[0:38] Thank you for being here this evening. We'd like to go ahead and call the City Council regular meeting to order. This time, we're going to have the Reverend Arnold Jackson from Mount Mariah Community Church offer our invocation. After which Councilmember Kimbo will lead us in the pledge of allegiance. If you'd all please stand.

[0:59] Oh God, our creator and assistantator. We come to you on this city council meeting this evening asking that your presence be among us.

[1:09] We pray that each item on the agenda would be worked according to your will, and according to your way.

[1:17] We ask that the individuals that have to make presentations this evening would be guided and be led by you.

[1:25] Be in this meeting, especially since it's the first official formal meeting since the elections.

[1:31] and we pray that each individual would be guided and would be led by you, bless us in

[1:40] during this holiday season of Christmas, of Quanza that is coming up in Hanukkah and

[1:47] all these things we ask in the name of the Father, the name of the Son, my Lord, and Savior

[1:54] Jesus Christ, and the Holy Spirit, and we all said amen.

[2:02] Congratulations to the United States of America, to the Republic for which it stands one nation in the visible liberty and justice for all.

[2:17] Thank you.

[2:18] Thank you.

[2:25] Great.

[2:26] Thank you very much.

[2:26] That'll take us to the roll, please.

[2:30] Council member Kimball.

[2:31] Council member Manfredi.

[2:33] Council member Smith.

[2:35] Council member Wade.

[2:36] Vice Mayor Brown.

[2:37] Mayor Price.

[2:38] Here.

[2:38] Mr. Mayor.

[2:39] We have a quorum.

[2:40] Thank you.

[2:42] We do have a proclamation.

[2:44] Excuse me.

[2:44] It's not a proclamation.

[2:45] It's an award to present tonight.

[2:47] The Far Department has been very, very patient with me as we have been exceptionally busy

[2:51] since let's say August when they were awarded this award.

[2:54] But we did want to get around to it and we wanted to definitely say thank you.

[2:59] They've done a great job.

[3:01] I'm going to invite Assistant Chief Bobby Miller up as well as anyone else from the Far Department

[3:07] who would like to receive this, this is for the Premier level agency known as the Premier

[3:12] EMS agency program.

[3:14] And Bobby, would you tell us a little bit about what this award is?

[3:17] Yeah, I'm here.

[3:18] Now some members.

[3:19] My name is Bobby Miller.

[3:20] I'm the assistant chief of operations and this is a really exciting thing for us because we

[3:27] get to celebrate some of the work that some of the behind the scenes people do specifically

[3:32] Cindy Innski, who years ago started a records management system, image trends so we could track

[3:40] a better track of our, I'm trying not to use acronyms so EMS emergency medical services

[3:46] through image trend and working with DHS, Arizona Department of Health Services, we were awarded

[3:53] because of the work of Cindy Innski, a premier EMS provider and that means for the citizens of

[4:00] copa that you can be assured that through the fire department that you get top-notch medical treatment

[4:06] in our response areas that we have an oversight area that we participate in record keeping

[4:13] and that we are on track with national trends in EMS emergency services. I'm very excited because

[4:20] Cindy really appreciates the limelight. She many times will be found, look at me, look at me,

[4:29] It's really torture for her, which we find huge delight in, so Cindy, if you would come up and we can give you your award.

[5:00] Congratulations for a far department, especially to Cindy and Skip, and all those who work so hard on that. We really appreciate it. It's a lot of work.

[5:10] That takes us at this time to the report from the mayor. As many of you heard before from previous council members, had the opportunity as well to participate in the, as the MC for the Maricopa Shark Tank, which was hosted by MCU, which is the Maricopa Center for Entrepreneurship.

[5:27] Now, there's a wonderful experience in which we got to hear from a variety of different

[5:30] of our youth on how to create a business.

[5:34] And there were some really interesting ideas, and so I hope we get to see more of that in

[5:37] the future.

[5:38] I think it was something very surprising, because I didn't, I don't know, I didn't know

[5:43] what to expect, but in the end, I was absolutely flabbergasted.

[5:46] And so, you know, the purpose of a Center for Entrepreneurship is to come up with new ideas

[5:50] and basically grow something homegrown into something large, and so I hope that we'll see

[5:55] many great things coming from folks that are willing to do that in the future.

[5:58] Also, we had the opportunity for the four-hour city shop at the COP program.

[6:02] I had the opportunity to go to Walmart with many children this year.

[6:07] I think it was 32, 36 children that really needed some help and the four-hour city.

[6:14] Group helps to raise donations and access the third part of the AISON to the MPD or

[6:20] of police department, they were there at Walmart and at McDonald's that morning and were able

[6:25] to do much shopping for their families and it truly was a magnificent event.

[6:30] Fire also had their toys for a ride as you heard before was able to participate in that.

[6:34] I'm not sure if my children or me were more excited about riding in the fire truck.

[6:39] So that was always interesting.

[6:41] And I did see lots of other adults that were probably more excited than their children.

[6:45] And so they were more than happy to purchase a toy and bring it.

[6:47] So they got to go for a ride in the fire truck.

[6:49] And I know that all they really wanted to do was play with the lights and sirens with they which they also got to do so that was a good thing as well

[6:56] We also had the I had the opportunity to attend the A dot meeting in Tucson

[7:02] I wanted to announce that former mayor of Maricopa, Kelly Anderson is now the official chair of the state transportation board

[7:11] That's really impressive

[7:18] That's that's a really impressive thing. I also got to sit next to supervisor Smith

[7:21] So, I had put a post on Facebook saying that between myself, Mayor Anderson and former Mayor Smith.

[7:28] Now, Supervisors Smith, I think we had this transportation thing covered, so we're closing in on them, they can't get away from us.

[7:36] At the same time, we also wanted to let you all know that we are always looking for volunteers for boards, committees and commissions.

[7:43] The city clerk and along with our graphic designers and Ruben put together this fancy little brochure, maybe you saw it in the audience, maybe you didn't.

[7:51] But it talks about what is a border committee or commission here at the city of Maricopa, what they do, what their responsibilities are.

[7:57] I think so often people ask me, how do I get involved when I say, you know, please get involved in a border commission.

[8:02] They think, oh, I'm going to have to be there every day in every night, and that's just not the case.

[8:07] However, you are an invaluable member of our team, and we can't do this job without you.

[8:12] So I would encourage you to pick up this little pamphlet or brochure, take a look at it, learn how you can be of use to the city

[8:18] into your community and give back a little bit, we really do truly take your recommendations

[8:22] and we can't do it without you.

[8:24] That being said, at this time we have a commission that is open called the non-profit funding

[8:29] committee.

[8:30] And this is the committee that will vet all the non-profits who wish to participate in

[8:35] the upcoming budget discussions for the city of Maricopa.

[8:38] This is an opportunity in which the city takes 1% of its budget and gives it back to the

[8:42] community.

[8:43] Sometimes in past years we haven't given it all just based on budgetary restrictions but we

[8:47] do look to help those nonprofits that are perhaps struggling or wanting to succeed or start up.

[8:54] And so we really do want to help out in any way we shape perform we can.

[8:57] And so this committee is the one that will look through these and scrutinize them and make

[9:02] recommendations to council.

[9:04] So if you are interested in doing that, we would really prefer that you contact the city clerk

[9:09] of Vanessa Boros here, put in your application and we really are on a time crunch here.

[9:14] So if you can do that here before, really the end of December, and especially as things get

[9:19] busy and before you forget, we'd really enjoy that.

[9:22] So please participate in that fashion.

[9:24] And then last but not least, I wanted to say that tonight is unfortunately our last

[9:29] night for Micah Miranda to be our economic development director.

[9:33] And so we wanted to have him stand.

[9:37] Micah?

[9:38] Whenever I can embarrass staff, I do it.

[9:47] Mike has accepted a position at the City of Chandler.

[9:50] I've told him he is not allowed to give away all of our trade secrets.

[9:53] And so anyways, we are very excited for him.

[9:56] It will be a wonderful opportunity.

[9:58] We are deeply...

[10:00] Deeply appreciative for everything that you have done for us in the past two and a half years, two years.

[10:07] And, you know, one of the things you guys don't understand is that economic development works behind the scenes as kind of the quarterback in making sure that development services and all these different agencies police and fire work together to create the potential for a new business to even arrive here.

[10:23] And so it's a tedious, tedious job.

[10:26] It's pretty much 24-7, and Mike has done a stellar job for us.

[10:30] So again, thank you, Mike.

[10:37] And that concludes my report.

[10:39] Thank you.

[10:39] We'll turn it time over to City Manager Rose for his report.

[10:43] I'd like to echo the mayor's comments regarding

[10:46] Mike's outstanding performance.

[10:48] He will certainly be missed, not just as a member of the executive team,

[10:53] but certainly as a valuable contributor to the community.

