Loading...
05/20/2024 - Meeting Materials Here are the Transportation Division internal applications. Please drag and drop them into the right column in priority order, with #1 being the highest priority. Number of responses:19 Rank choice n Score Times Ranked 1. Livable Streets Program$3,000,000 117 19 2. Safer Crossings Citywide$600,000 _ 117 19 3. Neighborhood Byways Program$1,600,000 103 19 4. Urban Trails Program$1,500,000 95 19 5 Transit Capital Program/Funding Our Future Transit 89 19 $1,500,000 6 Traffic Signal Replacement and Upgrades Program 85 19 $2,700,000 7 Conceptual Design and Cost Estimates for FY26-FY28 84 19 Projects$600,000 8 Green Loop$10,000,000(Public Lands submitted with 84 19 Transportation as a partner) 9. Transportation Corridor Transformations$4,600,000 81 19 Lowest Highest Here are constituent applications that are transportation-related. Please drag and drop them into the right column in priority order, with #1 being the highest priority. Number of responses:19 Rank Choice Distribution = Times Ranked California Avenue Pedestrian Safety Improvements 1 19 Construction-Concord St/Glendale Dr.$807,000 Guadalupe Neighborhood Streets Improvement 2. $2,517,000 1= 19 3 Marmalade-Fairpark East-West Connector Study -- 126 19 $80,000 4. 600 South Safety Improvements $530,000 -- 119 19 5. 500 East Raised Crosswalk(400 Block)$115,000 -- 116 19 Route 209-Accessibility,Bus Shelters,Benches,and 94 6' 19 Trash Cans $500,000 Pedestrian Safety/HAWK at Richmond St.and Zenith 7 93 19 Ave. $500,000 8 Pedestrian Safety/HAWK at Richmond St.and Elgin 92 19 Ave. $500,000 9. 700 East Median Tree Planting Project$2,400,000 62 19 10. Westminster Urban Forestry and Traffic Calming 54 19 Measures $477,000 Here is the combined list. Please drag and drop them into the right column in priority order, with #1 being the highest priority. Number of responses:19 Rank Choice Distribution Score Times Ranked 1. Livable Streets Program $3,000,000 279 19 2. Safer Crossings Citywide $600.000 270 19 3. Neighborhood Byways Program $1,600,000 -- 269 19 4. Urban Trails Program $1,500,000 245 19 5 California Avenue Pedestrian Safety Improvements _- 230 19 Construction-Concord St/Glendale Dr.$807,000 6 Transit Capital Program/Funding Our Future Transit 220 19 $1,500,000 7 Conceptual Design and Cost Estimates for FY26-FY28 214 19 Projects $600,000 8 Traffic Signal Replacement and Upgrades Program 209 19 $2,700,000 9 Green Loop$10,000,000(Public Lands submitted with . 205 19 Transportation as a partner) 10. Transportation Corridor Transformations $4,600,000 202 19 11 Guadalupe Neighborhood Streets Improvement _-- 196 19 $2,517,000 COMBINED (continued) 12. 600 South Safety Improvements $530,000 174 19 13. Marmalade-Fairpark East-West Connector Study 174 19 $80,000 14. 500 East Raised Crosswalk(400 Block)$115,000 161 19 15. Route 209-Accessibility,Bus Shelters, Benches,and 137 19 Trash Cans $500,000 16. Pedestrian Safety/HAWK at Richmond St.and Zenith 135 19 Ave. $500,000 17 Pedestrian Safety/HAWK at Richmond St and Elgin 127 19 Ave. $500,000 18. 700 East Median Tree Planting Project$2,400,000 92 19 19 Westminster Urban Forestry and Traffic Calming 71 19 Measures $477,000 Lowest Highest Participating in this poll: • 12 members of TAB (out of 13 current members) • 7 members of BAC (out of 12 current members) PROPOSAL: Transportation Advisory Board/Bicycle Standing Committee Potential revisions to meeting schedule and approach May 2024 The Salt Lake City Transportation Division currently manages and staffs two Salt Lake City bodies charged with providing constituent transportation advice and input to Salt Lake City, including the Mayor and the City Council. The Transportation Advisory Board takes a multi-modal approach, and was established by City statute in the mid 1990s. The Bicycle Standing Committee, commonly referred to as the Bicycle Advisory Committee,was established by City statute in 2013,following on the significant groundwork laid by an informal Mayor's Bicycle Advisory Committee which had been meeting since at least the early 1990s. Both groups have recently been meeting monthly. Starting in 2020, an annual joint meeting of these two groups was held, at the suggestion of the groups. Starting in 2023, this was expanded to two joint meetings per year, in January and June. A recent analysis shows considerable overlap between the topics presented to each board even outside of the joint meetings, in the past 18 months (October 2022 to April 2024).This is estimated at 65-75%overlap. Please see summary on pages 3-4. Some topics