[5:04] I'm calling this city council meeting to order. Today is October 24th, 2023. It's 3 p.m. This is a city of Prescott of City Council

[5:15] voting meeting. Mayor Perotam, do we have any announcements or introductions today?

[5:21] Today we are privileged to have both mayor, so I would like to introduce former council member

[5:26] for Marion Suttles, stand up and be recognized, Marion.

[5:29] Marion also serves on CDBG and the Preservation Commission.

[5:34] Thank you, Marion, for your service to the City of Prescott.

[5:36] And, Lois, for Ruth, for Ruth, I've tried to practice that, Lois, I swear.

[5:41] Please stand up and be recognized so we can embarrass you one more time.

[5:45] Lois will be joining us on council in two more meetings.

[5:48] I think two more meetings.

[5:49] I also have announcements, Mayor.

[5:51] Two after this, okay.

[5:52] I have announcements.

[5:54] Please join me tomorrow for the official ribbon cutting

[5:57] of the Granite Creek mural project Wednesday, October 25th at 4 p.m.

[6:00] The mural is located on the trail north of Gurlis Street.

[6:04] Please note that there are two entrances to the creek to access the mural.

[6:07] The first one is beside the dinner bell cafe stairs required.

[6:11] The other one does not require stairs and is near the crosswalk

[6:14] where Sam Hill, Ali and Willis Streets meet.

[6:17] the address is our staircase access addresses three to one west

[6:22] early street and no stair at easy access is one four three north

[6:27] McCormick street we hope to see you all there for those of you who have

[6:30] been joined the greenway trial you've probably seen the progress they've made on

[6:33] that mirror it's it's quite something to behold. In addition we recently sent

[6:38] out some three thousand citizens special surveys on behalf of the city. We have

[6:43] That over 250 completed so far, but we need your help to complete the survey if you have

[6:49] already received one.

[6:50] So please, the rest of you out there who are holding on to surveys and not getting them to

[6:53] us.

[6:54] We need your feedback.

[6:55] We hope to learn about citizen goals and comments in order to plan for the upcoming

[6:59] budget year.

[7:00] If you didn't get a mail survey, an online version will be available for all citizens on November

[7:04] 7 through the city website.

[7:07] And that's all there.

[7:09] Thank you, Mayor Protem.

[7:11] We'll now have an invocation from Revise Susan Shannerman from the Temple of Riths,

[7:17] Shalom followed by a Pledge of Allegiance conducted by Councilman Shishka.

[7:24] Thank you.

[7:25] Good afternoon.

[7:27] God, our strength and protection.

[7:30] We ask your blessings on the people who have been called to lead the community in which we live and work and play.

[7:39] Help them as leaders to not ask first, how do we fix this, but what do we need to learn, how might we need to change, and to whom do we need to listen?

[7:54] Remind them because we all forget from time to time, especially in the noisiness of what passes for political debate today that they are not only leaders, but also servants, and that it is their responsibility and ours to serve the common good of all.

[8:14] And help them to acknowledge that the Jewish community in Prescott is suffering because of the rise in anti-Semitism around the world and in the United States in Arizona and even in Prescott.

[8:31] And know that we also suffer greatly because of the war that currently ravages Israel.

[8:39] We pray for the state of Israel in this devastating time of shock and grief.

[8:45] We pray for the souls of the innocent victims, God send comfort to the grieving, send healing

[8:52] to the injured, and strengthen wisdom to their doctors and nurses.

[8:58] God spread your shelter of peace over their land and this land, wash away all hatred and

[9:06] bloodshed, and may our local community continue to support the Jewish population in

[9:12] Prescott with police and government and citizen awareness and assistance, as we struggle

[9:19] to find meaning and hope in the midst of tragedy, and let us say, Amen.

[9:33] United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indifisible with liberty and justice for all.

[9:51] We now have two proclamations. They're going to be presented. The first one is.

[9:55] Roll call first mayor, sorry.

[9:57] Oh, that's right. We have a present take. Well, we need to do roll call, don't we?

[10:01] We do.

[10:03] Mayor Good.

[10:04] Yeah, full council chambers like this.

[10:06] It's a little bit exciting.

[10:11] Mayer Good. Mayer Present.

[10:13] Mayer Present, Montoya.

[10:15] Still here? Councilwoman Kenton, me.

[10:17] Here. Councilman Moore.

[10:19] Here. Councilmember Rucing.

[10:21] Here. Councilman Sishka.

[10:22] Here. And Councilman Tany.

[10:24] Yes. All are present.

[10:26] Very good now. We'll move to presentations.

[10:30] We'll have a presentation from Prescott Meals

[10:32] on Wheels and the Center.

[10:41] Well, thank you, and good afternoon. My name is Neil Snellar, and I'm the executive director for

[10:45] Prescott Meals on Wheels, and standing to my right is Kathy McFadden, who you'll hear from

[10:50] shortly, who's the CEO of the Center. And without the Roli P. Simmons Community Center building,

[10:56] both of our organizations could not exist. And so I'm here just to thank the City of Prescott,

[11:01] and its citizens for the support of Prescott Meals on Wheels, who's been operating since 1973.

[11:08] And on behalf of our entire organization, thank you for the commitment from the city because

[11:14] it helps us to serve those who are most vulnerable in our community.

[11:18] We have 210 dedicated volunteers who drive over 120,000 miles each year, serving 700 clients

[11:26] roughly 104,000 meals each year.

[11:30] And we're facing incredible demand for meals on wheel services, and the need from the support

[11:34] from the community has never been more critical.

[11:37] A hot meal delivered by a volunteer

[11:39] to an individual means so much more than just a meal.

[11:43] It's a life-saver, a connection, a break and loneliness,

[11:47] and peace of mind.

[11:49] And too many of our senior neighbors

[11:50] are battling hunger and isolation.

[11:54] And with your ongoing support, we

[11:55] can partner and delivering hope to those neighbors who need it most.

[12:00] And with that, I'll turn it over to Kathy.

[12:05] So I'm Kathy McFadden. I have been with a center for 14 years and I've been the CEO for about a year and we are really working on turning things around and we just wanted to think the mayor and council for everything you do for us to allow us to use the really peace and

[12:21] building, which houses the center and meals on meals, to separate nonprofits. With Neil

[12:26] coming on board, we're doing a lot of things together and I think that is

[12:31] unifying our community even more. We have a lot of activities and I wanted to pass

[12:38] out a newsletter when I'm finished if I have permission so you could see that

[12:42] we're doing a lot of community events and we're even working on raising some

[12:46] funding to create some walking trails and a park area with the land behind the center.

[12:53] So we just want to let you know that we are more than just a senior center.

[12:57] We're actually 18 and over and we have been creating a lot of community events.

[13:02] So thank you for your time.

[13:05] Sure, go ahead.

[13:05] May I speak?

[13:15] Mayor?

[13:20] Thank you.

[13:20] Kathy and thank you, Neil.

[13:22] I know you're expanding the number of programs available to throughout the community.

[13:27] and although it's historically been kind of looked at as a senior location, there's a lot

[13:35] of different activities that are available for a variety of members of our community.

[13:41] And thank you, Neil.

[13:42] I know I've done a couple of right-alongs with the meals on the wheels myself and there's

[13:48] many people in the community that look forward to the delivery of those meals and sometimes

[13:54] It's their only contact with someone else outside of their home.

[14:01] So it's more than just a meal and a nourishment.

[14:05] Sometimes it's just a connection with other folks.

[14:09] So thank you all.

[14:22] I would excuse me.

[14:24] I had a request to speak.

[14:25] Did it not show up on your screen?

[14:29] Oh, would you like to say a council member Ruth?

[14:31] Thank you.

[14:33] We had a little technical difficulty here.

[14:35] I just wanted to say that I've been the council liaison to the center and they've been doing

[14:42] a wonderful job coming back from COVID, the parking lot's full, the buildings full, they're

[14:48] increasing their revenue and it's council, ex council member Suttles is also on the board and it's

[14:56] wonderful to see the collaboration between Meals on Wheels.

[15:00] In the center. So if you haven't had a chance, please visit the center and sign up for some of their wonderful activities. Thank you.

[15:10] All right. Well, now move on to proclamations. First one is a patient-blood management awareness week and that'll be presented by Councilman Shishka.

[15:34] I don't think you'll have any problem hearing me. Well, we only have six warehouses for this today.

[15:42] So, this is a proclamation for patient blood management awareness week, November 6 through 10th, 2023.

[15:52] Whereas, the city of Prescott is pleased to join Dignity Health, Yavipai Regional Medical Center,

[15:58] located in our city as it celebrates patient blood management over in this week, November 6 through 10th, 2023.

[16:06] And whereas dignity health, you have a pyregenometical center, is staffed by professionals with a commitment to improving patient outcomes through optimal blood management and whereas patient blood management is the appropriate provision and use of blood, its components and derivatives and strategies to reduce or avoid the need for a blood transfusion.

[16:29] And whereas patient blood management awareness week speaks to the concerns of every person

[16:35] to have the best health care available to them, respecting individual preferences and

[16:40] beliefs, and continuing education of health care professionals to provide that care.

[16:46] And whereas dignity health, the Avapai Regional Medical Center is staffed by professionals

[16:51] with a commitment to improving patient outcomes and educating the medical community about

[16:56] the best practices in blood management, and whereas we command the members of dignity health,

[17:02] the Avapay Regional Medical Center, for extending themselves in service to others, according

[17:08] to their commitment to improving patient outcomes.

[17:12] Now therefore, feel good.

[17:13] Mayor of the City of Prescott does recognize the week of November 6th through 10th, 2023

[17:19] as patient blood management awareness week. Congratulations.

[17:29] I'll give this to you, would you like to

[17:30] say a few words? Thank you, Councilman Sishka, and Mayor Good and the entire Council for all

[17:36] the good work that you do. Thank you. And I'm pleased as part of the patient blood management team

[17:43] at Dignity Health Wire MC to accept the proclamation and just say a couple of things about PBM,

[17:49] what we call it. I think most of us are very aware of our heart health, our brain, and digestive health,

[17:57] but do we think about our blood health? It is an organ 2 that does very important things for the body,

[18:04] and it turns out our own blood is still the best thing to have in our veins, but we want it to take oxygen

[18:10] to the organs and tissues and we want it to clot appropriately when we're injured. So it's interesting to

[18:17] that 400 years ago, a physician named William Harvey without microscopes or other testing equipment,

[18:22] he came to view blood as the priority organ.

[18:25] So we think it's real important to visit YMC.org in the medical services tab and patient

[18:31] blood management so you can learn more and you'll know how to contact us if you need some

[18:35] assistance.

[18:36] Thank you so much.

[18:38] Thank you, sir.

[18:45] Father, ways better.

[18:50] Thanks, Brad.

[18:51] Thank you very much.

[18:56] Our next proclamation is for homeless awareness month November 20, 23.

[19:06] I think I've got your feet, Steve, I only have four in mind.

[19:10] Well, members from a copy house, you can come up to anyone else.

[19:14] All right.

[19:15] It's my pleasure to read this proclamation on behalf of the city of Prescott

[19:19] for a copy house, homeless awareness month, November 2023.

[19:22] Whereas, Prescott Arizona joins the nation in recognizing November as homeless awareness month

[19:26] And whereas last year, the Prescott area identified over 150 homeless students, a

[19:33] gotpe house in Prescott works to reduce the number of homeless families by working,

[19:37] walking alongside families as they rebuild and turn their lives around.

[19:40] And whereas since its incorporation in 2013, a gotpe house has an 86% success, 86% success rate,

[19:47] a family's living independently one year after graduation from a gotpe house.

[19:51] Now therefore, the result that the city of Prescott hereby proclaims,

[19:55] November 2023 as Agape House homeless awareness month and encourages citizens of

[20:00] Prescott to give back and become involved with Agape House of Prescott in their vision

[20:05] to provide a pathway to independence for families and crisis.

[20:18] Does one of the worlds do you have any idea?

[20:22] Do you want to think?

[20:23] Yeah, come on, do you hear from the picture?

[20:26] It looks better if there's three people in the picture than two.

[20:32] Would would either of you like to say a few words?

[20:42] Mayor Council, first thank you for

[20:44] are honoring the whole organization, not just ours.

[20:48] There's some other organizations here that partner with us

[20:50] in Prescott and the surrounding area.

[20:52] It's a big problem.

[20:54] It's sad and a beautiful town.

[20:56] It's still an issue.

[20:58] We don't want the problems of Phoenix up here.

[21:02] But thank you for that.

[21:03] Thank Michael, your whole CDBG team.

[21:07] And the other is the change for the better.

[21:09] All those little pieces help us in many other organizations,

[21:12] and bring people from crisis, whether it's an older person, a senior, a family, juniors.

[21:19] We just want to help them take them from that life of crisis to a life of independence.

[21:23] I mean, we look forward to the day when one of those seats is filled by someone who came

[21:27] out of that crisis lifestyle.

[21:29] We have people that have come through our organization and others that not only are a homeless

[21:33] person you see, you know, pushing a shopping card or using drugs, we have people who have

[21:37] gone to start businesses in this town, where they're employing ten or more people

[21:42] all creating revenue for the town, for the city, and they've had changed lives, and it's

[21:48] because this is a great place to live. Everyone wants to live, it's everyone's hometown,

[21:53] sadly some people who are really challenged, wind up here, or have issues here. So thank

[21:58] you again. We appreciate you all.

[22:07] All right, we'll move on to the open call to the public.

[22:10] Thank you, Mayor. The city of Prescott welcomes public engagement. Residents may comment and

[22:15] address the council regarding matters that are not included on the posted agenda during

[22:18] call to the public. If you wish to speak, please complete a green speaker card and submit it to me

[22:23] prior to the meeting being convened. As a reminder, speakers are limited to four minutes,

[22:27] and the call to the public will be limited to 40 minutes in-

[22:30] Total, with the following stipulations. Citizens will be limited to addressing the council on the same topic, only four times in total. If a topic has been addressed more than five times by different speakers, the mayor may limit future discussion on this topic. And topics of a primarily national concern may be limited at the discretion of the mayor. I do have a couple of comment cards mayor and our first one is from, I believe the name is Lewis Row. I hope I said that correctly.

[22:55] I

[23:08] got some flyers a hand out. Is that okay?

[23:26] Okay, so I'm here for neurowrites.

[23:29] Break, bring in the mic down, sir. Okay. My name is Lewis Roe. I'm from Target at Trafficked.

[23:34] I'm a neurowrites organization. Human trafficking with cybernetics, cybernetics, the science

[23:40] of communications, control systems both machine and living. Cybernetics, human trafficking, we're

[23:50] traceably.

[23:51] A place where we can define torture and human trafficking

[23:54] when the cybernative world, the reality, struggle

[23:57] of influences, are made for a pretty penny,

[24:02] which means they make a lot of money.

[24:04] The destruction of oneself through illegal BCI

[24:07] brain computer interfaces, people are toyed with and used

[24:10] as illegal experiments for brain computer interfaces,

[24:13] neurology and implants, small semiconductors

[24:16] I connect and people to the computer from afar, data centers that

[24:20] collect and control this information with the information stolen

[24:25] from the individual, the individual and implanted.

[24:30] Once the implanted you are connected to a whole wide range

[24:32] of deep neural networks, where AI, cybernatics, and capable

[24:37] of influencing the mind through nerve reactions.

[24:41] All cognitive liberty at this point are stolen by the

[24:44] hands of corporate professionals.

[24:47] Cyber torturers, cyber torturers, what is called

[24:50] by the United Nations, United Nations created a mandate

[24:54] on cyber torture, but was turned away.

[24:57] Much like the individuals that can

[24:59] plane in our turn away into the world of mental health.

[25:04] Not truly observing the problems we need, technology that

[25:08] can read these implants, and find the person and find them

[25:11] in the person's body.

[25:12] We need a way to save people from these illegal ventures from corporations' hands with corporate chains.

[25:19] My organization would like to support from this from the city.

[25:23] My organization plans to retain a cardin of liberty without the restraints of criminals at the criminal's hands.

[25:32] These corporate individuals,

[25:35] these corporate individuals here are in the U.S. or foreign, do not care about what happens to the individual.

[25:41] your mind and your life are in the hands of the corporate corporations.

[25:47] The cybernetics act as a sort of mind surveillance with a neural implants, AI communication

[25:54] cybernetics, and torture for a formation.

[25:57] This type of reality is fearful, but is happening today.

[26:02] Data centers somewhere, it's collecting all your information identifiably.

[26:08] If the public knew exactly what was happening in today's time, there would be an alchra.

[26:14] Neurodata in today's time is everything, and there are, they are rocking the boat untraceably and illegally.

[26:21] This type of human experimentation must come to a stop.

[26:25] The truth about neuroscience and ways of capturing brain data, illegally, must be approached and put these people under accountability.

[26:33] The law defines men all equal, not one and both the other.

[26:38] The ethics and values need to change in the medical field, including psychiatric.

[26:42] When each structure in a way to capture these, capture this criminalization, vote for

[26:50] and pledge for neural rights.

[26:52] For every citizen and remove people from corporate hands, no man has the right to take

[26:58] others for any purpose. That includes science and within

[27:02] Deborah's in no way. Thank you.

[27:07] Oh, Louis, targetting traffic. Thank you. I'm

[27:09] from Phoenix, Arizona. I was smoking in front of the

[27:11] sea council there. I've done a lot of political work and

[27:14] done a lot of activism over the course of five or six years.

[27:20] I would like to act in the city, but I would like to

[27:22] work with the other officials. Thank you.

[27:25] Thank you.

[27:27] Carol Benedict.

[27:36] Good afternoon, Mayor City Council.

[27:39] I just wanted to come to say thank you to the City Council,

[27:43] a Councilwoman, Washington Mayor, good.

[27:47] The entire development team, city attorney, Chelsea,

[27:52] huge thank you for working through the many bureaucracies

[27:55] to finally get a slaughter for a triple project.

[27:59] And I'm just excited to go on to this next phase and I just wanted to publicly say thank you.

[28:05] You've all spent lots of hours and man hours working on this with us.

[28:10] And we appreciate it and it is not going to notice and just thank you so much.

[28:15] Fort Wippel is going to change the face of Edge and homelessness in this community.

[28:19] It's 103 units. We have 105 veterans on our waiting list.

[28:23] So it's going to, it's going to shift dramatically for us in our community and for our veterans.

[28:29] So thank you.

[28:30] How was it?

[28:37] Lisa Romaine.

[28:38] Again, I hope I said the name right.

[28:41] I can't hear a thing you're saying.

[28:44] Lisa Romaine.

[28:46] Lisa.

[28:53] Good afternoon, Mr. Mayor.

[28:55] City Council members.

[28:58] This is my first time in front of such an August board.

[29:02] So I'll try to be as coherent as possible.

[29:06] I'm here because I'm a dog walker.

[29:10] I am one of many in my neighborhood,

[29:13] and we have had in the last two, three months.

[29:18] Eight out of ten that I am familiar with have been attacked,

[29:22] hospitalized or agressed by off-leash dogs.

[29:26] We really feel that this needs to be addressed in some fashion

[29:30] and what fashion I really don't know, perhaps better education for dog owners, perhaps mandatory

[29:37] training for people who have aggressive dogs. It's got to the point where we really cannot,

[29:44] I don't feel that I can walk and enjoy the beauty of Prescott in the morning without having to

[29:49] look behind me constantly when I hear something coming behind me. I would really appreciate some

[29:56] Study on this, and as I say, I'm not sure.

[30:00] What the procedure would be, but I do believe that people who have dogs need to be reeducated. I know there are laws on the books about off-leash dogs, but it seems that no one seems to be aware of them.

