Salt Lake County CouncilCommittee of the Whole

~Minutes~Tuesday, April 2, 2013

1:07:23 PM

Committee Members Present: Randy Horiuchi

Jim BradleyRichard SnelgroveArlyn BradshawMichael JensenDavid WildeSam GranatoMax BurdickSteven DeBry, Chair

Legislative Briefing from the Utah Association of Counties (1:07:23 PM)

Mr. Brent Gardner, Executive Director, Utah Association of Counties (UAC), reviewed the following legislative interim issues it will be discussing at its Management Conference, being held April 10-12, 2013, at the new convention center in Provo. A group of county attorneys from the Civil Division will also be discussing the interim issues.

S.B. 72 8th Sub. – Prison Relocation and Development Amendments (Rep. Scott K. Jenkins)

This bill addresses the relocation of the state prison, including the development of the current prison land. It modifies provisions relating to the Prison Relocation and Development Authority; modifies the duties and responsibilities of the authority; establishes a process for the authority to issue a request for proposals for a new prison development project, current prison land development project, or master development project, receive and evaluate proposals, and make a recommendation to the Legislature and governor; provides requirements for a request for proposals and for proposals; enacts a provision relating to compensation and expenses of authority members; and enacts a provision relating to authority members' ethics and conflicts of interest.

The Legislature set up a committee of nine members to discuss this matter, but no one was appointed from UAC or the County. Since then, he met with the Governor who has agreed to put a County official on the committee as one of his six appointments. Mayor Ben McAdams has expressed an interest in being that representative, as have individuals from several other counties. This will be hotly contested at UAC’s meeting.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − − −

1

H.B. 199 1st Sub. – Fiscal Period for Political Subdivisions (Rep. Daniel McKay)

This bill amends provisions related to the fiscal period for a county, local district, and community development and renewal agency. It requires that a county adopt a budget for an annual fiscal period that begins on July 1 of each year and ends on June 30 of the following year or a biennial fiscal period that begins on July 1 and ends on June 30 of the second year immediately following; provides language related to the transition of a county from a calendar fiscal period; requires that a local district adopt a budget for a fiscal period that begins on July 1 of each year and ends on June 30 of the following year; provides language related to the transition of a local district calendar year entity to a fiscal year entity; requires that a community development and renewal agency adopt a budget for a fiscal period that begins on July 1 of each year and ends on June 30 of the following year; and provides language related to the transition of an agency from a calendar fiscal period.

Representative Daniel McKay wants to start an informal interim study group. UAC has volunteered to host it at its building, but has not heard back from Rep. McKay. He would let the County know when that gets going.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Referendum Amendment Bills

S.B. 66 1st Sub. – Referendum Revisions (Sen. Stuart C. Reid)

This bill amends and enacts provisions relating to a referendum petition to challenge a law passed by a local legislative body. It describes requirements for a referendum petition to challenge a law passed by a local legislative body; provides that when a clerk declares a referendum petition to be sufficient: the law challenged in the referendum does not take effect unless and until the law is approved by a vote of the people; the budget officer for the local government, in consultation with the attorney for the local government, shall determine whether, and to what extent, repealing the law has fiscal or legal implications, and shall prepare an unbiased, good faith written estimate of the fiscal and legal impact that will occur if the law is repealed; and the local legislative body shall hold a public hearing to consider the estimate and determine whether to repeal the law that is challenged by the referendum; describes requirements relating to the written estimate; and provides for a legal challenge of the written estimate.

This bill failed.

S.B. 265 2nd Sub. – Referendum Amendments (Sen. John L. Valentine)

This bill modifies the Election Code to address a referendum filed on actions taken with regard to property tax rates. It defines terms; sets different time periods for actions taken with regard to a referendum petition; addresses absentee ballots; exempts the referendum petition from the voter information pamphlet requirements; addresses the tax rate if the referendum passes or fails; provides language for the ballot; and addresses payment of costs.

2

This bill also failed. UAC tried to get Senator John Valentine to amend this bill to address it to the cities, but he could not find a legal way to do that.

Referendum Revisions/Amendments (Sen. Howard A. Stephenson)

Senator Howard Stephenson wants to keep the window open for signature collections on tax-hike referendums, thus making it easier to collect the required number of signatures to get a tax repeal referendum before voters. However, he has agreed to do away with the second Truth in Taxation requirement if it is replaced with an individual mailed notice requirement. However, that could be costly for the County.

