The URL can be used to link to this page

10/23/2003 - Minutes PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2003 The City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, met in a Work Session on Thursday, October 23, 2003, at 5:30 p.m. in Room 326, City Council Office, City County Building, 451 South State Street. In Attendance: Council Members Carlton Christensen, Nancy Saxton, Jill Remington Love, Dave Buhler and Van Turner. Absent: Council Members Dale Lambert and Eric Jergensen. Also in Attendance: Rocky Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer; Chris Bramhall, Assistant City Attorney; Lynn Pace, Assistant City Attorney; D.J. Baxter, Senior Advisor to the Mayor; Cindy Gust-Jenson, Executive Council Director; Gary Mumford, Council Deputy Director/Senior Legislative Auditor; Janice Jardine, Council Planning & Policy Analyst; Russell Weeks, Council Policy Analyst; Lehua Weaver, Council Constituent Liaison; Everett Joyce, Environmental Planning & Urban Design/Ordinance Planner; Steve Fawcett, Management Services Deputy Director; Dan Mule' , City Treasurer; Sandi Marler, Community Development Program Specialist; Greg Mikolash, East Bench/Subdivisions/Condominiums Planner; Doug Wheelwright, Land Use & Transportation/Subdivisions Planner; Brenda Hancock, Human Resources Division Director; Jodi Langford, Employee Benefits Administrator; LeRoy Hooton, Public Utilities Director; Jeff Niermeyer, Public Utilities Deputy Director; Jim Lewis, Public Utilities Finance Administrator; Jon Adams, Water Reclamation Manager; and Pam Johnson, Deputy City Recorder. Councilmember Christensen presided at and conducted the meeting. The meeting was called to order at 5:33 p.m. AGENDA ITEMS #1. REPORT OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INCLUDING REVIEW OF COUNCIL INFORMATION AND ANNOUNCEMENTS. Ms. Gust-Jenson said the City had received a grant from the Federal Government for Emergency Preparedness Equipment. She said the Police and Fire Departments wanted to purchase a large vehicle that could serve as a mobile unit with the grant monies. She said the vehicle would be shared by both departments. She said the Police and Fire Departments were concerned the purchase price bid would expire prior to an opportunity to brief the Council with their request. She said they wanted permission to move forward with the sale. Councilmember Saxton said she supported the purchase of an emergency vehicle. She said although grant monies would purchase the vehicle, she wanted a break down on estimated maintenance and upkeep costs. #2. INTERVIEW MANUEL "MANNY" EVANGELISTA PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF HIS APPOINTMENT TO THE SISTER CITIES BOARD. Mr. Evangelista said he had a degree in secondary education and a Master' s degree in social work. He said he had been a teacher for 17 years and branched into clinical social work. He said as a restaurant owner in the City, he was involved in the community as a businessman. He said he grew up in Kasson City, the City's sister city in the Philippines. He said he was an active member of the Filipino community. He said he worked with youth in various capacities such as intervention and educational programs, teaching awareness of their heritage and culture. #3. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING A RESOLUTION ON HOMELESS SERVICES IN DOWNTOWN SALT LAKE CITY. View Attachment 03 - 1 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2003 Councilmember Saxton and Janice Jardine briefed the Council. Councilmember Saxton said years past the shelter and service providers for the homeless were located on the far side of the City. She said the City had grown around these services. She said the shelter and service providers were now in a desirable location, increasing the value of their property. She said it was time for the Council to decide the direction the City would continue in and to restate the City's commitment to those in need of services. She said Council was presented with the Common Ground Statement and a draft of the proposed resolution. She said she and Councilmember Jergensen met as a sub-committee to refine the language of the resolution, but wanted input from other Council Members. Councilmember Christensen said the resolution addressed developments at Gateway, Pioneer Park and Rio Grande. He asked if affordable housing projects only pertained to those areas of the City. Councilmember Saxton said affordable housing was a City- wide issue. She said for the homeless this would be a step to assimilating into mainstream society. She said they needed to remain near the services provided in those areas. Ms. Jardine said the verbiage "throughout the City or City-wide" could be added for clarification. Councilmember Buhler said removing "in the area" from the resolution would allow other municipalities the opportunity to participate in providing services to the homeless population. He said the City should not be the only entity working toward solutions. Councilmember Love said adding the verbiage "we recognize the value of locating services and creating a collaborative environment" and "we encourage this unique approach to human services" would make the resolution stronger. #4 . RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE AUDIT OF HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES. View Attachment Brenda Hancock, Jodi Langford and Gary Mumford briefed the Council. Councilmember Christensen said the audit focused on the ratio of H.R. personnel to City employees. Ms. Hancock said the Bureau of National Affairs (B.N.A. ) comparison was an industry yardstick for the audit. She said nationally the ratio for H.R. consultants to employees was 1 per 100. She said in 1996 H.R. had 25 people on staff and now there were 17 with two on extended medical leaves. She said in 2003 Council cut three positions from H.R. during budget cuts. She said elimination of the training manager was hard. She said she had to take over the training of approximately 3, 000 employees. #5. RECEIVE A BRIEFING REGARDING THE BONDING FOR SEWER UTILITY UPGRADE AND THE 900 SOUTH STORM DRAIN PROJECT. View Attachment LeRoy Hooton, Jim Lewis, Jeff Niermeyer, Jon Adams and Gary Mumford briefed the Council from the attached handout. Mr. Hooton said an agreement with nearby residents would not allow the current sewage plant to be expanded. He said the current sewage plant could process 56 million gallons of sewage per day. He said physically the sewage plant had maintained the same hydraulic capacity. He said while programs such as increased fees for increased use and conservation had reduced the flow, City growth increased the strength of the sewage. He said although ground had been purchased for a new sewage plant, it did not make sense to build a new facility until the hydraulic capacity needed to be increased. He said now it was simply a matter of being able to treat a higher strength waste within current parameters. Mr. Niermeyer said the 900 South project would take place in two parts. He said plans were for the storm drain to be built in the first year and reconstruction of the street would follow the next year. He said this was a large project and he anticipated it would take years to complete. Councilmember Love said a Special Improvement District 03 - 2 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2003 (SID) project was scheduled for the 900 South and 900 East area. She asked if the utility upgrade could be done at the same time for cost savings. Mr. Niermeyer said the size of this project would require special contractors. He said there would be no cost benefit in combining the projects. Councilmember Saxton said business owners in the area expressed desire for beautification to be included in overall planning. Mr. Niermeyer said the current process at the sewage plant took the nitrogen levels from 15% to 5%. He said enhancements would take it lower. He said that would allow a certain portion of treated waste water to be reused as reclaimed water for green space beautification. Councilmember Saxton asked for a breakdown of the bond amount. Mr. Lewis said the total bond amount would be $34, 000, 000. He said $23,000,000 would go for the sewer treatment plant upgrade, $8,000,000 for the storm drain and $2,000,000 for the oil drain siphon. #6. RECEIVE A BRIEFING ON A PETITION BY THE SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT TO ANNEX APPROXIMATELY 12.3 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 1700 SOUTH AND REDWOOD ROAD. View Attachment Everett Joyce and Janice Jardine briefed the Council from the attached handout. Mr. Joyce said the proposed annexation included the school's property only. He said it would allow gaps to the east and west to fill in. Councilmember Christensen said he had concerns regarding traffic at that location. Mr. Joyce said although the School District was exempt from Salt Lake City permit requirements, they were willing to work with the City Engineering Department and the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) to meet safety standards. Councilmember Saxton asked if there would be additional benefit in annexing a larger area. Mr. Joyce said a larger annexation would involve the consent of all additional property owners. He said should the recreation complex proposal move forward the City might want to consider annexing additional parcels to the north. #7. HOLD A DISCUSSION REGARDING HOUSING POLICY STATEMENTS. View Attachment Janice Jardine briefed the Council from the attached handout. Councilmember Buhler said previous guidelines indicated a mortgage could not be greater than 30% of the buyer's income. He asked the administration for information as to the current benchmark. Councilmember Saxton said often a higher percentage was allowed on mortgages for a home in an urban environment. She said lenders took into consideration residents in those areas often did not purchase vehicles and auto insurance. Councilmember Turner said home loans were often approved on multiple incomes. He said should part of that income be lost, the remaining partner was unable to pay the mortgage alone. He said the City had no control over lending paperwork, but it was left with the consequences. He said there was an area of new homes in his district where 10% were vacant or on the market for that reason. Additional discussion was held on home ownership programs. A discussion was held on housing impact fees and housing development polices. A discussion was held on housing programs and implementation of those programs. Ms. Jardine said she would provide Council a summarization of the implementation strategies. She said that would provide more detail than the policy statements they were reviewing. 