[30:15] I've had dog owners to address me and telling me that I'm a trouble maker, that there's nothing wrong with their dog and I have to pick up my dog as many other people do.

[30:28] It's really becoming a problem, and specifically from what I hear in my area, which is the Prescott Heights Campbell,

[30:35] in the area.

[30:38] And officer Gray of animal control has

[30:41] concurred that this is becoming a problem in this area.

[30:45] So I would appreciate some consideration on this matter.

[30:49] Thank you very much.

[30:54] Sam?

[31:04] Sarah, can I have just a reminder for everybody to get as close as you can to that mic?

[31:11] Thank you.

[31:12] Yeah, thank you.

[31:13] Can hear me, okay.

[31:14] I want to follow up with Lisa's comments regarding the dog situation and press good heights.

[31:22] I've known about them for a year, since one of our best friends was bitten, mauled.

[31:28] She has a deformity of her hand, her dog needed care.

[31:31] She finally had to go to counseling in order to deal with the dog issue.

[31:36] Ten days ago, I was walking in my neighborhood where I've lived for ten years.

[31:42] out of the blue, here comes a pit bull. In two seconds that large pink grin on their faces

[31:53] facing me, I had no idea what to expect. I have a tiny little poodle. I tried picking

[32:01] him up, he slipped out of my hands. I picked, tried picking him up again, so it became a chaotic

[32:07] situation, I was actually on the opposite side of the street, then this person's house.

[32:14] And of course, I actually, the dog didn't bite me, and I can't say I was surprised because

[32:20] who would know.

[32:22] When a dog is attacking you, you have no clue what's going to happen.

[32:26] So with my heart pounding, I walked home about 900 feet as how close I live.

[32:32] I didn't even know this house was in there.

[32:34] It's kind of tucked up in the woods.

[32:37] Anyway,

[32:40] I decided, you know, with the one person

[32:43] that was totally mulled with her hand,

[32:46] was only one of two that I knew about.

[32:48] The other person had just been attacked and bitten quite

[32:53] savagely until Delano.

[32:56] And that had been about 10 days prior.

[32:58] So I thought, you know, this is just too much.

[33:01] I'm going to go back and I'm going to confront this man with his dog.

[33:05] And of course, he had the excuse.

[33:07] My dog's just outside playing in the front yard with my kids.

[33:11] And I thought afterwards, well, if that's the case, why is he running after my dog in the middle

[33:17] of the street?

[33:19] So I just want to bring it to your attention.

[33:21] This has become quite a problem as Lisa said in Prescott Heights.

[33:26] We know there's rules on the books, of course I call it officer gray, I talk to her.

[33:34] You know, something that you people may not think about is it's one thing to be bitten

[33:39] Mald and have to go to the hospital.

[33:42] It's also another thing emotionally to have to deal with an aggressive animal racing towards you.

[33:48] You think that's not going to go away anytime soon.

[33:51] So I would encourage us as a community to seriously look at the dog laws that are on the books and they probably need tweaking.

[34:03] When I went to talk to the man, and by the way, when I first was charged, I won't call it an attack because I didn't get hurt.

[34:13] praise the Lord,

[34:16] but, you know, he would never apologize, it's just like, you know, it's just

[34:20] another day in Prescott. So when I went back to him, I drove my car over there and I said,

[34:27] I want to talk to you. And he said, this is a confrontation, get off my property. So those are the

[34:33] kind of dog orders that we're dealing with and we might have to keep that in mind. Anyway, thank you

[34:38] taking your time to hear this address.

[34:43] That's all mayor.

[34:55] Very well.

[34:56] We'll move on to the consent agenda.

[34:58] Does anyone on the council want to pull any items off of the consent agenda?

[35:04] Yes, mayor.

[35:05] I'd like to pull items B, C and D.

[35:11] Thank you.

[35:15] Say that again.

[35:16] D and E and D. B is in boy. C and D. Okay.

[35:32] Any additional items?

[35:35] No, I'll entertain a motion on the remaining items then.

[35:40] You know, I move that we approve the consent agenda items A through K with the exception of items B, C and D. Second. Second.

[35:48] Ask

[36:06] the seven zero.

[36:07] Very good. Councilmember Rucing.

[36:12] Thank you. I just have a few questions for community development about this easement.

[36:31] Well, I'm not community development, but I drew the short straw.

[36:35] Ask away. Okay. Thanks, Gwen.

[36:38] This is about a dedication of a right away for creating a public street in the South Ranch residential

[36:46] development of a deep-well ranch and also extension of water and sewer utilities and I just

[36:55] have a few questions will there be an will that easement include room for a multi-modal

[37:03] sidewalk along this main connector. So Councilperson received the there are three items on the agenda.

[37:12] The first one is the dedication of the right of way, and then there's the plat for phase 1,

[37:19] A of South Ranch and the plat for 3A of South Ranch.

[37:23] The dedication of the right of way is for 62 feet of pavement and a median.

[37:30] But on the plat, for phase 1, a and phase 3, a, you'll see a trail easement within the tracks that a but the right of way. So there is a trail easement along the west side of gentleman and the water is along the east side of gentleman. So those things are contained alongside of the right of way, but the dedication is only 62 feet. So those things are in private tracks, just outside of the dedicated right of way.

[38:00] either a public utility easement or a tract for public use. Okay thank you because I remember

[38:06] looking at those plants I had to get out a magnifying glass and it said in very spine print

[38:12] T.R. something. It's a T.T. So it's a trail easement. Trail easement and the easement is outside

[38:19] of this public easement. It'll be on the south side of the right of way but it is in a

[38:24] public tract, yes. Okay. All righty. Okay. Well, thank you very much. I just wanted to clarify that and to make sure that we had easements for the water and sewer utilities included. So we didn't have to purchase the land and pay for it to put in easements.

[38:43] Those are what utilities are already there. And in fact, construction plans were submitted and we did verify that they're within those areas.

[38:52] Okay. Thank you very much for going. I appreciate it. Mayor. Mayor. Yeah, I had a question. This may be for Gwen or maybe it's actually more appropriate for Joe.

[39:02] When we're looking at these final plats, what is our actual charge in improving these final plats?

[39:09] Well, I think we're still on night of night of night of night.

[39:12] Okay. Are we?

[39:13] Oh, we can make a decision on that and then we can move on.

[39:16] Fair enough. Fair enough. I will I will hold my question and tell the next item.

[39:19] So I'll entertain a motion on item 9B.

[39:25] May I move that we approve item 9B on the consent agenda?

[39:31] Have a motion as second please vote.

[39:42] Pass the seven zero.

[39:43] All right, good to move to item 9C.

[39:50] Thank you.

[39:52] As you realize, we just earlier had a study session about Deepwell Ranch.

[39:57] And protection, public safety, we've been having many discussions about overflights, noise,

[40:06] DNL. And this is a 720 more residents coming soon. And I was concerned about, are we going

[40:18] to, since it's in the airport in Fluent area, the ASAP plan, are we requiring any soundproofing

[40:25] to decrease hopefully some of the complaints that we receive

[40:31] soundproofing as far as windows, addict, anything required here.

[40:37] Aaron Council, in response to that, the development criteria of both in the

[40:42] Deepwell Master Plan and the city's current building codes have an elevated level of

[40:48] insulation that's required in order to meet those codes and apologize on George Rowling the

[40:55] They effectively create additional sound barriers,

[40:59] just meeting the energy codes in the building code,

[41:02] but the deep-well master plan has additional requirements on top of that.

[41:06] They reinforce during the building permitting process.

[41:08] So the answer is yes.

[41:10] We do have codes that will add additional sound mitigation levels,

[41:14] and those will be enforced during the individual building construction permits

[41:17] for each individual.

[41:19] Okay, and then thank you.

[41:21] This also includes the next agenda item.

[41:25] on the consent agenda item 90 and C. So I'd like to just combine the two.

[41:33] I attend every airport advisory committee meeting and at the end of every meeting, they have a discussion about all the complaints.

[41:42] And our airport employees have to go out and they make personal home visits to people in Deepwell Ranch, mostly about overflight complaints.

[41:54] and they met with the HOAs, they met with community people and I'm I'm I'm

[42:00] stunned at how much time and effort they have to spend because it's people are

[42:05] just not being properly notified and I would like to request that before we

[42:13] improve these plants that we upgrade the notification procedures to include an AIA map,

[42:24] a map of the airport influence area, a disclosure, and then also a release that releases

[42:31] the city of any responsibility for all the complaints in the noise.

[42:36] Because apparently, and as you can see from the study session, people aren't being properly

[42:44] notified, and these documents should be signed at the opening of S. Square when the deposits

[42:52] are put down, because as it is now, they do not realize the extent of what they're getting

[42:59] into.

[43:01] Thank you.

[43:04] And I'll just address that briefly because this is something that we've been involved

[43:07] and legal as well, having a feeling that disclosures were insufficient, there is a requirement

[43:13] for a disclosure and a form of one within the navigation easement contained in the deep

[43:17] old ranch master plan and development agreement, and we did not believe that that form was

[43:23] going out.

[43:24] We have since working with the home builder, ensure that that now is part of what's going out.

[43:31] It's part of the community documents that they get, so there are a lot of documents, but

[43:37] They do get that updated form that we required, and we made them, we made sure that they did

[43:41] that before we got to this step.

[43:44] And then I'll say, as it relates to a form kind of waving liability of the city, I don't

[43:49] think we can do that specifically, although we do do that through the navigation easement,

[43:53] which applies to all of those properties.

[43:55] So I think that we're happy they worked with us.

[43:58] They weren't where we wanted them to be, but we've come a long way and they updated their

[44:02] disclosures to contain that form.

[44:04] Because I would like to see a copy of those disclosures just for my own peace of mind.

[44:11] And I think that that's something that people just have not been properly informed.

[44:20] And it is just, it has been skyrocketing because we keep approving more and more subdivisions under the flight plan.

[44:27] They have 800 fly-overs, over 800 fly-overs a day, and we bear the airport bears the

[44:35] brunt of the phone calls, and maybe in those forms, we should ask them to just maybe call

[44:41] the builder and his legal team instead of us.

[44:44] Thank you.

[44:49] Well, I have similar concerns, I've actually set down with two homeowners in Westwood and gone

[44:58] over the actual closing date.

[45:00] The documents that they received and assigned off on one day purchased their homes. They were told

[45:08] that they would have a full copy of the CCNRs. They were given a link on their computer

[45:18] to access those. The link was broken. They were not able to access the CCNRs. They received

[45:26] about two weeks after their close-up escrow.

[45:31] So that obviously was not sufficient,

[45:34] and making a statement like the homeowner will have access

[45:38] to those without actually being able to sign off

[45:42] and saying, I received them,

[45:44] and I've had a chance to review them.

[45:48] Even here, where it says CC&Rs,

[45:54] which reference the navigation easement.

[45:56] Yes, there is an navigation easement on the underlying property that the property owners have signed off on.

[46:04] But I think it's essential that each and every individual homeowner acknowledge that navigation easement and sign off on it individually,

[46:13] so that they know what the total overall impact is going to be in their homes.

[46:21] They also referenced a placard in the sales office.

[46:25] Well, this placard doesn't have anything to do with the navigation easement of the

[46:30] then showing a proximity of their home to the airport.

[46:35] Well, we've heard from a lot of people that said, well, yeah, I knew I was buying a home

[46:40] near the airport, but I had no idea that there would be this many overflights, and that's

[46:45] navigation easement is there to do, to identify the overflight impact and make sure the

[46:53] homeowner knows that and acknowledges that they're purchasing in a high aircraft overflight

[47:01] area and they accept the consequences of that. So these things need to be more legitimate

[47:10] and they need to be individually acknowledged.

[47:16] And I don't think that's happening.

[47:19] Even though the builders are claiming it,

[47:24] I've yet to see it actually happen on a individual basis.

[47:29] So how are we going to enforce that and monitor it?

[47:38] I think it's important.

[47:42] And clearly we've spent a lot of time on this disclosure issue.

[47:46] And I think that they've improved.

[47:47] We do need to enforce and monitor, and I think the how we enforce and monitor is, it's an agreement, it's part of about the navigation easement and the contract.

[47:57] So on a contractual level, we can withhold building permits if we see that that's not being done.

[48:03] I have checked and based on what I've, and I think someone in the community development went to the office office to make sure to see what their actual documents were and it did contain that document.

[48:14] And my impression is that it wasn't being given previously.

[48:18] It is now.

[48:19] And I've checked to make sure that the link works, for example, the link now works.

[48:24] And we do have that form, as I mentioned, the form of disclosure that's required and the contract

[48:28] is finally being given in part of those disclosures.

[48:31] Their signed off on as a receipt, though there are maybe 20 things being signed off on.

[48:36] So it is part of a big packet.

[48:38] But it's signed off on before the contract is counter-signed and that we have receipts for that.

[48:46] So we can at least acknowledge that we have the receipts and enforce on the receipts.

[48:50] And then there's a five-day resision period to receive the deposit back.

[48:54] Five days is not a lot, but we don't have anything covering that in our agreement.

[48:59] Well as long as that's being done and done consistently, I think we should be in a pretty good condition.

[49:06] So, I would suggest that whenever we have a inspector going out to look at a new home construction,

[49:15] maybe they drop by the sales office and take a good look to see that these disclosures continue to be offered.

[49:23] I mean, I was told this was happening before when it was door-n-homes.

[49:28] And then I was told it was happening when American Southern homes acquired Dorn, and now we have a third entity ever more, which is over and above those.

[49:41] So every time it seems like the ownership changes, then there's new policies, and sometimes the individual homeowners don't get what they're expecting to get.

[49:52] So, as long as we can drop in occasionally without previous notification, and we can confirm that

[50:01] this is continuing to be done correctly, then we should be okay.

[50:07] I have one more question.

[50:09] Mayer?

[50:10] We have Councilwoman Ken Tell me's up next.

[50:14] I have two points on this complex here.

[50:17] And George, I was in your office yesterday talking to you about this particular thing.

[50:22] And I wanted to find out, is the owner here today?

[50:23] I'd like to ask a question about the ability after reading the airport recommendations on this particular complex.

[50:34] There was a disconnect we discovered in the landscaping because of the height recommendation for the area.

[50:42] There was no wage for the homeowner, the end user, to be able to have access to that landscaping plan.

[50:50] and we discussed getting it into the CC&Rs, so that the homeowner would see the approved

[50:56] plantings because of the height limitation imposed on the airport.

[51:01] So is he here today, I'd like to ask him about that.

[51:04] We do have a representative here from the developer who may be able to speak to that.

[51:11] Okay.

[51:11] Mayor, council for your records, Lindsay Shubi, with the law firm of Gammajum Burnham, Forty North

[51:15] Central and Phoenix, Arizona.

[51:17] So thank you very much and thank you to staff, answering all those great questions we've had so far.

[51:23] We can work with any neighboring, any neighbor that has, that we're aware of the height restrictions on all of the landscaping and we absolutely will ensure that

[51:33] that our residents are aware of that.

[51:36] Well in what way because I know it's been a disconnect when you've got these airport recommendations on high limitation

[51:42] And I know how this works with the developer who is in charge of landscaping the common areas.

[51:48] He brings in a landscape plan.

[51:50] It's approved or disapproved.

[51:52] But the end user, the homeowner, when they go to landscape their property,

[51:57] they're left to just hire anybody out there to landscape.

[52:00] They don't have the availability to the same airport recommendations and plant lists.

[52:06] And that's where the disconnect comes.

[52:07] So if all of a sudden you've got a, you know,

[52:10] I don't know, I should ask Eric, a Siberian elm that grows to,

[52:13] you know, 150 feet, whatever they are.

[52:15] And they've planted it in error.

[52:17] They're not aware of it.

[52:19] So is there any way of getting that actually in the CCNRs?

[52:23] So the end user, when they buy that,

[52:27] and they go to higher independent landscaping company,

[52:30] Have the awareness, because expecting people to go police that after the fact is a very difficult thing.

[52:37] You know, it shouldn't be, it's not really fair for the airport people to have to do that either.

[52:40] It should be stopped in the beginning.

[52:44] Correct, mayor, mayor, pro-tem, councilwoman, agree.

[52:47] And I think that's something maybe we can work with the HOA in terms of enforcing that.

[52:52] It is hard to go through multiple homeowners in certain situations.

[52:56] And we shouldn't be the airport's responsibility nor should it be code compliance responsibility although that you know is a situation where we do that we do commit we will work I will tell you working with your city attorney we we are now more in tune with these disclosures than we ever thought we would be so so the current management and leadership

[53:18] mayor council member I commit to you know we if we go through the power point we do have all of our

[53:23] disclosures they've all been updated and and we're more up to speed on our disclosures than we ever thought we

[53:30] would be so we can ensure that in working with the property owners that have those height limitations

[53:37] I don't know what putting them in the CCNRs per se but I do you know working with the HOA that might be the right

[53:44] mechanism in terms of making sure that the neighborhood is taking

[53:48] to accountability in response.

[53:50] Well, that the end user is aware of that,

[53:52] immediately, not after the fact.

[53:54] The second issue real quick, and I'm going to build on what the mayor was saying.

[53:57] What happened, and I wasn't planning in zoning when this issue came up several times,

[54:01] is the disclosure on the navigation easements.

[54:03] What's happened in the past to build on what he was saying,

[54:07] is the chain of events, so the person goes into buy the home.

[54:10] They're not aware of the navigation easement because it's not disclosed

[54:14] right off the bat if they don't do their due diligence but then what happens they put the

[54:18] deposit down on the home they go to sign the papers and if they're aware enough out of

[54:23] the 150 page packet that they're going to get they might notice the navigation easement

[54:27] well they may decide not to sign it at that point but by that point they've lost the ability

[54:32] to get back their down payment on the house so my question is how has that been corrected

[54:38] has it been corrected because that was many of the constituents that I met with over this

[54:43] issue said to me I didn't get it and when I did get it it was too late. We were going to lose

[54:49] our 20% down or whatever it was by the time we saw that navigation easement.

[54:55] Mayor Mayor Protem Council member all of these disclosures now happen within before when

[55:03] on contract phase. So at the beginning, not in the closing documents phase. So we have

[55:08] the public report. We've got the CC&Rs, and those have been updated. We've got the

[55:13] placard on the sales office, and we also have the plat notes. And I can take you through

[55:18] those individually, but those are now signed and acknowledged before the seller countersigned

[55:25] the document, and then there is that time when you can get out of the contract and get your

[55:30] back. So when you say you've got the beginning, it's at the purchase and sale agreement stage.

[55:35] So when you make a statement that you've got the placard in the sales office, I'm assuming

[55:39] it's been framed and it's on the wall for full disclosure right off the bat.

[55:45] Mayor, council member absolutely disframed in on the wall and it is something we

[55:50] understand the importance of this to the community. The concern it has been to the airport

[55:54] and all of our sales team is trained on ensuring that this is right again right out of the gate

[56:00] at the purchase and sale agreement stage,

[56:03] all of these documents are provided, acknowledged,

[56:06] and there is an opportunity for the potential buyer

[56:10] to get out of the contract

[56:11] and to get their money back without any penalty.

[56:14] Thank you.

[56:15] You're welcome.

[56:16] I have a question.

[56:18] Just a second.

[56:20] Do you have some type of a disclosure

[56:23] that describes what an navigation easement is?

[56:27] I think if you take 100 average new homeowners and said you're signing an

[56:33] navigation easement, they wouldn't have a clue what that is.

[56:37] So being able to have something on the wall says, what is an navigation easement

[56:40] before I buy this house?

[56:43] It would be good for them to know exactly what it is.