Council Member Bradley asked what the threshold was on signatures.

Mr. Gardner stated it is still 10 percent of people who voted in the last gubernatorial election. The bill to increase that did not pass.

Council Member Wilde stated people can sign even if they did not vote in that election.

Mr. Gavin Anderson, Deputy District Attorney, stated they have to be current registered voters. This bill is particularly problematic for the County because it operates on a fiscal year. When the Council adopts a tax increase through the truth-in-taxation process, it is required to hold a hearing in December when it adopts the budget, and another hearing in July or August. The second hearing allows tax increase opponents two chances to file a referendum petition. This creates a lot of uncertainty as to whether the County’s tax increase will go ahead or not; it may have to freeze any increase for a couple of years. The District Attorney’s tax unit has been looking at the current statute to see whether that second hearing requirement could be changed into some kind of notice, without the County having to go to the Legislature.

Mr. Gardner stated this has already impacted other counties. Summit County cannot vote on its tax increase until 2014. UAC will put together a group to discuss this with Senator Stephenson over the interim, and will have a joint session with the county clerks, auditors, and commissioners to talk about how to handle referendum and legal guise.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Privilege Tax Bill (Rep. Dixon M. Pitcher)

This bill could potentially invalidate the privilege tax. That came about because of some court decisions regarding the ATK case with Salt Lake County. The bill has been abandoned, but there will be a discussion in the interim with attorneys from both sides to try to hammer something out while preserving privilege tax.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − − −

S.B. 267 – New Convention Hotel and Development Incentive Act (Sen. J. Stewart Adams)

This bill was three votes short of passing. It failed because there were a lot of new legislators who viewed this as a government give-away, which would adversely affect private enterprise of the free market. Little America led that chime. The legislators did not seem bothered about

3

subsidizing private business in other ways, such as through Redevelopment Agencies, Community Development Agencies, and Economic Development Agencies, wherein out-of-state companies come in and get an advantage over businesses that are already here. If legislators do not approve of subsidizing private business, they should amend State statute to reflect that.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Funding

Mr. Gardner stated Appropriations just came out of session, and came up with about $8 million for human services. A lot of that will go to Salt Lake County for drug courts and other things. The Legislature also approved an additional $1 million in conditional probation funding, bringing that amount up to $12 million. That is ongoing money. Eventually, UAC hopes to reach the full funding amount of $16 million.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Melissa Kennedy GRAMA Appeal

This item was not discussed.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Joint Committee Report ~ District Attorney Building Project (1:23:19 PM)

Council Member Bradley, seconded by Council Member Granato, moved to close the Committee of the Whole meeting to discuss a possible real estate puchase. The motion passed unanimously.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − − −

During the closed session, the Council voted to reopen the Committee of the Whole meeting.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Council Member Jensen, seconded by Council Member Wilde, moved to continue this discussion to a later date. The motion passed unanimously.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

District Attorney’s Hiring Freeze Opinion (1:45:34 PM)

Council Member DeBry stated he asked the District Attorney’s Office to give a legal opinion on the hiring freeze, as they expressed doubts about the legality of it. He also asked the Council’s Legal Counsel to opine.

Mr. Ralph Chamness, Deputy District Attorney, reviewed the District Attorney Office’s very narrow legal opinion as to the constitutionality of the hiring freeze, which indicates that the County Council may not, by way of legislative intent, and under current County

4

ordinance, prohibit the filling of any vacant position that was previously approved. State statute provides options for the Council to exercise its authority to engage in the hiring process, and the Council has consented to do that by ordinance. County ordinance outlines the adoption of the hiring process as part of the budget process. However, the Council may reduce the personnel budget of each elected official, under the Fiscal Procedures Act, by giving notice. That is, in effect, what the hiring freeze does. The Council may, also, expand its ability to review vacant FTEs and continue the hiring freeze by amending Salt Lake County Ordinance § 2.12.070.

Council Member Wilde stated he interpreted the statute broader, and asked if the exceptions to the hiring freeze process could be considered part of the budget process.

