Salt Lake County CouncilCommittee of the Whole

~Minutes~Tuesday, May 21, 2013

11:05:57 AM

Committee Members Present: Randy Horiuchi

Richard SnelgroveJim BradleyArlyn BradshawMichael JensenSam GranatoMax BurdickSteven DeBry, Chair

Excused: David Wilde

Citizen Public Input (11:05:57 AM)

Mr. Steve Van Maren spoke under “Citizen Public Input” regarding the Mutual Commitment Registry Ordinance, which will be introduced at the Council meeting. He requested the Council amend Section 10.80.060, Use of Mutual Commitment Registry, A., to read: “All facilities owned and operated by the County and the services provided by the County shall allow those listed on the Mutual Commitment Registry the same access and use accorded to other County employees and beneficiaries of County employees.”

Council Member Bradshaw asked if that was to make sure the ordinance was not limiting by just referring to facilities.

Mr. Van Maren stated yes.

Council Member Bradshaw stated that is the Council’s ultimate goal.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Use of Animals Services Resources for Areas Outside of Salt Lake County (11:09:20 AM)

During the May, 14, 2013, Committee of the Whole meeting, Council Member DeBry expressed concern that the Animal Services Division had sent staff members to Los Angeles, at which time they brought back 100 dogs. He asked to have Animal Services placed on this week’s Committee of the Whole agenda to explain that action to ensure those costs were justified and benefitted the County and the taxpayers.

Mr. Russ Wall, Director, Public Works Department, stated the mission of the Salt Lake County Animal Services Division is to provide responsive, efficient and high quality animal

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

care and enforcement services that promote a safe and humane community for people and animals. To achieve its mission, the Animal Services Division entered into collaborative partnerships with other municipal animal shelters, nonprofits, and the private sector. One aspect of that collaboration is the Transfer Program. During the recession, Animal Services was not able to adopt all its animals out, so had to euthanize many of them. In 2008, they were invited to participate in the Rescue Waggin program, sponsored by PetSmart Charities. The Rescue Waggin program enables facilities to adopt out their animals to other counties or states, so they do not have to euthanize them. At that time, dogs were transported out of the County shelter to Boulder, Colorado for adoption. PetSmart Charities paid for the costs to transport the animals, and in addition, gave the County a stipend for the animals it transferred.

Animal Services is now very successful at placing animals, so no longer has the problem of excess animals. In fact, it has a shortage of animals; therefore, has agreed to take in excess animals from other locations to adopt out. When the County receives animals, PetSmart Charities pays for the transportation costs and gives the County a stipend. In addition, the County gets back the full price of adopting out the animal to be used for other programs, such as the Trap-Neuter-Return program for cats. Another benefit of collaborating with other animal shelters out of state is if there is a catastrophic event, animals will have a place to go.

Council Member Horiuchi stated the idea of being a no-kill facility and collaborating with other jurisdictions to help each other is a win-win.

Council Member Bradshaw stated while the County’s focus should be adopting animals from the County, the people donating to these non-profit causes are interested in saving animals’ lives regardless of where they originate from, so it is significant that the County saves animals’ lives for other communities that might be struggling.

Council Member Snelgrove stated the benefits of this boil down to three things: 1) It does not cost the County any money; 2) it saves lives; and 3) as a side benefit, having a pet blesses people’s lives.

Ms. April Harris, Director, Animal Services Division, stated a fourth benefit is the County actually brings in money off the adoption fees.

Council Member Burdick asked if Animal Services had a say in the type of dogs.

Ms. Harris stated Animal Services selects every dog, and because it has been doing this since 2009, it is good at knowing what animals can be placed and how quickly they can be placed. This year, Animal Services is seeing substantial increases in the number of adoptions and adoption fees for the animals that have been transferred here because it is so good at selecting animals it knows will be in the shelter less than 14 days. Animal Services’ live release rate through April is above 92.7, which puts it above no-kill. Then, its dog live release rate is 95 percent, which is one of the highest in the nation.