[56:46] Yeah, Mayor Mayor Pro, great question.

[56:49] Again, in the public report, it absolutely says, notice and disclosure is located within

[56:55] of the vicinity of the Prescott Municipal Airport, Ernest A. Lovefield, the location will be

[57:02] subject to aircraft over aircraft, over flights, ordinance number. So we don't just say

[57:08] navigation easement, because I agree with you, that is it. Those are two words that people don't

[57:13] use in general, you know, much like ministerial, which George and I were talking about today,

[57:17] it's not a word that everyone uses. So it absolutely is broken down into plain language,

[57:22] in multiple areas, like we said, the public report, the plat, as well as the CCNRs.

[57:30] And it is broken down into plain language.

[57:32] There's also a phone number for the airport to contact if there are questions about the number

[57:36] of over-flight, but it is very, as well as the placard.

[57:42] Well, I know I've heard from a resident who said, yeah, I knew I was moving in next to an airport.

[57:47] But I had no idea that we're going to have overify every 67 seconds all day long from six in the morning until 8 or 9 at night and sometimes you've got the students learning how to fly on instrumentation.

[58:06] So it happens all day long even the weekends.

[58:08] and it's important that they understand what an navigation easement is, and what the impact

[58:15] is that they are agreeing to when they purchase that home and reside there.

[58:23] Council member Rucing.

[58:25] Thank you.

[58:26] I really appreciate your response.

[58:30] I would like to make a suggestion, you know, a pitcher's worth a thousand words, and the airport

[58:36] Influence area map is very simple, very clear.

[58:40] It's a giant rectangle, shows the airport.

[58:44] And it should be included, should be on your wall,

[58:49] should be included in all the disclosures for the people.

[58:53] Just look at sign and have the location of the subdivision

[58:58] and how it relates to the end of the runway

[59:00] and the fact that it's in this airport influence area.

[59:04] because I think that that is full disclosure, transparency, just to include a map for people

[59:15] to see.

[59:16] And then if they call up and complain afterwards, you know, we're pretty well-covered.

[59:22] Thank you very much.

[59:23] I appreciate it.

[59:25] Thank you, Mayor.

[59:28] George, my understanding of approval of final platoes that we're determining if it's

[59:34] substantial conformance with preliminary plaque? That is correct sir. Is the final

[59:39] plaque for this in substantial conformance with the preliminary plaque in your

[59:43] opinion? It is. Thank you.

[59:48] Councilman Shishka. Thank you, Mayor. I'd kind of like to

[59:52] go back to the application assessment. I'm not so concerned with the initial

[59:57] We'll sail at the house.

[1:00:00] I'm concerned with the second sale and the third sale and the fourth sale of the same house. With the

[1:00:08] avigation easement does a signed avigation easement by the initial buyer of the house.

[1:00:15] Is that, are they signing for all of the future owners of the house?

[1:00:22] Mayor, Councilman, great question.

[1:00:25] When there is a resale of the House, when you're dealing with the title company, all of

[1:00:29] the public report, the CCNRs, the Avocation Eastmint, are all party to that sale.

[1:00:36] So absolutely there will be acknowledgement as you move forward, and it will be re-disclosed

[1:00:41] with the CCNRs and the public report and the Avocation Eastmint will be part of that

[1:00:45] package every time the House is re-sold.

[1:00:47] So every time someone buys the house, they have to re-sign the navigation easement.

[1:00:53] Yeah.

[1:00:53] Mayor Councilman, they don't re-sign the navigation easement, but it is absolutely disclosed

[1:00:58] to them.

[1:00:59] So the navigation easement is placed over the property.

[1:01:02] They don't re-sign it, but they will get the CC&Rs and the plat note and the public

[1:01:07] report and the navigation easements.

[1:01:09] So there are four different mechanisms for notice for future home buyers.

[1:01:14] And if I may, it's an obligation that runs with the land once signed by the initial property owner.

[1:01:19] So it's an obligation that is incurred by subsequent property owners, but they don't sign it.

[1:01:24] Just like people don't sign an easement for a right of what easement when they buy near a road.

[1:01:30] But the obligation continues, and it becomes an obligation of the title company to disclose that as they go through the process.

[1:01:36] Okay. Thank you.

[1:01:38] And how do we deal with people who lease this property?

[1:01:42] Well, this type of disclosure being included in their leasing documents,

[1:01:47] so that somebody who says I'm moving in here for a year,

[1:01:52] and then finds out that they've got these huge number of overflights.

[1:01:56] How is that going to be addressed and protected to the leasing?

[1:02:01] And I can address this briefly, just under the state of the law.

[1:02:05] And it will say, you're not here.

[1:02:07] I don't believe they're here on any lease properties,

[1:02:11] but they could be leased by subsequent purchasers.

[1:02:13] And there are some disclosure requirements that are limited.

[1:02:18] And so, unless or will have to disclose the airport influence area,

[1:02:23] but that's about it.

[1:02:24] It's essentially your near and near port.

[1:02:26] And in terms of obligations to provide termination and so forth,

[1:02:31] that's not within the state.

[1:02:33] So that would be for the homeowners association and the CC and ours that they'll have to abide by once they become a leaky.

[1:02:40] If there's any CC and ours or homeowners association rules, they'd have to follow that.

[1:02:44] How many HOAs are being planned for this entire area?

[1:02:51] Just one?

[1:02:52] No.

[1:02:53] Or take a minute.

[1:02:57] Mayor Mayor Protem, I just want to make sure I was giving you the right answer.

[1:03:01] Right now there is one.

[1:03:03] There could be additional in the future, but right now there is just one.

[1:03:05] And I would imagine considering the total number of residential homes being built in this area either end up being more than one.

[1:03:16] Mayor, there could be. We don't know. There is one at this time.

[1:03:21] Let's see. One other question I had as far as these plants right now, both one A and three is a three A.

[1:03:29] three. They only have one way in and one way out. I think when the, um, there's kind of

[1:03:37] be connections, but even looking at the extended connections, there's still still, so

[1:03:43] it only seems to be one way in and one way out. The two units will connect with their

[1:03:51] face-toes, unit-toes, behind them. So the next set of plots that you see will have the street

[1:03:57] connectivity that we'll connect one A and three A together.

[1:04:01] I mean, I was looking at the larger map and I don't see a secondary

[1:04:06] access or an accident route.

[1:04:10] Are you referring to an access other than on to Jenna Lane, there will be two connections

[1:04:15] to Jenna Lane.

[1:04:18] Is that?

[1:04:18] Well, no, three A don't seem to be connected.

[1:04:22] They aren't with this phase of the plants, the next phase of plants will connect them

[1:04:26] a street that would give him a secondary exit or it would allow one A to exit through three A or vice versa without

[1:04:33] Should their connection to genalain be blocked so what happens if the

[1:04:39] expansion of these areas doesn't occur and

[1:04:43] You have people residing in here with only one way in one way out

[1:04:48] So we have what are called financial assurances for work that's done on the property grading for instance

[1:04:54] will probably occur across the entire site rather than one final plat unit at a time, and

[1:05:01] that additional would allow us to create a temporary connectivity if we need to.

[1:05:07] The shouldn't a builder's be required to put in the roads so that there is a secondary exit

[1:05:14] before they actually develop the individual lots.

[1:05:18] Generally, that doesn't happen as part of the process because we have a fire before they go in.

[1:05:26] We're just putting all those people at risk.

[1:05:29] Only if there are one way in and out is blocked, which seems unlikely to happen in most cases.

[1:05:38] I think that's a concern I have, is that even though future connectivity and extra egress is planned,

[1:05:48] sometimes I mean let's remember what happened during the real estate meltdown in

[1:05:54] no seven those properties in good year and other places were just they walked

[1:05:59] away from they never finished them until you know a decade later so in the

[1:06:07] meantime the people had bought there were and they were in high risk areas and I

[1:06:16] These developed areas also have protection.

[1:06:21] I can understand the, did you?

[1:06:25] Hi, Chelsea Walton interim community development directors.

[1:06:29] So to your question, Mayor, there is a temporary ingress egress for fire access

[1:06:35] provided during the construction activities.

[1:06:38] I believe it's on the farthest west side of the development.

[1:06:43] So not on the general lane side of it, but on the west side.

[1:06:47] So there will be connectivity.

[1:06:49] It will be temporary until the other final plats come in.

[1:06:53] But that will provide that level of protection,

[1:06:57] should something happen with those other phases,

[1:06:59] and then until such time those are approved and constructed.

[1:07:05] All right, that's a good answer.

[1:07:06] Thank you, sir.

[1:07:07] I know we did that for a story

[1:07:09] and a couple of the other developments.

[1:07:11] So there was a temporary egress.

[1:07:15] All right, thank you.

[1:07:16] That's all the questions I have.

[1:07:19] I have a question.

[1:07:22] I have a question.

[1:07:23] Kathy Rucing is up again.

[1:07:24] Councilmember Rucing.

[1:07:26] Okay.

[1:07:27] Thank you.

[1:07:27] I'd like to ask.

[1:07:30] Gar, city attorney to get with the attorney from gamage and the builders represented there to get everything

[1:07:39] she said today in writing and signed because we've been here for many times where we get a sales pitch

[1:07:47] and people are very happy to tell us what we want to hear, but then we never get it in writing

[1:07:53] and we don't have a leg to stand on number two, we need to have a city ordinance.

[1:08:02] We don't have a city ordinance requiring two city dedicated streets in and out of a subdivision.

[1:08:11] So until we get that ordinance passed, we're going to just continue to see these plots

[1:08:17] where one subdivision is daisy-chained upon another,

[1:08:22] which is exactly what we have in the high risk area,

[1:08:26] off of a copper basin road.

[1:08:30] So I'd like to see two city-dedicated streets accessing

[1:08:35] all future plants.

[1:08:37] It's all in the name of public safety.

[1:08:39] We had that Indian fire with cathedral,

[1:08:43] pines, fire trucks were trying to get out,

[1:08:46] hundreds of people were trying to exit all on that same road so it's time that we start

[1:08:52] doing our business and taking care of the public and not leaving public safety in the

[1:08:57] hands of the developers whose only care is the bottom line thank you

[1:09:10] city attorney I've

[1:09:13] got no it's all look for that agreement council and tanny thank you mayor seems like each time

[1:09:19] we're asked to to look at a final part to see if it's in substantial conformity with an initial

[1:09:24] the same good conversation comes up so I really would echo what's been said in terms of making

[1:09:31] sure that we've got ordinances that it's sure public safety. As it is, help me out,

[1:09:39] Mr. Ward, I'm uncomfortable being the arbiter of whether there's sufficient ingress and egress for emergency purposes,

[1:09:48] but I know we have experts who do that. Does the Fire Department look at these plats before they come to us and do they sign up on them?

[1:09:54] Every department looks at and improves prior to us bringing it full.

[1:09:57] So, once it comes to me, I can be certain that people who do this for a living,

[1:10:02] that look at emergency preparedness and emergency and dress and egress for a living,

[1:10:05] have looked at and signed off.

[1:10:06] And I don't need to discuss that up here.

[1:10:08] Is that what I'm hearing you say?

[1:10:10] The dispersal reality.

[1:10:11] If I just want to, that's fine, but that's not, that's a level that's

[1:10:15] already been taken care of by others who who do that for a living.

[1:10:18] Yes.

[1:10:19] All of your departments thoroughly review preliminary

[1:10:21] class before they come to you and final class before they come to you, and they have to sign

[1:10:26] off before we bring them forward. I appreciate the clarification. That said, I would be in favor

[1:10:31] of what the Councilman Russies brought up, Councilwoman Russies brought up on what the marriage

[1:10:34] brought up that we had to look at. Is it sufficient? Is it what the Department is telling us this

[1:10:38] sufficient? Is it really sufficient? And if they say, yeah, it is. Here's why great. If they say,

[1:10:43] actually, you know, we never thought of it that way. Thanks for stepping in Clark and fixing it for us.

[1:10:48] And in that case, I'm happy to look at it in a different way.

[1:10:52] Council, and then can tell me.

[1:10:55] George, this might just be, this is a technical question.

[1:10:59] In some cases, when we attach stipulations to approvals,

[1:11:04] when you agree to that, it actually says that we are approving

[1:11:08] this preliminary plot with the attached stipulations.

[1:11:11] In this case, do we need to do that with the airport stuff?

[1:11:15] In this particular case, the airport approved subject to some of the information you've already heard from the developer and from our city attorney.

[1:11:23] I don't believe that's a stipulated approval. I think that's something that was worked out separately. You do have an item coming up on your agenda later

[1:11:30] where there was some stipulated agreement between the developer and the airport at the Planning Commission and we will discuss those specifically in that presentation.

[1:11:39] And so they will be named in the approval that we approve it with those stipulations.

[1:11:47] Not for these items, you are determining substantial conformance to the preliminary plan.

[1:11:53] But didn't they become get into substantial conforming status with those attached stipulations?

[1:12:02] No.

[1:12:02] It was very important because it's part of the contract.

[1:12:07] It couldn't come forward here without compliance.

[1:12:10] And it's kind of above the final plot process.

[1:12:13] And somewhat bigger than the final plot process.

[1:12:15] So the final plot would be an approval.

[1:12:18] But direction from council to not go forward with FSA building permits

[1:12:22] until as long as we make sure that disclosures are accurate,

[1:12:27] that someone from community development go check on those.

[1:12:29] That type of direction I think is appropriate along with the approval of the plant, but it wouldn't be a stipulation or a condition on the plant.

[1:12:36] Okay, thank you.

[1:12:40] Okay, I think we're ready to move forward with the motion on these two items.

[1:12:47] Mayor, I move that we approve FNP22-003.

[1:12:54] Motion is second, please vote.

[1:13:06] Pass the 6-1.

[1:13:15] I'll entertain a motion on the other item.

[1:13:19] The item that we approve of MP23-001.

[1:13:28] Second.

[1:13:28] Second, please vote.

[1:13:42] Pass the six one.

[1:13:47] All right, that was exciting, wasn't it?

[1:13:50] Okay, now we'll move on to the regular agenda item 10A.

[1:13:54] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:13:56] The item is for the adoption of multiple ordinances.

[1:13:58] I'm ending Preskit City Code as follows.

[1:14:00] Number one, ordinance number 2023-1842, and ordinance of the mayor and council of the city of

[1:14:07] Prescott.

[1:14:08] Yavapai County, Arizona.

[1:14:09] Amending Prescott City Code Title V, Chapter 5-1, Section 5-1-3, amending the defenses and

[1:14:16] exceptions regarding to curfew for minors.

[1:14:20] Adoption of ordinance number 2023-1844, and ordinance of the mayor and council of the city

[1:14:28] of Prescott Yavapai County, Arizona.

[1:14:30] I'm ending Prescott City Code Title V,

[1:14:32] chapter 5-9, amending the outdoor camping ordinance,

[1:14:35] adoption of ordinance number 2023-1845,

[1:14:40] an ordinance of the mayor and council

[1:14:41] of the city of Prescott Yavapai County, Arizona.

[1:14:44] I'm ending the Prescott City Code Title V, chapter 5-10.

[1:14:47] Section 5-10-2, amending the aggressive solicitation,

[1:14:51] prohibited acts, and request for feedback

[1:14:53] on ordinance number 2023-1843,

[1:14:56] I'm ending city code chapter 5-7 sexually.

[1:15:00] The oriented business says, please don't ever give me a title that long again, Joe.

[1:15:11] That was very well done, City Clerk. I appreciate that.

[1:15:19] All right. Thank you, Mayor and council. We

[1:15:23] have before you four ordinances today that have been before you previously in study sessions. Three

[1:15:29] of these ordinances are on for approval for a final approval. And the fourth ordinance is on for a vote by council

[1:15:36] on the version of the ordinance that will go forward to put the public. Meaning we have to go

[1:15:41] through a public notice process and eventually come back

[1:15:44] for a public hearing.

[1:15:45] So that's this actually oriented business license.

[1:15:49] So we'll go over first 5.1,

[1:15:53] curfew for minors.

[1:15:54] This was a fairly no pun intended, minor change.

[1:15:59] But this is Section 5-1 of our city code.

[1:16:04] And specifically 5-1-3, we made an update

[1:16:08] that simply adds an exception to the curfew ordinance

[1:16:10] for those attending or commuting from an official school or religious or other civic activity.

[1:16:16] This has not changed from the version presented at study session other than to address any

[1:16:22] typos and to add a severance clause.

[1:16:24] Other than that, it's unchanged.

[1:16:27] And Mayor, I don't know if we want to go through each of the ordinances before receiving

[1:16:30] public feedback in bulk or whether to address them individually.

[1:16:34] But this is the only change for this my curfew for minor and the recommendation is we move to approve deny or approve with modifications.

[1:16:46] Well, it would be my recommendation that we move through each one of these individually and

[1:16:55] I think that will move this issue along a little a little more effectively.

[1:17:08] So we'll start with the curfew for minors.

[1:17:14] You want to describe the differences that we currently have.

[1:17:20] I think you alluded to them.

[1:17:22] But let's look at them in detail for the benefit of the public.

[1:17:26] Yes, so the curfew for minors, excuse me, I'm pulling up the actual ordinance, but it was just that change that there are several exceptions and the curfew is set for those under 16, there is one curfew and for those under 18, there's another curfew and it's midnight, but there was no exception for those traveling to school events for one, which was kind of the primary impetus.

[1:17:50] people are the kids at the school will travel for sporting events, for example, or other

[1:17:55] events to cities across the state, including as far as Kingman or the east side of the

[1:18:02] state to son, and they get back late, they were technically in violation of curfew.

[1:18:08] So the idea of having a lot of these kids who were involved in school or civic events that

[1:18:13] were important and having them in violation of an ordinance technically committing a misdemeanors

[1:18:18] with something we wanted just to update and fix.

[1:18:21] So we added and I'll read the language.

[1:18:23] This is the exception to the curfew ordinance.

[1:18:27] With prior permission of the miners parent or guardian,

[1:18:30] the miners exempt, if they were engaged in reasonable legitimate

[1:18:34] and specific business activity,

[1:18:36] examples include, but are not limited to a minor

[1:18:38] permission from the miners parent or guardian

[1:18:40] attending an official school, religious,

[1:18:42] or other recreational activity, supervised by adults,

[1:18:45] and sponsored by the city, a school, a civic organization, or other similar entity, and takes

[1:18:50] responsibility for the minor or going to or returning home from an official school, religious or

[1:18:56] other recreation activities, supervised by adults and sponsored by the city, a school, a civic organization,

[1:19:01] or similar entity that takes responsibility for the minor.

[1:19:05] So, again, the recommendations are either to approve or deny or approve modifications,

[1:19:10] But that I think is consistent with what the city is trying to do with the ordinance.

[1:19:18] Well, I think this is a very reasonable modification of our curfew and we looked at this during our previous study sessions.

[1:19:30] Do we have any comments for concerns?

[1:19:34] Well, then I'll entertain a motion on this particular ordinance.

[1:19:41] May or I move to approve ordinance number 2023-1842.

[1:19:46] The second.

[1:19:47] Have a motion as second, please vote.

[1:19:59] I notice our vote here includes all of them.

[1:20:02] It's not all doing individual vote.

[1:20:05] That's just the way that the item is showing up.

[1:20:07] As I initiate each vote, it'll do it.

[1:20:10] So this is just for 2023-1842.

[1:20:16] And may or I've got yours in.

[1:20:18] So now that's all of you, and it passes 7-0.

[1:20:24] Move on to the next ordinance, outdoor camping.

[1:20:28] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:20:30] So as it relates to outdoor camping,

[1:20:31] we spent quite a bit of time in two separate study sessions

[1:20:34] talking about this.