likely of interest to both boards have not made it onto both boards' agendas. Both boards often take a month off over the summer. A second consideration is that while both bodies are staffed by the Transportation Division with attendance by the SLC Police Department, often topics come up which involve the many agencies involves in stewardship of Salt Lake City's rights of way—this includes the City's Engineering Division, Streets Division, Public Lands Department, Public Utilities Department, Compliance Division (parking enforcement), Sanitation Division. While the committees have an opportunity to develop working relationships with Transportation Division staff,the same is not true of these several other agencies. More joint meetings? While keeping the Transportation Advisory Board and Bicycle Standing Committee as separate entities, it may make sense to have more joint meetings. This places a responsibility on both bodies to ensure quorum for the meeting to occur. If either body does not have a quorum,the whole meeting must be cancelled. In keeping with the amount of overlap,the below schedule suggests a total of 8 joint meetings(73%), 6 separate meetings(3 for each board), and one month off in the summer. Proposed topics include funding; additional topics are likely to fill in focused on policies and standards. Multi-department participation? Both boards regularly have input regarding topics that fall outside the Transportation Division's purview, such as maintenance activities performed by our fellow city agencies. The Transportation Division would seek the boards' collaboration in requesting our colleagues in other agencies to regularly attend either 3 or 4 meetings per year, in an expanded staffing. The repeating connection would help to build the knowledge and relationships to more proactively provide input and discuss concerns. When to meet? 2n1 Monday would avoid all legal holiday conflicts. Suggest switching to 2n1 Monday effective January 2025, and meeting either the 1 s`Monday or V Monday in 2024. A poll recently conducted indicates that members of the Bicycle Standing Committee are challenged to meet at the 4-5:30 time of the TAB meetings. This is a significant impediment to filling the slot of Vice-Chair of the bicycle committee,who attends both meetings. Results of this poll will be presented for discussion. Possible schedule-DRAFT for discussion Month Holiday Key Topics Joint TAB BAC Considerations January New Year's Day- 1 st CIP ranking&joint letter of support X MLK Day-3'd Mon February Pres Day-3rd Mon Multi department policies, X discussion, and recommendations March none TAB:topics TBD BAC:Bike Month, X X otherpre-season April none 5+5 review possible projects to add; X identify gaps&priorities May Memorial Day-last Mayor's Recommended Budget; 5+5 X Mon project selection/draft CIP list June Juneteenth-June 19 Multi department policies, X discussion, and recommendations July July 4, Pioneer Day --Summer break-- Off Off Off August None-School starts TAB: TBD BAC: TBD X X Tues.,Aug 20,2024 September Labor Day-1st Mon WFRC grants list, review of CIP projects X funded in recent round, Draft internal CIP for next round. October Columbus Day-2nd Internal CIP list for next round -final X Mon (not SLC holiday) Halloween-31 st November Thanksgiving-4 th Multi department policies, X Thurs discussion, and recommendations WFRC grants-Letter of support December Christmas-25t" TAB:elections BAC:elections X X even years odd years Other topics to be added. This is just a sample of potential topics aligned across the mix of separate and joint meetings. Summary of Transportation Advisory Board and Bicycle Advisory Committee topics(November 2022 to April 2024) Since November 2022,the board and committee have taken up a total of 32 topics,of which nearly half have been considered by both bodies. Of the 7 topics taken up by TAB alone,6 are likely of interest to BAC. Of the 12 topics taken up by BAC,5 are of likely interest to TAB,and 3 would be likely to be taken up by a joint TAB-PNUT board collaboration. Some of the topics that would likely be of interest to both bodies have not made it onto the other committee's agenda. Double presentations are challenging to make for staff(impacts resources),consultants(impacts budget),and outside agencies (may not understand why they are invited for two presentations to SLC boards,often will not accept twice). Many of the overlapping topics were also on both committee's agenda multiple times. Therefore,overall,the two committees had a clear majority of their time considering