[10:56] I think that he has a clear vision and real leadership skills and so, you know, it's certainly our loss, but I begrudgingly wish it well.

[11:08] It is viewed to your endeavors.

[11:10] It's certainly a wish that he were going to continue here with us in Miracopin.

[11:14] I'm sure I speak for the rest of the executive team as well.

[11:20] But the distance I would have to report you on it.

[11:23] Appreciate it.

[11:24] That takes us to the call to the public.

[11:25] So at this time I do have a speaker card first for the call to the public and so we'll go to that speaker card first after which all are welcome to approach the podium.

[11:33] We ask that you keep your comments to three minutes or under.

[11:36] We have a timer there for your convenience as well as that this is a time in which you can tell.

[11:42] The city council wants on your mind but we don't typically respond as this is not agendas for a back and forth discussion.

[11:47] However, if we can help you with getting the right contact person with staff or agendas for a future agenda will do so.

[11:55] So at this time, I wanted to offer the opportunity to bury McCann,

[11:59] the McCann or McCain.

[12:02] Barry, are you here?

[12:05] OK.

[12:06] I don't see Barry at the moment.

[12:08] So if he comes back before the end of called the public,

[12:11] we'll welcome him up to the podium.

[12:13] If not, we'll move ahead at this time.

[12:15] If you wish to approach the council, you may do so.

[12:28] Please state your name.

[12:30] Jolly Booth.

[12:33] Good evening, Mr. Mayor and city council members.

[12:35] My name is Jolly Booth.

[12:36] And I'm from the NYRC Sad Club Committee, the Assubs Committee Committee of the newly found

[12:42] BIOS and Youth Coalition.

[12:44] For the past year, we have been promoting our Y21 campaign to let our peers and community

[12:48] know why the legal age is 21.

[12:51] There are several physical development risks, including brain development issues, as well as

[12:56] accidents and issues with school achievement.

[12:59] This year, we want to focus on a more positive approach.

[13:01] We want to highlight the youth who do not use drugs or alcohol because they far outweigh the ones who do.

[13:08] We have collected pictures of local youth sharing their favorite substance free activities,

[13:12] and created this above influenced posters, celebrating the youth who do not use drugs and alcohol.

[13:17] Tonight we have brought you a copy of the poster and we hope that you will consider a place you can display it with pride.

[13:24] Thank you for the city of Maricopa's continued support of our youth.

[13:27] Thank you very much.

[13:34] Please state your name.

[13:35] My name is Keona.

[13:38] And hi, Mr.

[13:42] Hi, Mr. Mayor and city council members.

[13:45] I'm pleased to tell you that according to the 2014 Arizona Youth Survey,

[13:50] a escalator reported that in the last 30 days,

[13:53] 76.8% do not use alcohol,

[13:56] Well, 88 of eighth graders did not use cigarettes, and 88.2% did not use marijuana.

[14:11] Good evening, Mr. Marin City Council members. I am William Roe. I am pleased to

[14:16] tell you that according to the 2014 Arizona Youth Survey, 10th graders reported that in the

[14:21] last 30 days, the 71.3% of students did not use alcohol, 87.5% did not use cigarettes, and

[14:31] 34.4% did not use marijuana.

[14:38] Good evening, Mr. Mayor, and City Council members.

[14:42] My name is Joseph Montauvo, and I am pleased to tell you that, but according to the 2014

[14:48] era of Son of Youth, surveyed high school seniors reported that in the last 30 days, 69.1%

[14:56] did not use alcohol, 84.5% did not use cigarettes.

[15:00] And 75.6% do not use marijuana.

[15:10] Good evening, Mr. Mayor and City Council members. My name is Genevieve Bernal. We would like to invite you and members of the community to our first general meeting of the Biosam Youth Coalition at the Maricopa Youth Recreation Center at Maricopa Elementary School on January 15 from 6 to 7 p.m. We are looking for sector reps and members who can help us increase the number of youth

[15:36] not using substances and assist them in meeting their full potential.

[15:44] Thank you for your time and we hope to see you there.

[15:47] And what was the date again, the date in the time?

[15:51] January 15th from 6 to 7.

[15:53] Thank you very much.

[16:00] And that was at Maricopa Elementary School, correct?

[16:03] Okay. Great. Thank you very much.

[16:06] Anyone else at this time wish to you a person council?

[16:15] Good evening, Mayor and Council and Mayor Copa Community.

[16:20] I would like to invite you to a special event this Saturday

[16:23] at the Recycling Association of Miracopa at 46250 West McDavid

[16:29] Road.

[16:30] My name is Gina Diabella and I operate the Recycling Association

[16:34] of Miracopa there.

[16:36] We are sponsoring a holiday eco gift boutique.

[16:41] You may have wondered, what happens to all that recycling that comes into our facility?

[16:47] Well, sometimes we have very creative and ambitious artists that take advantage of all the resources we have

[16:54] and make beautiful creations from your recycled bottles and cans, metal, and other items that come into our facility.

[17:04] So that you can see these beautiful creations please stop by from 9am to 4pm

[17:09] And maybe you'll get some ideas for our art recycling contest for April 2015, thank you.

[17:17] Thank you, Gina.

[17:24] Anyone else?

[17:26] Seeing no one, we'll go ahead and close to the call to the public.

[17:31] And move on to the minutes.

[17:33] That takes us to item 7, 7.17.2.

[17:36] Can I have a motion to approve the minutes, please?

[17:39] Have a motion, is there a second?

[17:41] Yes.

[17:42] I'm December 1st, so do I recuse myself?

[17:47] Legal, I don't think that you have to, but it's up to Dennis.

[17:58] So it's your choice.

[18:09] At this time, we have a motion and a second correct, I believe,

[18:12] Council Member Van Freddy, is there any further discussion on the item?

[18:16] Seeing none, all in favor say aye, aye, any opposed?

[18:20] Motion carries.

[18:21] Thank you.

[18:25] That takes us to item eight.

[18:26] There are no public hearings at this time.

[18:27] And then on to the consent agenda, an items that are found on a number of nine here, nine

[18:33] one through nine, six.

[18:37] So you have a motion to approve consent, please.

[18:40] Have a motion, a second, is there any further discussion on the consent?

[18:43] seeing none on favor say aye.

[18:46] Any opposed?

[18:47] Motion carries.

[18:49] Thank you.

[18:50] And that takes us to the regular agenda.

[18:53] Item's 10.1 through 10.10.

[18:56] At this time, we'll go ahead and start with item 10.1, which is the mayor and council

[19:01] to discuss the cost of take action on making appointments to the mayor couple of youth council.

[19:05] This is for discussion and action.

[19:07] And I'll turn it over to Rocky first after which I have a few comments.

[19:13] It's one of my favorite nights of the year, it's time for our annual Youth Council

[19:16] appointments for 2014-2015.

[19:20] It's hard to believe that this is actually our fifth year doing the Maricopa Youth Council,

[19:24] and we keep getting wonderful kids applying each year.

[19:27] I was just wanted to share with you historically how we got to tonight, so you can know

[19:30] where we're at.

[19:33] On August 5th, the Maricopa City Council voted to amend the Youth Council Guide, one of the

[19:38] The major permit amendments we made is that now the selection process is comprised of each member of the

[19:45] American Council appointing two team representatives to serve on the board.

[19:51] Now, I can say that I need to officially pass the torch.

[19:54] I have Heather Lizano.

[19:55] She's our new youth programs coordinator.

[19:58] We're electing to be passing it along.

[19:59] I hold the youth.

[20:00] Councilor Nure and Dear My Heart, but we've definitely hired someone to take this group and

[20:04] build it and do more wonderful things and build on the current success. So I'm going to

[20:09] turn over to her to let you guys know we're at today.

[20:13] Good evening, Mayor and council members. So in November we had 14 applicants join us for an introductory

[20:20] meeting and at that event. We had, we couldn't leave without having a project in mind.

[20:29] So

[20:29] people with one night of planning and very

[20:32] litule advertising.

[20:34] We've already participated in a shop at the

[20:36] co-op last Saturday.

[20:37] We've judged holiday homes, and we're

[20:39] helping with the four Mayor Copacart

[20:41] Christmas Cardinal this Saturday.

[20:42] Before they were even appointed.

[20:44] So we have 14 applicants excited to make an

[20:47] impact in the community this year, and

[20:50] each of them bring a unique insight

[20:54] with them to the Youth Council.

[21:04] At this time, I wanted to do a couple of things here.

[21:08] If it's okay with Council, as there are 14 and two appointments per,

[21:14] if Council would accept the idea to move the slate,

[21:18] which would make it a little easier rather than us trying to each pick two.

[21:22] So that being said, prior to a motion,

[21:26] I did want to offer the opportunity for each applicant to please stand up and be recognized.

[21:30] And if you would remain standing until all of them have been called, I wanted to go ahead and read each person's name.