2

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦Ordinances

The Council reviewed the following ordinances, which have been placed on the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting for introduction. (Final adoption of the ordinances will be considered at the Tuesday, June 4, 2013, Council meeting.)

Failure to Appear Ordinance (11:22:49 AM)

Council Member DeBry reviewed an ordinance entitled “Failure to Appear” requiring a person who agrees to appear before a court to appear as directed and to enact the penalty for failure to appear.

Lieutenant Manfred Lassig, Unified Police Department (UPD), stated a group of UPD lieutenants devised a plan to encourage individuals with a misdemeanor warrant to take care of their warrant. When an individual with a warrant is pulled over for a traffic violation or approached about their warrant, they are asked to sign a form promising to appear in court within five business days. Taylorsville and Midvale Cities are already doing this, and Taylorsville City is getting about an 80 percent compliance rate. He presented this to the County Justice Courts, but there were some concerns that law enforcement was creating its own law. Therefore, Council Member DeBry suggested the County adopt a “failure to appear” ordinance to ensure that what UPD and the cities are doing is enforceable.

Council Member Horiuchi stated this allows an individual to pay their fine and avoid jail.

Council Member Snelgrove asked what the current penalty was for failure to appear.

Lieutenant Lassig stated when a police officer issues a traffic ticket, but the individual ticketed does not show up at the court to address the ticket, the court issues a warrant for failure to appear. That is an additional charge on top of the traffic ticket. If the individual is pulled over after that, they are taken to jail and their vehicle is towed.

This ordinance basically creates a reminder for an individual to take care of their warrant in lieu of going to jail. This also enables an officer to stay on the road rather than taking the offender to jail. Since the jail is so crowded, these offenders are released without bail in less time than it takes an officer to do the paperwork and leave the jail.

Oftentimes when an individual is confronted about their warrant, they say they forgot about it. Then, because the police officer makes them nervous, they cannot remember which court they were told to go to. This new form will list the courts, with a check box beside each, and the officer will check the applicable box. The form will be done in triplicate, and the offender will be given a copy, so they know which court to go to. Then, one copy of the form will go to the UPD

3

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

and the other copy to the court where the warrant is. All of the courts serviced by the UPD are on board with this.

Council Member Bradshaw stated in the event the County closes its Justice Court, he assumed this would be applicable to whichever court the unincorporated County uses.

Mr. Sim Gill, District Attorney, stated in theory yes. From a management perspective this is a great idea because not everyone needs to be booked. However, he did not want to create the expectation that everybody with a Class B or below violation, should get just a notice to appear. Some individuals may have domestic violence or DUI cases, which the District Attorney’s Office would want the officer to act on due to safety concerns. He suggested excluding certain categories.

Council Member DeBry suggested limiting this to traffic offenses because the vast majority of warrants are issued to traffic offenders.

Mr. Gill stated the Council could make this applicable to traffic offenses, excluding DUIs. Then, the Council may want to expand to other offenses, such as property or non-person crimes.

Council Member DeBry asked if this should apply to Class A traffic offenses too, such as reckless driving.

Mr. Gill stated those are handled in District Court, not Justice Court.

Council Member Burdick asked if this could be done as part of the citation rather than a separate form to eliminate different levels of paperwork.

Mr. Gill stated technically, this is a notice to appear and a citation, which would come into play if the person failed to appear.

Mr. Ralph Chamness, Deputy District Attorney, stated the person with the warrant would have to agree in writing to appear before the court. The language upfront would state that if they do not appear before the court, the court will add another non-DUI traffic offense to their record.

Council Member Burdick, seconded by Council Member Horiuchi, moved to approve the changes suggested by the District Attorney’s Office, and allow the District Attorney’s Office to make additional minor changes where necessary to clean up the language, and forward it to the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting for introduction. The motion passed unanimously. Council Member Jensen was absent for the vote.

