a.-/ ROSS C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES MAYOR ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL REPORTING May 14, 2003 To: Rocky Fluhart From: Gordon Hoskins --5"- i Re: Information Council requested Collection of Accounts Receivable on the Courts System In October 2002 the revenue auditors were asked to review the procedures and cash controls of the City's Courts System. They found that the City has outstanding accounts receivable from past due parking tickets and moving violations in the amount of$15.7 million. In the past seven months that amount has increased to $16.8 million. The courts are sending several letters out trying to collect these funds but because of the lack of staff the accounts receivable continues to increase. As we reviewed the data base we have found that about 40%of the records have wrong addresses or bad social security numbers. • In February we took twenty of those outstanding accounts to see what the success we could have in collecting them. Twenty five percent of those twenty we were able to do either a partial collection by reducing the interest and penalties or setting them up on a payment plan. We found that like the data base about 50%had bad addresses and no forwarding information. It is very important to make the collections when the accounts are less than two years old. After that time the accounts become very difficult to collect. Between 1 and 3 years there is about$9 million of the outstanding balance. We have established a team of employees from the Finance Office and the Treasurer's Office to help in these collections. We have dedicated one of the revenue auditors and several other people from these two divisions as they have time available on a part time basis to support the collections of the accounts receivables. For the past two months we have developed a procedure along with the attorney's office to pursue these collections. We have made arrangement to have access to credit information. That information allows us to find current addresses and current employment. The procedure is to send two letters designed by the attorney's office. From those letters we are seeing about an 11% response. We are still seeing about 40% in wrong addresses. The next step which we have just started is to find their employment and set up a garnishment. The costs that we are incurring are postage,paper supplies, and credit reports which are about$2 for each request. • 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 248, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 841 1 1 TELEPHONE: 00 1-535-7676 FAX: 801-535-7662 The ideal procedure would be to have a system with the state that the person could not register their vehicle until they paid their outstanding tickets. It could be a win for the 410 City and if we could give the State a portion or percentage it would be a win for them also. The Council asked for a break down of the accounts receivable. The accounts receivable range from current due and out to eight years past due. The following is a list of the types of accounts we are holding: Parking Tickets $10.3 million Moving Violations 5.8 Zoning Issues .5 Other MISC .2 Total $16.8 million • • MEMORANDUM • DATE: May 27, 2003 TO: Council Members FROM: Council Member Carlton Christensen SUBJECT: District One Olympic Legacy Project In response to the Council's decision to fund Olympic Legacy projects,I would appreciate the Council's support for the District One Olympic Legacy Project. The project includes the following features placed at eight locations along the Jordan River Trailway between North Temple and Redwood Road: • A bench with an Olympic message cast into the leg • A light pole with an Olympic message cast into the skirt • A concrete pad in-set into the pathway with a Salt Lake City 2002 snow flake and venue petroglyph figure for various event venues placed into the concrete pad. A message would be included that would give information on the various events,their locations, medal winners,etc. When the funding for District projects was initially proposed,a letter was sent out in August,2002, inviting each of the four District One Community Council Chairs,along with an additional member of their council,to attend meetings to begin the process of identifying an appropriate project for Council District One. Three meetings were held which included community representatives and staff from the City Parks Division. This proposal came forward from community members because of the commonality and accessibility of the Jordan River Trailway for all the District One neighborhoods and the recent transfer by the State of Utah to SLC and improvements desired along the pathway. The project meets the criteria set by the Council in the following ways: 1. The project must provide a long-term improvement to the City or create a community asset. This project will enhance the north section of the Jordan Parkway recently acquired by the City. Included in this project will the installation of lighting and benches that do not currently exist along the parkway. 