[21:36] So I wanted to start here with, oh sorry, let me rephrase that. I'll start one at a time.

[21:43] Caitlin Barnes, Caitlin, you hear? Excellent.

[21:49] Eden Castellanos,

[21:56] Samantha Corralis,

[22:01] Katanya Gijowski, if I butcher that I apologize,

[22:05] sorry,

[22:08] Courtney Finger,

[22:12] Evan Grace,

[22:17] Bianca Guzman,

[22:21] Alexandria Harris,

[22:26] Alyssa

[22:27] Holingsworth,

[22:31] Natalia James,

[22:35] Alexis Luzano,

[22:40] Austin Pierce,

[22:45] Hi, Lani Pinion

[22:49] and Fiona Chepones and

[22:55] with that that makes up our current youth council.

[22:57] Can I have a motion to approve please?

[23:01] A motion on a second is any further discussion on the item?

[23:04] Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

[23:06] Motion carries.

[23:06] Congratulations.

[23:13] Yes, and we also wanted to do a picture with the council as well as the new youth council.

[23:16] So if you'd all join me down there please.

[24:56] Thank you.

[24:57] That takes us to item 10.2.

[24:59] Merry Council.

[25:00] Should we discuss the consequences? We take action to approve subdivision case numbers SUV 14-022. A request for

[25:06] a reply to existing dignity, medical campus flat. This is for discussion and action.

[25:13] Good evening, Mayor Council. We'll call you for the new council members. My name is Rudy Lopez, senior

[25:18] planner for the planned division here. Mayor and council members, I stated this is a request to

[25:23] and existing property in the city.

[25:26] It's actually where the America of Stations being built.

[25:28] To divide that into two different properties.

[25:31] The process of requirements or the application has met all this

[25:34] to the standards in terms of the vision plating.

[25:36] With that staff recommends that state and staff report to consider

[25:39] the application for approval.

[25:41] If there's any questions, staff will be happy to answer those.

[25:50] I would accept the motion to approve this.

[25:53] have a motion for the discussion on the action. Seeing none on favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.

[26:03] Thank you very much, Rudy. Item 10. Three. We're going to discuss some hospitality action on request by the purchasing manager approve expenditures exceeding 25,000.

[26:11] And produce the approved limits for fiscal year 2015 pursuit pursuant to the city purchasing code.

[26:16] Right, evening mayor members of Council.

[26:20] The item in for your consideration discussion in action today is to allow the city to purchase

[26:29] an aggregate over $25,000 for throughout the fiscal year.

[26:36] The purchasing code requires that if any expenditures in aggregate over 25,000 with any one

[26:42] we get Council's approval to be able to do that with the two items here.

[26:48] You'll see throughout the fiscal year there will be some vendors that we do bring to Council's

[26:56] in front of Council for approval.

[26:58] We do anticipate.

[26:59] We try to anticipate the best we can on purchases of repairs and maintenance,

[27:04] some tires and machinery equipment, the best we can.

[27:06] Sometimes things happen, and the expenditures need to go over the aggregate for a certain vendor,

[27:13] and so we will come back to Council throughout the fiscal year to be able to ask for an increase

[27:19] and be able to keep the operations for fleet or for any of the departments going.

[27:25] For instance, here for VIP auto, tire services fleet uses them a lot for tire services and non-warren

[27:32] services for our vehicles, and then also with the Arizona machinery company parks, maintenance

[27:41] and fleet and police, and use them a lot for different parts and purchases, and as we've

[27:48] gone through the fiscal year, we've come up to that $25,000 limited in aggregate for the

[27:53] vendor itself, so I'm asking for a council to their action on, being able to go above and

[28:00] beyond the 25,000, but not above 50,000.

[28:05] And if we do see, if there is an emergency or if

[28:09] to see the expenditures that may go above the 50,000,

[28:12] we will come back to Council and ask for Council

[28:16] to, for an increase, if need be.

[28:20] With that, any questions?

[28:23] Questions?

[28:23] Council?

[28:26] Yeah.

[28:27] In reading the agenda item, you didn't read the entire piece.

[28:38] Yes.

[28:39] No, I was wondering.

[28:40] Well, I just wanted to make sure that we're just talking about these these three.

[28:43] That's what I mean.

[28:44] It's opposed to a blanket.

[28:50] Okay.

[28:51] So from the standpoint of the cumulative annual purchase in excess of 25,000,

[28:55] there's on a machine and company,

[28:56] the idea, auto-pair service, the answer is that the death of the block council, so that would

[29:01] be the only approved method in which to go about that.

[29:05] Because it does go for the purchase agreement.

[29:10] Thank you.

[29:11] Thank you.

[29:11] I have a motion and a second.

[29:13] I have a very further discussion.

[29:15] Seeing none.

[29:15] All in favor say aye.

[29:17] Any opposed?

[29:17] Motion carries.

[29:19] Thank you very much.

[29:19] Thank you.

[29:21] Council, with your permission, I'd like to move item 10.5 next and go through that discussion

[29:28] and then save item 10.4 for the following item as we may need any session on that, and

[29:34] so we'll go ahead and do that.

[29:37] So let's move to item 10.5 first, the Mayor of City Council to hear presentations by Greg

[29:41] Schwartz from Piper, Jaffrey regarding the city's primary problem checks.

[30:02] I think we surprised.

[30:26] Sorry, Mr. Mayor, and Council is looking for Greg Swartz. He's our financial advisor

[30:32] with Piper Jaffrey. We contract with Piper Jaffrey to advise on certain things with that city

[30:40] operates with. And today, tonight, he is here to present on the primary property tax and how it

[30:52] talk about the 1% limit and how that affects everything going on.

[30:58] Thank you, Greg.

[31:00] Sorry.

[31:01] I know that this is a scary topic, but I think it's carry out the rooms.

[31:04] Yeah.

[31:04] Well, I just had to use the restroom, but got back here as quick as the process would allow.

[31:12] I'm going to try to, you know, keep this quick and brief tonight.

[31:17] For those of you who are really, you know, want to go through Arizona's tax system and understand it first, I feel sorry for you.

[31:28] And secondly, that is, it's important to understand certain nuances, but it's not important to understand every nuance.

[31:39] So with that said, the presentation that you have in front of you this evening,

[31:42] And I hope that I can convince you to take away essentially five major takeaways.

[31:52] The first of which is why I'm here tonight, the city of Maricopa is losing and will continue

[32:00] to lose voter authorized primary property taxes that were authorized by voters for public

[32:07] safety.

[32:08] So as the first takeaway, you are now and will continue to lose property tax revenues.

[32:15] And again, they were voter authorized and they're dedicated to public safety.

[32:21] The second takeaway is that Arizona's tax system has various limits, various restrictions.

[32:28] Some of those limits and restrictions conflict with one another.

[32:32] and cause unintended consequences, and Maricopa is one of several communities that falls into that column of unintended consequences.

[32:44] So there's a myriad of things that drive our property tax system, and it was never intended to have Maricopa or the other communities lose money.

[32:54] The third point, the number of local governments that are now or will be losing revenue in the future is growing every year.

[33:08] And then finally point number four is there's a narrow range of solutions, all of which has to include other local governments and the organization called the Arizona Tax Research Association,

[33:23] which, if you're familiar with the state capital,

[33:27] the state capital is, say, right here,

[33:31] and a quarter of a block away is the offices

[33:34] of the Arizona Tax Research Association.

[33:38] And so they have excellent access to the legislature

[33:44] and probably are considered to be the only credible source

[33:50] first in the legislative process for any discussion about property taxes.

[33:56] So right off the bat, Attra, as their known has to be included in any discussion.

[34:01] So what that said, I did have five agenda items tonight.

[34:06] Unless there's some compelling reason to, I won't go through Arizona's property tax system

[34:12] and great detail except to tell you nationwide it is considered the most complex.

[34:19] there are various state budget agencies affiliated with each state, and Arizona proudly wins the award

[34:28] so often when it's given for the most complex tax system in the U.S.

[34:36] And for some of us, Arizona's tax system is I consider it, as well as others, to be not only

[34:45] confusing, but in some respects, deliberately misleading when compared to other states.

[34:51] As one example, I don't know how many times you've experienced it, but I've experienced it quite a bit

[34:57] at city council meetings, I'll get somebody from Michigan.

[35:00] Just moved here, looks at their tax rate and sees that it's $10 in the decimal point and then $10.1234.

[35:10] So, on this side of the decimal point, it's huge. What they don't understand, that person from Michigan is used to seeing a property tax that is zero on one side of the decimal and only four decimals.

[35:24] Arizona's taxable values are three digits for most homeowners.

[35:28] If you have a hundred thousand dollar home,

[35:30] it translates into a hundred dollars of taxable value.

[35:33] So our tax rates are large, but our taxable values are small.

[35:37] The end result is that we're still in the bottom 25 percent

[35:43] for property tax impacts in the U.S.