−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−−

Mutual Commitment Registry Ordinance (1:53:02 PM)

4

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

This ordinance establishes a Mutual Commitment Registry for Salt Lake County.

Council Member Bradshaw stated the latest edition of this ordinance includes suggestions made during Citizen Public Input. The concept of the registry originated with Salt Lake City in 2008. The County Clerk has also received requests for this service from citizens who do not live in Salt Lake City. The ordinance would make a Mutual Commitment Registry available to any two residents of the County that wanted to enter into such an agreement. This is important to support the community’s family-centered culture by recognizing the different types of relationships outside the State’s legal definition of marriage. It will also help businesses who provide benefits to domestic partners by providing documentation of a committed relationship. The requirements set forth in the ordinance are a higher threshold than obtaining a marriage license. Individuals would have to declare they are in a committed relationship, show two to four different financial dependency documents, and prove they share a primary residence within Salt Lake County in order to access the registry.

Council Member Horiuchi stated this ordinance is important because it gives recognition to non-traditional couples and provides an extra measure of security.

Council Member DeBry asked if the law passed by the State Legislature that allows for this registry makes it optional. It does not mean the City or County is a proponent of it.

Council Member Bradshaw stated that is exactly what the Legislature put in statute in 2008.

Council Member DeBry asked if everything done in this registry could be done under a contract for the same individuals.

Council Member Bradshaw stated yes, but it would be more complicated and expensive. This is providing an additional service to County residents who would like the government recognition of their relationship. It would also be an alternative method to access the adult designee program for County employee health benefits, or to obtain a family pass at a County recreation center.

Council Member Snelgrove stated he could have entered into such an agreement with his mother when he served as her primary caregiver prior to her passing.

Council Member Bradshaw stated that would also be possible, as long as it was a bilateral relationship.

Council Member Burdick asked about the cost to administer the program and any unintended consequences.

5

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

Council Member Bradshaw stated the ordinance allows for a fee of $40, but it also gives the Clerk discretion to adjust the fee based on the costs incurred to administer the program. The fee would then be approved by the Council during its regular budget process.

Council Member Burdick asked if the relationships could be dissolved by only one party.

Council Member Bradshaw stated one or two people would have to file for a termination with the Clerk’s Office and demonstrate that the termination document has been given to the other declarant.

Council Member Burdick stated this would be for all of Salt Lake County, not just the unincorporated area. He asked if there had been any feedback from the municipalities.

Council Member Bradshaw stated a municipality could enact its own registry if it so chose. However, since marriage licenses reside with the County Clerk, that is the logical place for this function.

Council Member Bradshaw, seconded by Council Member Horiuchi, moved to approve the ordinance, and forward it to the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting for formal introduction. The motion passed unanimously. Council Member DeBry abstained from the vote.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Colorado CustomWare Inc./Tax Administration System (CCI TAS) Update (11:35:53 AM)

Mr. Kevin Jacobs, Chief Deputy Assessor, gave an update on the County’s new property tax collection system with Colorado CustomWare Inc. (CCI). CCI has failed to meet milestones and keep the project on track; there have been several problems and delays. As a result, 17 months ago, the County insisted on a new project manager. Since then, deliveries have improved. He expects the new “go live” date will be May or June 2014 (pushed back from May 2013 and before that June 2011). As a result of the delays, the County has opted not to pay CCI in full. It made two payments to CCI last year for deliverables that were verified and proven as working. CCI recently informed the County it is in a very difficult financial situation because it has had similar problems on other big projects with other organizations, and those organizations have also opted not to pay CCI until it met their criteria. As a result, CCI’s cash flow has suffered.

The Assessor’s Office, District Attorney’s Office, and Mayor’s Office agree it would be in the County’s best interest to restructure the milestones with CCI, making them smaller and more attainable, and reducing the size of the payments to CCI. That way, the County can keep the project moving forward to try to protect its investment while helping CCI with its cash flow situation. The County has instructed its consultant on the project to devise a new project plan, and tie the remaining payments to that project plan.