2. The project must be limited to property that is owned by the City and be easily accessible to the community. The features in this project will be placed along the City- owned Jordan River Trailway. The parkway runs north and south through District 1 and is accessible by all the communities involved. Additionally,we will look at placement of one of the rest areas near a trail head that is visible from one of the arterials that run perpendicular to the parkway. 3. The project may include the enhancement an existing feature within the Council; it may include the development of a public place. Since the construction of the Parkway by the State of Utah,minimal improvements have been made and it has not had a chance to develop projects within normal city funding methods. This gives the community a chance to do both,while preserving a legacy from the Olympics. 4. The project proposal shall identify any potential maintenance cost and propose • funding source(s)for such costs. The plans for the project were developed in consultation with representatives from the Parks Division and the materials chosen for the project were selected to provide ease of maintenance by City staff. Other maintenance is • currently being provided to the parkway as a city park. 5. The Project Proposal shall provide an illustration of the end product. (See attached) 6. As an option,the Project may be combined with other grants, (including CBDG money),but the end product shall not be the repair of routine City infrastructure such as curb,gutter, or sidewalk. Since lighting for southern potions of the parkway have been funded and planned to be constructed,there may be an opportunity to add this project to an existing project. No other CDBG or CIP projects are planned,but it is anticipated that as the Parkway develops north of 1000 North, similar features will be installed for the benefit of residents who live in the newer Westpointe Area. That expansion of the parkway should be paid for primarily though impact fees. 7. The end product shall display a plaque indicating that Salt Lake Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympics Legacy moneys were used in whole or in part to fund the project. The project will have a plaque which makes this designation. 8. The project proposal shall recommend the appropriate department within the City to manage and appropriate the funds for each project. The project will be administered through Public Services Parks Division. I have been working with Dell Cook under the approval of Rick Graham. • • Page 2 of 2 • Carlton Christensen May 29,2003 Salt Lake City Council Salt Lake City,Utah Jeff Salt Executive Director, Great Salt Lake Audubon P.O. Box 522220 Salt Lake City,Utah 84152 Dear Mr.Christensen: I am writing to express concern about portions of the proposed Olympic Legacy project for the Jordan River Parkway. My organization is opposed to the installation of nighttime lighting along the river way,because of its impacts to wildlife. Great Salt Lake Audubon is also concerned about the incremental impacts to the Jordan River that have diminished the natural values from the river,and slowly turned the river corridor into a large- scale theme park. . Nighttime lighting is especially harmful to avian wildlife that inhabit areas like river corridors,because it drives birds away from places where they can roost at night. Recently, a neighborhood development project was constructed near Modesto Street without coordination with Jordan River interest groups,that illuminates the tree canopy where birds rest at night.Nighttime lighting stresses bird populations and is a leading cause of loss of wildlife populations in urban areas. The presence of wildlife within the river corridor is an important quality that makes the Jordan River trail system enjoyable to the public. Great Salt Lake Audubon will work to oppose further lighting of the trail system and the continued loss of natural values along the Jordan River corridor. Please consider removing this aspect from the proposed