03 - 3 PROCEEDINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH THURSDAY, OCTOBER 23, 2003 A discussion was held on transitional housing and rental housing. A discussion was held on single room occupancy (SRO) housing units. Councilmember Turner said there was a large number of existing SRO housing units in the City, but they were recognized as apartments. He said Council had approved a loan to Wood Haven for just such a project. Councilmember Saxton said the City needed to be clear on the definition of an SRO. She said SRO's should be like a studio located aside two and three bedroom units in an apartment complex. She said existing motels or hotels could be converted into SRO's. She said most were located along transportation lines or near other services. She said it would serve the City's housing policies better to convert existing structures rather than build new ones. Councilmember Buhler asked the administration to go through the City's housing policy to identify items which needed to be changed, modified or repealed and present only those at a new briefing. He said Council could have a more productive discussion focusing on fewer issues. Councilmember Saxton asked the administration to keep the Common Ground Statement in mind when identifying those items, eliminating conflict prior to that discussion. Ms. Jardine said the Council had established a sub-committee for housing, although they had not yet met. She said Council Members Love, Jergensen and Saxton comprised the committee. Councilmember Christensen asked the administration to have the sub-committee review the information prior to scheduling a briefing. #8. ENTER INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION, IN KEEPING WITH UTAH CODE, TO DISCUSS TWO MATTERS OF PENDING OR REASONABLY IMMINENT LITIGATION, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANN. 52-4-4 AND 52-4-5 (1) (a) (iii) , AND ATTORNEY-CLIENT MATTERS THAT ARE PRIVILEGED, PURSUANT TO UTAH CODE ANN. 78-24-8. Refer to file M 03-2 for sworn statement and recording. The meeting adjourned at 8:33 p.m. pj 03 - 4 6A-el SlF , C' T ilk), - 4I,O I1 • �,$�� < OFFICE OF THE CITY COUNCIL Posted: October 21, 2003 SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL WORK SESSION MEETING 5:00 p.m., Some Council Members may dine together in Room 125 at the City&County Building. (The room is open to the public.) DATE: October 23,2003 TIME: 5:30 p.m. PLACE: City and County Building 451 South State Street,Room 326 Salt Lake City,Utah AGENDA ITEMS • I. Report of the Executive Director, including review of Council information items and announcements. II. The Council will interview Manuel"Manny"Evangelista prior to consideration of appointment to the Sister Cities Board. III. The Council will receive a briefing regarding a resolution on homeless services in downtown Salt Lake City. IV. The Council will receive a briefing regarding the audit of Human Resource Management Services. V. The Council will receive a briefing regarding the Bonding for Sewer Utility Upgrades and 900 South Storm Drainage Project. VI. The Council will receive a briefing on a petition by the Salt Lake City School District to annex approximately 12.3 acres of land located at the Northwest corner of 1700 North and Redwood Road. VII. The Council will hold a discussion regarding Housing policy statements. VIII. The Council will consider a motion to enter into Executive Session,in keeping with Utah Code,to discuss two matters of pending or reasonably imminent litigation,pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § § 52-4-4 and 52-4-5 (1)(a)(iii), and attorney-client matters that are privileged,pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 78-24-8. Access agendas at www.slcgov.com/council/agendas/default.htm. A sound system for the hearing impaired is available and headphones can be obtained for all public meetings upon four hours advance notice. Arrangements can be made for sign language interpreters;please allow 72 hours advance notice. TDD Number 535-6021. Assisted listening devices are available on Channel I. Large type and#2 Braille agendas are available upon 72 hours advance notice. After 5:00 p.m.,pinasr enter the City and County Building through the east entrance. Accessible route is located on the east side of the building. In accordance with State Statute,City Ordinance and Council Policy,one or more Council Members may be connected via speakerphone. 451 SOUTH STATE STREET, ROOM 304, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH B41 1 1 TELEPHONE: 1301-535-7500, FAX: B01-535-7651 • MEMORANDUM DATE: - - October21, 2003 TO: Council Members FROM: Marge Harvey SUBJECT: Proposed City Council Resolution CC: Rocky Fluhart, Dave Nimkin, DJ Baxter, Ed Rutan, Stephen Allred, Chief Rick Dinse, Rick Graham, Kevin Bergstom,Alison Weyher, David Dobbins, Louis Zunguze, Luann Clark, David Oka,Valda Tarbett, Janice Jardine, Russell Weeks,Sylvia Jones, Gwen Springmeyer Earlier this year, the Mayor signed a Declaration of Intent in conjunction with a statement by homeless service providers as part of a Common Ground Initiative. The intent of this initiative is to ensure that the homeless service providers and facilities will remain undisturbed in the Rio Grande neighborhood. On August 12, 2003, the Council was briefed on the Common Ground Statement and a draft of a City Council Resolution in support of the Common Ground statement was presented. A • sub-committee(Council Members Jergensen and Saxton), met to refine the language of the draft resolution. A draft of the revised City Council Resolution is attached. Below are summaries of the elements in the Common Ground Initiative and also the proposed City Council Resolution, Common Ground Initiative: Statement of Homeless Service Providers: a) Maintain the current co-location of human services in the Rio Grande area. b) A human service presence in the downtown area is vital to serve those in need in Salt Lake City. c) People should be able to receive food, shelter, clothing, child care, medical, dental and mental health assistance in one neighborhood without having to travel throughout the valley. d) Homeless service providers have e a proven track record of being good neighbors to residents and businesses.. e) The Rio Grande neighborhood has shown that upper, moderate and low income residents can live and work together. f) Intentional planning and development efforts should be designed and implemented to integrate new investment and activity into the community without forcing out the homeless and those who serve them. - Declaration of Intent: a) Salt Lake City is committed to support the comprehensive mix of social services in the Rio Grande Community. b) The City declares its intention to support the collaborative, professional social service • community that exists in this area as new investments in business, housing and public infrastructure continue. c) It is the intention of this Administration to make decisions that strive to support and enhance the sustained diversity of this community. Draft City Council Resolution: a) Endorses the principles represented by the Common Ground statement. b) Urges an integrated planning process that looks at the area as a whole and not separate parts. - - c) Encourages those engaged in discussions of the future of the area to do so in a fair, equitable and open-minded manner. d) Encourages the development of permanent, affordable housing for low income and very low income people in the area to reduce the demand on existing services for the homeless. • S 2 • Draft City Council Resolution - Whereas, Salt Lake City is currently involved in extensive discussions about the future of the near west side downtown area, and Whereas,those discussions include possible new development at the Gateway, in the Rio _ - Grande neighborhood and Pioneer Park, and Whereas, any decision the City Council makes will consider how best to make the area a -- community where rich, poor and moderate income people can live, work and flourish - together, and - Whereas,this same pursuit of uniqueness, diversity and inclusiveness is well expressed - in the Common Ground agreement signed earlier this year by area homeless services providers and the Mayor, - Therefore be it resolved that the Salt Lake City Council: = 1)Endorses the principles represented by the Common Ground statement; 2)Urges an integrated planning process that looks at the area as a whole and not in - separate parts; _ - - 3)Encourages all of those persons engaged in further discussions on the area to do so in an open, equitable and fair-minded manner; - 4)Will actively pursue the creation of permanently affordable housing for low income and very low income people in the area to reduce the demand on existing services for the homeless.ID - - COMMON GROUND STATEMENT OF THE HOMELESS SERVICE PROVIDERS IN THE RIO GRANDE COMMUNITY AREA As providers of services for people experiencing poverty and homelessness, we intend to maintain our current co-location of human services in the Rio Grande community area. We believe that a human service presence in the downtown area is vital to serve those in need in Salt Lake City, especially people experiencing homelessness. Furthermore, the current mix of supportive and outreach services in the area complement each other by allowing people to receive food, shelter, clothing, child care and medical, mental health and dental assistance in the same neighborhood without having to travel throughout the Salt Lake Valley. This allows people to focus on seeking work and engaging in other activities that lead toward self-sufficiency and permanent housing. In considering relocation of any service currently operating in the Rio Grande neighborhood, it is necessary that the services remain close to the downtown area and in close proximity to other services. The likelihood of finding another viable downtown location for our services to operate in close proximity seems unlikely. A collaborative professional social service community already exists in our neighborhood and it should be preserved. Salt Lake City stands at a crossroads in deciding whether of not to embrace this unique approach to human services. It stands largely alone among major cities in that this system presently functions very successfully. Homeless service providers have a proven track record of making a quantitative difference in people's lives. We also have a strong reputation for being good and supportive neighbors with residents and businesses in our neighborhood. We welcome all people to our community. As the Rio Grande neighborhood continues to diversify and attract additional investment in the form of businesses and housing, a unique opportunity exists for Salt Lake City to do something dramatically different in urban redevelopment. A new