6

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

Council Member DeBry asked if Mr. Jacobs anticipated spending the full $4.6 million allocated to this project, of which about $3.4 million has been spent.

Mr. Jacobs stated he did expect to spend the remaining $1.2 million.

Mr. Lonn Litchfield, Chief Deputy Auditor, stated CCI is having a hard time implementing this project, and the Auditor’s Office does not think it has the economic ability to complete the project.

Council Member Bradley asked if the County should go out for a new vendor.

Mr. Litchfield stated the County may need a new vendor, or it may be able complete this in house. No one has an iron clad solution. However, the Auditor’s Office wants to do everything possible to try to make it work. This is an important project.

Council Member Bradley stated it sounded like CCI needs to take drastic remedial action to strengthen its company. He asked if the County was confident CCI could deliver the County’s product without going bankrupt.

Mr. Jacobs stated there is no guarantee CCI can deliver, but it has taken some reasonable steps to try and do so. It has scaled back its workforce by 9 employees, and of the 26 remaining employees, 15 are dedicated to the County. CCI has also put other projects on hold to focus on the County, and has relocated to a smaller building. He did not know what more it could do.

Council Member Burdick asked if the employees let go were working on the County’s project. He hoped CCI had not reduced its staff hoping to do more with less.

Mr. Randy Wightman, Chief Deputy Treasurer, stated the staff CCI retained is the staff working on the County’s project.

Council Member Snelgrove asked if the County’s payables are due after the work is performed.

Mr. Jacobs stated yes. CCI has to deliver; then the County pays for the deliverables once it accepts them.

Council Member Bradley stated it did not seem risky for the County to continue with this project provided the quality of the project is not the issue, and the County continues to pay as it goes while moving forward cautiously with new benchmarks. Also, this remedial action may solve CCI’s financial stress.

Council Member Bradley, seconded by Council Member Horiuchi, moved to accept the Assessor’s recommendation to move forward with the project, restructuring

7

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

the milestones making them smaller and more attainable, and reducing the size of the payments to CCI; and to keep the Council informed if there are any problems or it is not working out.

Council Member Burdick asked if Mr. Litchfield was in agreement with this.

Mr. Litchfield stated he did not think CCI was currently in a breach context, but it has done almost nothing to implement the Auditor’s portion. The Auditor’s Office will be meeting with CCI Thursday to discuss what it needs and to see how CCI is going to put that together.

Mr. Randy Wightman, Chief Deputy Treasurer, stated since the Auditor’s portion of the new tax system is a much smaller piece than the Assessor’s or the Treasurer’s portions, he suspected CCI put it on the back burner to bite off the bigger sections.

Council Member Bradley, seconded by Council Member Horiuchi, moved to accept the Assessor’s recommendation to move forward with the project, restructuring the milestones making them smaller and more attainable, and reducing the size of the payments to CCI; and to keep the Council informed if there are any problems or it is not working out. The motion passed unanimously. Council Member Jensen was absent for the vote.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Anticipated Federal Sequestration Impacts (1:41:10 PM)

Ms. Lori Bays, Director, Human Services Department, delivered a PowerPoint presentation regarding possible outcomes of the Federal budget cuts known as sequestration. She explained an overview of sequestration, reviewed the Human Services budget and possible cuts to the Behavioral Health Services Division and the Salt Lake County Health Department, budget impacts in perspective, and strategies for dealing with the cuts.

Council Member Horiuchi asked if it was possible to ask the State Legislature for some help to reverse this situation.

Ms. Bays stated when more details about the cuts are known, the County will be able to focus on more ways to mitigate this.