[1:20:36] The goal was to expand the definition of camping

[1:20:39] and place enforceable time, place, and manner restrictions

[1:20:42] on camping.

[1:20:44] We currently have a ordinance that prohibits all camping

[1:20:46] in the city limits no matter what.

[1:20:49] And that type of blanket prohibition on camping

[1:20:52] was struck down in the night circuit in a series of cases.

[1:20:55] So we wanted enforceable restrictions on camping

[1:20:58] that would direct our law enforcement on how

[1:21:01] they can handle such cases and provide for a safer city.

[1:21:06] So the primary, as I mentioned, goal in part

[1:21:09] was to limit the congregation or gathering

[1:21:13] that can present dangers to both individuals who

[1:21:17] or either homeless or camping and present a difficult situation for law enforcement.

[1:21:22] So dealing with that, we addressed it through, excuse me, time manner and place restrictions.

[1:21:29] And these are the time restrictions.

[1:21:30] This is directly from the ordinance itself, and it prohibits camping during daytime hours.

[1:21:37] So that is the laying out of sleeping equipment and so forth.

[1:21:41] and between the hours of 8 a.m. and 8 p.m. outdoor camping is prohibited.

[1:21:48] In terms of place restrictions, it limits the locations where one may camp within the city

[1:21:55] on public, and this is only related to public property, by the way.

[1:21:59] So it prohibits camping at any time in the downtown entertainment district where most of the problems

[1:22:06] that law enforcement has dealt with has happened, so it is an important area to address first.

[1:22:12] It also prohibits camping at any time on sidewalks, trails, rides of white streets, alleys,

[1:22:16] thoroughfares, or any other area of pedestrian or vehicular traffic.

[1:22:19] This is safety related within 500 feet of a preschool kindergarten elementary or secondary

[1:22:25] school or a child care center, areas posted no trespassing by the city.

[1:22:30] And then a prohibition on camping within 500 feet of any other person who's camping unless those persons are members of the same family, or it's in part of a designated camping area.

[1:22:43] So,

[1:22:46] sorry, I've went backwards each time I've done this. And then we have the manner restrictions.

[1:22:51] So, this prohibits camping in a certain way, which includes any obstruction of access to private property, or businesses adjacent to a public right of way, or maintaining a fire or using a gas heater, and primarily dealing with safety and other concerns.

[1:23:12] Again, additional manner restrictions here continued, erecting or installing some sort of semi-permanent

[1:23:20] or permanent structure, which you see essentially in what was brought up here as tent city,

[1:23:27] but these types of serious permanent or semi-permanent structures are prohibited, excavating or digging soil

[1:23:35] to alter the ground or infrastructure, placing our storing belongings in an area that's wider

[1:23:41] or greater than 10 square feet, and accumulating discarding or leaving behind garbage debris

[1:23:46] on sanitary hazardous materials, sewage, drug paraphernalia, or syringes in the public rights

[1:23:50] of way on public property, or on any adjacent public or private property.

[1:23:58] And then finally,

[1:23:59] based on direction of council as we came last time I've also left in the camping on private

[1:24:04] property which simply limits the ability to camp on private property and often is taking

[1:24:12] care of in zoning ordinances. We don't have this covered in our zoning ordinance but it

[1:24:17] allows for someone to camp on their own public property but only for a maximum length of 14 days

[1:24:23] and subject to the conditions that are listed here in. I have included there in parentheses

[1:24:29] a recommendation from Council to include if posted no trespassing that's currently not in the

[1:24:34] but if we wish, if Council wishes to amend the ordinance and approve it with that modification,

[1:24:41] I've put that there that would prohibit camping on private property only if it's posted

[1:24:46] no trespassing.

[1:24:50] So, continued on camping on private property, no property on our lawful tenant

[1:24:54] may charge rental or other fees to a person who's camping on private property, camping on private property

[1:25:00] within the entertainment districts prohibited unless it's not visible from adjacent road or

[1:25:06] public right of way, camping on private property must meet the same setbacks applicable

[1:25:09] to primary residents, and the same requirement to be free of unsanitary conditions, including

[1:25:17] garbage debris, drug paraphernalious syringes, is included.

[1:25:22] Now I, also here you'll see that the camping and a recreational vehicle is governed in

[1:25:26] accordance with the press kit land development code, that's a code that's already

[1:25:29] effect and prohibits camping in a recreational vehicle on private properties.

[1:25:36] So that's dealt with already in the land development code.

[1:25:41] So other items in this version includes a provision for the disposal of seize property.

[1:25:48] It shall be kept for 14 days and we've gone through with both our rec services and police

[1:25:54] department.

[1:25:54] They have a method to be able to store these materials for 14 days.

[1:26:00] So anyone cited or arrested can have access to their property and we've added a severance clause.

[1:26:07] That's the only major change since our last study session is the addition of a severance clause.

[1:26:12] And again, up to Council to approve deny or approve with modifications.

[1:26:18] Can you describe the severance clause and its necessity?

[1:26:23] Yeah, severance clause, we try to include in all ordinances that we adopt, and any ordinance

[1:26:30] within the last five to ten years will have it, but these older ordinance didn't have

[1:26:33] a severance clause.

[1:26:34] It essentially says that if any one aspect of the ordinance is ruled illegal, that the rest

[1:26:39] of it remains in effect

[1:26:44] counts one more.

[1:26:48] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:26:48] I have a few questions, under Section 5-9-1 definitions, pardon me, I turn the page.

[1:27:02] Under the second paragraph, under items 1 through 5, it says public property means any public school,

[1:27:09] park playground, splash pad, et cetera.

[1:27:11] And this says, or property open for public use within the city of Prescott.

[1:27:15] Does that include open space, I was wondering if we could use the word open space?

[1:27:19] Because the city has acquired areas such as where the Centennial Trail is.

[1:27:26] I consider that open space, but would people be allowed to park or camp there?

[1:27:30] That's one of my two questions.

[1:27:33] It would include open space, but including that in the definition itself, as the address

[1:27:38] of modification is something we can do as well.

[1:27:41] I just think that might be a good idea to add that.

[1:27:44] It could be good for the city as a network of just open spaces scattered throughout the city boundaries and a lot of them aren't frequented very often and are subject to camping just based on their location

[1:28:00] So I just thought to include the word open space and thank you Councilman if it's there's a motion to approve I would

[1:28:09] request that it that this be part of it that it be approved with a modification to include the

[1:28:14] open space.

[1:28:15] My second question has to do with this statement under section C, manner regulations.

[1:28:22] It says nothing in this article, she'll be construed to criminalize homelessness, target

[1:28:27] the homeless community, or otherwise criminalize, and individuals status rather than an

[1:28:32] individuals conduct. I appreciate that wording in the ordinance, but I think it also raises the

[1:28:41] question that if we're making camping difficult through this ordinance, we should also provide

[1:28:51] a solution. There should be in this ordinance a time or place where camping is allowed. Like

[1:28:58] have a lot of open space.

[1:29:02] I wasn't expecting that at all, but we should have a solution.

[1:29:08] We're coming up with all the short knots, but we know that homelessness is an issue in our

[1:29:15] community and what are we doing as a city to remedy that for people who truly can't find a place

[1:29:23] to stay at night or don't have a vehicle to stay in. I think we should designate a space that is

[1:29:29] by the city. This is, you can stay here tonight. This is a safe place where you are allowed to stay.

[1:29:36] So that we don't have this proliferation of camping all around the city. We have one space.

[1:29:42] This is the designated camping space. If you have no place to go, you can go here and be safe.

[1:29:52] All right. I'm going to ask for decorum in this meeting area. We're going to be discussing a number of issues.

[1:30:00] As we proceed with these ordinances that are going to be somewhat controversial, there will be people that support them. They'll be people that oppose them.

[1:30:09] But we'll have the quorum here and we're going to I'm going to ask you not to applaud or boo or anything else. We're going to be able to discuss these issues in a reasonable way so that we can come to a conclusion. Thank you.

[1:30:28] And so to address that, I think that if Council wants to designate a certain place, that's fine.

[1:30:34] This is ultimately, this is Council's ordinance and not mine.

[1:30:39] So whatever that may be, I will say that we explored it as we are drafting an ordinance.

[1:30:43] And it's clearly something that is allowed under the case of the president, since my case was hit case law.

[1:30:49] So as an example in Hawaii, there was a case that went up where they would have designated camping areas,

[1:30:55] and then they would switch those now and then so people would have a camping area that they

[1:30:58] felt was they were comfortable with and then that would be closed and they'd have to move

[1:31:01] to another camping area and they brought forth the lawsuit and that was found to be a reasonable

[1:31:06] restriction setting a specific area so it's allowed it's lawful but as we looked at doing so

[1:31:13] the idea of designated certain area was kind of looked down upon or looked unfavorably by any

[1:31:20] of the possible neighbors so we didn't include it and I think that finding an area to

[1:31:25] designate is the difficult part, but to the extent council wants to make that motion, that's

[1:31:31] ultimately this is a council ordinance. Mayor Proteem.

[1:31:36] Thank you, Mayor. Joe, my concerns deal with camping and private property. I'm curious if

[1:31:45] someone were to buy vacant parcel of land, and decide that they were going to oversee the

[1:31:52] building of structure on that big piece of land and they were to park an RV or something like that on that land while they were doing that.

[1:31:59] If I'm understanding this correctly, right now it says they can't do that for more than 14 days at a time. Is that correct?

[1:32:06] That's correct, under the way it's drafted. Now I will say that placing an RV as I mentioned is covered on the delanded development code and it's prohibited except in the event that some sort of catastrophe happens destroys a house and then

[1:32:18] And I understand that, I think the land development code is wrong.

[1:32:21] I think this ordinance is wrong in that capacity.

[1:32:24] Because it seems like my position is that we as legislators up here,

[1:32:28] it's not our business to regulate what people do with their private property.

[1:32:32] And Arizona has a pretty stored history of not interfering with private property rights.

[1:32:36] And so if that is, if this is the world that the rest of council wants to keep this component in it,

[1:32:41] I'm a, I'm a, I'm a, I'm a no on this.

[1:32:47] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:32:50] What Councilwoman Moore said resonated with me a bunch.

[1:32:54] And I really appreciate that we're not looking to criminalize status.

[1:32:58] We know that's clearly illegal and wrong.

[1:33:03] But we're looking to prohibit certain behaviors with the behaviors that we're prohibiting here,

[1:33:08] time-place and manner.

[1:33:10] Again, Councilman Morris concerned that we allow for this under certain circumstances.

[1:33:17] It seems to me that by definition it's written in that there are certain circumstances

[1:33:21] that people could camp in the city of Prescott.

[1:33:24] Can you give us a couple of scenarios one or two scenarios under which it would be legal?

[1:33:29] Because I agree, I do have some concerns about concentrating in that one place either temporarily

[1:33:33] or permanently for the reasons that you brought up, but people could do that in a dispersed manner

[1:33:39] under what circumstance, as long as there are 500 feet away from people who aren't related to them,

[1:33:43] they could be where at what times a day and do what things.

[1:33:47] So there are areas, and open space was brought up in primarily, that's one of them.

[1:33:51] It would open space in some different park areas.

[1:33:54] The answer is when can it be done between eight in the evening and eight in the morning,

[1:34:00] not on a public right away within 500 feet of another person in the downtown entertainment district?

[1:34:06] So, most parts of Prescott in the evening time when people are typically sleeping, as long

[1:34:11] as they're not in public rights away, it would be legal for a person to, to camp, to act

[1:34:17] as homeless people need to act, they need to live and be someplace that totally agree

[1:34:21] with that.

[1:34:21] So, again, without, it sounds to me, though, and help me out of my wrong, that we're not criminalizing

[1:34:26] But we are prohibiting behavior in ways that are generally accepted to be the most impactful on the communities as a whole.

[1:34:39] Is that fair characterization?

[1:34:41] I think that's a fair characterization.

[1:34:43] And the large part of a lot of the provisions, including the no-camping during day-light hours, is an attempt to limit the tent cities,

[1:34:52] or the congregating or the creation of kind of semi-permanent structures, which presents a lot more

[1:34:59] problems in both for law enforcement and for safety. But we cannot, based on Supreme Court

[1:35:07] and Ninth Circuit President, we cannot just criminalize the act of being homeless. But we can

[1:35:14] set these sorts of restrictions, so it prevents the most degrees or problematic problems from

[1:35:20] So what Councilor Moore said that really resonated with me is we need to have built in the ordinance, what people can do, it sounds like effectively, it is built in what people can do.

[1:35:30] Is that reserved for?

[1:35:32] That is fair that there is still an opportunity to live while being homeless and that shouldn't be criminalized.

[1:35:41] But there are certainly restrictions through the ordinance and restrictions, even on private property,

[1:35:47] some what under the way it's currently drafted.

[1:35:52] Councilmember Rucing.

[1:35:56] Thank you. I would just like to make the comment

[1:35:58] as to Mr. Montoya.

[1:36:01] I agree. I think if someone's building home

[1:36:03] and they want to live in an RV on the site

[1:36:06] for maybe a year, is there any way we could just

[1:36:08] issue a permit allowing that use?

[1:36:14] We do in limited circumstances.

[1:36:17] We could expand that.

[1:36:18] That would be an update to our land development

[1:36:20] And if that's the direction I'm hearing, then that's something I can start working on.

[1:36:25] Okay, because I think our goal here is to be compassionate, but also realize that living on the streets is not a solution.

[1:36:37] And for example, we support our homeless veterans in this community.

[1:36:43] And we just approved a 80 unit apartment complex on the VA for to accommodate homeless veterans so they can be in the VA community and receive care and be in a safe place. Thank you.

[1:37:02] Councilwoman can tell me.

[1:37:05] Thank you, Mayor. You know, I've received a lot of emails from all of you out there and I'm going to respond to all of you as soon as I can.

[1:37:11] But I do want to, one of the reoccurring questions was exactly what I think Eric just spoke about is why can't the city provide an anchor or two for a designated camping area?

[1:37:26] So here's my question to our attorney.

[1:37:29] Number one, who pays?

[1:37:30] For it, we put that on the tax payer. Number two, what is our liability if we were to do that? And number three, how do we deal with the abusers of this? I know that there was a short stint with CCNJ several years ago provided camping in a thrift store parking lot, I believe. And at that time, I was doing the research of how much the tax on the services was. And I don't mean taxes and a tax of tax, how did it tax our services?

[1:38:00] and loosening them up for taxpayers that needed, you know, their care.

[1:38:05] So, how do we deal with the cost number one?

[1:38:09] What is the liability?

[1:38:10] And how do we deal with the abusers of this program if we were to allow that?

[1:38:14] Because there is a cost.

[1:38:16] You've got portapoddies.

[1:38:17] You've got cleanup.

[1:38:17] You've got potential fencing.

[1:38:20] The police and the fire have to service this population a lot.

[1:38:23] So, do we as the taxpayer voluntarily step up to the plate and pay for that?

[1:38:28] I mean, how do we address it?

[1:38:32] It's a bigger problem than I can solve.

[1:38:36] But if the question is, can we design area and allow for camping, the answer is yes.

[1:38:42] Who pays for it, the city, and it obviously would be through taxpayer funding.

[1:38:47] And the question on my ability is, would we be liable potentially?

[1:38:52] I would say that recreational immunity probably applies if we're just making a piece of property

[1:38:59] available for use and allowing camping and probably apply so there's probably some immunity there.

[1:39:05] But we're still subject to reasonableness and so there is potentially liability.

[1:39:09] But to answer your first two questions is the city pays and I think you said who enforces

[1:39:16] it or how do we deal with the users and that would be another ordinance or policy we'd

[1:39:22] have to draft and try to figure out how we work through that.

[1:39:26] There was a case in Oregon where they did something very similar to clean out an area

[1:39:32] and they provided a public place for, and I don't remember how big the situation was,

[1:39:39] but they did fence it and two people were assaulted when was killed and they ended up suing

[1:39:44] the municipality and got a million and a half dollar judgment.

[1:39:50] So, those are the things I think about, it's like, do we do that to the taxpayer?

[1:39:54] I know we want to help them.

[1:39:56] We don't want to criminalize homelessness.

[1:39:57] We really don't.

[1:39:58] I get that.

[1:39:59] But we also have to be realistic about the cost of the taxpayer.

[1:40:02] Do we inadvertently put the city in that kind of jeopardy if we can't handle this thing correctly?

[1:40:10] So, I'd like to just say, let's take a pause, to everybody that's emailed about the city

[1:40:14] providing these services and understand the realities of that.

[1:40:17] It's a cost.

[1:40:18] It's a liability, it's a strain on the services, and then we've got you've got the issue of the Nimbies.

[1:40:25] Not in my backyard. How are we going to deal with those sorts of things, too? So these are just foods for thought.

[1:40:29] We just have to think this through. Thank you.

[1:40:33] Well, I will weigh in on this by saying, I think we should consider this particular ordinance.

[1:40:40] And if we want to look at another ordinance later on creating potentially a very short-term temporary camping area, that should be a separate issue that we could discuss and decide whether this city wants to create such a location.

[1:41:00] So, trying to amend the ordinance that we're talking about today to add this into it, I think, is a premature, and we don't really have the necessary information to even consider considering adding this to this current ordinance that we're considering on adopting.

[1:41:26] Council for more. Thank you, Mayor. Just an additional comment about open space.

[1:41:32] Often open space is designated as open space because of its environmental value.

[1:41:37] There's usually something unique or special about it that we want to preserve.

[1:41:41] That's why we made it open space. I think it would be wrong,

[1:41:44] obviously, to allow camping in those locations. So I just want to make that comment.

[1:41:50] I appreciate what the Mayor just said if we were trying to consider the ordinance as it's written.

[1:41:57] I don't think we could move forward with it today unless we are willing to make a commitment

[1:42:03] that we're going to come back with maybe further discussion on designating.

[1:42:10] It tells us where people can't camp, but I'm having a hard time figuring out where people can camp.

[1:42:15] I guess is my concern with this ordinance as it's written, and I just feel like that's something

[1:42:23] that needs to be addressed as well.

[1:42:24] I've already said that, but I'm having a hard time saying, should we move forward with

[1:42:28] a vote today?

[1:42:29] I should be table this to a future discussion.

[1:42:31] I'm just kind of torn there.

[1:42:37] City Attorney, you mentioned the possibility of posting no trespassing on some of these private

[1:42:42] property areas, what positives or negatives would such a posting create?

[1:42:54] I think in a lot of ways it would create some hardship on private property owners to require

[1:43:01] them to be to post no trespassing.

[1:43:05] If we adopted the language that states if post no trespassing, that's essentially what we do,

[1:43:11] We would be stating something that we can't do, which is any private or any individual can go camp on someone else's private property, unless they post no trespassing, so I think that would be the major problem with requiring a posting of no trespassing.

[1:43:27] Wouldn't it be beneficial for enforcement so that if police officer was called in to look at someone potentially camping on private property, who did not have permission?

[1:43:39] And there was no homeowner president or president or property owner present to be able to confirm or deny that that camper had approval.

[1:43:51] Wouldn't have no posting like this be able to allow the police officer to be able to remove that person.

[1:44:00] Well, I think requiring a posting like this actually adds just one additional element to removing someone.

[1:44:07] So you'd have to find that there wasn't no trespassing sign before removing someone from someone else's property.

[1:44:14] Whereas if there wasn't the requirement,

[1:44:18] if police responded to a trespasser, they would just remove as a trespasser.

[1:44:21] So I think it actually adds one element, one more element to enforcement.

[1:44:26] And it makes a little bit more difficult.

