082 of 2003 - Landfill budget for 2004 •
0 03-1
B 03-4
SALT LAKE CITY ORDINANCE
No. 82 of 2003
(Adopting the Solid Waste Management Facility budget,
which has been prepared and submitted by the
Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council
for calendar year 2004, subject to specific policy directives)
AN ORDINANCE ADOPTING THE SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT
FACILITY BUDGET, AS PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY THE SALT LAKE
VALLEY SOLID WASTE MANAGEMENT COUNCIL, FOR CALENDAR YEAR
2004, SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC POLICY DIRECTIVES.
PREAMBLE
On November 14, 2000, Salt Lake City(the "City") and Salt Lake County(the
"County") entered into an Interlocal Cooperation Agreement (the"Agreement"),pursuant
to Title 11, Chapter 13 of the Utah Code Annotated, regarding the joint management and
operation of a Solid Waste Management Facility. The Agreement established the Salt
Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council and provided it with authority and
responsibility relating to the operation and management of the Solid Waste Management
Facility.
Pursuant to the Agreement, all actions by the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste
Management Council constitute recommendations to the City and the County and the
City and the County have the power to review, ratify, modify or veto any action of the
Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council.
The Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Council has prepared the attached
Solid Waste Management Facility budget for calendar year 2004 and has submitted said
attached budget to the City Council for their approval. The City Council has authority
relating to budgets and appropriation of funds and, therefore, must approve, on behalf of
the City, the Solid Waste Management Facility budget. The attached Solid Waste
Management Facility budget has been available for public inspection in the Office of the
City Recorder for at least ten days.
The City Council fixed the time and place for a public hearing to be held on
December 9, 2003 to consider the adoption of the attached Solid Waste Management
Facility budget and ordered notice thereof be published at least seven days prior to the
hearing. Notice of said public hearing, to consider the adoption of said Solid Waste
Management Facility budget, was duly published as required herein. A public hearing to
consider adoption of said Solid Waste Management Facility budget was held on
December 9, 2003, in accordance with said notice, at which hearing all interested persons
were heard for and against the estimates of revenue and expenditures in the Solid Waste
Management Facility budget.
The City Council wants to adopt the attached Solid Waste Management Facility
budget for calendar year 2004, submitted by the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste
Management Council, subject to specific policy directives.
Be it ordained by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. PURPOSE. The purpose of this Ordinance is to adopt the attached
Solid Waste Management Facility budget, prepared and submitted by the Salt Lake
Valley Solid Waste Management Council, for calendar year 2004, subject to the attached
policy directives.
SECTION 2. ADOPTION OF BUDGET. The attached Solid Waste
Management Facility budget, prepared and submitted by the Salt Lake Valley Solid
2
Waste Management Council, for calendar year 2004, is hereby adopted subject to the
attached policy directives, and subject to similar approval by the County.
SECTION 3. RESERVE THE RIGHT TO AMEND. The City reserves the right
to amend the attached Solid Waste Management Facility budget, at any time, consistent
with the Agreement.
SECTION 4. PUBLIC INSPECTION. Copies of the attached Solid Waste
Management Facility budget shall be available for public inspection during regular
business hours in the Office of the City Recorder.
SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect on its first
publication.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this 9th day of
December , 2003.
Aa/aj
IRPERSO
ATTEST:
0./.. ###4
IEF DEPUT I Y CORDER 101 A. �11
Transmitted to the Mayor on December 9, 2003 `1Ritbl' ' '
Mayor's Action: y Approved. Vetoed.
MAYO
— -ev3/4,_
vi
ATTEST:
/ , f; . jA , / ,
r? „ "'k,...VVVVV_ __� �F DEPUT ' ' :CORDER
: i" Ali.° �,
iix L
tttt-9� P s y 1
4 4% RA'TS.
',y,r +ice-a
Bill No. 82 of 2003.