the same topics. At a guestimate,this represents 65-75%overlap. Both boards have had other"administrative"topics focused on internal process and procedures, ranging from elections to decorum. This amounts to"overhead"on maintaining each separate board. TOPICS ON TRANSPORTATION ADVISORY BOARD AND BICYCLE ADVISORY COMMITTEE AGENDAS SINCE NOVEMBER 2022* Both TAB only BAC only 1 1-15 EIS School District Updates Bike Lanes&Trash Bins 2 Orphan Assets Transportation Legislative Updates Snow Removal in Bike Lanes 3 2100 South Green Loop UTA Updates 4 Transportation Master Plan School Transportation U of U Active Transportation Updates 5 CIP Projects FY24 Sidewalk Widths Driveway Edges 6 Vision Zero Task Force Livable Streets Program Update East-West Study Grant 7 Pedestrian Safety Letter Life on State Bikeways Update Neighborhood Byways 8 1000 West 700 South Project Nominations for UDOT TIF/TTIF 9 5+5 Projects/Project Prioritization (monthly BAC updates) Bikeway Gaps(PNUT?) 10 700 East Shared Use Path Traffic Signals/Timing 11 City Creek Water Treatment Plant Irrigation along Trails/Bike Lanes(PNUT?) 12 5+5 and Pavement Condition Pump Station/Foothill Trails(PNUT?) 13 Collaboration with PNUT Board Future of BAC 14 CIP Projects FY25 15 Project Initiation/Complete Streets Checklist Italics indicate likely interest to other committee. *Excludes"administrative"topics focused on internal process/procedures. SLC Transportation Division,compiled April 2024 TAB BAC 2024 June Joint TAB/BAC Meeting-TBD Joint TAB/BAC Meeting-TBD May Collaboration with PNUT Board; other topics TBD TBD Apr Sidewalks(Widths and More); School Transportation Future of BAC; Bikeway Gaps March School Transportation- Panel Discussion & Board Action Collaboration with PNUT Board; Sprinklers& Irrigation along Trails& Bike Lanes; Public Utilities Pump Station/ Feb CIP FY25 Funding Requests; Project Initiation/Complete City Creek Canyon (follow-up); CIP FY25 Funding Streets Checklist Requests; Project Initiation/Complete Streets Checklist Jan Joint TAB/BAC Meeting-CIP FY25 Funding Requests Joint TAB/BAC Meeting-CIP FY25 Funding Requests 2023 Dec Board Process and Rolls;TAB Elections: City Creek Canyor Traffic Signals&Timing; Committee Process& Input; Orphan Assets Letter; City Creek Canyon Action Nov 5+5 Program and Pavement Condition; TAB Elections; Orphan Assets; City Creek Canyon Action;Vision Zero TAB Priorities 2024 Task Force Update Oct 1-15 Environmental Impact Statement Study Update, City City Creek Water Treatment Plant Upgrade, Creek Water Treatment Plan Upgrade,Transportation Transportation Master Plan Sept CIP/Project Prioritization U of U Active Transportation Updates, Bikeways Gaps Aug CIP/Project Prioritization No Meeting Jul No Meeting Neighborhood Byways, Project Nominations for UDOT TIF and TTIF June Joint TAB/BAC Meeting-700 East Shared Use Path Joint TAB/BAC Meeting-700 East Shared Use Path (UDOT),Scoring Criteria Used in Developing 5+5 (UDOT), Scoring Criteria Used in Developing 5+5 May Green Loop, 5+5 Projects Driveway Edges Policy/Standards(Engineering-Megan Leether), East/West Study Grant Apr 1-15 Environmental Impact Statement Study Update, 1000 West 700 South Project, U of U Update (Ginger 1000 West 700 South Project,Vision Zero Task Force Cannon), BAC Bike Tour Routes Discussion Update,Transportation Related Legislative Updates Mar SLC School District Updates, Livable Streets Program Vice-Chair Election, Dicussion on engagment and Update, Life on State Bikeways overview/wrap up/next feedback loop with broader cycling community steps,Vision Zero Task Force Meeting Update Feb Joint BAC/TAB Letter of Support for Transportation CIP Citizen CIP Applications letter with TAB,Snow Removal Applications, Constituent CIP Applications,Vision Zero in Bike Lanes-Streets Division (Mitch Hansen), BAC Task Force, UTA Update (Ski Buses),Joint BAC/TAB Mission Statement, Constituent CIP Applications Pedestrian Safety Letter Discussion Jan Joint TAB/BAC Meeting- Utah State Code Regarding Joint TAB/BAC Meeting- Utah State Code Regarding Quorum for Electronic Meetings, CIP Projects Update& Quorum for Electronic Meetings, CIP Projects Update & Request for Letter of Support,June TAB/BAC Meeting Request for Letter of Support,June TAB/BAC Meeting 2022 Dec 2100 South Project Update, Orphan Assets Letter,TAB Bike Lane Conflicts with Trash & Recycling Bins, 2100 2023 Priorities and Agenda Setting Discussion/Meeting South Project Update Schedule Approval (ran out of time in Nov) Nov 1-15 Environmental Impact Statement, Orphan Assets UTA Updates, 1-15 Environmental