[1:44:31] Mayor Protem.

[1:44:32] Thank you, Mayor. I just looked Amazon is selling no trespassing signs for 97 cents.

[1:44:38] So, I mean, I'm that that 97 cents, I'm sure they're folks who that's a hardship for.

[1:44:44] I guess my my question is if someone camps on my property right now and they don't have my permission,

[1:44:51] and I see them camping on my property, is my recourse not to call the police and say someone is trespassing

[1:44:57] and wouldn't the police response in that case to say

[1:45:00] You don't have permission to be here, and you need to leave. That's accurate. If someone camps on your private property, they are trespassing if they don't have your permission.

[1:45:10] So if my son-in-law comes to visit me one day when my daughter gets married and comes to visit me, and they're on a cross-country trip, and they're driving their RV with their grant, my grandkids, and they want to stay and park in front of my, you know, on my property, for 15 days, they're criminals, though. Is that corrupt?

[1:45:26] Not if they have your permission, or if it's 15 days, yes, at the 15, okay, so they are there.

[1:45:32] Okay, thank you.

[1:45:37] Councilmember Rucing.

[1:45:39] I think we should leave the ordinance as written as far as the no trespassing sign.

[1:45:43] It just is the ordinance as written. If it's private property and someone's camping there,

[1:45:48] then the owners contacted and you find out if they have permission or not.

[1:45:52] I mean that burdens all the owners of vacant land who may live out of town,

[1:45:56] have been going around and post everything with no trespassing signs and that would probably

[1:46:02] trigger a need to clean up all the no trespassing signs because they're going to start

[1:46:08] looking like campaign signs all over the place

[1:46:13] councilmember tini thank you Mary yeah I agree

[1:46:18] with what's been said about the extra layer of having to post no trespassing signs to keep someone

[1:46:23] from your property in, in, in, in, in, in, in, ordinance the way it is right now. People are not

[1:46:28] allowed to trespass without us posting a sign and it seems to, I mean, though it's only

[1:46:33] 97 cents totally get that. It shouldn't, it shouldn't need to do that to, to, to make it clear for

[1:46:39] people that, kind of, want them, camping in my front yard. Unless it's my son, I guess I'd be okay

[1:46:44] with that for 14 days.

[1:46:48] And if I could address the private property kind of the thought behind it,

[1:46:51] what I think that that was when the direction was to keep it in is that for some houses for

[1:46:59] example that may have issues safety issues that will be camping in the front yard and it really

[1:47:06] becomes a problem for neighbors having people camp in the front yard. Now having said that it is

[1:47:12] somewhat controversial to regulate use on of private property and we do it all the time through

[1:47:17] zoning and so forth. That's why it's kept in if there's a motion to approve without the

[1:47:22] private property. That's you're within your purview. But I just want to give a little

[1:47:27] background on why it was included or why I think the direction was delivered in was for those

[1:47:31] situations.

[1:47:34] And again, if the direction is to address that more specifically through the land

[1:47:37] development code, we can do that as well.

[1:47:44] Well, I don't think the 14 day restriction on RVs on private

[1:47:48] properties unreasonable. However, I do have a certain amount of sympathy for the Mayor

[1:47:55] Protem's family.

[1:47:59] They're phantom now at this point. My daughter's 17th, so.

[1:48:02] Oh, that's, that's reassuring. But I do have some concern about someone who may be in

[1:48:10] the process of building a home if they have acquired permits for building. And now they

[1:48:18] to be able to protect their home site as is being built and being able to provide some allowance

[1:48:28] for that beyond 14 days. It seems like that could be handled in some kind of a special way.

[1:48:35] And I will say that within the county's ordinance dealing with this, they do allow for someone who's

[1:48:40] building their home to live on the property in an RV and there's some other additions. Now within the city,

[1:48:46] It's only if you've built a home and it's destroyed, so that's limited, currently,

[1:48:53] but what I'm hearing, or if I'm hearing it, we can come back to council amending that provision in the land development code to be similar to the counties allowing someone who's building a home owns the property to have some sort of RV for a certain period of time, and I think it's generally a year.

[1:49:14] That kind of helps my decision process.

[1:49:18] I would say no to the trespassing posting.

[1:49:23] I would say yes to referencing open space

[1:49:27] and amending the wording to include that.

[1:49:32] I would say no to the designated camping area

[1:49:35] just because I think it leads to some really potential

[1:49:40] problemaries with 10 cities and long-term accumulation of concentrated camping issues.

[1:49:48] I know we're required to kind of keep track of how many available beds are available at

[1:49:57] any particular time so that we can show that we're taking and making an effort to find

[1:50:03] some accommodation for homeless people, but there are some people that don't want to

[1:50:07] all of those rules. So they're not willing to accept a bed in some of those areas, or

[1:50:14] facilities that require certain agreements on how they are going to be accommodated.

[1:50:24] And then we can keep the RVs in at 14 days and work on amending the land development code

[1:50:30] for a longer term, a legitimate uses.

[1:50:36] So that's my thought, Councilwoman Ken Tellney.

[1:50:41] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:50:42] Joe, I wanted to find out, too, if something did occur,

[1:50:47] and you go, let's say you get sued.

[1:50:51] Isn't there something in the law that says you have to have,

[1:50:54] they're going to ask you, did you have a note

[1:50:56] trespassing sign posted?

[1:50:58] Because isn't that part of your defense?

[1:51:03] This may be off topic a little bit in the overall scheme.

[1:51:07] But for individuals that put no trespassing,

[1:51:09] it gives them certain protections against a license

[1:51:12] argument.

[1:51:14] There's a presumed license for allowing people

[1:51:17] to come on your property, for example,

[1:51:19] walk to your front door.

[1:51:21] It eliminates that presumed license,

[1:51:24] and it does provide extra protections.

[1:51:25] But I think it's beyond the scope of here.

[1:51:26] I think in this case, there's no presumed license that someone can sleep on your property.

[1:51:32] So it wouldn't be needed in that case.

[1:51:35] And also on the issue of permitting, couldn't they just get a renewal if somebody, if Montoya's

[1:51:42] grandchildren came to visit him and they wanted to stay for 20 days, couldn't they just

[1:51:46] go down and renew the permit if they really had to?

[1:51:49] Not as it's currently written because there's no permit, there's just an allowance for short-term

[1:51:53] And to be honest, you kind of picture some small kids camping in their backyard.

[1:52:01] So if we prohibited private property camping, we'd also prohibit a few people sleeping in

[1:52:06] their backyard and that type of things.

[1:52:07] So I think there needs to be an allowance.

[1:52:09] If we're going to do a private property, there needs to be allowance for people to camp on

[1:52:12] private property to some extent.

[1:52:14] Where we draw the line there is up to Council, we have the recommendation of 14 days.

[1:52:20] But when it comes to permitting, that would be the additional follow-up step that I think we're getting direction for, which is to deal with in the land development code, go through a permit process to a...

[1:52:30] Allow for longer term stays on private property in legitimate circumstances. I think the mayor said, and we'd have to define what legitimate means.

[1:52:38] And Brandon might want them to go home after two weeks.

[1:52:43] Councillor Schischke.

[1:52:46] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:52:48] So, Joe, how did we come up with the 14 days? Was that a reaction to possibly having people buy a lot?

[1:52:56] and then putting their RV on there and just live it in the RV.

[1:53:05] I don't think it was a reaction to that, but I think that illustrates one potential issue.

[1:53:10] I think the bigger issue is really tent camping in front yards.

[1:53:15] That was an issue we've seen as a problem and why does Y-14 days

[1:53:20] because it's consistent with many other jurisdictions,

[1:53:23] especially when it deals with an RV on personal property and other things.

[1:53:26] So 14 days was, there's nothing magic in 14 days,

[1:53:29] but it was based on other ordinances and other jurisdictions.

[1:53:35] Thank you.

[1:53:36] Calce one more.

[1:53:38] Thank you, Mayor.

[1:53:39] I just want to make one last comment.

[1:53:42] Overall, I'm generally in favor with the ordinance.

[1:53:44] I think it's 95% rate on target.

[1:53:48] I think the only, maybe if we're not going to address

[1:53:53] in this ordinance, I understand we can't, probably.

[1:53:56] But if we can't address designating a place for camping,

[1:54:02] is it possible that the police department could,

[1:54:06] if they come across a person that's camping somewhere,

[1:54:09] they could hand them a map and say,

[1:54:11] this is where you can camp in the city,

[1:54:13] because we tell them where they can't camp,

[1:54:17] but can we maybe help them find a place where they can camp?

[1:54:21] That's safe.

[1:54:22] And I would be happy with this ordinance.

[1:54:24] I just think that's my suggestion.

[1:54:25] It's just a little map, or just a little something.

[1:54:27] So you know, you guys can't camp in this area.

[1:54:30] Most homeless people will never read this ordinance.

[1:54:32] They won't know where they can and can't camp.

[1:54:35] And so we need to provide them with the resources of knowledge

[1:54:39] of where they can camp.

[1:54:40] And that's all I'm asking.

[1:54:41] And I'm willing to vote for this ordinance

[1:54:43] if we could do something like that.

[1:54:44] Thank you.

[1:54:46] And I'll answer, we can.

[1:54:49] There's a cost, if this is the direction from council,

[1:54:51] ultimately, as I mentioned, this is council ordinance.

[1:54:54] And if that's the direction,

[1:54:54] we can figure out a way to deal with that and we could do so by just having a map

[1:54:58] with the city with some of the public areas and showing the areas where it's

[1:55:03] not allowed and directing that you know right of ways we have no right of ways

[1:55:07] at any time a right of ways are one of the bigger issues we'll see camping on

[1:55:11] right of ways sidewalks for example and so oftentimes when the police are

[1:55:15] dealing with it it's really hey you can't camp here on the sidewalk but if the

[1:55:20] direction is to also include a map if you can't sleep on the sidewalk but you

[1:55:23] can go over here's some different places that there's something we could do.

[1:55:26] I think that's just a humane kind way of handling homelessness will never go away.

[1:55:32] We're going to constantly have this issue in our community and when we're not trying to

[1:55:36] criminalize it, but I think we need to be humane and kind and we need to offer an option

[1:55:42] and that's all I'm saying.

[1:55:45] Council Member Rucing.

[1:55:47] In response to Healthman Moore, there already is a map, in fact it does more than just

[1:55:53] camping, at least food banks, social services, homeless shelters, and it's available at the library.

[1:56:02] We also have a part-time person that's employed at the library who is a great resource,

[1:56:08] not just a homeless, but to anybody that comes in with a problem. For example, if you're a homeless person,

[1:56:14] there was a homeless person and they needed a bike to get around. They had a job and this person found them

[1:56:20] So we do already offer that to the community.

[1:56:28] Okay, I think we need to call the question here.

[1:56:31] Mayor, we actually have public comment on the specific ordinance that we would need to take before you guys convert on it.

[1:56:37] I do have one comment card that specifically address that this individual wanted to speak on this ordinance.

[1:56:43] And then I have two that did not specify, so I'm curious if Whitney Williams and Patty Willis

[1:56:53] wanted to speak on this or on the last item for consideration.

[1:57:05] You're very much.

[1:57:06] So then it's just Peggy Glenn, please.

[1:57:15] I thought it would work until I stepped on it.

[1:57:20] Hello, everybody.

[1:57:22] Mayor, Mayor Potem, council members, city staff.

[1:57:26] The irony that this ordinance is up today when you gave a proclamation to Meals on Wheels

[1:57:35] and the Agape House blows my mind.

[1:57:41] I would say that this is a good start but I would say it's premature and not ready to put it in the oven.

[1:57:50] I think that's a lot of work that's going into it. By the way, there's a typo and trespassing.

[1:57:56] Only one asked in the beginning.

[1:58:00] Camping for some is survival.

[1:58:04] For others, it's the only option they have right now.

[1:58:11] And I'm a little confused about daylight hours when you say,

[1:58:15] 8 to 8, and we're at this latitude as opposed to the equator,

[1:58:21] where we, what about dawn to daylight?

[1:58:24] A dawn to dusk.

[1:58:25] You know, it seems it's a little more easy to recognize if someone doesn't have a watch.

[1:58:30] Doesn't have a cell phone.

[1:58:32] They don't know what time it is.

[1:58:33] Just an idea.

[1:58:38] I would challenge the council and city staff to go back to the table and use the knowledge that is part of what CCJ is doing,

[1:58:52] pass is doing, agape houses doing, they find a way to take care of the abusers to take care

[1:59:00] of the people who can't follow the rules. They simply don't get to stay there and we find an

[1:59:05] option for the other there. I would challenge you to put together a coalition. I'm talking straight

[1:59:13] to a couple of you who seem to have your humanity clicked in right now. A coalition of faith-based

[1:59:20] People, the non-profits in this city who do a fabulous job,

[1:59:25] but are stretched almost beyond their limits,

[1:59:27] the Chamber of Commerce because this isn't a good look

[1:59:30] for everybody's home town.

[1:59:34] Realtors,

[1:59:36] the guy said, decorum, please give me a shot at it.

[1:59:40] Thank you.

[1:59:42] The developers,

[1:59:44] the worker bees in this town.

[1:59:47] We don't have anything even coming close to affordable housing, much less survival housing.

[1:59:56] If this is going to be everybody's home town, it's not.

[2:00:00] Just for the rich people.

[2:00:07] We're not trying to stir up trouble. I'm trying to come to you with pieces of thought and heart.

[2:00:15] Bottom line, I challenge you to take this back to the table and come up with councilman more's alternative.

[2:00:24] Councilman is more's humane alternative before this is adopted. I think it's a great start and not ready for the oven. Thank you for the time.

[2:00:38] That's all on this one, Mayor.

[2:00:42] Okay.

[2:00:42] Then I think we need to call the question here.

[2:00:46] I would propose that we adopt this ordinance and amended to include describing open space.

[2:00:56] As Councilman Moore indicated, and the rest of it can be presented and voted on as written.

[2:01:04] And then we'll take a look at a different time on how we would go about possibly designating

[2:01:13] a rotating camp area or something like that.

[2:01:18] And I think our visa and private property are reasonable, especially since we're referencing

[2:01:24] other ordinances and other municipalities that have been able to maintain those and pass judicial

[2:01:33] or legal challenges.

[2:01:37] May are you making emotion, and so are you suggesting that the parenthetical expression

[2:01:41] if posted no trespassing be eliminated?

[2:01:46] I'm proposing that we correct a spelling.

[2:01:50] I'm with you there if we include it.

[2:01:51] Was that emotion that you made and you're looking for a second?

[2:01:54] I made that motion.

[2:01:56] Can I clarify on the, the, if posted no trespassing,

[2:02:01] That would be an amendment, it's in there just for informational purposes.

[2:02:07] Are you requesting that it not be in there or that it be in there, sorry?

[2:02:10] I'm requesting that it not be in there.

[2:02:14] May or I second to your motion.

[2:02:18] All right, we have a motion in second.

[2:02:20] Please vote.

[2:02:35] Councilwoman can tell me.

[2:02:37] Can you vote please?

[2:02:40] Said yes.

[2:02:44] Pass the six one.

[2:02:50] move on to what is it aggressive panhandly yes thank you mayor aggressive solicitation

[2:03:15] I'm now sorry

[2:03:19] so the aggressive solicitation ordinance was brought to you in study session with a few changes not a whole lot

[2:03:26] but they dealt with the other prohibited acts so

[2:03:30] section 5.10 or 5-10-1 is the definition of aggressive solicitation includes quite a few definitions that

[2:03:38] wasn't changed at all. But in Section 5-10-2, it deals with other prohibited acts. So aggressive

[2:03:46] solicitation or soliciting aggressive manner is prohibited, along with several other

[2:03:52] prohibitions, including soliciting someone within a certain distance from a bank, from a ATM,

[2:04:00] from a business, entrance or exit, from people engaging in financial transactions and so forth.

[2:04:07] So, based on the study session, we standardized that to 50-foot prohibition, so it has to be 50-foot feet from someone engaged in using a banker ATM.

[2:04:18] It has to be 50 feet from someone that is engaged in financial transaction and so forth.

[2:04:25] So, that's all standard except for we reduce the amount of distance based on first amendment concerns of solicitation from someone immediately adjacent to the entrance or exit.

[2:04:37] of any commercial business or privately on a establishment.

[2:04:40] And that was done primarily in recognition of some of the areas within the city and primarily

[2:04:45] downtown that are where the entrances are closer than 50 feet.

[2:04:50] So it would have caused a prohibition if we had a 50-perper or a bison, it would have created

[2:04:54] essentially a noble solicitation zone, which I think was beyond the scope of what we could

[2:04:59] do or should do under the First Amendment.

[2:05:02] So those were, those changes were suggested from the, from the, from the last version, and that has been drafted and implemented into this version.

[2:05:12] And the major change is a prohibition on solicitation from moving vehicles.

[2:05:19] And that was presented in the study session and remains here.

[2:05:22] And other than that, and as I mentioned in addition of a severance clause, it's the same as the version that was brought to you in study session.

[2:05:31] So again,

[2:05:35] this would be for final adoption and a request for a motion to approve deny or approve with modifications.

[2:05:57] Thank you, Mayor.

[2:05:58] So Joe, I have three questions actually.

[2:06:02] Section D, when it says 50 feet of an entrance and or exit of commercial business,

[2:06:09] I assume you're meeting a building and not the parking lot.

[2:06:11] I just think I'm wondering if it should be more clear if you're talking about the building or

[2:06:16] the parking lot because I think that's a different as a small business owner. I was in a shopping

[2:06:21] center for many years and there was lots of people soliciting in that parking lot. They weren't

[2:06:27] necessarily near the entrance of the building. So I think that needs to be clearer.

[2:06:33] And then another

[2:06:34] question are shopping centers considered private property because I says on private property

[2:06:40] with the express written permission and consent of the owner or the person legally in possession

[2:06:44] of such property.

[2:06:45] Because oftentimes a shopping center, the owner is out of state legal entity where they

[2:06:51] don't have a local presence that is going to enforce that.

[2:06:55] So I'm just wondering how that's going to be handled.

[2:06:58] And my third question, sorry, I've got three issues.

[2:07:02] Undercamping, it said that each day that a person was found camping that each new day would be a new violation.

[2:07:12] And I was wondering, with this ordinance, does there need to be similar wording that each day that a violation of this section continues or occurs shall constitute a separate offense?

[2:07:24] because people who solicit are generally habitual solicitors, that's what they do every

[2:07:30] Day, that's how they make their living, but it was addressed in camping, but it wasn't addressed in solicitation, so I think that's something that needs to be addressed in this ordinance because it isn't.

[2:07:41] So to address your questions, the question on the entrance or exit from a commercial business, is the private property entrance, not the actual building.

[2:07:51] Now, and so there is private property that is covered in I, as you mentioned, and this was,

[2:07:59] and I actually forgot that this was an addition or a tweak from the previous version,

[2:08:04] say session based on input, and we required express we're written consent so that we could

[2:08:09] enforce.

[2:08:10] So, if there is solicitation on a parking lot, for example, officers can go and make sure that

[2:08:15] they have permission written permission from the owner, because there are absentee owners.

[2:08:19] So it deals with that issue.

[2:08:20] So I think, those are the answers on the first two questions.

[2:08:23] On the third one, on the each day,

[2:08:27] camping was treated differently because there is

[2:08:33] in something like solicitation, there's an instance.

[2:08:36] And each instance, each solicitation would be

[2:08:38] its own violation of the ordinance,

[2:08:41] whereas camping is a more long-term duration.

[2:08:44] So someone makes a list at all day,

[2:08:45] but that would technically be several violations.