kind of neighborhood is beginning to flourish where rich, poor, and moderate income people can live and work together. This will not continue to happen unless intentional planning and development efforts are designed and implemented, seeking to integrate new investment and activity into the community without forcing out our homeless people and those who serve them. Allen Ainsworth Maggie St. Claire Wasatch Homeless Healthcare Catholic Community Services Major Wayne Froderberg Mathew Minkevitch Salvation Army The Road Home Glenn Bailey Mitzy Stewart Crossroads Urban Center Valley Mental Health • Jeff St. Romain Volunteers of America SALT LAKE CITY DECLARATION OF INTENT Salt Lake City is committed to helping homeless people determine the course of their own lives by supporting the comprehensive mix of social services in the Rio Grande community. Since the mid-1980's, Salt Lake City and many of its leaders and citizens have worked selflessly to establish a network of shelter, food, medical, mental health and dental care, clothing and child care for the men, women and children who have found respite and support in and around the Pioneer Park area. Salt Lake City is grateful for the coordinated and substantial benefit offered by homeless service providers in the Rio Grande community. This neighborhood is a remarkable, diverse and unique area. The City declares its intention to support the collaborative professional social service community that exists in this area as new investment in business, housing and public infrastructure continues to transform the neighborhood. It is the intention of the Administration that we will make decisions that strive to support and enhance the sustained diversity of this community. • Ross C. "Rocky" Anderson Salt Lake City Mayor • SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: October 21,2003 SUBJECT: Human Resource Management Service Division Audit Observations and Recommendations AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: Citywide STAFF REPORT BY: Gary Mumford KEY ELEMENTS: The City Council contracted with Deloitte & Touche CPA firm for several small audits. The audits were not extensive or all-encompassing but were very limited-scope studies with rather small budgets. One of the audits was an analysis of Human Resource Management Services Division. The audit report includes an executive summary, background, observations/recommendations, and management's response. The audit concluded that the policies and practices of Human Resource Management Services appear to be generally consistent with those of other similar organizations (i.e. Bountiful, Ogden, Phoenix, Portland, Seattle). OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The auditors reported that Salt Lake City had 20 full-time employees in its Human Resource Management Division. However, the number of human resource employees was reduced by two in the Mayor's Recommended Budget, and one additional reduction was made by the City Council resulting in 17 full-time employees. The ratio of human resource employees for every 100 full-time citywide employees is currently 0.65. The auditors reported that the national average is 0.9 human resource employees per 100 full-time-equivalent employees in the organization based on a 2002 report from the Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (BNA). This average is for all industry classifications, not just government. The 2003 report shows an increase to 1.0 human resource employees per 100 employees in the organization. The BNA report notes that the increase may be due to reductions-in-force that have not yet been met with proportional adjustments in human resource staff. According to the auditors, Ogden City has a ratio of 0.58; Bountiful City's ratio is 0.82, and Portland's ratio is 1.15 human resource employees per 100 full-time-equivalent employees. 2. The auditors believe that the Human Resource Management Division performs sufficient research and analysis to ensure that compensation and benefits provided to City employees remains consistent with the local market and where appropriate to the national market. Employee benefits for Salt Lake City employees were compared to Phoenix and Portland. The auditors noted that some of the benefits are better than the other two cities (e.g., short-term disability, number of dental plans, accidental death & dismemberment). 3. The Division held training on 16 courses in 69 separate sessions. The auditors were not able to • compare the City's entire training budget to the budget for other cities because most departments also provide specialized training. 4. Salt Lake City currently accounts for cash payouts (sick leave, vacation, etc.)upon retirement. This seems to be a common practice with other cities. Only one out of six cities contacted by . the auditors set the money aside in the year earned. The auditors suggested that the City may wish to consider funding the liability in the year earned to avoid large payouts when many employees retire in the same year. The Administration provided additional information regarding funding employee leave liability, and the Council was schedule to discuss this topic on October 21, 2003. OPTIONS: a. The Council may wish to discuss some of the above observations and recommendations with representatives of the Administration at the Council work session. b. The Council may wish to encourage the Administration to consider the observations relating to the ratio of human resource staff to the number of citywide employees compared to national averages when developing the budget for fiscal year 2004-05. c. The Council may wish to conduct an additional study relating to employee compensation or benefits. • • ' SALT LAKE CITY D e I o CORPORATION SA LT LAKE CITY,UTAH • & T ouche 42, • 311 Performance Audit of Human Resource Management Services May 16, 2003 Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu mil Table of Contents 4 I. Executive Summary 2 il Scope and Objectives 2 Overall Conclusion 2 ill Methodology 3 ill II. Background and Understanding 3 ni Human Resource Management 3 _ III. Observations and Recommendations 4 Objective 1 4 MI Review the staffing and organization compared to other comparable cities and to best practices 4 Objective 2 5 Evaluate training provided by the Human Resource Division compared to other cities and best practices. 5 ill Objective 3 6 Make comparisons of Salt Lake City's employee compensation and average pay rates for benchmark positions with the local market by measuring total compensation including salaries,wages,bonuses,paid leave, group insurance plans,retirement,and all other benefits. 6 Objective 4 7 i Evaluate the City's method of granting general pay increases to professional employees(300 and 600 ibSeries)contrasted with comparable cities and with best practices 7 Objective 5 9 ill Analyze the City's practices for evaluating reclassification requests. 9 ill Objective 6 10 ill Compare the City's benefit package to the local market and to best practices. 10 Objective 7 11 Evaluate the City's current practice and method of accounting for cash payouts upon retirement. Compare the City's budget practices for accounting for cash payout at retirement or layoff with comparable cities ill and best practices. 11 ill Objective 8 11 Review access controls and verify pay rates and benefit hire dates,etc. for those with access to BR il information systems 11 jiii IV. Appendices 12 Appendix A 12 Benefits Comparison 12 Salt Lake City Corporation 1 Human Resources Management Services I. Executive Summary 411 We have completed the Performance Audit of the Human Resource Management Services of Salt Lake City Corporation. Human Resource Management Services(HAMS)is under the leadership of Brenda R.Hancock and is part of the Management Services Division. The Performance Audit was conducted consistent with the direction received from the City Council and was performed in accordance with the Generally Accepted Government Auditing Standards. Scope and Objectives Our Audit included specific Human Resources practices and procedures as of November 30,2002. The Council identified eight objectives to be completed in conjunction with this audit. These objectives are: 1. Review the staffing and organization compared to other comparable cities and to best practices. 2. Evaluate training provided by the Human Resource Division. 3. Make comparisons of Salt Lake City's employee compensation and average pay rates for benchmark positions with the local market by measuring total compensation including salaries,wages,bonuses,paid leave,group insurance plans,retirement,and all other 4 benefits. 4. Evaluate the City's method of granting general pay increases to professional employees(300 and 600 series)contrasted with comparable cities and with best practices. 5. Compare the City's benefit package to the local market and to best practices. 6. Analyze the City's practices for evaluating reclassification requests. (J 7. Evaluate the City's current practice and method of accounting for cash payouts upon retirement. Compare the City's budget practices for accounting for cash payout at retirement or layoff with comparable cities and best practices. 