Council Member Bradley stated these cuts in Behavioral Health Services are going in the opposite direction of what the County is trying to do in criminal justice services. It is especially concerning that things such as cancer screening and immunizations are being cut.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

GRAMA Appeal of Melissa Kennedy (2:35:00 PM)

8

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

On January 22, 2013, Melissa Kennedy submitted a Government Records Access Management Act (GRAMA) request of the Salt Lake County District Attorney’s Office for documents relating to the November 2, 2012, shooting of Danielle Willard by West Valley City Police Officers. The District Attorney rejected Ms. Kennedy’s GRAMA request on the basis that the records were privileged and/or protected by attorney work product doctrine. On February 20, 2013, counsel for Ms. Kennedy formally appealed the GRAMA denial. The Council heard arguments for the appeal at the May 14, 2013, Committee of the Whole meeting, and continued the discussion until today.

Council Member Horiuchi asked for clarification about whether releasing the requested documents would be in violation of State statute.

Mr. Sim Gill, District Attorney, stated if a municipality classifies certain records as protected; it is not within the District Attorney’s authority to release them.

Council Member Granato stated the Council wants transparency in government, but also wants to protect the integrity of the District Attorney’s Office in an ongoing case.

Council Member Granato, seconded by Council Member Burdick, moved to deny the GRAMA appeal.

Council Member Bradley stated the Council received a letter from Adam Miller, Deputy District Attorney, dated May 16, 2013. Mr. Miller noted the following points:

1. The statute of limitations for filing a State action is more than two years.

2. Records generated by the West Valley City Police Department are classified as “Protected” and the County must honor that classification.

3. The District Attorney’s investigation into the November 2, 2012, shooting of Danielle Willard is still ongoing.

4. The proposed protective order is problematic. The County Council does not have authority to issue protective orders against private citizens.

Mr. Gill stated right now, this is an ongoing investigation. Last wee,k the possibility of filing suit as a placeholder was discussed. That could be done because counsel may not get access to records until the investigation is completed. He was sympathetic to Ms. Kennedy’s request, but there was still a responsibility within the ongoing criminal investigation.

Mr. Jon Williams, Counsel for Appellant, stated the statute of limitations is a difficult area of the law. The 1983 cause of action does not have a statute of limitations to it;

9

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

one must go to State law to make that determination as to the length of time there is to file a claim. Second, the classification as protected or private is a difficult global argument. Utah Code authorizes this body to release private and protected records and to limit that disclosure. The notion that the Council’s enforcement ability does not exceed beyond Salt Lake County misses the point. Any attorney who violated a protective order would be subject to discipline by the bar, up to and including disbarment. Lastly, he has absolute respect for this ongoing investigation. Melissa Kennedy wants a thorough investigation more than anybody else involved in this case.

What has been requested does not jeopardize any further investigation. The District Attorney has indicated that the basic facts of November 2, 2012, will not change over time. Even if such information as photographs and toxicology reports on detectives were released, it would not change the facts or jeopardize an ongoing investigation.

Mr. Adam Miller, Deputy District Attorney, stated in considering the release of these documents, the overriding concern was for the ongoing investigations by multiple entities. Any type of protective order would not protect the investigation. The information is that sensitive, that important, and the investigation is that important to where there would be severe ramifications. Because of the immense danger that exists, the District Attorney’s Office decided to deny the request and he asked the Council to reaffirm that denial.

Council Member Jensen asked if the timeline for filing a lawsuit could be extended 10 or 20 years since there is no real statute of limitations.

Mr. Williams stated the Federal statute does not have a statute of limitations. State statutes do have such limitations. Currently, Ms. Kennedy has waited over six months for any information about her daughter’s shooting. She is only asking for a finite amount of material.

Council Member Jensen stated he was sensitive to the appellant’s case and wanted as much light shown on this case as quickly as possible. However, he would err on the side of ensuring the possibility of criminal prosecution.

Council Member Burdick stated he was a big fan of trying to protect attorney work product, especially for ongoing investigations. The Council needs to protect all entities without compromising any investigations.