Mr. Chamness stated the process of reviewing exceptions to the hiring freeze each week is not part of the budget process, unless it is noticed up as part of the budget process and the action is taken in accordance with the Fiscal Procedures Act.

Council Member Horiuchi asked if the District Attorney’s Office would feel good with the process if the Council formalized the process through an ordinance amendment.

Mr. Chamness stated the Council can continue the way it does the hiring process by changing the ordinance, and changing some policies so they comply with the ordinance.

Mr. Jason Rose, Legal Counsel, Council Office, stated he read the statute much broader than the District Attorney. He, also, prepared a legal opinion indicating the Council does have the authority to do the hiring freeze as it is currently doing. That being said, he could write something the District Attorney would be comfortable with, whether it is the process the Council is currently following or a different process.

Council Member Horiuchi stated he did not want to do anything wrong, and he wanted to alleviate the District Attorney’s concerns.

Council Member DeBry suggested that Jason Rose draft an ordinance right away that would allow the current hiring freeze, and consider changes to the hiring freeze process at a later date.

Council Member Wilde asked what the Council would do in the interim. If the Council agrees with Mr. Rose’s legal opinion, it can continue with the hiring freeze process as it currently is. If it agrees with the District Attorney’s legal opinion, it would have to discontinue the hiring freeze until the ordinances and policies are changed.

Council Member Burdick asked what would happen if the Council continued doing what it was doing.

Mr. Chamness stated at best, it would be a technical violation. The Council has not held up other elected officials thus far; it has approved the exceptions to the hiring freeze, with a few exceptions.

Council Member Bradley stated the hiring freeze was implemented to deal with the budget crisis, and the crisis is no longer there. Therefore, he did not feel there was a need to lock in legislative authority in terms of implementing a hiring freeze. Instead, the Council should increase its scrutiny of each office and their hiring practices during the budget process.

5

If, at that time, the Council does not agree with decisions that were made, it can make changes to budgets.

Mr. Sim Gill, District Attorney, stated it is not that the Council does not have the authority; it is that the Council has not exercised its authority in a lawful manner.

Council Member Snelgrove stated the best time to look at the viability of consolidating or eliminating a position is when there is a vacancy. The Council would lose that opportunity if it only evaluated positions during the June and November budget hearings.

Council Member Wilde stated he did not think drafting a policy locked the Council into anything. This would just create a tool for the Council to use if necessary.

Council Member Jensen stated having a tool in the toolbox enables the Council to manage budgets and keep costs down by controlling personnel. He wanted as much flexibility as possible. Utah is out-performing the country when it comes to economic recovery, but it has not cleared the woods yet, and there may still be a need for that tool.

Mr. Chamness stated the District Attorney’s Office could draft ordinances to provide different ways of doing this.

Council Member Wilde asked if Mr. Rose could have something ready by next week.

Mr. Rose stated he would need two weeks to change whichever policy the Council wanted to further, and additional time thereafter to work with the District Attorney’s Office to make sure the policy was within the bounds of the statutes.

Mayor Ben McAdams stated the Mayor’s Office is about to begin an overhaul of County Human Resources policies. He suggested looking at this topic in that broader context. He envisioned the Council having a tool similar to a light switch that could be flipped on when the County is in a fiscal crisis to allow for a hiring freeze, and turned off when budgets are stable. There is constant turnover in the Mayor’s Office, so he needed the flexibility to replace people when the right candidate came up. When the Mayor’s Office has vacancies that last for weeks, it trips up their ability to execute.

Ms. Jill Carter, Director, Administrative Services Department, stated the Administrative Services Department will be coming before the Council on April 16, with their plan to rewrite the policies. A small committee will be formed to help write the policies, with the Council’s input, after which the policies will go to the Steering Committee for review, then back to the Council. It felt premature to make this change now. She wanted to make sure the Council did not put something into cement that may have to be rewritten after considering this is going to be done soon anyway.

Council Member Burdick stated the Council should look for opportunities to overhaul, streamline, and improve County government, but at the same time, not tread too much on other elected officials and their ability to do what they need to do.

Council Member Bradley stated he wanted everyone to keep in mind the Council’s responsibility is simply budgetary, but being budgetary there may be times the Council needs to invoke a hiring freeze or hiring review. He asked that the ordinance and policy allow

6

the Council to do that, but that it include a time period for the hiring freeze rather than it being standard procedure.