Impact Statement, Letter,TAB 2023 Priorities and Agenda Setting 2100 South Project Letter of Support,Transportation Discussion/Meeting Schedule Approval Master Plan Update Green =Topics by both committees Orange=Topics by both committees with unequal attention or significantly different timing Blue= Internal administration (elections,etc.) This excerpt is from the Salt Lake City Council's Staff report from the May 14, 2024 Council Packet. The Mayor's final CIP Budget Book is expected to be added to the City's website on the week of May 20. ADDITIONAL KEY ELEMENTS OF THE MAYOR'S BUDGET PROPOSAL A. Capital Improvement Program(CIP)—The proposed budget has a General Fund transfer to CIP at 6.8%of ongoing General Fund revenues or$25.2 million.On May 7,in Budget Amendment#5 of FY2024,the Council appropriated$15 million to a CIP holding account for capital maintenance projects. Taken together,the$40.2 million from the General Fund($15 million plus the$25.2 million)would be equivalent to a 1o.8%of ongoing General Fund revenues transfer to CIP which is the largest percentage for maU years.Previous plans identified 7•0 as a recommended minimum level of investment and a goal of 9%.The City did reach the 9%funding level in FY2023,although several departments have noted difficulty with getting projects constructed due to staffing constraints,continued supply chain challenges,and construction inflation. At the time of publishing this staff report an updated Mayor Recommended CIP Budget Book with recommendations for the$15 million was being printed for delivery to the Council.A funding log summarizing the Community Development&Capital Improvement Program or CDCIP resident advisory board and mayoral funding recommendations including the$15 million for capital maintenance is available as Attachment 2.Note that the funding log is not formatted for printing and is best viewed on an electronic device with a large screen. Differences between the CDCIP Board and Mayoral Funding Recommendations The CDCIP Board's recommendations do not include the$15 million for capital maintenance projects because the appropriation was made after the Board's final FY2025 budget meeting.The tables below summarize the Mayor's funding recommendations to use the$15 million for capital maintenance projects in three ways.The Mayor's recommendations also add$1.5 million of funding on top of the CDCIP Board's funding levels from three sources: $84,490 more from the General Fund, $750,000 more from Class C(gas tax),and$678,600 more from parks impact fees. Mayor recommends additional funding to projects recommended by the CDCIP Board CDCIP Board Funding Recommendations Mayor Additional Funding Totals Project General Fund General Fund un Class C Parks hupact Funding Our Funding Our 1/4 c Sales Tax for Capital Maintenance (Board+ enerat or Gas Tax Fees Future Sheets Future Transit Transportation Holdin Account Complete Streets $3,5—— $ 1 aagaoo $4 r uoo Reconstruction Completes Streets Overlay 000 000 $3,500,000 ie Replacement and Renewal Plan $ 1,366,350 $ 1,39c 150 $2,756 Soo Rene Sport Courts and $ 549,150 $ 54,490 $ 904A50 $3,508,E Playgroands Replacements Trafficsignal $ uco $ 230. o $ 13gao0 $ 86o,— Replacements&Upgrades Amplifying OurJordan River Bond projects $ on,— $ zag000 • Mayor recommends funding capital maintenance projects without CDCIP Board funding recommendations Page 117 Projects witlr Funding Only Recommended by the Mayor Project Class C Parks Impact Capital Maintenance General Fund Totals Gax Tax Fees Holding Account Too South Phase 7 from 4600 West $ 4 5 '00D *4_9D0,000 to 5000 West Memory Grove Park Urgent Repairs,Preservation,and $ - $ 1.910,000 #1,91%000 Maintenance Plan Art Barn Failing Infrastructure and $ g0o,000 $ g00,000 ADA Irovemenis Fairmont Park Basketball Corot 6o0 00 000 Alleyway Iraprovements aoo o00 Historic S" s Markers $ W.0oo 3000 Public Way Concrete Replacement $�,� # 75q� and Repairs • Mayor recommends substituting$3.14 million from the capital maintenance holding account for an equivalent amount of quarter cent sales tax for transportation funding recommended by the CDCIP Board for rebuilding the 400 South Jordan River Bridge and reallocate the$3.14 million to the Green Loop projectfor designing eligible transportation parts of the project. CDCIP Board Mayor Project 1/4 t Sales Tax for 1/4 0 Sales Tax for Capital Maintenance Transportation Totals Transportation Holding Account Totals 400 South Jordan River $ 4,000,000 "000,000 $ 86o,000 $ 3,140,000 $4,000,000 Bridge Reconstruction Green Loop I $ - I $ 3,340,000 # - # 0 000 • Annual CIP Process Summary: Each year,the Council appropriates the overall funding available for the Capital Improvement Program(CIP)and approves debt payments as part of the annual budget in June. Over the summer,the Council reviews individual projects and per state law must approve project specific funding by September 1.CIP is an open and competitive process where residents,local organizations and City departments submit project applications.The Community Development and Capital Improvement Program (CDCIP)resident advisory board reviews the applications in public meetings and makes funding recommendations to the Mayor and Council.The Mayor provides a second set of funding recommendations to the Council which ultimately decides project specific funding. • Background on Infrastructure-Infrastructure in the City is funded several ways: ■ CIP(enhanced by Funding our Future in FY 20)—funds a variety of ongoing infrastructure projects including sidewalks,ADA ramps,bridges,curb/gutter, facilities and buildings,park amenities and usually local/residential neighborhood streets.These are either funded through annual allocations on a pay as you go basis, or larger projects are sometimes financed with debt service(future revenue bonds such as sales tax). ■ County Quarter Cent Sales Tax for Transportation Funds(Fund Class 69— new in FY 20)—The Administration will be tracking both the receipt and expenditure of these funds in a separate account to make reporting to the state more streamlined(these funds are restricted as to use). ■ Class C(gas tax)funds in CIP—this usually funds larger scale projects and is typically allocated in a large quantity.In recent year,the Council appropriated these funds as a batch for street reconstruction and asphalt overlays.The internal Roadway Selection Committee determines which specific street segments receive improvements based on several criteria and other major projects. ■ Streets Division Budget located in the Public Services Department—this usually funds the more small-scale,maintenance activities such as pothole patching Page 1 18 and chip seal-type projects.The City currently has an asphalt street maintenance program.The vast majority of City streets are asphalt pavement. ■ Impact Fees—Pay for bigger demand on City facilities caused by population and employment growth.More specifically,impact fees are a payment of money imposed upon a new development activity as a condition of development approval to mitigate the impact of the new development on public infrastructure and services.There are four types of impact fees charged by the General Fund which are limited to eligible uses identified in the City's Impact Fees Plan.The four types are: fire,parks,police and transportation. ■ Infrastructure is also addressed indirectly through staff in Engineering, Transportation(Community and Neighborhoods Department),and Streets(Public Services)general fund budgets, and Public Utilities Budget(sewer,stormwater and water). B. Legislative Intents of the Council—The Administration has included all FY 2024 Legislative Intent Statements and Interim Study Items adopted by the Council in the Mayor's Recommended Budget Book, starting on page 122 of the budget book,along with relevant department responses if available.The Council held a high-level review of these at the May 7 work session. Staff will make a note of relevant items throughout the department budget briefings and hold a legislative intent briefing later in the budget process to confirm the list for the coming fiscal year. C. Funding our Future-In 2015 the Legislature authorized the City to impose a 0.5%additional local sales tax option as a result of the decision to relocate the State prison. The Council initiated this option, and while the State enabling legislation did not restrict what the City could do with these funds,the Council and Administration determined four critical need areas of focus for the funds based on resident engagement and feedback:housing,public safety(including 911,fire,police,and more),transportation, and street infrastructure(sidewalk-to-sidewalk).In FY 23,when the amount was anticipated to increase significantly,the City added a fifth category need,Public Lands Maintenance. • The FY 24 budget is projecting$57.9 million in total revenue for funding our future,a$7.4 million (14%)increase from FY 24.Note: this increase is greater than the City's local option sales tax line item because the Administration evaluated actual revenue received(the City retains l00%of the sales locally unlike the City's base local