Council Member Snelgrove asked how the Willard civil case would be harmed by waiting for the requested material.

Mr. Williams stated he ceded that point. As Ms. Kennedy’s attorneys, they want to do a proper, thorough investigation. Right now, there is very little to go on. That hinders the case. On the other hand there is the issue of a mother who has waited six and a half months for answers. He understands the District Attorney’s investigation trumps a lot. When the Council

10

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

looks at competing interests, as GRAMA allows the Council to do, the Council has the discretion to weigh those interests.

Council Member Bradley stated counsel has talked about toxicology reports and photographs. He asked if that was part of the list of information.

Mr. Williams stated he wanted things that are factual and could not change. Work product doctrine really protects the impressions that an attorney might form as they look through records and interpret witness statements and interviews. Photographs and toxicology reports were just the easiest materials to ask for.

Council Member Bradley asked if West Valley City had formally been asked for the same documents.

Mr. Williams stated no. That is the same agency that withheld any information whatsoever for more than five months until the case was sent to the District Attorney.

Council Member DeBry stated this dialogue probably resonates with him because he is a police chief, and he understands the issues that go with this type of a situation. He feels for both sides in this issue, but he would look to proceed with caution. The Council should never compromise an ongoing criminal investigation. Also, West Valley City gave its records to the County, and if the Council were to release those records, it would hurt the County’s credibility. Ms. Kennedy does have an appeal process beyond this Council.

Council Member Bradley stated he thought a reasonable case was made that certain records could be released without jeopardizing the case. He appreciated the comments about seeking justice, but he felt the Council could not continually throw to the side the issue of freedom of information. He cannot absolutely say releasing the materials will not jeopardize the case. However, freedom of information is important. Counsel has made a fairly convincing case for the information they are seeking, and it is information that would be gathered incidentally to the investigation.

Council Member Burdick stated he did not think the Council always denied these appeals. There are times when compromises are made.

Council Member Granato, seconded by Council Member Burdick, moved to deny the GRAMA appeal and request Council’s Legal Counsel to finalize the Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law. The motion passed 7 to 1 with Council Member Bradley voting in opposition.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

2012 Salt Lake County Volunteer Report (2:13:26 PM)

Ms. Sheryl Ivey, Volunteer Services Director, Mayor’s Office, stated 2012 was a banner year for Volunteer Services. The number of volunteers increased over 2011. However,

11

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

volunteer hours were down due to the discontinuation or cuts in four different programs. There is also an effort being made to more accurately count the number of volunteer hours. Salt Lake County is the nation’s leader in volunteer services.

Council Member DeBry asked what that was attributable to.

Ms. Ivey stated it is probably because of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saint’s emphasis on service, which has expanded to all areas of the population.

Council Member Bradley stated the County also provides an excellent program that gives people the opportunity to volunteer.

Ms. Ivey stated that was true. Salt Lake County is known for its sheer volume of volunteer programs and community outreach.

Council Member Snelgrove asked if there was a problem filling some board positions.

Ms. Ivey stated smaller boards are sometimes hard to fill. However, people line up to serve on the high profile boards.

Mayor Ben McAdams stated on a side note, Ms. Ivey will be receiving a national award this year as “Outstanding Volunteer Coordinator.”

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

2013 Capital Project Progress Update (2:06:37 PM)

Mr. Wayne Marion, Director, Facilities Services Division, presented an update on the 2013 capital projects, per the Council’s request for quarterly reports. He reviewed project descriptions, approved funding, spending, and percentage of completion.

Council Member Horiuchi asked if it was still possible to move a curb and gutter project from one location to another.

Mr. Marion stated that would have to be done as a budget adjustment.

Council Member DeBry asked about the request to reupholster the seats in the Council Chambers.

Mr. Marion stated there will be an adjustment in the June budget to upgrade seats and several other items in the Council Chambers.

Council Member Horiuchi asked about the escalator project in the Salt Palace.