Council Member Bradshaw asked that the Council have the ability to proactively invoke a hiring freeze, but that the hiring freeze has an expiration date, such as 90 days. Then, when the time period runs out, the Council would have to proactively make a decision to keep it in place. That way, the Council would continually be asking itself if the hiring freeze is necessary.

Council Member Wilde suggested that instead of a time period, the expiration be upon the end of the current economic crisis, which would be based on particular criteria.

Mr. Gill stated if the Council wants the District Attorney’s Office to amend an ordinance or policy before the Mayor’s Office completes the policy overhaul, the District Attorney’s Office will need a couple of weeks. They want to make sure whatever they write protects the separation of powers. Their job, as legal counsel, is to assist the Council in making the most informed decision in executing the policy objectives within the parameters of the law.

Mr. Rose stated he would draft something if he was asked to. In the interim, the Council can continue approving the exception to the hiring freeze requests as it is doing now. However, if it is going to deny an elected official’s or department’s request to hire a vacancy, it will have to approve a resolution to open the budget and reduce that particular budget.

Council Member Wilde suggested changing “exception to the hiring freeze” to “review of new hires.”

Mr. Rose stated that would accurately reflect what the Council is doing.

Council Member Wilde, seconded by Council Member Jensen, moved to maintain the status quo while the Mayor’s Office, in conjunction with the District Attorney’s Office and the Council’s Legal Counsel, work on the necessary policy changes, then bring them back to the Council; and to change the heading on the agendas from “exceptions to the hiring freeze” to “review of proposed hires.” The motion passed unanimously.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Exceptions to the Hiring Freeze ( 2:16:46 PM )

Mr. Brad Kendrick, Assistant Fiscal Analyst, Council Office, reviewed the following requests for exceptions to the hiring freeze, which have been placed on the Council agenda for formal consideration:

Auditor’s Office

Requests exceptions to the hiring freeze in order to fill an Exempt Secretary position, two Deputy Auditor 28/30/32 positions, and a Tax Administrative Assistant 20/22 position.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

7

Assessor’s Office

Requests an exception to the hiring freeze in order to fill a Personal Property Appraiser position.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Public Works Operations Division

Requests exceptions to the hiring freeze in order to fill a Sweeper Operator 16/18 position and a District Worker 15/17 position.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Aging Services Division

Requests exceptions to the hiring freeze in order to fill a Senior Center Custodial Worker position, a .5 Health Educator 22/24 position, and an Ombudsman 22 position.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Salt Lake Valley Health Department

Requests exceptions to the hiring freeze in order to fill two Office Coordinator 19 positions.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Library Services Division

Requests exceptions to the hiring freeze in order to fill the following positions:

FTE Position Location

.50 Public Services Librarian 24/26 West Valley Library1.0 Assistant Circulation Supervisor 19 Kearns Library.50 Shelver 11 South Jordan Library.50 Shelver 11 Whitmore Library

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Youth Services Division

Requests an exception to the hiring freeze in order to fill a Youth Services Case Manager position.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

8

Parks & Recreation Division

Requests exceptions to the hiring freeze in order to fill a Lead Custodial Maintenance Supervisor 15 position and an Assistant Superintendent of Greens 18 position.

Council Member Jensen, seconded by Council Member Wilde, moved to approve the requests and forward them to the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting for formal consideration. The motion passed unanimously.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Interim Budget Adjustments (2:18:23 PM)

The Council reviewed the following interim budget adjustment request, which has been placed on the Council agenda for formal consideration:

Engineering/Flood Control Division

Requests an interim budget adjustment of $37,825 to improve water quality, support community revitalization, educate the community, and engage and empower some of Salt Lake County’s lowest income residents through two connected programs. Funding will come from Environmental Protection Agency Urban Waters grant funds that were awarded to Salt Lake County for three years. Of the $38,915 awarded for 2013, $2,000 is to be used to reimburse travel, and $1,090 is to reimburse staff time already included in the 2013 budget.