8. Review access controls and verify pay rates and benefit hire dates,etc.for those with access to the FIR systems. d Overall Conclusion Based on the procedures performed relative to the specific objectives,the policies and practices of the Human Resources Management Services appear to be generally consistent with those of other similar organizations. No significant deficiencies were noted and the desired results for Human Resources are being achieved. Sall Lake City Corporation Human Resources Management Services 2 Methodology 11, To accomplish project objectives, we reviewed program documentation, interviewed Human Resource personnel, reviewed current practices and conducted appropriate analysis. For particular objectives in this audit, we relied on the work and analyses performed by Human Resources Management Services relative to specific benchmarking information to support our conclusions and recommendations. Deloitte & Touche held work sessions with the Human Resource Management team to review and validate findings and conclusions and to jointly develop recommendations to assist Salt Lake City Corporation in its operations and goals. II. Background and Understanding The Human Resource Management Services (HRMS)Division develops programs to attract, motivate and retain a skilled and productive work force that is prepared to provide excellent public service. FIRMS staff coordinates recruitment for City positions, which includes advertising, screening and certifying eligible candidates. In addition, technical assistance is provided to departments relative to proper hiring procedures and pay range placement. To ensure that the pay ranges and job classifications for City employees are consistent with local and national markets, the staff performs extensive research and analysis. HR staff also works closely with the Citizens Compensation and Advisory Committee for independent salary feedback and guidance. FIRMS also administers a wide range of employee benefits, including health insurance, retirement and life insurance, which are usually managed through third party administrators. FIRMS is also responsible for employee records and information and works closely with the Information Management Services Division to ensure accurate and complete records, both paper and electronic. A major emphasis for the past few years has been automating on-line policies, procedures,job descriptions, pay plans, salary approval, and job applications. FIRMS developed an employee self- service application that allows employees to access their own information and to make changes in some information, such as addresses and deferred compensation contributions. An on-line performance appraisal system is the next major project. Professional staff members spend considerable time working with City supervisors and managers on appropriate employee relations, including discipline and rewards. Such work has become particularly intense in a time of litigious workers and reduced resources. Human Resource specialists are assigned to work with particular departments, advising them on human resource planning, as well as day-to-day employee performance issues. Additionally, Human Resources address issues of equity, fairness, and diversity in the work place, and the City's EEO Officer is part of the Human Resources staff. The EEO Officer or other FIR staff investigate and report on all internal and external discrimination claims. Staff also coordinates labor negotiations and manages employee grievances, appeals and contract inquiries. Salt Lake City Corporation Human Resource Management 3 Training and organizational development are also key components of Human Resource Management. Currently, this division is implementing and coordinating a performance measurement program, including developing and monitoring a new performance appraisal system. Courses in leadership, diversity and communication, as well as harassment prevention, are mainstays of the Division. 3111 III. Observations and Recommendations OBJECTIVE 1 Review the staffing and organization compared to other comparable cities and to best practices. METHODOLOGY To achieve this particular objective, we interviewed the Director of Human Resource Management Services and examined and analyzed information from various HR data sources including the BNA —HR Department Benchmarks and Analysis 2002 (BNA Report). CONCLUSION Based on the documentation reviewed, the staffing and organization of the Human Resource Management Services appears generally consistent with other cities and organizations reviewed. However, the BNA benchmarking reports suggests that the City has less than the national average for managerial positions and a significantly higher ratio of professional/technical positions than the national average. 1.1 POINT OF INFORMATION Staffing Size - Based on 2002 BNA benchmarking data, the average staffing size for HR departments is 0.9 HR employees per 100 full time equivalent (FTE) employees in the organization. The City currently has 20 FTEs in the HR department. During the winter months of 2002, the City had approximately 2,600 FTEs. Consequently, the city has 0.76 HR employees for every 100 FTEs. The city's ratio is significantly lower than the national averages in the BNA benchmarking report and would be even lower during the summer months in light of the seasonal employees (possibly as low as 0.64). As part or our review, we contacted several local and comparable cities in the western region to consider local variations from the national average. Bountiful City has a 0.82 ratio and Ogden City has a 0.58 ratio. The City of Portland, which is considerably larger than Salt Lake City, has a 1.15 ratio. Salt Lake City Corporation 4 Human Resource Management Department Composition —In the following table, the composition of SLC's HR department is compared to the national averages reflected in the 2002 BNA benchmarking report: Human Resource Position :Salt Lake City: National Average 3111 Managerial/Supervisory 15% 35%, Professional/Technical 65% 35%, 311 Secretarial/Clerical 20% 30% OBJECTIVE 2 Evaluate the training program of the Human Resource Division. METHODOLOGY To achieve this particular objective, we interviewed the Training Manager, and examined and analyzed information from various HR data sources including the BNA—HR Department Benchmarks and Analysis 2002. CONCLUSION Based on the documentation reviewed, training provided to Salt Lake City employees appears consistent with other cities and organizations reviewed. However, an additional study is recommended to fully capture and aggregate the City's training budget to include all City departments (i.e. Airport, Public Utilities, Public Services, Management Services, Police, Fire, etc.). Based on the BNA Report, the average training and development costs per employee is $252. Since training and development is performed in various departments throughout the City and every department budget contains their own training budget, a comparison of this data to other cities could not be performed within the scope of this project. 2.1 POINT OF INFORMATION The training division within the HR department provides several general training courses that apply to all employees. The training covers three primary areas: (1) Citizenship, (2) Leadership Development and (3) Personal Development for managers and employees. Specifically, 1. Citizenship curriculum includes the following courses: • Diversity • Harassment Prevention • FMLA Salt Lake City Corporation111 5 Human Resource Management • Violence in the Workplace 111 2. Leadership Development includes the following courses: 111 • Performance Management (Balanced Scorecard) for Managers • Performance Management (Balanced Scorecard) for Employees • Management and Leadership Skills to fully implement the Balanced Scorecard ✓ Performance Planning ✓ Performance Execution 311 ✓ Performance Assessment • Performance Impact (software training for Managers) 311 3. Personal Development for employees and managers includes the following courses: • Conflict Resolution • Business Writing (outsource) • Survival Spanish • Customer Services Additionally, the training division is responsible for administering the Employee Opinion Survey on an annual basis. The division is also responsible for developing a system to track and monitor the employee performance system. The Airport and Public Utilities Department provide training needs that are specific to their employees such as Safety, some Leadership Development, Defensive Driving and Customer Services. However, they also include the training classes offered by the HR department. The Police and Fire offer specialized training to their employees and also participate in the training offered by HR. Each department across the city has their own training budget to send their employees to "external" training or to use in other ways as they deem appropriate. As part of this review, we were unable to develop a"fully loaded" training budget, which could then be compared to other cities. MANAGEMENT INPUT Human Resources held training on 16 courses in 69 separate sessions, for a total of 4,415 City participants. Note that many employees participated in more than one workshop, so the total participant count is a duplicated count. OBJECTIVE 3 Make comparisons of Salt Lake City's employee compensation and average pay rates for benchmark positions with the local market by measuring total compensation including salaries, wages, bonuses, paid leave, group insurance plans, retirement, and all other benefits. Salt Lake City Corporation Human Resource Management 6 METHODOLOGY Our efforts focused on the work already performed by the Human Resources department. We also interviewed the Director of Human Resource Management Services, collected and examined applicable internal documents, reviewed the BNA Report for 2002, and reviewed the Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee 2002-2003 Annual Report. CONCLUSION Based on our review of internal documentation and the Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee 2002-2003 Annual Report, and in general terms, total compensation provided to City employees appears consistent with the local market. In addition, sufficient research and analysis is performed by the Human Resource Management Services to ensure that the compensation and benefits provided to City employees remains consistent with the local and national markets. OBJECTIVE 4 Evaluate the City's method of granting general pay increases to professional employees (300 and 600 Series) contrasted with comparable cities and with best practices. METHODOLOGY We reviewed the Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee 2002-2003 Annual Report, the BNA Report, internal reports and documentation, as well as interviewed several FIR personnel. In addition, several other sources of information relative to the various methods of granting pay increases were reviewed. CONCLUSION The City does not grant pay increases based on performance, i.e., performance has no effect on wages. While the method of granting pay increases based on objective performance criteria may appear to be a"best practice", there are sufficient research and evidence to support that performance based pay may be counter productive. However, it is important to note that countless studies have been performed that will support either method. To this end, the City's method of granting general pay increases to professional employees is consistent with comparable cities and best practices. 4.1 POINT OF INFORMATION Salary increases for Salt Lake City employees are not based on job performance factors. The two factors that are used to determine a professional employee's raise at the beginning of the fiscal year are: • the general percentage increase, which is based on the projected market wage increase and the City's projected financial condition; • And, the employee's current wage in relation to his/her pay grade's midpoint. 1110 Salt Lake City Corporation Human Resource Management 31 31 3 For example, an employee whose wage equals the range midpoint will receive a raise equal to the general percentage increase. The farther below midpoint an employee's salary is, the AID higher his or her raise percentage. The farther above midpoint the salary is, the lower the raise. 