12

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

Mr. Marion stated it is scheduled to start late in the year due to the convention calendar.

Council Member DeBry stated Council Members could review the project lists and call Mr. Marion if they had questions.

Mr. Marion stated the Council had also requested that building assessments be done by County staff. His division has the expertise to do those assessments on all 162 County buildings. An RFP was planned to handle the indexing of the assessments. However, by tweaking the current software, the Facilities Services Division can now handle the assessments and the indexing, thereby save money.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Review of Proposed Hires (2:21:33 PM)

The Council reviewed the following requests for hires, which have been placed on the Council agenda for formal consideration:

Aging Services Division

Requests permission to fill a Secretary 17 position and a Nutrition/Transportation Supervisor 22 position. These positions are grant funded.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Assessor’s Office

Requests permission to fill a Personal Property Audit Manager position, a Personal Property Auditor position, and a Data Systems Administrator position.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Criminal Justice Services Division

Requests permission to fill a Screening Services Supervisor 27 position.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Administrative Services Department

Requests permission to fill an Employee Benefits Administrator position within the ESR Reserve Fund.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

13

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

Salt Lake County Health Department

Requests permission to fill an Office Specialist 15 position, Lead Office Specialist 16 position, and Public Health Nutritionist 23/25 position. Council Member Jensen, seconded by Council Member Burdick, moved to approve the requests and forward them to the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting for formal consideration. The motion passed unanimously.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

CONSENT AGENDA: 2:22:30 PM

Constable

Mr. Brian Maxwell, Council Aide, submitted a letter requesting approval of the appointment of Andrew Paul Bone as a deputy constable under Constable Robert Reitz.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Mr. Brian Maxwell, Council Aide, submitted a letter requesting approval of the transfer of Jack Howell from Davis County Constable Mark Sessions to serve as a deputy constable under Constable Silvan Warnick.

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

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Resolution

The Council reviewed the following resolution and agreements. The resolution authorizing execution of the agreements has been placed on the Council agenda for final approval and execution:

Resolution and Interlocal Agreements

Agreements between Salt Lake County for its Clerk’s Office and the following improvement districts to conduct 2013 Service District Elections:

Cottonwood Improvement DistrictGranger-Hunter Improvement DistrictKearns Improvement District

14

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

Kearns Oquirrh Parks & RecreationMagna Water DistrictMidvalley Improvement DistrictMount Olympus Improvement DistrictSouth Valley Sewer DistrictWhite City Water Improvement District

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

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Gifts to Salt Lake County

The Council reviewed the following gifts to Salt Lake County. The Declaration of Gift forms have been placed on the Council agenda for final approval and execution:

Salt Lake County Health Department

Safe Kids Worldwide has offered to donate $1,500 to be used towards the 2013 Sports Safety Clinic.

− − − − − − − − − − − − − −

Sheriff’s Office

The Salt Lake Honorary Colonels has offered to donate $18,500 to be used for events and expenses for the employees of the Sheriff’s Office, and for a banquet honoring those working in the field of law enforcement and citizens who provided meritorious service beyond the call of duty.

Council Member Jensen, seconded by Council Member Bradley, moved to accept the gifts and forward the Declaration of Gift forms to the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting for formal consideration. The motion passed unanimously.

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

Business License Penalties

The Council reviewed the following recommendations from the Administrative Hearing Officer for business license appeals. These recommendations will be formally considered at the 4:00 p.m. Council meeting:

15

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

Recommended to rescind 100 percent ($130) of the penalty charged for late payment:

Holly Taylor

Recommended denial of the appeal:

Keith Kekel Yard CareRed Rock Massage TherapyBlindvisionEda Land PlanningMiyong Kim Ceramics

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

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

The meeting was adjourned at 3:04:11 PM.

_____________________________________ Chair, Committee of the Whole

_____________________________________ Deputy Clerk

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦ ♦♦♦

16

Committee of the WholeTuesday, May 21, 2013

17