Council Member Bradley, seconded by Council Member Bradshaw, moved to approve the request and forward it to the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting for formal consideration. The motion passed unanimously.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Clark Planetarium 10 th Anniversary Events Update (2:18:49 PM)

Mr. Seth Jarvis, Director, Clark Planetarium, stated the Clark Planetarium will launch its tenth anniversary with ten days of celebrations intended to reach out into the community. The major event will be a lecture by noted astronomer and author, Dr. Phil Plait. The lecture will be in conjunction with a gala dinner and silent auction on Thursday, April 11, 2013, which is ten years to the day that the Clark Planetarium opened in The Gateway. The Council has been invited to attend the event. The Planetarium is where it is today because leadership in Salt Lake County decided this was an investment they were willing to make in the community. It has been an excellent return on investment. He hoped to have a conversation with County leadership about the future of astronomy and science education in Salt Lake.

Council Member DeBry asked where the closest similar facility was located.

Mr. Jarvis stated it would probably be Chicago, which has its own stand-alone planetarium. Most major planetariums are connected to museums. For the size of Salt Lake, the County has a planetarium that hits way above its weight.

9

Council Member Wilde asked about the production and distribution of science shows by the Planetarium.

Mr. Jarvis stated the Clark Planetarium produces shows that are shown at the Planetarium and then sold to facilities around the world. Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation in Salt Lake City, which provides the equipment for the planetarium’s dome, also produces shows. Between E&S and the Clark Planetarium, they produce three quarters of all planetarium shows shown in planetariums around the world. This is a major part of the Planetarium’s revenue and business model. Therefore, the funding received from Salt Lake County accounts for the minority of the Planetarium’s operating budget.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Residential Facilities for Persons with Disabilities Ordinance (2:31:51 PM)

Mr. Rolen Yoshinaga, Director, Planning & Development Services Division, updated the Council regarding the Residential Facilities for Persons with Disabilities Ordinance, which his office has been working on since last fall. He stated this ordinance has been reviewed by all the community councils and planning commissions. It will be coming before the Council for review soon. This ordinance brings the County ordinances into alignment with Federal laws and with the State of Utah Department of Human Services licensing procedures.

Council Member Horiuchi asked if the ordinance goes as far as it can in having any say or impact on these types of facilities.

Mr. Yoshinaga stated it goes as far as it can. The State enacted a code that limits counties from enacting any provisions that go beyond the Federal Fair Housing Act.

Council Member DeBry stated he understands that the County cannot stop these group homes from coming in per Federal law, but he would like to have a list of things local governments can do to control these homes. He questioned if local governments can put a cap on the number of people residing in a home or where the homes will be located.

Mr. Yoshinaga stated the Federal bill limits the number of residents to 16, anymore than that it becomes an institution.

Council Member Bradley stated there cannot be 16 people in a small home. The size of a home needs to be taken into consideration as well.

Mr. Yoshinaga stated the Department of Human Services determines how many residents can live in a home. It is part of the licensing requirement.

Council Member Bradley asked if there was any distinction between profit or non-profit homes.

Mr. Yoshinaga stated no, that is not taken into consideration. The homes just need to be certified by the Department of Human Services as a treatment facility.

10

Council Member Jensen asked if the argument on the Federal side is that disabilities are a protected class under Title 7. He felt this was a local issue and should be reserved for local governments to decide, not the Federal government.

Council Member Bradley stated if local governments had the ability to say no, there would be no housing for people with disabilities. No one would want them in their cities.

Council Member DeBry asked for clarification. The ordinance would list group homes as a permitted use/reasonable accommodations in any single family neighborhood in the County so long as the home meets State license standards and local building codes and does not offer out-patient treatment services.

Mr. Zachary Shaw, Deputy District Attorney, stated that was correct, and it would allow up to 16 residents.

Council Member Burdick asked if there were controls in place regarding the sort of people that would live in these homes.

Mr. Yoshinaga stated that would be governed by the Department of Human Services. This is not an alternative to incarceration type of situation. These are people with disabilities.

Council Member Jensen stated he would have a concern with a person who committed a crime and should be in prison, but had a disability and should be in a group home. He wondered which would have primacy, the crime or the disability.