option,which is distributed 50%population/5o%point of sale). • The Administration's proposed budget tracks the revenues and expenses separately to increase transparency for the public as to how these funds are used.The public can also visit fundingourfutureslc.com for details on the programs and projects funded from these dollars and the voter-approved$87 million Streets Reconstruction Bond. • In FY 23,based on previous policy input from the Council about broadening the definition of "Public Safety"beyond police,the City expanded uses such as Fire,mental health responders, dispatchers,and emergency management personnel. • The chart below shows Funding our Future expenditures by department since 2023.See Attachment 4 for a detailed list of specific Funding Our Future initiatives,by department. • Staff will highlight this revenue tool in each of the relevant departments. Page 1 19 ELECTION Chair of the Committee: Review Role & Specified Term State responsibilities, qualifications, term. Public ambassador and role model for people who bike in Salt Lake City Submit Ballots Write "I .(yournarne). _nominate Basic understanding of active transportation — .. _ ..(candidateJ...n Submit to election facilitator. l concept, design and engineering Share Reasons Round Ability to set and maintain a relaxed, friendly tone "I'd like in this role because-,.... while keeping the committee on task Invite Changes Strong understanding of how to manage productive "I change my nomination to,-------- because.......... meetings while encouraging ideas to flow freely and Open Discussion I able to enhance the overall understanding of the Use this step only if necessary. It is optional and seldom use,, issues. Consent Round Responsive and responsible — able to follow through Facilitator proposes the candidate with the on commitments Strongest arguments relative to qualification. Available for all scheduled meetings and any REMEMBER: Propose candidate based on arguments.Numeric majority is additional hours required to plan for productive less important than Ueight"of reasons. > Ask for the candidate's consent last. meetings > To address paramount objections,see'Dptions for Moving Forward"in the consent decision making process. Ability to remove personal basis/convictions and Nnecessary,amend proposal and repeat consent round. focus on keeping the committee focused --DO NOT!---- Great communicator > Elect for an unlimited term. Has a knowledge of other cities and best practices > Ask for a volunteer. > Inquire who is interested or who is not. for cycling in other communities/cities/states Have dialog during a Round. Able to serve one two-year term — see note, next page. Seek the perfect candidate: recall that each Proposed: term will end December 2025. candidate has strengths and weaknesses. ELECTION Vice Chair of the Committee: Review Role & Specified Term State responsibilities, qualifications, term. Able to attend both Bicycle Advisory Committee and Transportation Advisory Board meetings Submit Ballots Ability to facilitate meetings when the Chair is Write "I . (yourname).__nominate ..(candidate)...n Submit to election facilitator. absent Share Reasons Round Basic understanding of active transportation — "I'd like in this role because—.... concept, design and engineering Invite Changes Ability to remove personal basis/convictions and "I change my nomination to,-------- because.......... focus on keeping the committee focused Open Discussion I Great communicator Use this step only if necessary. It is optional and seldom usec Has a knowledge of other cities and best Consent Round practices for cycling in other communities/cities/ Facilitator proposes the candidate with the states strongest arguments relative to qualification. Able to serve one two-year term REMEMBER: Propose candidate based on arguments.Numeric majority is less important than Ueight"of reasons. > Ask for the candidate's consent last. > To address paramount objections,see'Dptions for Moving Summer 2024: To get on-cycle for BAC to have alternating election Forward"in the consent decision making process. > N necessary,amend proposal and repeat consent round. years vs. TAB's elections, staff propose that for this election, BAC Chair and Vice Chair terms would end with elections in —— ——— ——DO NOT!———— December 2025. > Elect for an unlimited term. > Ask for a volunteer. (1 .5 year term) > Inquire who is interested or who is not. Thereafter, terms would be 2 years. Have dialog during a Round. Seek the perfect candidate: recall that each candidate has strengths and weaknesses.