[35:46] So that the system is deliberately, I'll strike that word.

[35:50] The system is complex, needlessly so, and creates need-jerk reactions by people who look

[35:56] at the rates and think they're going to be paying 10 times more than what they were

[36:00] in Michigan, as an example.

[36:04] And again, unless there is a desire for more detail, what I would like to zero in on is

[36:08] the agenda item called the 1% limit, because at the end of the day there are many nuances

[36:15] is that impact why Maricopa is losing revenue, but this is the primary one.

[36:23] So I'm going to skip through some of this other stuff unless again, you can email me.

[36:29] I could be more than happy to do a presentation at some other time, but this system is,

[36:37] like I said, you really have to be a glutton for punishment to want to understand it.

[36:41] So let's skip right to the bottom line, the 1% limit, the 1% limit is embedded in the Arizona Constitution.

[36:49] It essentially says homeowners are limited in the amount of primary property taxes they pay.

[36:56] There's two property taxes, a primary and a secondary.

[37:00] Primary property taxes are used for operations.

[37:03] The homeowners are limited to paying 1% of the value of their homes.

[37:07] So if that home, again, we said it was worth a hundred thousand dollars,

[37:10] They're limited to paying $1,000 in primary property taxes to the city, to the county, to the community college and the school.

[37:21] So, some total to all four, it cannot exceed $1,000 in that example.

[37:27] That equates to a $10 rate.

[37:30] So, when the combined rate for all primary property taxes for the county, for the community college, for the city,

[37:36] in the school district exceed $10 than the state steps in and does a number of things to reduce that burden.

[37:45] All right. Without going into great detail, the 1% limit is partially offset by one thing that continues and one thing that used to be appropriated but no longer is.

[37:58] The one thing that continues is called state aid

[38:01] for education.

[38:02] The state steps in and pays 44% of every school district

[38:07] primary property tax rate.

[38:10] So if a school district has a rate of $10,

[38:13] the state pays 44% of that.

[38:16] So the state funds that.

[38:18] That state aid for education or SAE

[38:22] has the practical effect of limiting the number of communities

[38:25] over $10, where the combined rate is over $10,

[38:32] They used to appropriate what was known as additional state aid for education and they haven't for several years.

[38:40] The additional state aid for education was limited to those communities where even after SAE, the rates were above $10.

[38:50] They would step in on select school districts and reduce their rates even further so that

[38:57] Maricopa and other communities wouldn't lose revenue.

[39:00] They have not appropriated the state is not

[39:02] appropriated additional state aid

[39:03] for education for several years.

[39:06] Presently, there is no authority for the county

[39:10] or the state to reduce your rates.

[39:12] Your rates were voter authorized.

[39:14] Your levy was voter authorized.

[39:16] They have no authority to reduce your rates

[39:18] and they have no authority to reduce your revenues.

[39:21] It's just a vacuum in statutes

[39:24] because of all those conflicting restrictions and limits, unintended consequence.

[39:30] So the bottom line is the state has already acknowledged

[39:34] that it has no authority to touch your rates.

[39:39] The county has already recognized and acknowledged it has no authority to do so,

[39:44] but they really don't have a choice because the Constitution says

[39:48] homeowners are limited to 1%.

[39:52] So, with that said, before I jump into the impact across Arizona, is there any questions?

[40:00] Essentially, the 1% limited, again, is directed at homeowners. They pay 1% of the value of their home,

[40:08] a home worth 100,000 pay a thousand dollars total a year. And when the combined tax rate exceeds that, then you start having problems.

[40:19] All right. Unless there's any questions about that, I'm going to go right into the impact across Arizona.

[40:25] The slide I hope you're looking at right now says jurisdictions with combined rates above 10.

[40:32] And this is before state aid for education.

[40:36] So what this list shows you is the number of communities that are getting close to the point that they're losing revenue,

[40:43] but aren't losing revenue right now.

[40:46] Okay? So this is the entire universe of potential problems out there.

[40:52] So in 2010 we had roughly 12 cities and 2015 we have 31 cities where the combined tax rate exceeds $10.

[41:02] And why is this important? State aid for education or SAE is a policy choice. The legislature makes a policy choice.

[41:13] If they want it to be 44% of the school district rate, then it's 44% that's state aid for education.

[41:19] they want it to be 20%, it can be 20%.

[41:24] So if they reduce state aid for education from 44%

[41:29] to anything less than that, this is the universe of communities

[41:34] that will be added to the list that are losing revenue.

[41:39] So this problem, if you look at community or counties,

[41:44] it's gone from eight counties to 12 counties in five years.

[41:47] If you look at the number of school districts where the area is impacted, it has gone from 25 to 85.

[41:54] If you look at the number of incorporated areas, it's gone from 15 to 56.

[41:59] I'll explain why it's growing geometrically in a minute.

[42:05] But first, before doing so, the next slide shows you that of that subset of communities that have rates above $10 before the state steps in.

[42:16] Here's that subset of communities that still have rates above $10 even after state aid

[42:23] for education.

[42:24] So in 2010 it was six cities and five years later it's 12.

[42:29] It was two counties and now it's five counties.

[42:33] And again I'd like to emphasize that the 44% state aid for education is the only reason why

[42:41] the number of communities on here isn't doubled, isn't tripled, isn't quadrupled.

[42:46] At 44%, you get to 43%, Phoenix gets added to this list.

[42:53] You go to 42%, well, a number of communities just grows.

[42:58] Every time you drop state aid for education, why is that a concern?

[43:02] We have a structural deficit at the state level.

[43:05] We have a court order that school districts are to get more money.

[43:11] So this may be up, you know, the 44% again is not constitutional, it's simply a policy choice

[43:18] made in the budget each year.

[43:20] So this list of those who are losing revenue right now is likely to grow.

[43:29] And the reason why it's growing is, from my perspective, based on the data that I analyze,

[43:35] And it's interesting, I have a very good relationship with the Arizona Tax Research Association.

[43:44] They know I know this, and so occasionally I'll find a head of a horse in my bed from the Godfather movie.

[43:52] And then the director of the Joint Legislative Budget Committee for the Legislature lives across the street.

[43:58] and he and I, we see a big tidal wave of problems, and why is the problem growing?

[44:08] The way the pie gets allocated, who pays how much of your levy, so if your levy is a million

[44:14] dollars, there's a certain allocation formula to how much businesses pay and how much

[44:19] residents pay. Business properties are paying less now than they did in 2006 because

[44:27] the assessment ratio, part of that nuanced formula has decreased from 25% to 10% or 18%.

[44:35] So if a commercial property was worth a million dollars, it's assessed value was 250,000.

[44:41] So that's what that's saying.

[44:44] And then agricultural properties, their assessment ratio is decreasing as well.

[44:48] What that means to you is if their share of the pie goes down, in other words, they pay

[44:55] less taxes, that means it gets shifted to residential properties.

[45:00] So, your problem is growing in large part, not exclusively, but in large part because of the change, but the legislature did to the assessment ratios.

[45:11] A second thing that will cause this problem to grow is that there is now a limit to property value growth.

[45:17] There used to be this bizarre formula that your secondary value and your primary value of each

[45:23] property could increase at different rates. All of that has gone. Now each piece of property

[45:29] can only increase by 5% naturally each year. So that's going to have a practical limitation

[45:36] on your ability to grow your way out of this problem. And then finally new construction is only

[45:42] going to relieve this problem in the short term.

[45:45] It depends on your mix of residential and non-resonential property.

[45:48] And again, it will not resolve this problem in the long term,

[45:52] based on the analytics that we're looking at that we share with the state.

[46:00] It's difficult to estimate lost revenues to the city of Maricopa,

[46:05] because essentially the property tax system in Arizona

[46:10] for the year doesn't become set until August of each year, but presently within this year

[46:17] within your boundaries, the amount of revenue you're losing depends on how much homeowner

[46:23] property, residential properties, as a percent of your total property, how much that state aid

[46:29] for education is stepping in to reduce the merit-copy unified school district rate, and then the limit

[46:35] Another bizarre limit that the state aid for education can only benefit up to $600 per residential property.

[46:44] This is bizarre, I know.

[46:47] This is why Arizona gets the most complex property tax system award.

[46:53] We may be 51, including Puerto Rico.

[46:56] We may be 51 on many less, but we're number one when it comes to complexity of our tax systems.

[47:01] We're estimating, and I would defer to Brian to provide a better estimate that your annual

[47:11] losses now could range from 750,000 to 1.5 million.

[47:16] Again, that is voter authorized primary property taxes, which the voter's authorized to

[47:25] be dedicated to public safety.

[47:26] So, this is not a circumstance where this could be considered the fat of government.

[47:33] This is the bones of your government right here.

[47:39] Potential solutions, the state aid for education could increase.