Published: December 18, 2003
G:\Ordinance 03\Adopting the Solid Waste Mgmt Facility Budget-Nov 6,2003.doc
4
Salt Lake City Corporation
Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet
for
Budget Development and Budget Amendment
Public Services FY0304
Department For Fiscal Year
SLVSWMF 2004 Budget
Initiative Name Initiative Number
Greg Davis 535-6397
Prepared By Phone Number
Co-Approve SLVSWMF Annual Budget
Type of Initiative CFDA Number
Fiscal Impact of Proposed Change
A. Revenue Impacted by Fund and Source: 1st Year 2nd Year 3rd Year
FY 2003-04 FY 2004-05 FY 2005-06
1. General Fund
Total $0 $0 $0
2. Internal Service Fund
Total $0 $0 $0
3. Enterprise Fund
Interest 813,00 829,26 845,845
Landfill Fees 14,000,00 14,000,00 14,954,545
Compost Sales 370,00 370,000 370,000
Salvage Sales 220,00 230,000 240,000
Interfund Charges 105,00 105,000 105,000
Other Sources 256,000 260,00 275,000
Fund Balance...(Favorable)/Unfavorable (204,151 100,918 (546,426)
Total $15,559,84 $15,895,17 $16,243,965
4. Other Fund
Total $0 $0 $0
B. Expenditures Impacted by Fund and Source:
1. General Fund
Total $0 $0 $0
2. Internal Service Fund
Total $0 $0 $0
3. Enterprise Fund 15,559,849 15,895,178 16,243,965
Total $15,559,849 $15,895,178 $16,243,965
4.Other Fund
Total $0 $0 $0
C. Expenditure Impact Detail
1.Salaries and Wages 2,579,301 2,643,784 2,709,879
2. Employee Benefits 1,158,817 1,187,787 1,217,482
3.Operating and Maintenance Supply 265,700 265,700 270,000
4.Charges and Services 9,315,031 9,547,907 9,786,604
5.Capital Outlay 2,241,000 2,250,000 2,260,000
6.Other(Specify)
Total $15,559,849 $15,895,178 $16,243,965
Landfill Budget_fiscal note_tied to BA#111/7/20039:43 AM
Salt Lake City Corporation
Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet
for
Budget Development and Budget Amendment
D. Personnel Service Detail: FTE Grade/Step Amount
County Employees-2003 71.40
Waste Inspector 0.10
Seasonal, now full time 0.45
Seasonal, now full time 0.45
County Employees-2004 72.40
County Employees-2005 72.40
County Employees-2006 72.40
Landfill Budget fiscal note tied to BA#111/7/20039:43 AM
Salt Lake City Corporation
Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet
for
Budget Development and Budget Amendment
E. Measured or measurable Impact on functions, structure and organization
F. Issue Discussion: A complete justification will contain a discussion of each of the elements mentioned below;
criteria, condition, effect, cause and recommendation.
Criteria is a definition of what is expected or what can be expected. It provides a basis for comparison without which
analysis cannot be effective. The criteria varies from issue to issue. In straightforward cases, it can be an ordinance or
policy. In other cases,it may be an industry standard or comparable data from another city.
Condition is a description of current practices. It is the information to which the criteria is compared.
Effect is the difference,if any, between the condition and criteria. It is best described in terms of a dollar impact or a
service level impact. If an effect cannot be identified, there is no finding.
Cause is sometimes a difficult element to identify but is essential to a finding. It is simply identifying why the condition
varies from the criteria. Sometimes the answer is as simple as a change in policy or budget but often goes deeper into
management
Recommendation is made in a way that addresses the cause. By doing so, it is most likely to result in improving the
condition to be in line with the criteria.
Criteria: Each year the Salt Lake Valley Solid Waste Management Facility (SLVSWMF), which is
jointly owned by Salt Lake County and Salt Lake City, submits its budget to Salt Lake City for
approval. Salt Lake City last provided its approval of the SLVSWMF budget in December of 2002 for
calendar year 2003.
Condition: SLVSWMF has submitted to Salt Lake County its proposed budget for calendar year
2004 and is seeking approval from Salt Lake City.
Effect: As in the past, revenue will match expense with a contribution being made to fund balance.
Year-to-year, revenue and expense will decrease by $923,964 after a contribution to fund balance of
$204,151 has been factored in. The contribution to fund balance in calendar year 2004 is budgeted to
be $30,673 more than in the amended calendar year budget for 2003.
Cause: The major revenue and expense changes are as follows. Revenue, including a contribution
to fund balance, is proposed to decrease in 2004 by $923,964. This major component of this
reduction is diminishing landfill tonnage. This loss in tonnage equates to 5.1% or a $750,000
reduction in tipping fee revenue. Sale of vehicle revenue, will decrease by $227,291 because auction
proceeds on a piece of equipment sold were higher than anticipated and will not be replicated.
Offsetting these proposed reductions is a increase of $30,000 in compost sales and an increase of
$40,000 in salvage sales. Expenses are also proposed to decrease by $923,964. Proposed
increases in expense include a $20,000 increase in contract labor, a $70,000 increase in regulatory
fees and a $145,000 increase in other professional / intergovernmental costs. Major decreases
proposed in expense include a reduction in capital expenditures of $965,603 and a reduction of
$140,000 in contract hauling.
Recommendation: Approve the SLVSWMF budget.
Analyst Comments:
Salt Lake City Corporation
Management and Fiscal Note Worksheet
for
Budget Development and Budget Amendment
G. Grant Criteria: A grant will satisfy one of the following four criteria.
1—In some cases, the General Fund or an Enterprise Fund of the City will use grant funding for
projects or programs that have been identified by the Council for future funding. The General Fund
or Enterprise Fund will provide funding once grant funding
2- Grant funding will be used when the use of the grant money will result in long-term financial
savings or operating efficiencies.
3- Grant funding will allow the City to build internal capacity to continue the service in the future.
4- None of the above.
Question I - Will this grant fund employee positions? What programs are funded with this grant and
what are the performance measures of each program?
Question 2 - What is the potential for continued grant funding for the position?
Question 3 - Is it expected that the positions can be eliminated once the grant funds are unavailable?
Question 4 - Is the program that the grant funds, a program that can accomplish its goals within the
grant funding time frame?
Question 5 - Will there be a significant service level impact on the community once the grant funds
become unavailable?
Question 6 -Does the grant duplicate services that are provided in the private or non-profit sector?Is
there a better fit in another jurisdiction or entity?