[2:08:48] police obviously would probably see one and enforce that one. But each instance of solicitation

[2:08:54] would be a violation of the ordinance, whereas in camping we don't want to criminalize each

[2:08:59] head or head nod or some other variation and they just made sense in that instance.

[2:09:04] That clarification, that makes sense to me.

[2:09:08] Councilmember Rucing.

[2:09:10] Thank you. I look at this as a public safety issue, panhandling from moving vehicles

[2:09:18] I've seen Panhandlers sitting on the curb, by the big old tire store, they're on Ironsprings and Gayle Gardner right on the curb while people are trying to make right turns.

[2:09:33] Just recently my husband and I, there was a lady who was clearly disabled lying on the sidewalk, they're at five points.

[2:09:40] And we had to stop and pull over and help her over to a bench by the Boy Scout statue there.

[2:09:48] So I feel that adding the prohibitation to solicit from a moving vehicle is a good thing.

[2:09:59] It prevents traffic accidents and injuries and maybe deaths to the Panhandlers.

[2:10:06] Thank you.

[2:10:16] I'll are there any other comments or concerns

[2:10:21] on that I'm in or I'll entertain a motion on approving this ordinance.

[2:10:27] There I move to approve ordinance number 2023-1845. Second.

[2:10:36] Do we have any public comment on this? Not on this one, Mayor.

[2:10:39] All right, so we have a motion as second. Please vote.

[2:10:49] Pass the seven zero.

[2:10:53] What's an easy one. Okay, what's up next?

[2:11:02] Thank you mayor. The next is sexually oriented businesses, which may not be quite as easy

[2:11:07] And in part, it's not in a final form. It needs to go to public

[2:11:11] comment. It needs to be published and

[2:11:14] I expect we'll receive more comment as we go through the process

[2:11:20] All right, we have brought this to

[2:11:23] Council before in a study session and sought some direction and

[2:11:26] And this here I just wanted to go over some of the effect of the original or the last version

[2:11:34] that was brought to council.

[2:11:35] And that was an addition of certain covered businesses to include massage parlors, adult

[2:11:40] entertainment entities, and body painting studio.

[2:11:44] And as we mentioned, when we came last time, massage parlors was an attempt not to regulate

[2:11:50] massage therapy, but certain businesses that have become or we are right for abuse within

[2:11:57] the city and within the state. Adult entertainment entities was the cover traveling shows

[2:12:03] or shows that are not in a permanent location and bodies painting studios, I guess self-explanatory.

[2:12:11] Now, it also increases coverage of the adult bookstore, novelty stores and video stores to include

[2:12:17] all stores, and no longer requires that such activity

[2:12:20] constitutes a primary purpose of that business.

[2:12:23] So that was the expansion of the definition

[2:12:25] of adult bookstore and novelty store or video stores.

[2:12:28] And the primary prohibition is to eliminate or limit

[2:12:32] minors from entering sexually oriented businesses.

[2:12:35] We also amended various definitions within 5, 7, 2,

[2:12:39] which is the definition sections.

[2:12:42] And so the next section is some of the changes

[2:12:47] from the previous draft. So I didn't make substantive changes, but I did make smaller changes

[2:12:53] that were consistent with what I felt the direction was to clean up the ordinance a little

[2:12:57] bit. And part of the direction from council was that some of these newly regulated businesses

[2:13:03] shouldn't be restricted to only industrial zones. They're not necessarily in the same category

[2:13:09] as cabaret, which is a strip club or adult theaters or so forth. So in order to do that,

[2:13:16] we cleaned up in the late latest version, some of the restrictions on zoning to make it clear

[2:13:23] that as long as it's not within a residential zone area, those businesses can be allowed.

[2:13:28] And there was previously a prohibition on being adjacent to a residential district, we removed

[2:13:34] that for those limited businesses. The newest draft also removes the license requirement for

[2:13:40] part-time employees and employees of adult novelty stores.

[2:13:44] Now, this was unclear whether this is the council direction

[2:13:48] I wasn't sure, so we included that in the draft.

[2:13:51] And essentially, it removes kind of the heavy burden for part-time

[2:13:55] employees and for businesses that engage in the sell of adult novelty

[2:14:00] source, given that includes all adult or any business that sells

[2:14:04] adult novelties, it removes that requirement.

[2:14:07] And the newest draft, as I mentioned, cleaned up some of the remaining

[2:14:11] consistencies in some other portions of the, of the ordinance towards that

[2:14:18] direction that council gave.

[2:14:21] Mayor, pro-tain.

[2:14:23] Thank you, Mayor.

[2:14:24] Would you have a clarity question here?

[2:14:26] What defines a adult novelty store?

[2:14:31] So, it's defined, but, and maybe I, it's best if I just read, yeah.

[2:14:37] So it's a, but it's a store that sells books, magazines, or other printed matter, you know,

[2:14:45] pornography.

[2:14:47] And any instruments or devices or paraphernalia, which are designed for using connection

[2:14:52] with specific sexual activities.

[2:14:54] So with that include condoms?

[2:14:56] It would under that definition.

[2:14:58] It's a pretty broad definition.

[2:15:00] Because there's a lot of places in Prescott that sell condoms.

[2:15:04] And so, and that's why I have, and I think it's important to address that, and whether that's the direction

[2:15:09] council wants to go, but I put here specific modifications that council may or may want

[2:15:14] and not want to do, and I think it's important to address. And the first one is rather to reinstate

[2:15:20] the threshold for qualifying, as an adult novice sort. Now, the previous version I feel like is

[2:15:25] unforcable. It said, one of the primary purposes, and what does that mean? It's not defined.

[2:15:29] So having a threshold, I do think makes some sort of sense.

[2:15:33] I put 20% there, I don't know what it may be, that's a council decision, but you may

[2:15:39] want to consider whether it should be limited to a certain percentage of the business.

[2:15:45] Again, one of the complaints we've heard is that these adult entertainment is defined as being

[2:15:53] of an erotic nature, and erotic is also defined, and removing that definition of erotic

[2:15:58] because it refers to a definition in a Supreme Court case,

[2:16:04] which is hard to define.

[2:16:05] Obscenity is, the first Supreme Court says,

[2:16:07] obscenity is, I can't define it, but I know when I see it.

[2:16:12] But secondary, but subsequent cases defined it as appealing

[2:16:15] to the pure interest and not, which is also difficult to define.

[2:16:21] So it may be, in terms of enforcement,

[2:16:24] easier to remove the erotic altogether and focus

[2:16:27] on that, which is easy to find, which is new to decimited any specified sexual activity,

[2:16:33] and have the businesses that may have one or all of these aspects qualify rather than

[2:16:39] something of an erotic nature.

[2:16:43] There's based on input, bring forward to you the question of whether, I think it's clear

[2:16:49] from council direction that miners that we feel miners should not be allowed to sexually

[2:16:52] businesses. The question becomes whether miners that have parental consent or a

[2:16:57] company by a miners should be allowed in. And that's the question that you may

[2:17:02] wipe out. I misspoke. And whether to or whether to reinstate licensed

[2:17:09] requirement for all of them plays. So as I mentioned that was removed in the

[2:17:11] latest draft and whether Council wants to reinstate that aspect. And we heard other

[2:17:18] various feedback and I think a lot of those addressed in trying to clarify the zoning issues

[2:17:26] for some of the newer businesses being regulated and the employees issue of requiring licensing.

[2:17:34] But there remains some. I did hear regarding massage parlors for example. And I one recommendation

[2:17:41] and it was after I drafted this but I think it would be important is that a final draft to

[2:17:46] sent to the public if approved, change the section 5, 7, 20, which gives exceptions for licensed

[2:17:54] massage therapists. And it does have sort of a outdated definition of the licensing requirement.

[2:18:01] It refers to Arizona State Board of Education, I believe, and I think that our recommendation

[2:18:07] if approved would be an exception and make it basic to those licensed under the state Board

[2:18:14] of massage therapy and remove kind of the requirements

[2:18:17] like the 500 hours of education would remove that

[2:18:20] because that's a requirement by the State Board of Education

[2:18:22] and let them deal with that.

[2:18:25] Although I will say there was some feedback on whether

[2:18:28] the word massage at all, including that in the sexually

[2:18:34] oriented businesses and massage parlors,

[2:18:36] would adversely affect those who engage in legitimate

[2:18:38] massage therapy because the name is somewhat

[2:18:41] And I think that's well taken, but I think as long as we're not trying to regulate those

[2:18:46] license under the state, it probably continues to forward the directive of Council.

[2:18:54] So at this point, I think that there's probably be a healthy discussion, and I'd like to hear from

[2:18:59] Council.

[2:19:00] And the approval, and I think we need a vote to do so, and it will help narrow down what the

[2:19:09] publication, and then come back for a public hearing.

[2:19:16] I'm going to answer your question, Mayor Proto.

[2:19:18] Yeah, I think so is it at this point, I guess, Joe, if I'm understanding correctly,

[2:19:24] right now, there is no threshold as it's currently written.

[2:19:29] That's correct.

[2:19:29] And so I just double checking to clarify my understanding.

[2:19:33] So under the ordinance that we're looking at voting to send to publication right now,

[2:19:37] the maverick that's on roostry if they happen to sell condoms qualifies as an adult

[2:19:42] novel police or

[2:19:43] i think it would qualify as written so either

[2:19:47] and this is your decision but there are two ways we could deal with it would be to exclude

[2:19:51] condoms from the definition of paraphernalia

[2:19:53] or

[2:19:54] to have some sort of threshold of the call

[2:19:57] it's the condoms is less of my concern i guess my concern is that

[2:20:02] it starts to like

[2:20:03] casting too broad of a net with this ordinance to me seems unwieldy and and it takes

[2:20:09] it creates a problem with enforcement that becomes unreasonable. The idea that, you know, I think

[2:20:16] my opinion from where we stand right now based on what I've read of the ordinance is that it is both

[2:20:22] too broad and yet too specific at the same time in really unique ways. I also think that

[2:20:29] As it's written right now, unless you were to add in that exception around the percentage and I don't know if I have no basis to know why 20% so I don't even know if that's appropriate or not.

[2:20:40] But I think it becomes a situation where you're creating an undue piece of regulation in my opinion.

[2:20:47] And that's not what we really ought to seek to do. I think this needs to, I think this needs more consideration personally.

[2:20:54] and I don't think it's ready for publication because it's just, there's too many components

[2:20:58] here that I don't want to criminalize like, you know, I don't want to put Walmart in a situation

[2:21:05] where suddenly they'd be coming at all novelty store overnight because they happen to sell condoms

[2:21:09] or sexual lubricant or any number of items that might rise to the standard of that.

[2:21:13] It just seems like we're falling down a slipper to slip in my opinion.

[2:21:20] Well, Mayor Protein, I agree with you on a number of issues.

[2:21:25] Some of these descriptions and definitions are very hard to legitimately define.

[2:21:33] And I think anything that's made available for the public for health and safety issues,

[2:21:40] contraception, different things like that are not intended to fall into this category,

[2:21:46] and shouldn't. Clearly, condoms and spermicides and other contraceptives have a legitimate

[2:21:57] health care prevention aspect to them. And they're not intended to be the kinds of material

[2:22:07] that juveniles should be exposed to. I think they should be aware of what is available

[2:22:13] when and if they become sexually active and they want to make sure along with their parents that they don't make mistakes that can affect their health and their future so I agree with you.

[2:22:30] Have those included and then have every wall martyr or a circle K be restricted on being able to provide those reasonably and necessary health products.

[2:22:47] You know, the 20% issue, that's very, very difficult to be able to ascertain.

[2:22:55] But I think being able to make sure that miners are not either intentionally or accidentally

[2:23:03] exposed to some of these other material and being able to make that an adult's only restricted

[2:23:10] area, we will have, I mean, we do have a cup of water.

[2:23:15] of retailers that provide some of these things that miners can easily be exposed to.

[2:23:25] And I know there's many places in the country that either restrict entrance to adults

[2:23:31] only, or they put this material behind some type of a barrier so that accidental exposure

[2:23:39] to a miner is not going to occur.

[2:23:45] And I think that's what we're trying to do here.

[2:23:50] I also agree that having a heavy background check and licensing and licensing a cost

[2:24:01] for part-time employees that are hourly workers in some of these places doesn't make any sense either.

[2:24:07] But I think the owner who's going to be operating these retail locations should be able to

[2:24:14] know that they have to follow these restrictions and rules and and we want to make sure

[2:24:22] that they're operating in a legal and inappropriate manner.

[2:24:29] I know there was one reference here about being close to a location that was selling alcohol.

[2:24:36] And I think having a location that's near a pizza parlor that has a beer and a wine shouldn't be restricted from that.

[2:24:50] I know we have a couple of retailers that currently are offering some of these things,

[2:24:56] so I think there probably needs to be some consideration for grandfathering of those locations,

[2:25:01] because I wouldn't want someone who invested in putting in a business and it's operating

[2:25:10] effectively. All of a sudden they have this going to affect and they feel that they

[2:25:15] have to close shop and move somewhere else. So I think you're right. There's a lot of

[2:25:22] things that we want to look at here and before we craft this into a final ordinance they

[2:25:27] have to be considered. I think any type of a law in an ordinance is certainly a law. You

[2:25:34] have to ask yourself, well what if? What if this happens or what if this happens and how can

[2:25:41] we have a reasonable definitions and reasonable regulation that protects the miners in our community

[2:25:54] and but also offers reasonable access for adults.

[2:26:00] And if I could address a couple of those issues that you read them,

[2:26:03] I think the first question about minors viewing kind of adult novelty items,

[2:26:09] it can be dealt with in some ways through the this ordinance,

[2:26:13] but also we could have a prohibition on having those types of items in the view of minors

[2:26:19] without classifying those stores that's actually on a business, which might be a way to go,

[2:26:23] depending on how the council wants to do it, but that's another option.

[2:26:28] And just to clarify on the,

[2:26:30] some of these location-specific items like being near a liquor store

[2:26:35] and being adjacent to a proper line,

[2:26:38] that was removed through five, seven,

[2:26:41] twelve-eye for adult novelty or bookstores,

[2:26:44] massage piles of adult entertainment entities,

[2:26:46] removed those requirements like being close to liquor and so forth,

[2:26:52] remove them from those requirements, but they're still ours under requirements, clearly.

[2:26:58] Council member Rucing.

[2:27:00] Thank you, I'd just like to make two comments.

[2:27:03] I'd like to direct your attention to page 20.

[2:27:07] Item G refers to the date February 10th, 1998.

[2:27:12] I'm thinking maybe we might want to update that to at least 2023.

[2:27:20] And I will say that wasn't a typo, but it is a consideration

[2:27:22] And I think that it's one of those things we debated and quite frankly based on council direction change updating that could be helpful.

[2:27:31] All right, and then thank you.

[2:27:33] And then the other one is currently, we have the sexually oriented businesses restricted to industrial zone areas, which also conforms with the county zoning.

[2:27:45] they do the same thing, and I'm concerned that if we open it up to everywhere that's

[2:27:54] not residential, that we may create an area that's kind of like a strip, as I remember

[2:28:03] in front of a lot of military bases, and for example, business general zoning does include residential,

[2:28:13] And we have strip zoning all up and down girly that's all business general and I'm concerned that that would create a adult oriented businesses all up and down our main drag.

[2:28:28] Also we have a medical building medical office and according to if we allow it in business general zoning, we could potentially have sexual oriented businesses.

[2:28:42] next to our medical office, which I don't think would be a plus for our property values.

[2:28:51] So I personally do not support changing.

[2:28:58] I would just like to delete all of paragraph

[2:29:02] I and keep it the same as industrial zone to areas. Thank you.

[2:29:10] Thank you and if I may say I understand that and I will say though that the exception from being only in zoning industrial is only for those limited those three

[2:29:20] business types not all business types but and also

[2:29:24] Section C in that same Section 5 to 712C does prohibit sexually oriented businesses from being within 500 feet of another business.

[2:29:35] So it will still deal with the idea of having sort of a red light district or a strip of such businesses, but that doesn't.

[2:29:42] I'm sorry, just says sexual other sexually oriented businesses, it doesn't say just regular businesses.

[2:29:48] Right, so it would be 500 from other sector oriented businesses to then the I see the point to prevent sort of it

[2:29:55] With still being next to my medical office

[2:29:58] You may have one next to my other

[2:30:00] Well, office, but you all have a whole strip of them.

[2:30:02] Oh, great. Thank you.

[2:30:06] Council on Shishka.

[2:30:09] Thank you, Mayor.

[2:30:11] You know, I think that I saw a lot of letters from folks who ended their letter.

[2:30:14] We need to protect our youth.

[2:30:18] Well, and I would agree with that, but I also think that no one wants the press.

[2:30:22] Good city council and their bedroom.

[2:30:25] And so, you know, we need to really be careful.

[2:30:28] We're not chasing our tale here.

[2:30:30] swatting a fly with a sledgehammer instead of a fly swatter. You swat a fly with a

[2:30:39] sledgehammer, there's probably going to be a lot of collateral damage, and I

[2:30:43] think that we need to really, really consider and listen to the public today. I

[2:30:49] think it's really important to just put this all in perspective for God's sake.

[2:30:56] So I think that trying to regulate people's choices,

[2:31:03] you know, our whole economy is built on choice.

[2:31:08] And I think that by limiting choice,

[2:31:13] we're going to run into a real problem.

[2:31:17] And I also think that whose judgment

[2:31:22] is it that it's erotic?

[2:31:24] I mean, I had a professor who wouldn't let women who wore knee-length skirts sitting in the front row,

[2:31:34] because he was tempted to look up their dress.

[2:31:38] Well, the truth of the matter is, again, who is judging whether something is erotic or not?

[2:31:46] That certainly, you know, wasn't too a normal person, but I think that we need to really, really, really take an account on what you folks say and how you would like to see us deal with this situation.

[2:32:03] Because again, Prescott City Council has no place in your bedroom.

[2:32:13] I don't think there was a single reference in this proposed ordinance with bedrooms.

[2:32:20] Councilman Moore. Thank you, Mayor.

[2:32:25] Reading this proposed ordinance was quite a slog.

[2:32:28] It was a lot of material.

[2:32:31] And I have to say that I really appreciate Mayor Protem's comments,

[2:32:35] that in a lot of ways it's too broad and a lot of ways it's too specific.

[2:32:41] And I think the conclusion that I've come to is as an elected body of the municipality,

[2:32:48] We have limited powers, we have powers, but where do you draw the line?

[2:32:55] We're trying to protect children from pornography, for example.

[2:32:59] Well, how many children access pornography every day on their phones on their computers?

[2:33:05] And we're trying to prevent people from having access to maybe products of a sexual nature

[2:33:12] that they can just buy on the internet if they can't buy it out of store.

[2:33:16] If you're going to prohibit them from buying at a store, they can just go online and buy it.

[2:33:20] So are we going to start policing the internet and press get to?

[2:33:24] And are we going to start seeing what people are prohibiting what they buy online?

[2:33:29] I feel like this ordinance is just too broad.

[2:33:33] And we're getting out in the weeds as a city council.

[2:33:36] And I think we need to be really careful because of people's first amendment rights and privacy rights

[2:33:43] that we're getting on the fringe of that

[2:33:49] well I do want to mention the fact that

[2:33:52] we've had this ordinance in effect since 1998 was it before then I think

[2:34:01] that was the last time it was a man that was the last time it was okay so we're

[2:34:04] not creating something brand new we're just trying to bring it up to some

[2:34:10] reasonable current standard, and as speaking of that, I just want to let you know that the

[2:34:16] Diamondbacks were a head one to nothing over the Phillies after the first inning.