[47:45] I don't think that's likely based on the amount of beer my neighbor is drinking, the director

[47:51] of joint legislative budget committee.

[47:53] He seems pretty, pretty worried.

[47:56] The state's structural deficit in that school, the legal decision about school funding, makes

[48:05] addition of state aid for education any increase unlikely.

[48:09] We'll be lucky if we can hold it at 44%.

[48:12] Additional state aid appropriations unlikely.

[48:15] They haven't been appropriated for several years.

[48:19] Legal action.

[48:20] That's possible.

[48:23] But I personally don't recommend it and here's why.

[48:29] The Arizona Tax Research Association, being a quarter block away from the legislature,

[48:35] has the ability to affect policy here better than anybody in Arizona.

[48:41] In the 2006, they did something to the property tax system,

[48:47] were essentially communities got to levy.

[48:52] They got to generate revenue based on what

[48:54] their 1979 levy was with 2% increases annually

[48:59] from that point on.

[49:01] And you didn't have to tax up to the maximum.

[49:03] You could just bank that authority.

[49:05] They took that authority away.

[49:07] And the 2006 legislature essentially said,

[49:11] whatever your levy was in 2005 is now your new base.

[49:15] were getting rid of 1979. Flagstaff as an example could have been taxing at a much higher rate,

[49:21] much higher revenue, and was roughly 60% of that. They lost 40% of their tax space. They

[49:27] went and pursued legal action and got nowhere with it. There were several communities

[49:33] that were affected by that, including Phoenix Scottsdale. So the point is legal action.

[49:42] It

[49:43] It's not advisable.

[49:46] There is, among other potential solutions, there is this concept of override.

[49:52] As an example, the Maricopa Unified School District has the Constitutional and statutory

[49:58] authority to go to-

[50:00] The voters asked for a budget override, where it can get additional property taxes paid from the secondary property tax and not the primary property tax.

[50:12] Sorry that Arizona system is so convoluted, but you essentially shift the burden from a primary, which has limits and restrictions on to a secondary that doesn't have any limits and restrictions.

[50:23] Penal county has constitutional and statutory authority to seek an override from voters.

[50:31] The community college districts have authority both constitutionally and statutorily

[50:35] to seek an override.

[50:37] The only form of government that does not have the authority to seek overrides our cities

[50:43] and towns.

[50:45] The constitution says you can, but the constitution says if as directed in statute.

[50:51] So, Constitution says, yes, statutes are silent, you have no authority.

[50:57] So that is one potential solution, a solution that is exercise quite frequently by in particular schools, less so counties.

[51:07] And for my perspective, the optimal solution is there ought to be some sort of automatic override for communities like Maricopa.

[51:15] And there are some other options that have been considered like changing the way state-shared revenues are allocated.

[51:24] But that involves, you know, getting in a fist fight with Phoenix and Scottsdale.

[51:29] So while likely you just got to keep that in mind.

[51:33] So hate to some so negative but the bottom line is there are solutions and you'd have to pursue them in alongside other municipalities that list of municipalities that either has the problem now or will in the new future is getting is growing.

[51:55] So you're not alone.

[52:00] And again, if you want to learn more about the nuances one, I feel sorry for you.

[52:05] And then secondly, I can do so via email, I can do so via phone call.

[52:10] But the bottom line is the 1% limit and all the other nuances impose this burden upon you.

[52:18] There is no statutory authority for anybody to reduce your rates, but it's done so just to

[52:28] Thank you.

[52:32] Great.

[52:33] Can you have two questions?

[52:34] Matter of fact, if you will.

[52:36] The first question is, why is this state, and so we're

[52:39] reluctant to have a tip as opposed to other states?

[52:43] We're the only state we're called a tip.

[52:46] And attacks increment financing.

[52:49] There are a few communities in Arizona,

[52:53] in a caustic round, a poxy junction and a Tucson and a couple of others that still have the

[52:57] grandfather right to do essentially a tax increment financing.

[53:02] We are the only state, and for that matter, a Puerto Rico and the other US territories have

[53:09] tips too.

[53:10] So we're actually, there's more, more entities other than just states, if that's worth it

[53:15] to you.

[53:16] I don't know why we don't have it, but I do know that at the end of the day there are ways

[53:22] around that, if you truly want, it tiff is viewed as a tool for economic development.

[53:29] And there are other tools that if you use them with the same objective in mind, you can

[53:38] get to the same outcome. An example is a community facility district, where there is some

[53:45] of that tiff-like activity going on. As an example, we represent the city of Scottsdale,

[53:51] only used a community facility district to do the waterfront project, which was several million

[53:57] dollar project. So it's tiff like, but not exactly like tiff. I can tell you that historically,

[54:05] the legislature has felt that that got too far into the gray area of the constitutional

[54:15] prohibition about gifts from local governments to private entities.

[54:26] The next one, I guess, is not a question, it's an observation.

[54:32] I'm sure you know, as well known in the State of Economist,

[54:37] by a variety of spoke to the panel of partnership and your presentation.

[54:42] And every year, he seems to tell the fact that there's more rooftops,

[54:47] More housing, air goal, greater economic growth, and that seems to fly in the face of the

[54:54] property tax in which you've presented here in terms of what the state does for us.

[55:10] There was a time when a primary industry in Arizona was growth itself. Growth was a primary industry. But to use terms that you probably all familiar with, rooftops are a cost center and businesses are a profit center for municipalities.

[55:32] So, you break even, I'm sure, I mean, I have to have to talk to Brian to look at your budget.

[55:37] But if it weren't for sales taxes, exercise taxes, transaction, privilege taxes,

[55:43] it would be very difficult to run a government in Arizona.

[55:46] So, in terms of economic growth, roof tops by themselves,

[55:54] and less followed by employment opportunities are just that

[55:59] cautioners.

[56:00] Absolutely.

[56:01] Thank you.

[56:03] Other questions, Councillor.

[56:07] I wanted to follow up on one question regarding the amount of revenues that the city

[56:13] would receive.

[56:14] If a home is built here in Miracopa in that assessed value is at

[56:18] $100,000, what is the amount of property tax money for our primary property taxes

[56:25] that the city would receive based upon our current tax structure.

[56:31] All right, so just to make it quick, $100,000 home through this bizarre formula

[56:36] against $100 taxable value.

[56:39] So, Maricopa's rate is presently 4.98.

[56:45] That's the voter authorized permissible rate based on a levy authorized by voters in 2005.

[56:54] My estimate is that, presently, you're not getting because of this 1% limit anywhere from 15% to 20% of that rate.

[57:06] It exceeds in combination with the county, the school, and the college, it exceeds the 1% limit.

[57:15] So you're losing revenue because homeowners are limited to paying just 1% of the value of their homes.

[57:21] So, we've estimated it, and when you add all that up, it ranges between 750 to 1.5 million.

[57:31] And again, it depends on a number of factors.

[57:35] But, you know, with more precise data that the department of Arizona Department revenue should have come out with by now,

[57:42] but hasn't, we could tell you precisely what the allocation of residential versus non-residential properties are.

[57:49] and can fairly definitively tell you what your loss is,

[57:53] what Pennell County's loss is, and what community

[57:56] the Central Arizona community college losses.

[58:02] Yes, I'm sure I do.

[58:05] Because I'm not really smart,

[58:08] so I just want to try to find the answer to something.

[58:11] So what do you see as the benefit of this discussion here

[58:17] with us this evening?

[58:18] What do you want us to leave here with?

[58:22] Okay, I guess the takeaway first and foremost, this was a voter authorized tax dedicated

[58:30] public safety.

[58:34] Given the nuances of Arizona's tax system, there's an unintended consequence where

[58:39] you're not collecting the amount of revenue that the voter's authorized.

[58:47] The third point is you need to be part of the conversation to

[58:56] be part of the solution.

[58:59] If you don't engage in particular, the Arizona Tax Research Association, they will come up with a remedy,

[59:10] not unlike what they did.

[59:12] And I do mean they did it.

[59:14] That's okay.

[59:14] Everybody knows they did it in 2006, where they lowered the levy.

[59:20] It was based on 1979.

[59:22] You got whatever you raised plus 2% since then and you didn't have to set your levy at the maximum.

[59:28] Flagstaff lost 40% of its tax base, Scott Stail lost 15%.

[59:34] So you, they know this is a problem, they know you know what's a problem.

[59:41] You need to engage them as well as the other communities.

[59:44] And again, you go from 44% state aid for education down to say 43 or 42%

[59:52] Phoenix is on the same list you are.

[59:54] Thank you.

[1:00:01] One is, I'd requested that that great comment and brief on this issue, because it really is a precursor to the budget discussions that we will get into a very soon and wanted to be clear as to why we struggle with what some of our revenue streams.

[1:00:19] In particular, though, I think that there has to be an effort to change the laws that are

[1:00:27] in place that appear at least to be anti-growth.