Mr. Shaw stated the State would be the entity to make that decision.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Cultural Facilities Master Plan and Support Program Update (2:43:10 PM)

Ms. Erin Litvack, Director, Community Services Department, submitted a draft of 2013 criteria recommendations regarding regional cultural facilities and school partnerships within the Cultural Facilities Master Plan. The Cultural Facilities Support Program Advisory Board has put together a process to vet future cultural projects that would eventually be brought to the Council for funding consideration. In the course of creating that process, some challenges have been discovered, and the board is seeking direction from the Council to its recommended changes.

One recommendation was to build up to three regional cultural facilities similar to the Rose Wagner Performing Arts Center. A number of applications for such facilities were submitted and the Cultural Facilities Support Program Advisory Board needs some clarification on definitions and criteria.

Another recommendation was creating partnerships with the schools to utilize their auditoriums as cultural venues for the community. The challenge of this idea are how to transition from a school function to a cultural venue, and whether the County want to become a funding source to build school auditoriums.

11

The third area of clarification is about deferred capital maintenance. Applicants in this category had asked for such things as upgrades in auditorium seating. This would make the County a funding source for everyone’s deferred maintenance issues. The Board decided any capital requests should be for items directly related to the cultural nature of the venue.

Council Member Horiuchi stated the County needs to get the same kind of partnerships with the schools as it has with recreation facilities, such as the Salt Lake City Sports Complex.

Ms. Litvack stated the Board struggled with how to build those partnerships with the schools. The Board wanted to know about public access, and when the arts organizations would be able to use the schools. Schools are not expected to build dressing rooms or ticket booths for the cultural venue, but a partnership needs to be defined before anything is funded.

Council Member Wilde stated for the most part, these discussions are academic because there is no money to fund the projects. The Zoo, Arts, and Parks (ZAP) tax will be reauthorized in 2014, and some of the ZAP funding should go to build these cultural facilities instead of recreation centers.

Council Member Jensen stated he was concerned about the idea of changing the ZAP formula to spend less money on recreation centers. Any change to the ZAP statute would open up the opportunity to change all of the formulas in place. In addition, there is still a lot of pressure to build recreation facilities in every area of the County.

Ms. Litvack stated there is an opportunity to tweak the ZAP formula at the Legislature every year because it is statutorily driven.

Council Member Jensen stated that is not really true in practice because the County bonds against the 30 percent of funding dedicated to recreation.

Council Member DeBry stated he has had preliminary discussions with West Jordan City about building a recreation center in the western area of the City. The City has the land and would partner with the County to build and manage the facility. With the population growth in that area, a recreation center would draw people from a large area.

Council Member Bradshaw asked who would control the content of performances if a school became a cultural venue.

Judge Lee Dever, Chair, Cultural Facilities Support Program Advisory Board, stated this issue has never been brought up. This arrangement works in Park City, where the cultural venue has a separate entrance, and it is not an issue.

Ms. Litvack stated that issue should be addressed.

Council Member Bradshaw stated this needs to be made clear in any school partnership.

Ms. Litvack stated the applications being received vary from asking to help with audience seating to requests to be a regional cultural center. A regional cultural center was a very specific recommendation in the master plan and the board wanted to pin that down, as opposed to a facility that might be built for a single non-profit agency.

12

Council Member Granato asked that the board seriously consider locating some of these facilities in the unincorporated Salt Lake County area.

Council Member DeBry asked if the old Granite High School in South Salt Lake City was under consideration.

Mr. Phil Jordan, Director, Center for the Arts, stated South Salt Lake City was an applicant in last year’s round, but then a local ballot initiative failed. The City has not come back to the County with an application to become a regional facility.

Council Member DeBry stated the City has tried to sell the school to a film firm.

Mayor Ben McAdams stated the City has talked to him about what could be done with the school if the film situation does not work out. Subsequent conversations will presumably go through the established process before any final decision is made.

Council Member Jensen stated he liked the general idea and direction the board was taking. However, he was concerned about the proposal to require a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from surrounding entities to participate in a regional cultural facility. If that surrounding community also applied for a cultural facility, and was denied, the chances of them wanting to sign an MOU with the winning city is not politically feasible.

Ms. Litvack stated that requirement is meant as a guarantee that if the facility is built, it will get used.

Judge Dever stated without an MOU, the City or organizations that asked for the building could end up going somewhere else.

Council Member Wilde stated he represents Taylorsville City, West Valley City, and Murray City. All of them would like some kind of facility; and he feels torn between them.