31 The City, however, does have a policy of granting lump-sum bonuses for employees who 31 exhibit outstanding performance during unusual situations. Examples of unusual situations 31 would include the Olympics, a power outage, etc. A mechanism for rewarding/compensating continuously high-performing employees does not exist. 311 To compare the City's practices to similar cities, Deloitte& Touche contacted Bountiful 31 City, Ogden, Portland, and Seattle: o Bountiful City does not use a pay for performance system. o The City of Ogden uses a pay for performance system for executive staff and is in 311 the process of implementing a pay for performance system for all merit employees (clerical, professional, technical). Ogden hopes to implement this system by the end 311 of July 2003. o The City of Portland, Oregon uses a modified pay for performance system. For 311 example, each employee is evaluated on an annual basis and if the employee is performing as expected, the employee is given a standard 4.1% increase. If the 311 employee is not performing as expected, he or she receives something less. However, Portland did mention that approximately 99% of staff will receive the full 4.1%. o Seattle, with the exception of executive level positions, does not use a pay for performance system. They have tried to implement this type of system in the past, but the City could not get the required approved funding. MANAGEMENT INPUT A meaningful pay for performance system requires a very objective performance appraisal system and a somewhat forced distribution of rating scores to ensure real differences among 311 employees' scores. Further, the City would need to budget sufficiently to ensure that pay raises were high enough at the top level to justify differences in effort and accomplishment. no Employees in pay for performance systems should know in advance that substantial pay raises will result from their efforts; however, municipal budget uncertainties may not provide adequate or stable funding to sustain a pay for performance system. Salt Lake City Corporation 8 Human Resource Management OBJECTIVE 5 4110 Analyze the City's practices for evaluating reclassification requests. 111 METHODOLOGY Deloitte &Touche interviewed key personnel and reviewed the City's policies, procedures and current practices for evaluating and approving or declining reclassification requests. CONCLUSION Based on our analysis, policies and procedures appear adequate and sufficient due diligence is performed to compare the reclassification request to the market, prior to the approval of the reclassification. Attempts to reclassify positions cannot take effect without the proper documentation and approval from the Classification and Compensation Program Manager, who verifies that the proper evaluation process has occurred before granting approval. It is important to note that positions are rarely, if ever, reclassified downward. Lastly, the Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee 2002-2003 recommended that reclassifications will no longer be considered as a promotion and will therefore be ineligible for 21 immediate wage increases, unless an employee's current wage is below the new range minimum. 5.1 POINT OF INFORMATION The market wages of benchmark positions are determined through direct comparison with the local employment market. For all other positions, market pay rates are estimated through internal equity comparisons to benchmark positions using point-factor analysis or promotion separation analysis. Point-factor analysis assigns points to a position based upon job requirements within,six categories: knowledge and training, mental application, accountability, responsibility for contact, supervision exercised and working conditions. The position is then classified into the same pay grade as other positions with approximately the same point total. Promotion separation analysis is used to establish the wage for a position when direct market data is available for related positions. For example, if the market wage is available for beginning and advanced level positions, the wage of a related mid-level position would be set at a logical point between the two. Once non-benchmark positions have been assigned to pay grades based on internal equity comparisons, it is assumed that annually checking the benchmark position wages against market rates effectively checks non-benchmark positions against market rates. If the market wages of benchmark positions rise, the non-benchmark positions are assumed to rise similarly. However, cases arise in which the market wage for a position may change relative to other positions in its pay grade. Shifts in supply and demand may cause a position's market wage to rise or fall. Also changes in job duties may cause a position to no longer be comparable to others in its pay grade. The resulting lack of market equity in such a situation may be Salt Lake City Corporation 9 Human Resource Management 1111 addressed through a position review to evaluate the need to reclassify the position to a different pay grade. Reclassification reviews may be initiated by a department head, the Mayor, the Chief Administrative Officer, the City Council, or by the HR department based on information indicating that a position's pay rate is out of line with the market rate, such as an unusually high or low rate of turnover. OBJECTIVE 6 Compare the City's benefit package to the local market and to best practices. METHODOLOGY 111 Our scope focused on the types of benefits offered to City employees and the reasonableness of the coverage of those benefits when compared to cities of similar size. Further, our analysis focused on AI the benefits offered to full-time employees only. We interviewed the BR Benefits Administrator, collected and examined applicable internal documents, reviewed the BNA Report and examined the Citizen's Compensation Advisory Committee 2002-2003 Annual Report. 111 CONCLUSION The benefits for Salt Lake City were compared to those of Phoenix, Arizona and Portland, Oregon. This comparison can be found in Appendix A of this report. Based on our review, it appears that the benefits for SLC are better than those of the other two cities. While the costs of these benefits were not fully explored as part of this review, it is important to note that the City is monitoring JI these costs through third party benchmarking tools and comparisons with other local Utah cities and counties. In addition, the City should consider eliminating one of its three dental plans offered to employees to the extent having three plans adds an administrative burden or additional expense to the City. OBJECTIVE 7 Evaluate the City's current practice and method of accounting for cash payouts (e.g. sick leave, vacation, etc.)upon retirement. Compare the City's budget practices for accounting for cash payout at retirement or layoff with comparable cities and best practices. METHODOLOGY We obtained an understanding of the City's current practice and method of accounting for cash payouts upon retirement. We also contacted other cities and organizations and gained an understanding of their practices relative to the method of accounting for cash payout upon retirement. CONCLUSION 111 Based on the test work performed, the City's practices and method of accounting for cash payouts upon retirement is consistent with other Cities and best practices. While it appears that accruing Salt Lake City Corporation l o Human Resource Management 31 sick leave without any limits is a declining benefit, only one of six entities tested funded (set the money aside) the liability in the year earned. The others funded (or paid) the liability upon retirement. However, one of the cities contacted indicated that it had many employees that retired in the last fiscal year which created an economic hardship in that fiscal year. As a result, this city is 31 considering funding the liability in the year earned. To prevent a similar unanticipated cash outlay, Salt Lake City may also want to consider funding this liability in the year earned. 311 311 311 OBJECTIVE 8 Review access controls and verify pay rates and benefit hire dates, etc. for those with access to HR information systems. 31 METHODOLOGY 31 We obtained an understanding of the access controls associated with the HR system through inquiry 31 with HR management and IT management. In addition, we obtained a listing of all City personnel that have access to the HR system as of our testing date(December 2002). Selections were made from that listing for examination. For the selections made, Deloitte& Touche obtained the employee file and verified pay rates,job descriptions, etc. for appropriateness. 311 CONCLUSION Based on the information received and testing performed, the access controls over the HR systems appear to be reasonable and adequate. 2111 1111 nui Salt Lake City Corporation 111 Human Resource Management 11 Woi 61 61 61 61 Ili 61 k IV. Appendices Appendix A BENEFITS COMPARISON BENEFIT Salt Lake City. „;1: I,: Phoenix,, Portland,: 7 Medical Two Preferred Provider Organizations Two Preferred Provider Organizations Two Preferred Provider Organization (PPO)and one Health Maintenance (PPO)and one Health Maintenance (PPO)and one Health Maintenance Organization(HMO)plan offered. Organization(HMO)plan offered. Organization(HMO)plan offered. PPOs: In-Network benefit 90%,no PPOs: In-Network benefit 70%,no PPOs: In-Network benefit 80%,after deductible; Out-of-Network benefit deductible;Out-of-Network benefit $150 individual/$450 family annual 90%of Public Employees Schedule of 70%of Usual, Customary and deductible is met; Out-of-Network Benefits only,no deductible. Reasonable charges(UCR)after$300 benefit 60%of Usual, Customary and calendar year deductible is met. Reasonable charges(UCR)after$450 PPO Prescription Drugs: Co-pay of individual or$1,350 family annual $10 generic,$20 brand name/30 day PPO Prescription Drugs: Co-pay of deductible is met. supply. Mail Order Rx: 90-day supply $10 with contracted pharmacies. Out- available for co-pay of$20 generic, $35 of-Network Pharmacies: 30%of PPO Buy-up Option: In-Network brand name. charges after$300 calendar year benefit 90%after$100 individual/$300 deductible. Mail Order Rx: unknown. family annual deductible is met;Out-of- Network benefit 70%of Usual, Customary, and Reasonable charges (UCR)after$300 individual/$900 family annual deductible is met. PPO Prescription Drugs: Co-pay of 10%-30`)/0 up to$50 max/30 day supply. Mail Order Rx: 90-day supply available for same co-pay limits. HMO: 100%benefit,no deductible; HMO: 100%benefit,no deductible; HMO: 100%benefit,no deductible; office visits$10 copay office visits$10 copay office visits$10 co-pay HMO Prescription Drugs: $5 copay HMO Prescription Drugs: $10 HMO Prescription Drugs: $15 generic, $10 copay brand name/30 day copay/30 day supply. Rx.Mail Order: copay/30 day supply. Rx.Mail Order supply. Rx. Mail Order: $5 copay unknown $30 copay/90-day supply. generic,$10 copay brand name/90 day supply. Salt Lake City Corporation Mama. Flocnurrov Vianauvrtwitt cervices 12 BENEFIT : : Salt takeCitv; UT Plinenii.;AZ:::: : HPortland;:OR Vision Two vision plans available: One vision plan available: Two vision plans available: HMO: 100%of allowable charges after HMO: 100%of allowable charges VSP: 100%of allowable charges after $10 copay. after$5 copay. $15 copay when VSP provider used. PPO: Maximum of$30 per year of HMO: 100%of allowable charges after allowable charges. $5 copay. Eyewear discounts available at selected providers. Dental Three dental plans available: Two dental plans available: Two dental plans available: Preferred Plan: Plan year limit$1,500 Indemnity Dental Plan:Plan year limit ODS Dental Plan: Plan year limit per person;$0 annual deductible. 