[1:00:31] And the impact that that has a miracle in particular is that it does not provide us with

[1:00:38] the revenue stream sufficient to provide the services that are required to support those

[1:00:44] either in public safety, or in recreation, and so that's one of the issues.

[1:00:51] If we're not successful in getting the laws changed, that just as that we have an increased

[1:01:00] need to diversify our economy, we can't simply be continue to be a bedroom community and

[1:01:07] be sustainable.

[1:01:10] Thank you.

[1:01:11] Anyone else?

[1:01:13] Thank you very much.

[1:01:14] Very informative.

[1:01:15] I appreciate it.

[1:01:18] I could please item 10.5.

[1:01:19] That will take us back to item 10.4.

[1:01:21] Mayor and City Council have discussed the positive action on improving recommendations.

[1:01:24] Made by the Transportation Advisory Committee regarding the East West Parkway corridor study.

[1:01:29] I do have two speaker cards for that.

[1:01:31] However, I will invite staff up to speak first and then we will turn the time over after they speak to

[1:01:37] Thank

[1:01:42] you very much, good evening Mayor, council members, pleasure to follow up on the work session item with this agenda item.

[1:01:52] Basically what you heard in the work session was the high level down to some of the minutia and how we arrived at the current proposed alignment for the east west corridor, which you see there before you and green.

[1:02:05] As mentioned by Burwen in this presentation in subject, I think, of your report and this evening's meeting is to get direction on two particular items for this corridor, which is the white and parker road in interchange, with the proposed alignment for the east west corridor, as well as the interchange or the intersection at 347.

[1:02:33] So with that, staff is recommending or similar to the tech or very similar to the tech advisory committee recommending this quarter be approved by the city council tonight and what that means is that it basically allows it's not putting this in place permanently it allows us to move forward to the next step of the

[1:02:54] study, basically to go further, and this is generally the alignment we want, let's start

[1:02:59] looking at some nuances.

[1:03:00] We acknowledge that the white and parker has burwen presented the white and parker interchange

[1:03:06] in intersection and how you see the roadway, the alignment, varying into the eagle shadow

[1:03:14] property to make its approach to cross the current, the current, the current, the current

[1:03:20] away. That interchange can move around, as he had in his exhibit showing the dash lines.

[1:03:26] So all of this said, there is a lot more work to do on the project, your acknowledgement

[1:03:33] and approval. Tonight is essentially saying yes, this is generally the corridor that we

[1:03:37] would like to see continued for the study. And that's it. With this recommendation for approval,

[1:03:46] We'd also ask that you provide some direction to staff to continue to work with the developer

[1:03:52] of the Eagle Shadow property to further refine the concept in an effort to create an acceptable

[1:03:59] parcel configuration for the land located between the East West corridor proposed alignment

[1:04:04] in the existing Mercupacasa Grande alignment is brewing presented right now.

[1:04:09] We just have a kind of an awkward parcel that's created.

[1:04:12] It might not be the best solution for the development of that parcel.

[1:04:16] In the property owner, again, that doesn't really matter to staff.

[1:04:20] We'd prefer that the owner and developer look at that and tell us kind of how they would

[1:04:26] like to see that parcel configured, given that it really doesn't have any traffic impacts.

[1:04:30] We'll still review and have traffic engineering and other engineering to review the final

[1:04:35] alignment that's determined, but we'd like to keep that option open to just to continue

[1:04:40] to refine that how these was corridor encroaches into their property.

[1:04:46] They have a degree that yes, it's going to do this.

[1:04:48] This is just maybe not the best geometric parcel or shape,

[1:04:51] and we could continue with that discussion.

[1:04:54] It really doesn't have any impact from the beginning of our planning area

[1:04:57] to that terminus that's currently shown on 344.

[1:05:00] 37, it's just how exactly would that be configured and in my conversations with the property owner that is amenable.

[1:05:08] So that said, the recommendation would also include some direction to staff to continue to work with the property owner to design.

[1:05:16] The property owner's design team to coordinate the future roadway intersection designs and alignments affecting the property.

[1:05:22] That's obviously a very sincere to continue to offer information.

[1:05:27] I probably won't be able to offer too much detailed information on the design and history of this project,

[1:05:32] but I'd be happy to answer any questions.

[1:05:34] Okay. Council, do you have a meeting of questions?

[1:05:36] And if not, then we'll move to the two speaker cards,

[1:05:41] and then we'll probably call you all back up for questions.

[1:05:44] So Scott Cole and Seth Keeler.

[1:05:50] Good evening.

[1:05:52] Mayor Price and members of the Council.

[1:05:53] My name is Seth Keeler.

[1:05:54] My address is 1-1-2-1, West Warner Road.

[1:05:57] Sweet 1-0-9, 10-years-on-a-8-5-2-8-4,

[1:06:00] and I'm with W Holdings.

[1:06:01] And I am the property ownership group

[1:06:04] that is just east of the Action Casino.

[1:06:09] I submitted a letter of opposition that was read

[1:06:12] in last council hearing.

[1:06:14] I appreciate you doing that.

[1:06:15] And at the Florida Smortime, then to visit with staff.

[1:06:18] We met December 3rd with staff.

[1:06:20] And we were able to go through the concerns,

[1:06:26] we are still not in favor of having our property

[1:06:28] cut in half with the proposed ending that Erwin had presented as well as what Dana just

[1:06:36] talked about.

[1:06:38] When I asked staff, who's the driver behind this rerout, I was told that it was action.

[1:06:44] They want to have it between the casino and also their entertainment complex.

[1:06:47] I asked them more about this potential road that could go west of the 347 and staff informed

[1:06:55] me that action is not committed to anything.

[1:06:58] There's no guarantee that it would even go west.

[1:07:02] That's kind of a concern to us.

[1:07:05] We feel like essentially we're the sacrificial lamb for an idea that may never come to pass.

[1:07:12] The concerns that we have with this road bisecting our property,

[1:07:17] we own the commercial piece, as well as the transitional piece that's right behind it.

[1:07:22] It creates a very difficult to develop triangular parcel with the transitional piece.

[1:07:27] In fact, if you look closely, the Feral family owned two out parcels along Feral,

[1:07:35] we would be left with a triangular parcel that would have these two out parcels within it.

[1:07:40] even more limiting our development area on that back end parcel.

[1:07:45] Staff mentioned to me that this is actually a pretty good idea because you end up with two commercial

[1:07:52] parcels instead of one.

[1:07:55] I looked into the framework of this parkway and the concerns that we have as was mentioned by

[1:08:00] Irwin, this parkway's design is for efficiency.

[1:08:04] You want to get as much traffic without any impediments on there as you can.

[1:08:07] What that translates into for property like myself, if I'm traveling on this parkway and I want to get to the property to the south, I can't do it.

[1:08:16] If I'm traveling east and I want to get to the property of the north, I can't do it.

[1:08:20] It is a restrictive parkway.

[1:08:23] So I don't see this as a win for us.

[1:08:27] I see this as more of a detriment to us.

[1:08:29] In the meeting with staff, I was told that, yeah, we do have a reason on PAD and we do have a development agreement,

[1:08:35] but because we're not at final plat, we're not vested.

[1:08:40] So I read our development agreement and it does say that if we give the approval on the

[1:08:44] reason that our development is vested, so we do have a vested property right adjacent to the

[1:08:51] action casino, it's not just farmland that we're talking about.

[1:08:57] We are proponents of this principle of the East-West corridor.

[1:09:03] Part of me is frustrated because I don't want to be the rain on anybody's parade,

[1:09:06] but I do see great challenges with what's being proposed by staff.

[1:09:13] We have looked at a potential alternative concept.

[1:09:18] Do I permission to show up a map to members of the council?

[1:09:34] I do have an extra one there. There should be an extra.

[1:09:38] perfect.

[1:09:42] On this exhibit, you'll see that if you keep the Parkway on

[1:09:48] Feral and you may enter that road after the Action Casino Entertainment

[1:09:54] Complex, you can still get to that alignment that was proposed by the

[1:09:58] community.

[1:10:00] If, in fact, the action you come forward and want to do that, there is an option to continue that roadway west and it ends up being to where we don't end up having our property split.

[1:10:12] Those are the major points I was hoping to cover tonight. I appreciate the opportunity to do so. I can answer any questions at this time if you have any.

[1:10:20] Thank you very much.

[1:10:22] Seth, any questions for Seth at the moment?

[1:10:26] Not hang tight because we'll probably have someone as we continue the discussion.

[1:10:29] Okay, thank you.

[1:10:30] Thank you, Seth. Scott?

[1:10:39] Good evening, Marin Council.

[1:10:41] My name is Scott Cole.

[1:10:42] I represent Heartman Ranch, Master Plan Community on Anderson,

[1:10:47] North of the Maricopa County.

[1:10:50] and Santa Cruz Ranch Master Plan Community on the Anderson South of the Maricopa Canis Grand Highway in the city's planning area.