Ms. Litvack stated the Board will look at each application on its own merits. At some point the Mayor and Council will make the decision about where to put a regional venue and what size it should be.

Council Member Bradley stated a regional facility should transcend city borders. The most important aspect is how accessible it will be to other parts of the County.

Council Member Jensen asked about the areas planned for the regional cultural facilities. The submitted map has five areas, but only three venues are mentioned.

Ms. Litvack stated the master plan recommends up to three additional facilities. Ultimately, the Council and Mayor make the decision on location. When the master plan was formulated, it was looking at population growth.

Mr. Jordan stated the intention of the master plan was that anybody could come forward for the opportunity to have their community supported by additional cultural funding, and it was assumed the County would operate any new regional facilities. That brings a lot of commitment to ongoing maintenance. The question has always been how to ask communities to coalesce around one location, knowing that it is not going to be in their backyard. The doors

13

are always open for anyone who wants to use the facility. It is a matter of prioritizing who gets to use certain dates first.

Council Member Wilde stated he thought there would be one facility built in each of the designated regions. He asked why only three smaller facilities were planned.

Mr. Jordan stated it goes go the issues of efficiency of operation, and staff support.

Council Member DeBry stated the Hale Centre Theatre will be moving to Sandy. He asked what would happen to its current building in West Valley City.

Council Member Jensen stated the Hale Centre Theatre move did not get funded by the legislature this year.

Ms. Litvack stated she and Mayor McAdams have met with West Valley City officials regarding that issue. The lease on the Hale Center Theatre goes through 2016, so there is time before Hale has to make a final decision. Any move on their part will require a large fundraising campaign. West Valley is in a wait-and-see mode, but it has been up front with the County about being considered as one of the regional cultural facilities. This is a possibility. It depends on whether or not the building could be renovated to fit the model.

Council Member Snelgrove stated the Cultural Facilities Master Plan is a living document that will be changed from time to time. He asked when the County expected to complete all three regional cultural facilities.

Ms. Litvack stated the plan was meant to be a long term document. No timeline has been set for building the three venues because of the nature and reality of public funding. It is hoped that the master plan will be updated every five to seven years depending on what is happening in the local communities.

Judge Dever stated the Board was actually pleased that it did not have any money to work with because that gave it time to define and change the more difficult issues in the master plan.

Mr. Jordan stated the community population would always be a top consideration. Facilities should not be built before the community is ready to commit to them.

Council Member Jensen, seconded by Council Member Horiuchi, moved to bring this item back to the Council during the April 9, 2013, Committee of the Whole meeting for approval. The motion passed unanimously. Council Member Bradley was absent for the vote.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

CONSENT AGENDA (3:27:33 PM)

Mayor’s Community Contributions

14

The Council reviewed the recommendation of the Contribution Review Committee for the following community contributions to be appropriated from the Mayor’s 2013 budget:

Make a Wish Foundation $200 (1-$100 golf card/2-$50 Clark Planetarium cards)

Council Member Bradshaw, seconded by Council Member Wilde, moved to forward the recommendation to the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting for formal consideration, and found the County received fair and adequate consideration for the contribution. The motion passed unanimously. Council Member Bradley was absent for the vote.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Gift to Salt Lake County

The Council reviewed the following gift to Salt Lake County. The Declaration of Gift form has been placed on the Council agenda for final approval and execution:

Parks & Recreation Division

Land O’Frost has offered to donate $26,400 to be used in the comprehensive 2013 Land O’Frost Youth Sponsorship Program for the Salt Lake City area. The sponsorship will focus on approximately 550 teams in the Spring/Fall season for teams under the age of 10.

Council Member Bradshaw, seconded by Council Member Wilde, moved to accept the gift and forward the Declaration of Gift form to the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting for formal consideration. The motion passed unanimously. Council Member Bradley was absent for the vote.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Other Business

Approval of Minutes

Council Member Bradshaw, seconded by Council Member Wilde , moved to approve the Committee of the Whole minutes for Tuesday, March 19, 2013. The motion passed unanimously. Council Member Bradley was absent for the vote.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

The meeting was adjourned at 3:27:52 PM.

__________________________________Chair, Committee of the Whole

15

___________________________________Deputy Clerk

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

16