80% $2,000 per person;$50 individual/$150 $2,000 per person;$25 individual/$75 benefit coverage. Orthodontia coverage family annual deductible. Orthodontia family annual deductible. Orthodontia 50%up to$1,500 lifetime maximum. coverage 80%up to$2,500 lifetime coverage 50%up to$2,500 lifetime maximum. maximum. Traditional Plan: Plan year limit $1,500 per person; $0 annual Prepaid Dental Plan: $0 annual HMO Dental Plan: $10.00 co- deductible. Orthodontia coverage 50% deductible,copay varies. pay/visit. Coverage limits may apply. up to$1,500 lifetime maximum;plan Orthodontia(age 19&under) 50%up covers 80%benefit of Preferred dental to$3,000 maximum lifetime benefit. fees only. HMO: Plan year limit$1,000 per person;$50 individual/$150 family annual deductible. Orthodontia coverage 60%up to$1,500 lifetime maximum;plan covers 100%benefit of most services. Pre-Tax Benefits Deductions for medical/dental Deductions for medical/dental Deductions for medical/dental premiums,flexible spending accounts premiums,flexible spending accounts premiums,flexible spending accounts deferred compensation,and and the city retirement plan are taken on and the city retirement plan are taken on supplemental AD&D are taken on a a pre-tax basis. a pre-tax basis. pre-tax basis. Salt Lake City Corporation Human Resource Management 13 Ili li itii li WI li 61 WI li ii li li ii li il he Iii li li li li i li ii li li ii 4 li ii ii BENEFIT ,:iii:;:' ::: ::' ':::: Salt Lake City, : :: : : :Photifilc AZ.: : :: ''"'':' il ::i:::: :Portland, OR " : ' Basic Group Term Life $50,000 -the City pays the premium. Amount of coverage depends on lx annual salary: An amount equal to Insurance employee classification.The City pays your basic annual earnings,rounded to the premium. the next higher multiple of$1,000 to a maximum of$50,000.The City pays the premium. Supplemental Term Life Employee: Employee: Employee: Insurance Up to$300,000 Up to$250,000 $20,000 to$300,000 Spouse: Spouse: Spouse/Domestic Partner: Up to$150,000 Up to$100,000 $20,000 to$300,000 Dependent Children: Dependent Children: Dependent Children: Up to$10,000 Up to$10,000 $5,000 to$25,000: Accidental Death and $50,000-the City pays the premium. Built into term life coverage. Coverage None Noted. Dismemberment (AD&D) depends on classification. Supplemental AD&D Up to$250,000. Built into term life coverage. Coverage None Noted. depends on classification. Accident Weekly $25 to$500 per week in non-taxable None Noted-employees can donate None Noted-employees can donate Indemnity Benefit income based on monthly gross salary. some of their vacation leave bank to some of their vacation leave bank to assist those that do not have accrued assist those that do not have accrued vacation to use in place of STD, vacation to use in place of STD. Accident Medical Benefit $2,500 in accident medical coverage in None Noted. None Noted. excess of medical insurance. Short Term Disability 100%of your basic monthly earnings if None Noted. None Noted. (STD) disability occurs in the line of duty;66 2/3%if disability occurs off duty. Benefit available for a maximum of 2 to 12 weeks depending on length of service. Long Term Disability 100%of your basic monthly earnings if 66 2/3%of your basic monthly 40%of your basic monthly earnings up (LTD) disability occurs in the line of duty;66 earnings. Benefit available 90 days to$3,333 per month. Benefit available 2/3%if disability occurs off duty. from onset of approved disability. Must 60 days from onset of approved Benefit available 60 days from onset of be employed 12 months to qualify, disability or exhaustion of sick leave approved disability, whichever comes last. Salt Lake City Corporation T-Trtmars Rocaurry Alanagemeni 14 ii li WI ii W W W li ii li i id li li III i Id id i i ii i i a id ki id 4 hi ii ii •• •:••• • BENEFIT , s' ::' ''' Sallt:Lake'Cit*,i:UT s: :: ... ,Pboenix.;iXti,'" ,'-' ::: ' :i: '; Portland, OR Supplemental Long Term None Noted. None Noted. An additional 20%of your basic Disability (LTD) monthly earnings(up to$1,667 max) benefit per month. $5,000 monthly benefit maximum when combined with 40%benefit. Same waiting period and coverage limitations as above. Employee Assistance Confidential counseling services for Confidential counseling services for Confidential counseling services for Program (EAP) employees and eligible dependents up employees and eligible dependents. Up employees and eligible dependents up to 8 free visits per incident per year. to 12 free visits per incident per year. to 6 free visits per incident per year. Flexible Spending Medical Expenses: Pre-tax Medical Expenses: Pre-tax Medical Expenses: Pre-tax Accounts reimbursement of eligible medical reimbursement of eligible medical reimbursement of eligible medical expenses not otherwise covered by expenses not otherwise covered by expenses not otherwise covered by insurance. Limit: $3,000 per plan year. insurance. Limit:$10,000 per plan insurance. Limit: $3,000 per plan year. year. Dependent Care: Pre-tax Dependent Care: Pre-tax reimbursement of eligible dependent Dependent Care: Pre-tax reimbursement of eligible dependent care expenses(necessary for reimbursement of eligible dependent care expenses(necessary for employment).Limit: $5,000 per plan care expenses(necessary for employment).Limit: $5,000 per plan year. employment).Limit: $2,500 to$5,000 year. per plan year based on marital status. Retirement Plans Noncontributory Defined Benefit Plan Contributory Retirement Plan Noncontributory Defined Benefit Plan Contributory Retirement Plan 457 Plan 457 Plan 457 Plan Deferred Compensation Pre-tax salary reduction defers taxes on Pre-tax salary reduction defers taxes on Pre-tax salary reduction defers taxes on principal and interest until withdrawn, principal and interest until withdrawn, principal and interest until withdrawn, current maximum annual deferral is current maximum annual deferral is current maximum annual deferral is $8,500(increased annually till 2010). $8,500(increased annually till 2010). $8,500(increased annually till 2010). Salt Lake City Corporation Tillman Resource Management 15 hi hi libli iii WI ill li hi ii hi ii li hi li 411 ha I hi i li li ii la ii II kii ii 46 ii li M BENEFIT::::: ::; ; :;;Salt;LAke;City,;;UTH;:: :::: :;;;;;;; ; ;;Phiienii,A4i:: ; ;;:::;;;;; ;;;si; i ;li:: i:;;;;;;Piirtland OR Vacation, Sick Leave, Vacation:Employees accrue annual Vacation:Employees accrue annual Vacation:Employees accrue annual Personal Leave and vacation leave at a rate of 6.67 to 16.67 vacation leave at a rate of 7 to 15 hours vacation leave at a rate of 6.67 to 16.67 hours per month(80 to 200 hours per per month(84 to 180 hours per year) hours per month(80 to 200 hours per Holidays year)depending on length of service, depending on length of service. year) depending on length of service. Sick leave: 80 hours accrue per year. Sick leave: 10 hours accrue each month Sick leave: 4 hours accrue each pay (120 hours per year). period(104 hours per year). Holidays: 11 per calendar year. Holidays: 10.5 per calendar year. Holidays: 9 per calendar year. Personal Days: 1 calendar day per year (use it or lose it). Personal Days: 3 calendar days per Personal Days: 3 calendar days per year(use it or lose it). year(use it or lose it). Unpaid Leave Up to 12 weeks upon the birth/adoption Up to 12 weeks upon the birth/adoption Up to 12 weeks upon the birth/adoption of a child,care of immediate family of a child,care of immediate family of a child,care of immediate family member,or employee's serious health member,or employee's serious health member,or employee's serious health condition. condition. condition. Prepaid Legal Plan No Yes No Childcare Assistance Yes Yes Yes Eldercare Assistance Yes Yes None Noted. Wellness Program Yes Yes None Noted. Job Share Yes Yes Yes Flexible Work Hours Yes Yes Yes Rideshare Program Yes Yes Yes Free/discounted Bus Fares Yes Yes Yes Educational Assistance/Reimbursement Yes Yes None Noted. Salt Lake City Corporation 16 Human Resource Man agetnent MliIIiIIIIIIIIIIII1III1IIoII :: . : . . Portland,:OR . . ••• 4 .... . . . Professional Memberships, Workshops and Seminars Yes Yes Yes Service Awards Yes Yes None Noted. Employee Suggestion Program Yes Yes None Noted. Paid Jury Duty Leave Yes Yes Yes Bereavement Leave Yes Yes Yes Career Consultation None Noted. Yes None Noted. Credit Union Memberships Yes Yes Yes Savings Bonds Program Yes Yes Yes Employee and Family Medical Clinic (No Office Copay) Yes None Noted. None Noted. Payroll Deductions for Auto/Home Insurance Yes None Noted. None Noted. Commuter Insurance Policy None Noted. Yes None Noted. Salt Lake City Corporation 17 Human Resource Management • SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT DATE: October 21,2003 SUBJECT: Bonding for Sewer Utility Upgrades and 900 South Storm Drainage Project AFFECTED COUNCIL DISTRICTS: Citywide STAFF REPORT BY: Gary Mumford ADMINISTRATIVE DEPT. Public Utilities AND CONTACT PERSON: Leroy Hooton KEY ELEMENTS: The Department of Public Utilities is requesting that the City Council adopt a bond parameters resolution authorizing the issuance of bonds for the capital projects of the Sewer Fund and Stormwater Fund. The adopted budget includes bonding for upgrades of the sewer reclamation plant, bonding to pay a portion of a new storm drainage line on 900 South between 600 East and the Jordan River, and bonding for dredging and cleanup of the Northwest Oil Drain canal. The Water Fund will not receive any of the bond proceeds. In • November, the Department of Public Utilities will provide another written update on the water revenue forecast and representatives of the Department will be available if the Council desires a briefing. MATTERS AT ISSUE AND QUESTIONS FOR THE ADMINISTRATION: The fiscal year 2004 budget includes issuing$23 million in bonds to upgrade the existing wastewater treatment plant. The budget also included the use of accumulated reserves to partially fund the upgrades. According to the Department, the upgrades are needed to increase the capacity of the plant to handle additional loading, which have increased over the past several years. In 2000, the Council adopted a new sewer rate structure that created an incentive for certain types of businesses to reduce discharge strengths and finance replacement of aging infrastructure. Under the new sewer rate structure, businesses have the option to decrease sewer costs by lowering the amount of organic material placed in the sewer such as by placing waste food into containers for the landfill as opposed to grinding it into the sewer system. Part of the purpose of the rate structure was to postpone expansion of the sewer treatment plant. The Council may wish to ask representatives of the Department for an additional explanation of the need for the sewer plant upgrade and about the successfulness of the new sewer rate structure. • OPTIONS: There is a 30-day waiting period required between the Council's adoption of a parameters resolution and when the sale of the bonds can be closed. Council staff's understanding is that the low bid that was received for the sewer reclamation plant upgrade needs to be accepted by December 10,2003 in order to ensure the bid price. Therefore,the Department of Public Utilities is seeking the Council's decision as to whether to proceed at this time with these projects. 