[1:11:02] Last time Council took up this item, I spoke, and I had two concerns.

[1:11:08] The first concern was for the Hartman Ranch property, and it dealt with the alternate

[1:11:16] route in the area of Anderson and Petersen-Nall.

[1:11:24] Since that last council meeting where I spoke, I've had discussions and met with staff and

[1:11:32] was staff recommendation to eliminate that route

[1:11:36] from the map that you're potentially approving tonight.

[1:11:41] My concern is resolved, and I'm in favor

[1:11:44] of staff recommendation and action tonight.

[1:11:51] And I sincerely appreciate and want to thank

[1:11:54] Dana and staff for factoring in our concerns

[1:11:59] and working with it on it.

[1:12:01] The second item I brought up at the last meeting that dealt with this was dealt with the

[1:12:09] Valvista and Anderson Parkways, South of the Maricopa Cascround Highway, which affect the Santa Cruz Ranch development.

[1:12:19] Now that's not technically on the agenda tonight, but since I mentioned it at the last council meeting, I was at, I thought I'd just update you.

[1:12:28] Since that time, City Manager Rose has agreed to set up a meeting with us to discuss our concerns.

[1:12:40] And so again, we're sincerely very appreciative of the City Manager agreeing to discuss our concerns with that.

[1:12:52] And I look forward to doing that in the future.

[1:12:56] Thank you.

[1:13:01] I guess I would ask, I mean, speaking to Seth's comments,

[1:13:09] Dana, would you like to come

[1:13:10] up and answer any of those things at this time as best you can or,

[1:13:21] yes, mayor, council members,

[1:13:23] my understanding that with regards to the vested rights and the rights for that property

[1:13:29] or largely dependent on the development agreement, pre-enactation development agreement, that

[1:13:34] was adopted when that, obviously prior to that property being annexed into the city.

[1:13:43] Anyway, my no legal staff has taken a close look at what the effectiveness of that development

[1:13:49] agreement is. Is this a question that you'd prefer to hear?

[1:13:55] Yeah, I mean, I guess I was just looking for help on the comments outlined by Seth as far

[1:14:02] you know, the swoop down and how it cuts his property and half, et cetera.

[1:14:07] And, you know, I guess Council, I would look to legal here, but as we're talking about alignments,

[1:14:17] I personally would like to possibly go to East Session to discuss this with Council,

[1:14:23] a little further, especially considering we have some new members of Council,

[1:14:26] but look for your support on that or your ideas on that.

[1:14:43] So, Council on anything, Council on the Chappeters.

[1:14:51] So, I'm clear, is the major objection to the alignment continuing down for our road,

[1:14:57] must the cultural issue?

[1:15:00] That's what's been conveyed to myself. Perhaps Paul or I wasn't out of involved in the discussion on how that movement was created.

[1:15:11] I was on my way to shed some white on that issue. The reason that the alignment deviated from a fairer road has to do with what is the best route for getting over to Wallston, as I understand it.

[1:15:29] And our communication with the oxygen community

[1:15:34] indicated clearly that the extension of the parkway across

[1:15:42] fear, across the property, simply was never going to occur.

[1:15:47] And so the alignment that is being proposed

[1:15:50] where we do not have an agreement with oxygen at this point.

[1:15:55] They did seem favorable towards that alignment

[1:15:58] in our discussions in our intergovernmental policy.

[1:16:02] Can you fight one a comment on that as well?

[1:16:07] Mr. Mayor, members of Council.

[1:16:08] In discussions with the auction with Jerry Owens,

[1:16:14] he did reveal to me that they've had a transportation plan

[1:16:17] for 10 years that showed that quarter mile alignment

[1:16:19] south of Farrell.

[1:16:20] It was not released publicly.

[1:16:23] We didn't find out about it until this East West

[1:16:25] quarter study came about, and that's when they asked for consideration to, to bend that,

[1:16:32] to connect with what road they had on the drawing board for 10 years.

[1:16:37] And so it just seemed to work out.

[1:16:40] We had never even hoped that this study would allow a quarter to go all the way through,

[1:16:46] at least while we don't have any guarantees with this adaption, there's the possibility, a decent

[1:16:55] possibility that we will be able to go to a Ralph Ballston. If we go straight through the

[1:16:59] ferrell, as the commander says, he'll never happen.

[1:17:07] Any other questions on the alignments there? If not, can I have a motion move? Do you session

[1:17:13] please?

[1:17:14] have a motion and a second, sorry for the discussion, not all of every say aye, aye, we'll

[1:17:21] return shortly.

[1:19:16] Mr. Kayla, and looking at this alignment and the proposed concept that's on there, in

[1:19:22] terms of development, are we talking about retail, commercial, a number of different types

[1:19:29] of entities going in there, and does that result in your concern being access from

[1:19:36] North and South points, or Eastern West as well.

[1:19:43] I'm going to chop it off.

[1:19:45] The use is that our plan, there's two components to this site.

[1:19:49] The first one is the retail component, which is the one closest to the 347.

[1:19:53] The other component is the transitional zoning piece.

[1:19:56] That's a 64 acre parcel that's behind that.

[1:20:00] The concern that I have regarding access relates to the East West corridor, getting on to if this were to be

[1:20:06] bisected, getting to the north or getting to the south of those two pieces that are commercial.

[1:20:14] And is there anything specific plan for that transitional acreage?

[1:20:19] We do not have a site plan on that parcel like we do for the commercial parcel.

[1:20:24] Okay, and by we, W. Holdings is the entity that's developing this. Do you own this property?

[1:20:30] Are you representing somebody else? I'm not quite sure I understand.

[1:20:34] Okay, so there are two pieces of property here.

[1:20:38] We have an investor that owns the property.

[1:20:41] We have an agreement with Vestar.

[1:20:43] We've done several of these concepts with Vestar throughout the valley.

[1:20:47] We come forward with the land. They come forward with the development.

[1:20:50] And then we give them a discount at the beginning of the deal and then we are shared with the profit on the back end of the deal.

[1:21:00] So Vestar on that front parcel is motivated to be a partner with this because they got such a good deal going into this.

[1:21:07] And then we're motivated to keep in the deal because then we get to ride the profit on the back side of the development.

[1:21:12] That's how it works just a simple model, and we've done this in Gilbert, the Crossroads,

[1:21:18] in Quink Creek, we did Marketplace, and Tucson, we did the Oral Valley.

[1:21:23] Our hurdle was when the market collapsed, then a piece like this, it just didn't make sense

[1:21:29] to move forward.

[1:21:30] So it's on, it's waiting for the market to recover.

[1:21:34] Okay, so just so I make sure I understand we're trying about three entities involved in this

[1:21:38] potential project, an investor, W. Holdings, and Vester?

[1:21:43] There are W. Holdings, which I represent. There's Vester, which is the developer.

[1:21:48] And there's also our investor, who is a German entity, and she's in both parcels with us as a financial partner.

[1:21:57] So we have ownership of both pieces with our agreement with our German partner, and Vester comes in as a development entity.

[1:22:08] Do you represent them as well then, as a partner on that parcel?

[1:22:13] I am here representing everybody.

[1:22:17] I'm representing W Holdings, I'm representing our German investor and I'm also representing

[1:22:22] the interest of Vesta has in this piece, as our partner for future development on that

[1:22:26] front piece, which is the commercial one.

[1:22:29] Okay.

[1:22:30] And of those three entities are all three names specifically in the development agreement

[1:22:34] currently exist in the development agreement that exists best start is named as the development

[1:22:39] entity. W Holings is not named nor is our German investor. So the agreement that we have

[1:22:47] with best start on a German investor is just not a recorded document. That's why it doesn't show

[1:22:52] up as part of the pre-enekstation development agreement.

[1:22:57] So, let me ask another question. I mean, as developments go, obviously, obviously we want

[1:23:02] development obviously we want I mean what city doesn't want additional sales tax revenue adding

[1:23:07] to the quality of life of your constituents et cetera and so there's always that careful

[1:23:11] balance trying to strike while obviously you see the night that has been very transportation

[1:23:16] based because that's one of our priorities as well but is there would you say that there's a

[1:23:21] population threshold that you need here in the city of America before that becomes even you know from

[1:23:27] from concept to reality, from a development standpoint?

[1:23:32] Mayor Price, that's a good question.

[1:23:34] In the development agreement itself, it states that in order for us

[1:23:37] that we're obligated to move within 18 months,

[1:23:40] when there are more than 10,000 people within a five-mile radius.

[1:23:45] So roof tops are required for a venture like this to make sense.

[1:23:50] So if that answers your question, yes, there is a threshold on when

[1:23:54] we would see development happen within this piece.

[1:23:56] and it's based on growth happening in this corridor.

[1:24:01] But if it's a five mile radius, I mean, it's right across the Machin.