Olympic Legacy project. Sincerely, Jeff Salt • RESOLUTION NO. OF 2003 ESTABLISHING FUNDING CRITERIA FOR THE$700,000 OLYMPIC LEGACY PROJECT WHEREAS $700,000 has been provided to Salt Lake City(the"City")by the Salt Lake Olympic Committee for an Olympic Legacy Project to commemorate the Salt Lake City 2002 Winter Olympics; and WHEREAS, this Council has determined that it is in the best interests of the citizens of Salt Lake City that the$700,000 be divided among the seven city council districts so that each district will receive$100,000 for a project(the "Project")to be developed within that district; and WHEREAS,criteria should be established to ensure that the use of the funds in each council district will be appropriate for their intended purpose and to insure that there will be some consistency in the use of the funds among the council districts; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah: A. Criteria for Projects The following criteria shall be applied in making a determination regarding the use of the$100,000 available to each of the seven city council districts for Olympic Legacy • projects within the City: I. The end product of the Project shall provide a long-term improvement to the City or must create a community asset. 2. The Project shall be limited to: a. Property that is owned by the City or will become City property as a result of the Project; and b. Involves an area easily accessible to the council community, i.e.located on a major/common thoroughfare. 3. The Project may include: a. The purchase of land or of an existing brick&mortar establishment; b. Enhancement to an existing feature or fixture within the council community; c. The creation of public art or a public art piece; { d. The creation or development of a picnic park, children's park, open space, or similar public space; e. The creation of a public monument. 4. The Project proposal shall identify any potential maintenance costs and shall propose funding source(s) for such costs. 5. The Project proposal shall provide an illustration of the end product. 6. As an option,the Project may be combined with other grants (including CDBG money), but the end product shall not be the repair of routine City infrastructure such as curb, gutter or sidewalk. If the Project is combined with other grants, the Project shall nevertheless meet with the criteria established herein in addition to any other criteria that may be required by the application process for the other grant money. 7. The end product shall display a plaque indicating that Salt Lake City 2002 Winter • Olympics Legacy moneys were used in whole or in part to fund the Project. 8. The Project proposal shall recommend the appropriate department within the City to manage and appropriate the funds for each Project. B. Approval of Funds l. Projects that meet all the criteria set forth hereinabove shall be submitted to the City Council for review. 2. Prior to submittal, the Councilperson of each council district shall have obtained input from residents of the district regarding the Project, including input from the Community Councils within the district. The Councilperson for each district may decide whether a public meeting or an open house is the best method to gather the appropriate input for that district 3. After Council review,projects shall be placed for consideration of approval on a City Council agenda. 4. Distribution of the funds for each district shall be determined by the Project(s) approved,not by the number of Community Councils.This is due to the uneven number of Community Councils within each district and the fact that many Community Councils overlap into more than one district. C. Administration of Funds Each project shall follow the procurement policies of the City in creating the • project,such as competitive bidding. Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City,Utah,this day of ,2003. SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL By CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: CHIEF DEPUTY CITY RECORDER APPROVED AS TO FORM Sal lake Attorneys Office Deis 3 2oc• By G ResoluiAltesolso ion Establishing Funding Criteria(m S700,000 Olympic Neighbor ood legacy Project 3-7-03 2 • , . . . 0 c 6 - , ..,. \ ..0 . -2-\4 4''''' 'I V .,.. .2..eZe. t -1 ICi .zz•- - ,._.1_,....r j. b' ,,. , ......14v• ',...-, " - -• A ) , ..• ..,g1 - -...t...,, .., _, . , - ftt itr•.• n . _S-r 1 ,,, ...... , .4' • • 9 1 '-1.4,•••• N-• Illit".,A..14.11'....e. ‘--,...... 3,14r.. - g ..4••• < 4t '''.1-iiii, "-:•:':'''';c-fr'l • 1.