1. The Council may wish to discuss whether to authorize the sale of$23 million in bonds for the sewer reclamation plant upgrades at this time. Another option is to re- bid the project at some future date in hopes of receiving more favorable pricing. If the Council desires to proceed with the project, the Department of Public Utilities plans to propose a December budget amendment for$3.4 million dollars since the low bid was in excess of the original budget. 2. The Council may wish to discuss whether to authorize the sale of$8 million in bonds in order to proceed with the 900 South Street reconstruction project. Other options include delaying the project or phasing it in over a longer period of time. 3. The Council may wish to discuss authorizing the sale of$2 million in bonds to fund the City's share of cleanup of the sewage canal. The Council may wish to discuss other options with representatives of the Department for funding the cleanup project • including paying for the cleanup from current reserves. cc: Rocky Fluhart,Leroy Hooton,Jeff Niermeyer,Jim Lewis,Dan Mule,DJ Baxter LEROY W. HOOTDN, JR. I`• a " � ® it ROSE C. "ROCKY" ANDERSON DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC UTILITIES MAYOR WATER SUPPLY AND WATERWORKS WATER RECLAMATION AND STORMWATER T7-4/4", TO: Rocky J. Fluhart, Chief Administrative Officer DATE: October 10, 2003 FROM: Leroy W. Hooton, Director of Public Utilities Lt13 SUBJECT: Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds Series 2003 STAFF CONTACT: Jim Lewis, Finance Administrator TELEPHONE NUMBER: 483-6773 RECOMMENDATION: Request the City Council hold a discussion and schedule the adoption of a bond parameters resolution authorizing the issuance of Series 2003 Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds. DOCUMENT TYPE: Briefing/Discussion • BUDGET IMPACT: This proposed bond issue is included in the 2003-2004 City Budget to finance the upgrade of the Sewer Reclamation Plant and finance a portion of the 900 South Storm Drainage Project. Both projects and the additional debt service were included in the current budget and capital improvement master plans. However, an additional budget amendment will be required for the Sewer Reclamation Plant upgrade as bids have come in at$3.4 million over original budget amounts. The upgrade to the Sewer Reclamation Plant is needed to increase the capacity of the plant to handle additional BOD loadings which have been increasing over the last ten years and to finance Public Utilities share of the cost of the Oil Drain clean up. The 900 South Storm Drainage Project is a new storm drain line from 6th East to the Jordan River and provides additional capacity for storm runoff. It will be constructed along with a street reconstruction project. DISCUSSION: In preparation for the construction of the sewer and storm water improvements outlined above, City Council is being asked to approve a Bond Parameters Resolution that approves the issuance of water and sewer revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $38 million. In addition, the General Indenture of Trust that currently guides the issuance of water and sewer revenue bonds for the Salt Lake City was adopted in November 3, 1981, and has been amended over the last twenty-two years. Our bond counsel, Chapman and Cutler LLP and Financial Advisor, Wells Fargo have advised us that it would be in the City's best interest to issue the proposed new bond under a new • 1530 SOUTH WEST TEMPLE, SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH 84115 TELEPHONE: 801-483-5900 FAX: 801-483.681 8 • Table of Contents 1. Chronology 2. Annexation petition 3. Annexation plat • 4. Vicinity map / Site plan 5. Resolution accepting the annexation • • • • 1 . Chronology • Chronology 8/6/2003 The Salt Lake City School District submitted the annexation petition. 8/6/2003 The Salt Lake City Recorders Office notified the Salt Lake County Clerk that the City received the annexation petition. 8/26/2003 The Salt Lake City Development Review Team reviewed the site plan with the architects and engineers for the proposed middle school. 8/27/2003 Planning staff received the petition and assigned a petition number. 8/28/2003 Planning staff requested resolution from the City Attorney's office. 9/18/2003 Planning staff received the resolution from the Attorney's office. 1111 0 • 2. Annexation Petition • :t N., FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ;F,� �..- /r .�A PetitioriiTo ��v74 3s ZVI ' ' " v 3• Annexation A lication -Rc11* - 3 Ittir: aLr Salt Lake City, Utah : � - z '35`'"5'= Address or Area f tt Sa( {— La G $ ot� t,'41'IL�'Phone t S l 9 g 33 Z • Primary Petitioner f L,� 4—I Address of Primary Petitioner 44 D E. I D 0 6 " S a l 4- La_�Q 64. / UT S,4 t t I teem • S I-6,9 h.�vi5 .414._ k.ta,LA-t-,t.cs S� Si - f 331 E-mail address of Primary Petitioner FAX# `- Second Petitioner Phone Address of Secondary Petitioner '4-- E-mail address of Secondary Petitioner FAX# .( ::-'7.27iii Please answer the following questions. Use back side of application or additional sheets,if necessary C.; / Is the subject area continuous to the current boundaries of Salt Lake City? Yes ef No o What is the current use of the land? V a_t_a,ri-I--/ L,Ln je_vf I°peel -y What services are currently provided by another municipality,county or special district? Nt7 v1P • Please identify any legal or factual barriers that would negatively effect the pri y1� ar> oE3f the -• subject property? 0 V e_ AUG 0 6 2003 _I `` Please include with the application: 1.Completed"Petition for Annexation into the Corporate Limits of Salt Lal� ttORDER. T t 2.Three copies of the Annexation Plat. The plat shall contain a complete legal description and total acreage of the area proposed for annexation and shall be prepared by a licensed land surveyor. 3.A current property plat(Sidwell map). Plats may be obtained from the Salt Lake County Recorder's Office, 4, - , 2001 South State Street,Room N1600. .- � 4.The names and addresses of all property owners within four-hundred fifty(450)feet of the subject parcel[s]- exclusive of streets and alleys. The name,address and parcel number of each property owner must be typed :116 or dearly printed on gummed mailing labels. Please indude yourself and the appropriate Community Council _ Chair. The cost of first class postage for each address is due at time of application. Please do not provide postage stamps. 5.If a development is proposed,please attach a site plan of the proposed development -A If you have any questions regarding the requirements of this petition,please contact a member of '` the Salt Lake City Planning staff(535-7757)prior to submitting the petition. File the complete application with: Salt Lake Gty Recorder,451 South State Street,Room 415 Please Note: On the date this application is filed with Salt Lake City,a copy of the complete petition must also be ` filed with the Salt Lake County Clerk,2001 South State Street,Room S-1100. • _-±_-;:``'._e (. Received , Date d-G-0 3 Salt Lake City er 6/01/2003 040 • Petition for Annexation into the Corporate Limits of Salt Lake City I, the undersigned petitioner(s) for annexation to and into the corporate limits of Salt Lake City, pursuant to UCA 10-2, Part 4, hereby certify by the signature(s) below that I am the owner(s) of real property shown on the attached annexation plat, which is located within territory which is contiguous to the corporate boundaries of Salt Lake City. Fur- thermore, by the signature(s) below, I indicate my desire to have the real property I own located within said territory, annexed to and into the corporate limits of Salt Lake City and therefore do hereby submit this petition for annexation with the accompanying plat and legal description to Salt Lake City by the filing of same with the Salt Lake City Recorder. Dated this as tid day of it-4- , 2-O c 3 Sidwell/Tax Parcel No. D — 2.Z — l Do - o Z Printed Nameg Petitioner K.&ni- ke.eLS I— LA.L C 1 j Sd wo( Signature gAA Title 5( t vte.b6 vL t —tom Y Sidwell/Tax Parcel No. b - ZZ- - 1 DO -O 2Z Printed Name/of Peti ioner d M-�-�6--�p eh s, Ste - L4t (� �GJo D[ D-t --_ Signature 6� 93(-- Title At n I +r +b r Sidwell/Tax Parcel No. b g - 2 2- I o l7 - D 2-3 Printed Name of Pet" ioner , 4 i4- L ( 4- SADP1 t i F. Signature ` o .) Title 13 Lh tn.us A-A oitt.ni s-kc-I v Sidwell/Tax Parcel No. Printed Name of Petitioner Signature Title Sidwell/Tax Parcel No. Printed Name of Petitioner Signature Title 0 • • 3 . Annexation Plat • ` ....,,, • 11/1 COPT FIX RIX SW tt N, S.L. C. SCHOOL, DISTRICT A 'EXATI01 208 T---",.. TO SALT LAKE CITY CORPORATION 201 1 *---...„.........,. 1700 N. REDWOOD ROAD, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH 6rRa U0NAFMl LOCATED IN THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 22, We POUT — — — j ` ye\ I NORTH i TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 1 WEST, SALT LAKE BASE & MERIDIAN z� I �-4.....,� al �� — — —� '-I . g88 �ZOS ! ��-� Igra `� AEU F.I'=60' 1 -It --..