[1:24:05] There's not really anybody living there.

[1:24:08] So I mean, that could be, that could be forever.

[1:24:11] Thierry, right?

[1:24:12] I mean, it could be, it could be coming from the other side too,

[1:24:14] but coming from the west, there's not a lot there.

[1:24:17] So two and a half miles in, there's nothing there.

[1:24:21] What I cited was just what's in the agreement in terms of our obligation to move.

[1:24:25] So there's a clock where obligated to move, whether we move sooner than that or not, to be quite

[1:24:31] honest with you, that's where we looked at Vestar and there at the expert in the development

[1:24:35] side of the retail component.

[1:24:38] Thank you.

[1:24:42] Council, other questions?

[1:24:44] Concerns?

[1:24:45] Thoughts.

[1:24:47] Okay.

[1:24:48] Can I have a motion for this for this particular item?

[1:24:51] Which of where the council pleases?

[1:24:52] to approve the recommendation for the East West.

[1:25:00] This is court or concept, but I'd also like to have Mr. Burkhardt read into that motion the specific

[1:25:06] staff recommendations as part of that.

[1:25:13] Very good. Mayor, council members, with regards to the

[1:25:17] white and parker intersection with the East West corridor, staff recommends the council include

[1:25:24] the language and direction to staff to further refine this concept with the owner of the shadow

[1:25:31] property in an effort to create an acceptable parcel configuration for the land located between

[1:25:36] the future east-west corridor alignment and the existing Maricopa Casa Grande rights of

[1:25:42] way.

[1:25:43] Staff will also work with the property owner's design team to coordinate the future roadway intersection

[1:25:48] designs and alignments affecting the property.

[1:25:52] And then a second recommendation we also have is direction to staff to work with the property

[1:25:59] of the land at the intersection, Mr. Keeler's property,

[1:26:04] the intersection of the proposed east-west corridor,

[1:26:06] and 347, in an effort to create an alignment

[1:26:14] and intersection at 347.

[1:26:19] My apologies, I will start that over.

[1:26:22] Direct staff to work with Mr. Keeler and the property

[1:26:25] owners to further refine the alignment and intersection at 347

[1:26:29] and effort to create parcel configurations,

[1:26:31] is acceptable to the owners.

[1:26:39] So there's been a motion in a second.

[1:26:42] Any further discussion on that item?

[1:26:45] Seeing none.

[1:26:46] Can I have all in favor say aye, please?

[1:26:49] Any opposed?

[1:26:50] Motion carries.

[1:26:52] Thank you very much.

[1:26:57] Okay.

[1:26:57] Moving on.

[1:26:58] It takes this item.

[1:26:58] 10.6.

[1:27:00] This is the resolution of the mayor and city council.

[1:27:02] I'll sit in America.

[1:27:02] But declaring is a public record.

[1:27:04] The certain document filed to the clerk.

[1:27:05] Title chapter nine.

[1:27:06] Health and sanitation.

[1:27:07] The mayor of the city code relating to the enforcement administration.

[1:27:09] of the health and sanitation related laws and regulations in the city of Maricopa and

[1:27:13] amending the code by limiting the section's 9-1-1 through 9-2-11 in chapter 9 of the

[1:27:19] previously adopted city code and replacing those sections with 9-1 through 9-61

[1:27:24] says forward discussion and action.

[1:27:32] Question 5-3.

[1:27:33] Question 5-3.

[1:27:34] Question 5.

[1:27:35] Question 5.

[1:27:36] discussion on this particular item.

[1:27:38] Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

[1:27:40] Any opposed?

[1:27:41] Motion carries.

[1:27:44] Okay?

[1:27:45] Bear with me once again as we move to the ordinance here.

[1:27:47] The ordinance of the mayor and city council, the city of

[1:27:49] Maricopa adopting.

[1:27:50] Arizona adopting chapter nine health and sanitation by reference

[1:27:53] As sections nine dash one through nine dash 61 of the

[1:27:55] Maricopa city code and repealing sections nine dash one

[1:27:58] dash one through nine dash two dash 11 of the

[1:28:01] chapter nine of the Maricopa city code and providing for

[1:28:05] responsibility and the effective date thereof.

[1:28:07] It is for discussion and action.

[1:28:08] Can I have a motion please?

[1:28:11] Have a motion.

[1:28:12] Sir, a second.

[1:28:13] Mr. Wade.

[1:28:14] With that, it is an ordinance.

[1:28:15] So can I move to the roll, please?

[1:28:18] Yes.

[1:28:18] Vice Mayor Brown.

[1:28:19] Council Member Smith.

[1:28:21] Council Member Chapatos.

[1:28:23] Council Member Wade.

[1:28:25] Council Member Mad Freddie.

[1:28:26] Mayor Price.

[1:28:27] Yes.

[1:28:27] Motion passes.

[1:28:28] Great.

[1:28:28] Thank you very much.

[1:28:30] Ten point eight.

[1:28:31] The Resolution of the Mayor City Council.

[1:28:32] authorizing the imposition of the collection of fees for licensing and regulating the collection

[1:28:36] transportation and disposition of recycling of residential commercial and industrial

[1:28:40] refuge generated within the city of Maricopa and establishing the solid waste fees scheduled.

[1:28:44] This is for discussion in action.

[1:28:54] The motion and a second, if we approve item 10.8, it's going to be further discussion on this

[1:28:59] particular item.

[1:29:01] Seeing none, all in favor say aye, aye, any opposed?

[1:29:05] Motion carries.

[1:29:08] And then finally, it takes the time 10.9, which is not finally, and apologies.

[1:29:13] Discuss and positive take action on extending the agreement for the recycling and has

[1:29:16] household hazardous waste collection services with the Environmental Concerns

[1:29:20] Organization, Arizona non-profit corporation, which is approved on September 16,

[1:29:24] 2004 and authorized in the city manager Gregory Rose for execute not.

[1:29:27] Any and all documents necessary to amend this agreement.

[1:29:29] This is for discussion and action.

[1:29:37] It's been motioned and seconded.

[1:29:40] Dance.

[1:29:41] Sorry.

[1:29:42] You got up with us there.

[1:29:56] I'm not sure we can do this one now.

[1:30:03] Can you turn your mic on?

[1:30:10] Yeah, agreed.

[1:30:13] So is the motion that's on the floor? Is that something that I can have council resend until after we come back to me session or how does that work?

[1:30:21] There was a second of the motion.

[1:30:29] Okay, so if that's the case, can I have a motion to move G session then, please?

[1:30:34] The motion in a second, on if ever say I, we'll return shortly.

[1:31:16] Okay, let's go ahead and get started here.

[1:31:19] Let's take us back to item 10.9.

[1:31:21] We apologize for the delays.

[1:31:23] Typically trying to have these G sessions between work session and now, but,

[1:31:27] That wasn't a possibility today so anyways that it takes us back to 10.9 as you recall there is a motion on the table

[1:31:34] And it has been seconded

[1:31:36] Is there any further discussion or amendments to that motion at all from council

[1:31:41] Okay, seeing none can I have a

[1:31:46] What's that?

[1:31:47] No, there's no amendments to the motion

[1:31:51] So having said all in favor say aye aye any opposed motion carries

[1:31:56] at something on to the record indicating my intention to move for with a constructing an RFP

[1:32:06] to rebuild this recycling-ish service.

[1:32:12] Thank you.

[1:32:14] And then finally that takes us out of 10.10.

[1:32:16] I asked this be placed on here just based on the fact that from a scheduling standpoint

[1:32:21] In the past, just so you're all aware, again, we've typically rescheduled that meeting, the

[1:32:27] first meeting in January, because it typically falls so close to January 1st.

[1:32:32] In this case, it is the 6th, however, you got to figure that most city staff and oftentimes

[1:32:37] council members take that week off between New Year's and Christmas and New Year's, and so

[1:32:42] therefore, to try and get that we only meet as a city till Thursday, any house, so the reality

[1:32:47] trying to get a council meeting together in less than two days and from publishing and everything else.

[1:32:51] It can be done, but I have to ask you do you really want to come here on the six or one small

[1:32:57] item, or shall we just cancel it and push it back and do the one meeting then on the 20th,

[1:33:03] thereby complying with the city code. So I would leave that in your hands.

[1:33:09] We have just the second meeting in January. Okay, we have a motion in a second.

[1:33:16] It's any further discussion on the item.

[1:33:18] Seeing none, I'll be able to say aye.

[1:33:20] Aye, any opposed motion carries, and that concludes our session.

[1:33:24] So have a motion to adjourn, please.

[1:33:26] Have a motion, is there a second?

[1:33:28] Seconded, on fair say aye.

[1:33:30] Aye, any opposed motion carries?

[1:33:31] Thanks for watching, and don't forget to like, share, and subscribe to our channel.

City Council Regular Meeting on 2014-12-16 7:00 PM

Agenda

Transcript