[2:34:24] Councilwoman Ken Tellmey.

[2:34:29] So where do we go from here?

[2:34:31] I'm confused with our clarity.

[2:34:34] We're not going to scrap the whole thing.

[2:34:35] We're talking about move to a period with some modifications.

[2:34:39] Have we all agreed on those modifications?

[2:34:41] How do we go forward?

[2:34:43] And if there's, if you feel it's too, too many modifications, I would still like a vote.

[2:34:49] I'm modifications to bring back to you, but it can either be a vote on modifications to incorporate and bring back to you or modifications to then go forward and publish to the public.

[2:35:00] Well, so the qualifying 20 percent, can we just start with that one?

[2:35:08] If you're talking about Walmart and their little small section of condoms and in relation

[2:35:14] to that giant store, I'm just going to take a guess, it's probably 1 percent of the business.

[2:35:20] How do we move forward on just that reinstate the threshold for qualifying as an adult

[2:35:25] novelty store for 20 percent?

[2:35:27] Is that safe to do that?

[2:35:30] That's a threshold that's used in some jurisdiction, and it 20% is also used not specifically for this reason, but also used within the ordinance for some other requirements.

[2:35:39] That's why 20% was thrown up there, but the ultimately the number is up to debate.

[2:35:43] But we'll say that it can be done either through grocery seats or the shelf space, the way we define 20% is still an open question.

[2:35:52] So, if you want to make sure that we equalize all businesses and we don't carve out any particular business.

[2:36:01] In my mind, 20% seems reasonable. If you tip over to 50%, 75%, then you're probably in the business of distributing those materials.

[2:36:11] Let's move on to the next one. Who cares about the word erotic? It is erotic, whatever.

[2:36:16] I mean, I don't care about that.

[2:36:18] The nudity part, yeah, I think that that has a place a big part of it.

[2:36:22] So can we at least agree that that's a part of the modifications?

[2:36:29] Again, for clarity, do we just go home and make our own modification lists and give it to you?

[2:36:34] I mean, how do we go forward?

[2:36:36] I think either through a vote or through direction here, if there's a polling.

[2:36:39] Either way is fine, and I think it would be appropriate.

[2:36:41] And making these changes, for example, the erotic, to be honest, as the prosecution side of

[2:36:47] my office, it would help our office to have better clarity and enforcement.

[2:36:51] So you would prefer to keep the word erotic.

[2:36:53] I'd prefer just for my purposes, I'd prefer to remove it.

[2:36:57] Oh, remove it.

[2:36:58] Well, that would have no problem.

[2:36:59] You know, personally, if we're taking a polling vote, I would like to see these stay in

[2:37:03] the industrial area areas.

[2:37:04] I would like to see licensing because we do have sex offenders that also are attracted to

[2:37:10] kind of thing. I think they do should have licensing. And remember, all businesses should have

[2:37:15] licensing. So I think that that's an equalization situation.

[2:37:21] I would have no problem

[2:37:22] obscuring some of these things. There are some things that I think if parents want to go

[2:37:26] in there and shop for a bottle of water, maybe it shouldn't.

[2:37:30] Yeah, and the open. You know, some people would think that's wrong. But I personally, I think that's not a problem.

[2:37:38] Let me see what was the other thing.

[2:37:39] The parental, is that there are states, state law that even with the pair, I mean, you can't take a six year old into a building and the parent comes along and he says or she says to the property owner, the business owner, I want my six year old to go into that booth and watch these pornography.

[2:37:58] I mean, could it happen? Sure. But do we try to prevent somebody with no judgment from bringing

[2:38:07] their children in there? I'm sort of in favor of that. I mean, I don't think it's right.

[2:38:12] And yeah, I know there's a certain certain sect of people out there that think that's okay.

[2:38:16] But we have a lot of proof. People build their practices on situations like that.

[2:38:22] So, again, do we go back to the drawing table and bring our own modifications forward from here?

[2:38:29] That's up to Council, I prefer some sort of voter direction or polling here, because I'd

[2:38:34] like to hear from the Council as a whole rather than individuals.

[2:38:37] It's hard to deal with kind of one-off changes, so I prefer polling, but I want to

[2:38:43] address two things on the licensing.

[2:38:46] Under the way it's currently drafted, any sexual awareness business would have to license

[2:38:49] the owner would have to license, and where employees are not required to license, which are

[2:38:54] and employees of novelty stores, they would have to certify

[2:38:58] that their employees are not registered sex offenders.

[2:39:02] So there is that requirement.

[2:39:05] Regarding the parental, just to clarify your question,

[2:39:09] is there a state ordinance?

[2:39:10] Yes, there is a state ordinance, and it deals with

[2:39:12] prohibiting harmful material to minors is the name of the ordinance.

[2:39:16] And it essentially is pornography,

[2:39:19] and that is prohibited for minors.

[2:39:21] Now, this ordinance goes a little bit beyond pornography.

[2:39:26] When we deal about nudity, nudity is necessarily

[2:39:29] qualifies pornography.

[2:39:31] So it is a little bit broader, and that's why the question

[2:39:34] is raised whether we want to allow parental consent

[2:39:38] or not.

[2:39:39] Then, quite frankly, I have no recommendations either way on that.

[2:39:43] So for today, do we go ahead and make a motion

[2:39:46] that we move to approve with modifications?

[2:39:53] OK, no, I'm sorry.

[2:39:54] I just want to work out.

[2:39:56] We're not really making a motion on this.

[2:40:00] You're going to make your recommendations to our city attorney about what issues you'd

[2:40:05] like to modify, eliminate, keep, et cetera, so that he can work on another draft.

[2:40:14] That's going to be closer to being acceptable as being a voted in ordinance.

[2:40:19] Thank you.

[2:40:22] Mayor Protem.

[2:40:23] Thank you, Mayor.

[2:40:24] Yeah, I still have some questions before we start making motion, so I would appreciate the opportunity to ask those questions.

[2:40:31] One of the things you mentioned, Joe, is the business does have to certify that their employees are not sex offenders? Is that correct?

[2:40:41] Yes.

[2:40:41] Okay, and so, again, I guess my question would be,

[2:40:47] They're the means for them to do that to be able to comfortably as a business order to

[2:40:53] comfortably certify that presumably would be a background check.

[2:40:57] Well, no, okay, we have a sex offender registration where people can be

[2:41:04] stopped.

[2:41:04] So it just be, go online and look it up.

[2:41:07] Okay, so they don't have to do background check, okay.

[2:41:08] But they do have to pay a licensing fee for a registered for them, for themselves, just as

[2:41:13] on it.

[2:41:13] But not the employees.

[2:41:15] It depends on the business. So for adult novelty stores.

[2:41:19] Not they don't have to pay for the employees under the way it's currently drafted and this can go either direction as capital C's fit.

[2:41:25] But no for adult novelty stores. There's no requirement for employees to be licensed and for part time employees. There's no requirement.

[2:41:31] Okay. What are the requirements where they would have to pay for the license of the employees?

[2:41:35] Full time employees.

[2:41:38] Or at adult not at little novelty stores or at full time employees at any business other than adult novelty stores.

[2:41:44] Okay, so the traveling, I guess I'm imagining if we had someone who put together a traveling

[2:41:51] cabaret show that, you know, met that definition of what we would think of as sexually

[2:41:55] wearing a business in this, would the person who is running sound have to pay, would they have

[2:42:00] to pay to license that person?

[2:42:04] As it's drafted, if they're full-time employee, then yes.

[2:42:07] Okay.

[2:42:11] It counts one more.

[2:42:14] Thank you, Mayor.

[2:42:14] I guess part of my angst with this proposal, as I think, we've lumped together into sexually

[2:42:28] oriented businesses,

[2:42:32] maybe businesses that provide goods and businesses that provide services.

[2:42:37] And I think that's a concern for me.

[2:42:40] I mean, it's not uncommon in large cities, such as Phoenix.

[2:42:45] You go down nice 17 and you can see billboards and signs for stores like fascinations or

[2:42:52] As once called these essentials for lovers or something that you see you see the signs

[2:42:55] Okay, and they're they're retail stores and I'm a retail store for example

[2:43:02] They're not providing massages. They're not providing archaids. They're not providing cabaret shells. It's just a retail store

[2:43:09] So I guess a concern I have is lumping

[2:43:14] retail stores and making it more onerous on them like licensing and burdensome. I

[2:43:21] own a small business. I don't have to pay a $500 fee, you know, licensing fee.

[2:43:26] So I think we need to look at how we're being unequal in what we're

[2:43:32] levying on a small business because the nature of their business. And so I just

[2:43:38] have a problem with several elements of this ordinance.

[2:43:42] And I will say that this was all in the ordinance before we got to this point.

[2:43:48] So we can change that.

[2:43:50] But it's not, none of that is new in terms of having stores and places for services under

[2:43:56] the same ordinance.

[2:43:56] And I'll say that in Phoenix it's the same way.

[2:43:59] And so you'll see essentials for lovers or whatever go through this licensing process

[2:44:03] in Phoenix.

[2:44:05] So that part is not necessarily abnormal, but certainly it's a consideration as, and as you move forward and decide what direction we're going to go, that can be determination you make.

[2:44:18] Mayor for a time.

[2:44:19] Thank you, Mayor.

[2:44:20] I guess I would tend to agree with what Eric saying that I think one of the problems I have in reading this ordinance, it's trying to do too much all at once.

[2:44:29] It combines a lot, and I know that that's, I understand that historically that's how this ordinance was poorly written years ago, and it continues to be poorly written in that way.

[2:44:38] I guess the other thing I over that I appreciated that Eric said was, you know, as,

[2:44:45] who I imagine being the only parent of a minor child that's on this council up here, and I happen to be a parent of two minor child children.

[2:44:52] I don't really particularly want the city of Prescott to get in the business of raising my kids.

[2:44:57] I want to do it myself.

[2:45:00] I imagine most parents feel that way. And so I think we have to be careful about regulating how people raise their children a little bit. That's a huge concern I have. Now, do I think that, you know, if a parent is commuting abuse against a child, which, you know, certainly could go in the way of, you know, exposing them to sexually oriented businesses potentially, there's there's a reality, but I think at the end of the day, we already have laws in effect that deal with those issues. So I don't know that waiting into over regulating things is what we need to do.

[2:45:30] And I think if I had my brothers about this,

[2:45:33] I would break this up into very specific things.

[2:45:35] I would have one that deals with massage parlors specifically.

[2:45:39] I would have a separate ordinance that dealt with the novelty source

[2:45:44] specifically.

[2:45:44] And one that's dealt with trialing shows.

[2:45:46] Because I think it gives the city more flexibility.

[2:45:50] If we move forward and we say, OK, we've dealt with the adult novelty

[2:45:54] story issue.

[2:45:55] And we've established parameters.

[2:45:56] And maybe we think that 20% isn't that big of a deal.

[2:45:58] And then come to find out that we're having a disproportionate economic impact on a small business owner in this community.

[2:46:04] We could get that feedback and modify without having to go through this whole process again,

[2:46:09] which is I think part of the problem here is that we're trying to do too many things at once.

[2:46:13] So that's my opinion, and I don't know how to put that into emotion or a vote,

[2:46:17] and I don't expect the city, you know, I don't want to go home with homework because I don't think I'm going to get out of here until six.

[2:46:24] So, I would suggest that maybe there's a way to break it up into pieces.

[2:46:36] All right, I think we can take some public comment at this point and maybe get some input on things that we are considering.

[2:46:46] We haven't considered just so that we have a broader understanding of what the community is interested in in this area.

[2:46:57] All right.

[2:46:58] First comment card is before we do that. The fill is just tied it up. It's one to one.

[2:47:05] Jay Ruby.

[2:47:21] Opportunity to speak and address what I think is a critical issue.

[2:47:27] Please begin to the microphone sir.

[2:47:29] Begin to the mic. I usually just boom my voice.

[2:47:32] I expect two things from elected officials in our country.

[2:47:37] One protect the agreement that keeps our union together.

[2:47:40] the Constitution.

[2:47:42] To guard the common good, starting with our tax dollars,

[2:47:48] I'm here to address the pending resolution

[2:47:50] City Code chapter 5 through 7, which has just been discussed.

[2:47:54] As the producer and founder of the free all ages

[2:47:58] performance festival that brought tens of thousands of people

[2:48:02] to the Prescott Courthouse Plaza over 15 years,

[2:48:05] I look at this resolution, and I could see

[2:48:08] are family, friendly, festival, tsunami on the square,

[2:48:12] having been in breach of this ordinance.

[2:48:15] When John Tanuse, eventual executive director of Smoke

[2:48:18] I'm Museum and Coconino Center for the Arts,

[2:48:21] wore a grass skirt and coconut breasts to sing

[2:48:24] with the ukulele at the first tsunami on the square.

[2:48:27] Was he in breach because the coconuts

[2:48:30] were occupying specific anatomical areas?

[2:48:33] When world-renowned Japanese Buto dancers, Koichi and Haroko Tamano performed in kimonos on the courthouse plaza satirizing female expressions emphasizing their hips and pelvis could that have been considered specified sexual activity.

[2:48:52] When young male Afro-Brazilian copuera dancers performed shirtless in tight shorts, were they performing in a semi-nude condition,

[2:49:05] would the observable surge of teenage girls before their performance be construed as specified sexual activity?

[2:49:13] When the mayor of Clark Dale's wife, Belly danced, articulating her hips and rhythmic

[2:49:19] undulation in front of a clapping public, was she emphasizing specific sexual activity?

[2:49:27] Who here can legitimately answer these questions?

[2:49:31] Or, what is lacking in artistic literary political or educational value?

[2:49:38] The answer is no one can.

[2:49:40] They are subjected to taste, and there is no reasonable or current standard for taste.

[2:49:47] We lose the character of our country when ordinances like this legitimize government over

[2:49:53] reach.

[2:49:54] Legislating morality through legal code is what the communist regimes of Eastern Europe did.

[2:50:01] Preskit City Council should be better than Stalin's Minions.

[2:50:05] This ordinance will also fail, because it's in violation of the First Amendment, and when

[2:50:10] it fails, press it could get sued and lose money.

[2:50:15] As a taxpayer, I will resent our community's financial loss, because our city council

[2:50:21] approved legislating morality and taste.

[2:50:25] Dear city council and mayor, please do the right thing, stop government overreach, and protect

[2:50:32] the first amendment and our tax dollars, do not waste any more time or money on this ordinance.

[2:50:41] Thank you.

[2:50:46] Candace divine Sheridan?

[2:50:53] Good evening council. Mr. Mayor and Mr. Mayor pretend. My name is Candace divine Sheridan.

[2:50:59] I stand before you first and foremost the mother of the coolest state-year-old you'll ever meet.

[2:51:04] I'm also a wife and a business owner in town. I'm co-owner of Sheridan property group and I am

[2:51:10] the president and owner of further west, which is a live event, production company female

[2:51:15] lead.

[2:51:16] More than half my team are mothers that live in this city, having children from the ranges

[2:51:20] of 4 to 18.

[2:51:23] I'm going to start with, I put on about 8 to 10 events a year in town, but I'm going to start

[2:51:27] with the largest event just to kind of personify the overreach of this ordinance.

[2:51:33] I put on the pure imagination music festival at Watson Lake.

[2:51:36] Under this ordinance, the National Treasurer Dally Parton would get me in trouble because

[2:51:42] her costuming has specifically done things that show underboob sideboob potentially

[2:51:49] buttocks.

[2:51:51] When you put something like this through to your point, Mr. Montoya, it's so broad you're

[2:51:56] now asking me as a business owner to police artists that I don't even know what they're

[2:52:01] going to be wearing until they go on stage.

[2:52:03] Our event, our festival, is family friendly.

[2:52:07] I leave it to the parents to decide if they believe a music festival is an appropriate place

[2:52:12] to bring a child.

[2:52:14] I can tell you, past the last two years, more parents than not have said what an incredible

[2:52:20] event, how lovely that we've brought so much culture and music and diversity of sound

[2:52:25] into our beautiful landscapes and that my child gets to witness it.

[2:52:30] We're putting me in a position to not be able to do that for my business. You are squashing my business

[2:52:35] liberty, the first amendment rights of my performers, and putting me in a position that also affects

[2:52:41] our economy as a whole. I employ hundreds of people for this event. That is inclusive of and not

[2:52:48] limited to the PUSD buses and the bus drivers, the off-duty police officers, all of our local food trucks,

[2:52:55] are easy rangers, or local musicians, or local artists, or local performance artists,

[2:53:00] or local bartenders, or local vendors.

[2:53:03] I also get a ton of aid and sponsorship and partnership with 25 to 50 other businesses

[2:53:09] in town who support my festival because of the direct correlation to advertising for their

[2:53:14] businesses.

[2:53:15] And I hire set up crews, clean up crews, parking crews, ticketing crews.

[2:53:20] I hire the kayaking vendors.

[2:53:21] And I also hire our indigenous brothers and sisters to come speak to our festival, bless our indigenous lands and remind everybody to keep our areas clean, excuse me, it's clean as possible.

[2:53:33] This ordinance envelopes all of it.

[2:53:37] And so you're looking at something that is a wonderful experience for our community, which I had 4,000 plus people, the first year of our community, 6,000 people last year.

[2:53:46] We're growing. I can't wait to share who's on our festival line up for 2024. But under this ordinance,

[2:53:53] one, I don't know how it's going to be enforced. And two,

[2:53:57] am I to be frightened that I'll be hold off in handcuffs if one of my performers shows up in a

[2:54:02] crop top with underbub? How are you going to enforce this? How are you going to decide what's appropriate

[2:54:10] and not appropriate in the culmination of something so artful being put on its feet?

[2:54:15] So, I stand with J. Ruby on that front.

[2:54:18] The first amendment here is in great question for sure.

[2:54:21] Your squashing business liberty, and I think it needs to be divided into very specific

[2:54:27] lanes and take a lot more time on this, because you are inevitably affecting the economy

[2:54:32] as a whole, with something this broad.

[2:54:35] Thank you.

[2:54:40] I'm going to ask you again, not to demonstrate and make clapping or booing sounds for anything

[2:54:47] also otherwise we'll eliminate future comments from the public.

[2:54:52] So I ask you for decorum and let's allow everyone to make their statements without

[2:54:58] comment.

[2:55:00] Judy Stahl.

[2:55:08] Hello council Mayor, Mayor Procham, and council members.

[2:55:11] My name is Judy Stahl.

[2:55:13] I've been a practicing massage therapist in Preskitz since 1992 and I want you to know that

[2:55:21] Arizona State Board of Massage Therapy is the body that regulates the practice of massage therapy

[2:55:29] in Arizona and requires, at this point in time, background checks that will protect the

[2:55:37] public when licensed massage therapists are practicing within our city limits. I really appreciate

[2:55:44] what city attorney young brought up today about the concerns, first of all, with those issues.

[2:55:52] If we put in to whatever ordinance you may determine to put forward regarding massage therapy,

[2:55:58] if you simply put in that someone who is licensed in good standing with the Arizona State Board

[2:56:05] of Massage Therapy, that that's what is a massage therapist within the city of Prescott.

[2:56:10] then you are protecting the citizens completely.

[2:56:15] If there's someone who is practicing something and they are claiming that it is massage,

[2:56:21] legally they are not allowed to do that because they are required to be licensed to use those

[2:56:27] terminology whatsoever in the state of Arizona.

[2:56:31] And if someone is claiming that they're doing massage, the city can of course, if there's

[2:56:39] complaint that there's something going on that's nefarious.

[2:56:43] The city can look into it.