___ I = Fe s arson-r Z--- --•I 6 w 60 x IW 160 Zm SOO SURVEYOR'S CERTIFICATE 204 un•--�t. ..._-___._- sIRvEYOR,S LERIIFlLAIE' --'' �77 \ I l DALE IC NNRER.VOL MD SAY M Or AT 1 All A O Rtla10ISD LAIN TEST h j I IWra Oral R-0"'N OMR w 203 II ACCORDING TO RE RILES NV REGUAPPIS CF I1E STATE CF tER 1 DOMRCP ES STATE TNT RE MOW TO 06CNBED PROPERTY IYAS OSURLIERTATTOOCO IEAEOIL j ! I FOR REVIEW ONLY 1 ------202 ', I I TOO OPNAMOMzo • DATE 071/Pl6EI' O UT W) a EARNSHAW LANE o , N aY t" OW 71 IONO wNEW j (1780 N.) �j� 1.0 t4 �..,.a^: 201 LOX A6mc MOW F-- I ,.'„-�i,. ''' '�, 0-0 R. f `° BOUNDARY DESCRIPTION 1 n M._._- WWI I 2 N,-i A �? £ T.ONNA Al A AC•0 WIw 6POOT OlA N00 M OIYMER LRCM OE GAT TT TO61 A TOSS W WOW Al M 42 I Ws E7.R. I I IL MINA a SOTO 22 Immo 1 Idi0 RACE I REST,YU NE alb N0 caw.NO TRH0 110CE OM 6PION' �A 1 EA roc YO WNRR LOOT UE 61706 FEEL rots WON woos ELI(MORIN 00111A'RSr IFA9M➢)WC ME ILmI 6R,6 6H �i 1 t�e MOLT UE 01 YER TAO Nie6 0 0400A D SA 1 00 2.10.1011 m APO.CO RE MO TX a OF SAC i I IT" utO wUVW1Y;ROTI mml OTTO-COT CAA SIT.NN LIE OAT FM.TOO S 0.]rCYN'PSI ATM SST { C. ,:� I,IA--,`'� ,� t ' -,c¢ STALLS TM:,SST TIT ID A rub a RE SC NONTA 0 U E CI'LTAAW Rao ImW Ian RV mmt Aar L _ MEW AOC YO AST 100-O-ar OE Of FT10010 DALE COPSES SOOT UST ICI SIN MET(SOON MOO j I I/� 'N'� wF 1EI91R➢1 N A IVII a TA001oL naQ N8C nc NE a A IGS950 fOW 0.b15 20 D M r1E IQL 101 CA AD -j 5• R�' q •�Ics aN{Wt N4f a nrl3'S9'A O61Nq r]6 Y RL m A TOM a WLVR.nEME WNN aA'w3r!Y w(AAIM ari101' . o fi ; L s EST IEASAE0)T nE wNT 6 IEIPN6IC Z4} ! I A I I C E �,5 r Z `� (9OIVaIG 2261 HIES L — VICINITY MAP . 44 0 I t... LEGEND F I S '00 > 0 MIDO SIGN 01611 DOOM M O I I I .. -- WINO NGAA{Nr V oa 1 I I8 y �__—_ — Ior1ALR IK 0 I ,4 46 II4 c LOOFA MC W2 AONNIr PmPENIY OF i . ID 2 • SET CO BM k OP 6 NEk Io IW { 2 N9ER 5 9 lea FLED' ® 47 I Iy IS MW TOSS IIR 01SECIOI 21 CT • • f• Mt RIM,9alN '� R riaaieN ssul �_---------------- ------------------ IIN7NASY r, .. frAvaEo( r ecm rrr'i—6F'iod''-- .N/Rwac 2L —c3'RdleuExi—_— nE RM au 1700 NORTH STREET AM FT b nOP E6NEo)M Nip • p I 1 - 4 �WESTPOINTE FARMS, PHASE 2 I4. 7 aiPEWEE j011 WNI Z E' Wa0 TOSS OP IONROO n1N STOOL aR 00.a9ESS NA061RAON W -.e. T.E ND) NO FT No'OM UT, a_. SCUM A COVER 6 SIM IL • j TX RI RON SALT TIC Mt IA WO R. MITT, ES Y PLNIMNG COILOSSION CRPPW210 2()1(6 00FARRYWICITY APPROVAL ER E711GN• I'f:LNG LILY CEPARMENT 6 PUBLIC SERVICES COY Af70.R PRESEN1m N SALT LIRE COMA RIS RECYRtOEO «tAAAADL MS1ARYSYIYl LG AWROaD N6 N 6 E H 6RTY M I a E N D R6 TA LaT® RPP ED AT M svrtNa Y AR AM) Ni ,9 AS ro EDR Rb MY 6�_AD A—NO 6 EMBY N RROED NNE a NN @ Nr a SRr U L RIDSCa NN RID N O(NaC a IWOT EW.AM eRoomnT as A—M r6E SAIr IAA£WUIIO' Tf OR Ofi1LE NN 0 6 COWE6 W AIZCNONND IaDR N6DY 6rAA RES OAT a OSA6 AD„SO__ TAMER A LAND lAMUW 114Tt20 11ATOD COMSfiR OIIN RE KONN11pN d1 TLC AW IEPIDF APPMIhIl ----- _- SEr UR OR wON Art rV CCM", RISS SOOw SW FAST,SLC.N 0021 _ (60r)206-TAX) YLI IMF O6 PI.VEaO 6ECIOR OIL Oa RriIEiR WR Off SLArE1DR DATE SALT ATE CITY PU&.E NINNIES TART SALT ME an'A(tOfRLT W MI MOM�6a R I sOWI two r _. i • • 4. Vicinity Map Site Plan • 0 a Zrc O 1900 N ry o - w Y " cc RED.ANGUS DR re ._;_ -._ n ; iL co O : Cl ROSE PARK LN - z • , _: :1700N" - Annexation W y NILESAVE Area Q u V _- - - ±_ DAB; : ~ i- - `:RIDG€AVE uu w -- __ --_":_:�=t - °: -NDEPENDENCE: BLVD ~ " . NE :YOR RKbE .,.Q ce _ rF_ ' �RTON- ;R: j_-__ �__-_-= � M O -��;:, ra _ SUNSET DR - _ : - _ = - 1300 N ") DUPONT AVE = _ = = VILLAGE=PARK AVE_ :__ • Salt Lake City School District Annexation .,*N s • • i .'� +� 4•. .. ' a s-"_�, ti .A,a` v -- "'i 1-.ice �„ 'v ay s F: ,�,,� �.�.fir.,. � ��`��-� �x ; � 7e*� � x � '+�; e�� `;� , I`^ F�a e1 II � O k! r 1 Z O ;{ o I o i O O 7 J k$ / t A 4 1 _ " mar � ' > ,." e � `� I -f ;-. o .B r 'R� PARKING °4, ` �r � '''9� I I I I I s' 1I ,, .04� 2C -_,,.*rr n.Tv +'T�„ :.c.'t^ _�`,'i I I I F 0U5 DROP OFF ~r REDWOOD ROAD j\ e P a NORTHWEST MIDDLE SCHOOL „CEL SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 5. Resolution 110 SALT LAKE CITY RESOLUTION NO. OF 2003 (Receiving the Salt Lake City School District Annexation Petition for Purposes of City Council Review) A RESOLUTION ACCEPTING THE SALT LAKE CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT ANNEXATION PETITION FOR APPROXIMATELY 12.3 ACRES OF LAND LOCATED AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF 1700 NORTH AND REDWOOD ROAD, PURSUANT TO PETITION NO. 400-03-24, FOR PURPOSES OF CITY COUNCIL REVIEW. WHEREAS, Salt Lake City has received petition #100-03-24 (the "Petition") by the Salt Lake City School District (the "Petitioner"), requesting the annexation of approximately 12.3 acres of unincorporated territory in Salt Lake County, which would extend the existing corporate limits of Salt Lake City, and said Petition is attached hereto as Exhibit "A"; and • WHEREAS, the Petition is signed by a majority of the owners of the real property and the owners of more than one-third in value of all real property within the territory to be annexed as shown by the last assessment rolls of Salt Lake County; and WHEREAS, Petitioner has submitted to the City a plat for the territory proposed for the annexation; and WHEREAS, the territory described in the Petition lies contiguous to the corporate limits of Salt Lake City and within an area projected for Salt Lake's municipal expansion, and otherwise initially appears to satisfy the standards and criteria applicable to annexations; • NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE SALT LAKE CITY 1111 COUNCIL, STATE OF UTAH: 1. Petition Received for Study. The City Council hereby receives the Petition for the purposes of considering said annexation for the expansion of the City municipal limits. 2. Review by Planning Commission. This Petition shall be forwarded to the Salt Lake Planning Commission for review and analysis, taking into consideration Salt Lake City Council growth policies, applicable City master plans, the zoning of comparable areas, the requirements of the City's existing and proposed site development ordinance, and any additional requirements of the Salt Lake City Public Utilities Department and the City Transportation Division. After its review, the Planning Commission shall recommend to the City 411 Council an appropriate zoning classification for the property upon its annexation to the City. 3. No Vested Rights. Nothing in this Resolution or in any other act, omission, or representation of the City shall be construed to vest Petitioner with rights to compel annexation of the said property, to bind the City Council to finally approve the Petitioner's annexation, to vest the Petitioner with rights to develop under particular zoning, subdivision, or development ordinances, or to require Salt Lake City to provide any municipal services or to exercise jurisdiction over the area, until such time as decisions to annex and extend the corporate limits have been made and all annexation formalities and documentation have been completed, including the preparation of the final annexation plat according to the 1111 2 City Engineer's specification, appropriate ordinances, annexation agreements, and documentation verifying the sufficiency of the Petition. Nothing in this Resolution shall imply any approval of, or be deemed to approve, any development plans or projections contained in the Petition. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Salt Lake City Council this day of , 2003. CHAIRPERSON ATTEST: Chief Deputy City Recorder s `D3 =T d G-\RESOLUTM.onexation petition NW corner of 1700 N and Redwood Rd-Sept 18,2003.doc • 3 . MEMORANDUM DATE: October 21, 2003 TO: Council Members FROM: Janice Jardine SUBJECT: Housing Policy discussion As part of the on-going Council's housing policy discussions, staff has attached a copy of the Council's current Housing Policy Statements for review and discussion. It would be helpful to receive direction from Council Members as to which policy statements may still be pertinent and those that should be updated or deleted. 411 1 CITY COUNCIL HOUSING POLICY STATEMENTS _ illThe Council adopted the following Housing Policy Statements on December 14, 1999. The statements were included in the City's Community Housing Plan,adopted in April 2000. A. Affordable and Transitional Housing The City Council supports: 1. Salt Lake City residents having access to housing that does not consume more than 30 percent of their gross income. 2. The analysis of the impacts of fees and current zoning on affordable housing. 3. The type of business growth that is compatible with affordable housing needs in the City. 4. Development of programs to meet the housing needs of all individuals employed by and working or living within Salt Lake City. 5. Policies and programs that encourage home ownership without jeopardizing an adequate supply of affordable rental housing. 6. The dispersal of affordable and transitional housing Citywide and valley-wide. In particular,the Council supports the establishment of smaller transitional housing programs,with a minimum of one four-plex per Council District. 7. The citywide development of single room occupancy housing(SROs). 8. The City providing examples of how affordable housing can be built, offering incentives for innovative projects that developers may not initially be willing to undertake and serving as a facilitator/partner to maximize housing opportunities. B. Citywide Cross Section of Housing The City Council supports: III 1. A citywide variety of residential housing units,including affordable housing. 2. Accommodating different types and intensities of residential development. C. Design The City Council encourages: 1. Architectural designs compatible with neighborhoods that: a. make good use of and incorporate open space,even minimal amounts; b. interface well with public spaces; c. address parking needs in the least obtrusive manner possible; d. are creative, aesthetically pleasing and provide attractive public spaces, such as designated "commons" areas, community centers, child care, resident gathering places,resident gardens, etc. D. Transit Development and Design The City Council supports: 1. Coordinated, comprehensive land use and transportation master planning. Specifically, the Council supports transit-oriented development as well as adequate, reliable public transportation in order to allow residents to easily access their employment and residences. 2. A pedestrian and bicycle friendly environment throughout the City. 3. Housing densities and mixed uses that support use of alternative and public transportation, depending on the characteristics of each area. 4. Appropriate housing densities in areas where public transit and local services are conveniently available or can be provided and are accessible on foot. 5. Reinvestment in existing urban and inner suburban areas. ill6. A rebirth of compact,transit and pedestrian oriented developments that conserve water and energy resources,enhance air quality and help restore community vitality. 7. Transit-oriented development with an affordable housing component.