- 1 r•-0;,,,.. co., -, 4. -e-c-1. - -.,.. - __ - • -i_o.,-.,v . ,..,....,--.,,..,._ , „._: ....t.4.,...1 0-. _ ----:- • , '•-•-y- ..e.-4,r-y _ > n ..-"--- ------ - 4141(li';°P,,,. 14111..,..' • .i.11°. 4oit: •. it: -...,.--,.. -. G ril tli i•_,.:4-4,'?.f.i- *11%%7.,' (1-!--• . • ' r./..:,.!,..• it...,- .114b,-- _ , l':-'441SA - at M C) -:-77';'-'illil fz4• iti4,'-}!', ,,0 1- ---.' ' ' 1C.'... ks. • air"! # ›. ......,,,,,„.„,...,,„. ,.......,_ _ 0 J.-.7.1::1,,,,..:,,, ,,ift-,fiy:.,....-..,,,)„4-11,,,-\\• .,t-, .. ,- 4. , ....fr- _,,,‘_-___ / .*....0- _, ---1. iL,-..1, -.4,-,-- 4-14t zi ..< .•:-',.-7;-'.,:-f",-,.10pi,:‘,',,,,•;'„%r .11.1110•01101.'.', ,,, v--. - . • n ii.f.I.X.i.lig:7..i.!=n,.', '',I .••. ,14,‘ •••a ,,. -.k.,, ...,_, •-•0... .,?4 '"_;.:.Z.I- - ., tri i't _T..'4';.?2,4":Viii-i;:i i 4'•.'.••.1 ii,!!--- 116, *,, ' ) - / *,7*.•;'•,t., ., :4'. -X-tA...;'. e4..1...- ..I.II.V.I. .,.. g Pc) ii,-if.o-J?4:1q.i.1,,• , . --Li- ...iejlir ,..i., - ....,------ Ati 41-, ----.'s . ,t- - .:0*,. Ndr... ai -"...- WI. _ ,7, 0 iiii,ItlgAiLki:fi"•'*i.'•1'..13:1;.7ii, _J"L 41kwilinik: • - At?..‘x-' ' "- _ -- • '2-1-7-4 ' - :• .:-: ''-,'i PT_ itlt:., ,,, k-101.3..e.,:-- -,--71%soilibt 4... - _ , .:.75c.- __........„7„-- wr.._. ii ,LI'::41%,•,_ ,P t ,.. -. lk . •s ...,,,-..- „.....-, ... ...L., -.. _-.....„..,,,- -...\ -_ r:: ,--1 -i..-4,_-:.-„y:.:::..J.1 .•,1,_.,• . i,,t- . \•• es-a "40 144141C4, Tit h--,I•‘• . 0 : ' k _ ., --IV, '' If. _I . . -.:,,4'fr-,.',..3:1,4;4=.,...,%•::13 1,11,,,,-S,' ' . Z a , 4 'd -'117,,i0W-" "="--•: "Nz..„.. ' ... 'II NICISik, - •-.-..'.=,.,..? t,.,:ti,,,,,,i,„••.1t••;t,.. _.. __.„,......t.-- -arc •• ir , -..--,A,..- .--_.=:q3,7yi4.:1,1:1,:: iiii...-.s.,c-,_.1‘t.--,;,z...„.46.-"'•%. ---- ....- -..---"?,/s.-';..,:,,, illilk; ''',?- 4 7''. •::140,,,,Ailr,4):,,....t._ • • -1,4 °‘ - . ,.....3....,-...4.„, i,ark,....„.„_-__,:_,..,„,„,„ -.. .....1. _. ,itt. ,,,4, t , . • tc.r..31, -. -- -_ < 0 , ••••'-'ili'li. ...2,:v ;:t Y,i;..T1C-,:•..-.!,1,5.....-7- - ----- .e.tV•r:,,-;40*.1- r•k- = 41 - •t,10:. ii•',.r arbi-4,1--......--..„ ,...,4_ ......„ _ , • .<4 l'"•pir ' ,''1. '--, ' ..."' •-•., ., ' ••• a •: •• l: fr,:, ••ir,ess..,. -ir .0. , -• .,, ...... . .. li,;I: l yii";I! •j ,. • - ..‘ 1,$1 ',f'',',1 f s' .a.t. •''- '' -...r. . .T1?,,?.A ,;14.- • ‘ .I'arit.'...- ... .'"A;a4.• ...1:fr ;‘'.. '' . - , , •••4\ X l' ' l'.:,i\,vd...4i'... ..t, ..:"ii 1.. "wk.,:"..ii'a w .• "r_ ^"A..,., 1- - j\& ‘._ - ..i4.1 • 10,4 il‘,...A,:z...S. •i,-* ..7,; .... ' t"*". -AL" tr73.....‘ •L'I 4. . •••".. • .''7111\0'2Y .f•••-.1,,...., , ---4. `. -;li -. 1 a z " ,-; r N. -., ,..t......,- ... . ' A - nIt_,,•w,Jr • • . r-, .„--,--- 11.1 • - 'E.%„ • .. •?- ." 10-Tg.-.P'S • .• . , _,„••,... i _ le %3 • i,-_. 7,ar, 74. 4, •••ii ---- -: i . • -----=111- - -1- I 1P-110, fr--- - ir- -• ....,i7,,,,. f 41 i.1:i- t':-.....,, 7".. ,‘ l'ir •-"P k •••• ••••....3 JP • ...,..A"Vi .1..4 \ t" •,, .4.' -,- T- kiii N. . • i",-1-4 it •;:='; . _ lb • • • •';‘, :'At.11 : "-1 • r.), •,-. i* ":--1111..„;,,‘", elk., o 'WI p p r--, -to . •. .,.',31'.. .A.V•zi--s c,• A'••• . '...,. -. ..•'•• :, 4. ..+.6,* . f.,:---,k-.- . _ ,:- ..)_ -5rN, " • , --..._-2,-,1,.,,..,,,-Q.--;.;;;;11;,..-,:ikT:' , • . .:,.-if.-7-.4t/1;',111 41.,i;:::''_4-4A,::".::;1••3'..-i. : it"' 6 'I.. '°114?: ''.' 4 - , . • .11.1' •t 4,*,..)1' .• ••• 3. ..... ••%1-; it - '11"-,,j; il'?.."':14i 4.!q;;'. ,?:i‘ '\N,, k A.,-1#.,_.4:03•,....lki L.-v‘41:,*,..=.- .4-,',1;•*N r,t,.: ...'. ',. .tr.,Ar:'';,1'" '•' , 1 i‘ '',j3...-alii.:11 }i'.•,1'7?''..1`411:.t.;: -ill r--.-"Ii, ...iw.‘; t V:.ANI:4•4.2;....7,L'r '''t.l.' -r7 .- ..- i-.4-'147-.'.1,..- :k . Alli:::'4k:feZ' k`• .3• '''' .4Ail . ''.:1 -; • ''' 1,.. 31"'"...0.lik.F' --''i: ..:. .' '1°4 :' 'V t ti; . VI. -.........-...- i,-;•z.;",..."::,,' 1. - ,•- al., ,.., A '` 't,' . ./ .. "- --'4,..1.:31?1'..:_....;;:ifyS.::i 4, ,.zr, .f.: _‘ .-te.; ......114, /i ok ( it 41.1:7 r i-.,..' 4:-.r•-:--1 r • A '''' ' ;4 'fi,73c3.11,i':11..F.•-.':'. 1.1,•tr :k kic:Ntr_' , 41,,\:*'illit..i.:,,., :, /..... .X 4---,;TV1-1, ''', ' 't. •4, '••••44''1 L k ii:-' ---• 1'--- • vA- 4.1ft,,, tr5 _4; -i_A .gr,-- -,,,ski-,------21.... -;,-3.----7.-,,1„\.. i -_-.:-----, --, , -; 'i;..;4 t*,.+2. ''.. 1,... , ". ' -1' ' , - kff ' let:', . s.' X4:7. I" -.1CAk ' :'s -'.- ow k, 0.- .,,,.(‘ - -41--, --*,:, -)., *A, ,..,,., - 2 •.:,,.., 1.. ...., .., , -,,\, Alt- ,\,,,, ,,,, , ,,... ., 4-4:,,,A 1, _, ,.,,.•• ,..,...-. .., , ,_. • * , --,„,,- . . -,-- , ?..., ,' -•',41, ""-‘ • -41 ':ii--; -1 '\ 'ft - letse , . 4.,ii '*••• ...-1,-it • 'S 0 .; o _.,. _ifr., - . - 4. - 4'',,-• • AG