[2:56:44] I would imagine that the city can go in and check and see whether or not those people

[2:56:49] have a license to practice, but to put in massage parlor after the decades that we have

[2:56:56] spent attempting to make clear that massage therapy is not sex.

[2:57:03] In fact, massage therapy is medicine.

[2:57:07] Massage therapy is now a practice through the Veterans Administration that is offered with

[2:57:15] a definition of massage therapy and all of the research and data showing how it is medicine

[2:57:21] that is offered to the Veterans Administration clientele throughout the country.

[2:57:26] This is the largest health care system in the country and massaged therapy is a provided therapy.

[2:57:34] So it is not massage parlors, it is actual medicine, and so the fact that we've got a state

[2:57:41] licensure law that covers the practice of massage therapy, and the fact that it is now absolutely

[2:57:47] demonstrated to be medicine, you know, the research is undeniable, it is massive, and it has

[2:57:55] coming about for many years. I really do not want to see the word massage used in any way

[2:58:02] related to sexually-oriented businesses. You know, someone even mentioned earlier, well,

[2:58:07] if we're talking about massage parlors, it's such a loosely used phrase at this point. And of

[2:58:12] course, it goes right up the spine of someone who's been providing this medicine that, finally,

[2:58:17] is recognized as medicine and is provided to clientele, helping with things such as cancer pain,

[2:58:24] postoperative pain, PTSD therapy, anxiety, depression, and on and on.

[2:58:31] So I cannot give up the practice of my profession to something that is described as sex

[2:58:39] and sexually oriented businesses because that also makes it very difficult for who our

[2:58:45] licensed massage therapist to practice without perhaps having someone contact us and

[2:58:50] say, yeah, I want to come in and get a massage and then they come in and they want

[2:58:54] there's something other than

[2:58:56] professional such there.

[2:58:58] Please conclude your remarks.

[2:59:00] So the bottom line for me is

[2:59:05] please don't do this without

[2:59:07] making sure that you are really clear

[2:59:10] on what the results are going to be

[2:59:12] of what you're doing.

[2:59:14] I appreciate what a lot of folks

[2:59:16] have said here today regarding the city

[2:59:18] regulating what's going on in people's lives

[2:59:21] In ways that it doesn't seem like there's really much of a problem that couldn't be handled

[2:59:27] through just using the police and going to the State Board of Massage Therapy.

[2:59:32] Thank you.

[2:59:33] Patty Michelle Schaefer?

[2:59:40] Good evening, City Council Mayor, Mayor Protem, Council members and staff.

[2:59:47] My name is Patty Michelle Schaefer and I recently retired here, handful of years ago,

[2:59:55] and from the Air Force Space and Missile System Center in Los Angeles where I was

[3:00:00] This year to scientists, for 37 years, now it's called Space Command. That was a fairly recent change. Working on hypersonic nuclear weapons at the secret level and missile defense, but also climate breakdown and chemical management comments relative to this issue, please.

[3:00:20] Yes, I'm going to do that right now.

[3:00:23] So the first 17 years of working at the Air Force Space Command,

[3:00:29] my name was Patrick.

[3:00:32] The next 19 years, my name was Patricia.

[3:00:36] So they helped me repair a birth defect that was very important in my life,

[3:00:41] and I was able to continue my research.

[3:00:44] At that time, I became aware of my fantastic and unfelt because it's asymptomatic ignorance

[3:00:53] of the LGBT community because I had no idea.

[3:00:57] I mean, we can all agree pretty clearly about certain things, but it strikes me that

[3:01:03] this sort of thing might be impinging on their rights of that community, whose struggles

[3:01:10] a lot. And you can imagine while I was going through this transition from Patrick to Patricia,

[3:01:17] your laws might have impacted me if I'd have driven through this town. So there may be some

[3:01:23] ignorance, because I know what you feel like. I was completely ignorant of that community

[3:01:29] until I was in my forties. And then I met these people and realized they have their own concerns

[3:01:35] And they're just other citizens like us and they're not going out, making sex parlors, or massage, or anything like that.

[3:01:45] But yet they're impacted by laws like this that don't define things well.

[3:01:51] For instance, during that transition, did I look erotic?

[3:01:56] I don't know. Do I look erotic now? Do my classmates at Yavapy College? Look erotic.

[3:02:01] So it may be a bad law, and it might be important to consider this aspect of your constituency

[3:02:08] who you may not have any friends who are LGBT.

[3:02:12] You may not have family members who are LGBT, but we have specialists in this town, many

[3:02:17] of the churches, actually have outreach programs to these people, and can provide you with

[3:02:22] information on what's going on in their communities.

[3:02:26] Thank you very much.

[3:02:29] Sherry Hannah, she's still here.

[3:02:39] Kathleen Sauer?

[3:02:41] Hopefully it's at that rate?

[3:02:46] Good afternoon.

[3:02:48] Mayor, Mayor, Protem, City Council members, and City staff.

[3:02:53] I'd like to focus on the additions, the current additions, not the ones on the screen,

[3:02:58] to chapter 5-7 that are in violation of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,

[3:03:03] and that they target a protected class and are unconstitutionally vague.

[3:03:07] The revision adds three important definitions to the existing code.

[3:03:11] Adult entertainment is to define as any exhibition dance,

[3:03:15] Panama modeling, or other performance,

[3:03:17] predominantly distinguished or characterized by emphasis or depiction or description of any erotic nature,

[3:03:23] including but not limited to performers in the state of nudity,

[3:03:27] performers in a semi nude condition or depiction or descriptions of specified sexual activities

[3:03:32] or specified anatomical areas.

[3:03:35] Arodic is defined as devoted to our intending to arouse or excite

[3:03:39] periance sexual desires or curiosity, specified sexual activities

[3:03:44] includes many things but it's been expanded specifically to include the purposeful exposure

[3:03:49] whether complete or partial of prosthetic genitalia or breasts.

[3:03:55] It really appears that these definitions were added to specifically target all drag shows.

[3:03:59] Despite numerous recent examples of courts refusing to hold bands on drag shows, it appears

[3:04:04] of this link, which has been added to back into the definition of scene speech as defined

[3:04:08] by the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of Miller versus California in 1973.

[3:04:13] In that case, the Court defined speech during a no-first amendment of protections with

[3:04:17] following tests.

[3:04:18] It's been mentioned before.

[3:04:20] First, the average person in applying community standards must find the work as a whole appears

[3:04:24] to the period interest.

[3:04:26] Second, the work must show in a patently offensive way, sexual conduct, specifically defined

[3:04:31] by the law.

[3:04:32] And third, the work is taken as a whole mislead serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.

[3:04:40] Applying community standards, you must admit that drag shows have been performed and enjoyed in this community in throughout the state of Arizona for years.

[3:04:48] Why the sudden interest in banning or contailing them now?

[3:04:51] Even if one segment of our society is decided that now is the right time to demonize drag and the LGBTQ community,

[3:04:59] this does not allow the constitutional overreach of this revision.

[3:05:04] This revision tries to meet the second prong of the Miller case by the addition of complete

[3:05:08] or partial exposure of prosthetic genitalia or breasts to the definition of specified sexual

[3:05:14] activities.

[3:05:15] However, this definition is fatally vague.

[3:05:18] Consider a musical performance via a survivor of breast cancer, post-reconstructive surgery

[3:05:24] and address with a plunging neckline.

[3:05:26] with this performance fall under this definition.

[3:05:29] Finally, the last prong that the work taken as a whole

[3:05:32] mislead serious literary artistic political or scientific value.

[3:05:36] This was left out of the definition of erotic entirely,

[3:05:39] even though it appears elsewhere in the revised codes such as

[3:05:42] in the definition of adult theater. Why?

[3:05:45] Clearly, drag shows are artistic.

[3:05:48] However, I would also like to emphasize that drag is not

[3:05:51] inherently sexual or period.

[3:05:53] By leaving out this third-prong, this revision has been rendered unconstitutionally big.

[3:05:58] I want you to consider some other forms of entertainment that could plausly fall under

[3:06:02] the revised definition of adult entertainment, a production of plays by Shakespeare, particularly

[3:06:07] those in which the male actors, like in the day of Shakespeare, assume the female roles.

[3:06:13] Plays by Tennessee Williams are a number of noteworthy playwrights, an exhibition of artistic

[3:06:18] work, depicting nudity, such as Michelangelo's David, a film festival with R-rated movies.

[3:06:23] If these forms of entertainment are not adult entertainment as defined by this revision,

[3:06:28] then neither is drag. If this revision is enacted, it will be seen as targeting the

[3:06:32] LGBTQ community and will create equal protection and protected class issues. I'm putting

[3:06:38] out the flaws in this ordinance. It's not as a blue print for you to go back to the drawing

[3:06:42] forward and try to fix it. I'm doing this to point out that if your target is all drag-

[3:06:48] You cannot fix this.

[3:06:49] Please.

[3:06:50] You cannot add a definition here or tweak the language there in a way that will allow you

[3:06:55] to ban or children's shows under the first and 14th amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

[3:07:00] I urge you to abandon this effort and embrace all of your citizens with respect, understanding, and acceptance.

[3:07:06] Thank you.

[3:07:08] Peggy Glenn.

[3:07:09] And I will make a statement that we recognize that LGBTQ is a protected class under

[3:07:18] federal law, and we also will mention the fact that there's been no specific reference to

[3:07:25] drag shows here, we're trying to make sure that the public.

[3:07:30] Health and safety are protected and we do have consideration about minors. That's where we're working on.

[3:07:40] So let's be clear on that because a lot of people have extrapolated the discussion here far beyond what we're discussing and what we intend to do.

[3:07:52] we will make sure that we follow the law and we follow judicial decision-making and federal

[3:08:01] statutes when it comes to protect the classes.

[3:08:10] Hi, me again, Peggy Glenn.

[3:08:13] Mayor Good, Mayor Protem Montaia, Clark Taney, Eric Moore, Kathy Rousing, Steve Sischke,

[3:08:20] and Connie Contomie.

[3:08:20] Thank you for having me here again.

[3:08:23] Mr. Young, you can't put lipstick on a pig and call it anything other than a pig.

[3:08:31] Apparently, the prudesquad got all upset about some of the things going on in our town.

[3:08:39] Oh my god, there's traveling drag shows, there's traveling,

[3:08:42] bodyvel shows, oh there's a burlesque disc, there's something else that we better prepare for the apocalypse of

[3:08:52] sexualization. And if you've got a really old law that's not doing the job, you don't

[3:09:02] try to put lipstick on it and make it a good law or good ordinance. You start from the

[3:09:07] scratch. You know if I'm making a cake and all of a sudden the flowers got weevils in it,

[3:09:14] I don't continue to make the cake. I toss it out and I go buy a new bag of flour and

[3:09:20] make a better cake. If I'm trying to make a dress and the fabric I'm using has got a big hole in it,

[3:09:27] I don't continue. I go buy a new piece of fabric and make a new dress. You, uh, Connie,

[3:09:34] I think, and Kathy asked, well, what do we do? How do we approve this? You have three choices.

[3:09:41] Move to approve as drafted. Move to deny that would be fabulous. It's not ready for primetime.

[3:09:52] Yes, I'm an actor.

[3:09:54] Yes, I'm a performer.

[3:09:55] Yes, I'm a public speaker.

[3:09:56] Yes, I'm a little louder than others.

[3:09:58] But I am a pragmatist as well.

[3:10:00] If you've got a really cruddy law, you don't try and amp that law

[3:10:05] to make it do something that it's not designed to do.

[3:10:08] You have the option to move to deny.

[3:10:13] Secondarily to that, I would challenge each one.

[3:10:15] I would challenge city staff, actually, to find a setting,

[3:10:18] So that's anybody with hearing loss could sit in the chair down here and see because when we're sitting in the chair and you guys are talking in your mics

[3:10:29] Mr. Good. I am paying attention. I'm hoping we can't see your mouth. So we can't read your lips. And if you're not close to the mic, we can't hear you. I would challenge you to find get a good sound tech and get some sound system in this room so that people can actually participate in these meetings and hear what you have to say.

[3:10:47] Because I don't think you're sitting up there with nothing important to say.

[3:10:51] You don't have this job to be unimportant.

[3:10:53] You have this job to do the best you can for the citizens of Prusket.

[3:10:58] I appreciate your time.

[3:11:00] I appreciate you listening to me.

[3:11:02] You have the option to move to Deny.

[3:11:08] Maria Lanham.

[3:11:14] Thank you so much for letting me stand up.

[3:11:17] My name is Maria Lanham and I want to thank all of you for being here today.

[3:11:22] This has been a very long session.

[3:11:25] I was listening, I'm not going to read my prepared notes, listening to your comments,

[3:11:31] listening to Peggy, and you've gone beyond the wording of what is in this 25 page proposed

[3:11:39] ordinance.

[3:11:41] My suggestion is that you deny it and you start from scratch.

[3:11:45] There are state laws that must encompass most of what is in here.

[3:11:51] I don't know what exactly you're trying to get here.

[3:11:59] I am concerned that you are going to turn into, not you per se, but you're going to have

[3:12:07] a department in this city that's going to turn into the morality police.

[3:12:12] How in God's name do you define something that's lacking in artistic literary, political, or

[3:12:17] educational value?

[3:12:19] We can't do that. We can do it in person and encourage others to either go or not go.

[3:12:26] You're taking away our personal right and responsibility as citizens.

[3:12:31] This is a 15 year old law and I have no idea of who has been charged under this law or any of the aspects of it.

[3:12:41] So, basically, I'm just suggesting that you deny this motion or whatever it is and go on

[3:12:48] and let's start from you and other responsible members of the community start from scratch

[3:12:53] and look at it as Brandon, excuse me, Councilman Montoya suggested from, let's potentially

[3:13:02] split it up and give the citizen the decision, not you.

[3:13:08] So, I thank you, and I also echo, and for, unfortunately, Peggy's comment about the

[3:13:17] mic system.

[3:13:17] It is not very good.

[3:13:21] May are good.

[3:13:22] I've talked to you before about this.

[3:13:24] I can sometimes barely hear you, especially when you give us a paragraph, which I enjoy it

[3:13:30] with like to hear.

[3:13:32] You know, it disintegrates and we can't grab it.

[3:13:37] So I hope the people at home can, so thank you very much.

[3:13:43] Rosemary Dixon.

[3:13:54] Hi, thank you for taking my comment.

[3:13:57] I just want to say that I believe that parents

[3:14:01] can and should make the choice of what entertainment

[3:14:04] their children see.

[3:14:06] I think it's way beyond the purview of city council

[3:14:09] to be deciding what a minor can see in the can't see

[3:14:12] if they have parents.

[3:14:14] So for me, it's sort of a nanny state kind of thing.

[3:14:18] And I'm a mother, my daughter, we had to make all kinds of choices about what she saw.

[3:14:23] And we made those choices and she's just fine.

[3:14:25] Thank you. So I would like you all to reconsider this very carefully.

[3:14:29] We all want to protect our children.

[3:14:31] But it's not the city's job to protect the children from entertainment.

[3:14:36] Thank you. Jeffery, Daveurman.

[3:14:48] Stephanie Weatherington.

[3:14:58] Good afternoon. Thank you.

[3:15:00] Having me? I appreciate the time. Please pick into the microphone.

[3:15:03] Is that better? And I appreciate you guys listening to my emails that I've been sending and some

[3:15:08] other customers that I've been having email you guys as well. So we're going to get away from the entertainment

[3:15:12] and go to the retail stores. That's been a big topic of conversation here. So I own Obey, which is

[3:15:20] lingerie store. We have lingerie, club wear, body jewelry, and then we also have adult wellness products.

[3:15:27] I'd say that's probably about 20% of my business, but then again, I'd have to have you guys come in and tell me which products are actually adult.

[3:15:35] Because there's so many different products there.

[3:15:37] The type of people that come into my business while basically look around, these are my customers.

[3:15:43] I have professionals, business owners, doctors, lawyers, teachers, professors, council members, and these find people that come into my shop.

[3:15:52] Thank you.

[3:15:52] You'll look around.

[3:15:58] I run a clean legitimate business and every day I'm thanked for having this door open because

[3:16:03] people have a safe place to come and shop for their wellness goods.

[3:16:08] Things that benefit them, their marriage and relationships also doctors are sending their

[3:16:14] patients to me because I carry products that help with couples at to have an intimate

[3:16:19] life again.

[3:16:22] People are saying thank you because they don't have to go to Phoenix anymore to go into

[3:16:26] those shops, they don't care to, that they don't feel safe in.

[3:16:31] So I did have something prepared, but I agree with so many people back here that we don't

[3:16:35] want the government in our bedroom.

[3:16:37] And I really do appreciate that there is modifications on here.

[3:16:43] Some of that stuff I can live with.

[3:16:44] the old one, I had a whole list of things that would really make it difficult to be in business and

[3:16:52] and the other retailers as well in town. So I do appreciate that you guys are wanting to modify it,

[3:17:00] but I think it has a lot more work left to do, and it would be nice to have some input or talk to us

[3:17:06] about some of these issues. Like you guys are doing. So I thank you for that. I'm going to keep it short and

[3:17:17] That's her, that's her, like, that's her, like, I've

[3:17:27] got all sorts of pages written that I was going to talk about, but at this time of night, I don't want to talk about them. We don't have that kind of, we don't have that kind of time.

[3:17:37] But I would like to read a letter that her excuse me.

[3:17:43] It's an article that was in the Quad Cities Business News in July that Mayor Good wrote.

[3:17:49] He said his goal is to make sure that the ordinances of the city of Prescott meet the needs of our cities in these modern times.

[3:18:00] A few of these are related to adult entertainment, or sexually oriented businesses, and the hosting of sexually oriented shows, such as cabaret or drag shows.

[3:18:11] And I'm afraid I just don't think we need to do that.

[3:18:20] I don't think we need ordinances like this.

[3:18:24] There's another post that was on the web.

[3:18:27] The Puritans are added again in Prescott.

[3:18:30] I've been to many drag shows here and never once if I seen nudity,

[3:18:35] at least not anymore than the cleavage I've seen some Republican women showing.

[3:18:40] It's entertainment, people just like the Prince or Taylor Swift or Prescott Arts Center.

[3:18:47] Moreover, it celebrates gay culture and I think this is over at Homeophobia.

[3:18:53] I expect a severe ordinance to pass and then the city to be hit with a freedom of speech lawsuit.

[3:19:00] This is from a post on the Democratic Women's website or extremely Facebook page.

[3:19:06] So, I'm not going to say any more except that I think there's a long ways to go.

[3:19:13] The references regarding what was used as a basis for this document are old and out of

[3:19:20] date.

[3:19:21] Please update them, yet references from psychiatrists, medical professionals, your police officers

[3:19:30] find out what's going on in Prescott.

[3:19:33] I really thank it's important to really understand this community and this

[3:19:42] motion as it is written does not understand this community.

[3:19:48] Thank you for your time.

[3:19:52] Whitney Williams.

[3:20:01] Hello, my name is Whitney Williams and I'm Vice President of House of Use.

[3:20:05] A local queer arts nonprofit in town and a drag performer, a public school teacher.

[3:20:10] And I've been born and raised born in the Yav of Pai Regional Medical Center actually before the Burthing Center was moved to PV.

[3:20:18] A captain for Kathma did a strip tease down to his chest at the big brother's big sisters dancing with the stars fundraiser.

[3:20:26] I know of several families that attended and not one thought it was inappropriate for their children.

[3:20:31] Would this ordinance be enforced for him?

[3:20:34] So given that example, these changes to the ordinance will disproportionately affect women,

[3:20:39] queer performers, and local businesses. It is a violation of our freedom of speech.

[3:20:44] You cannot tell me that if a drag queen fully clothed, performed at that fundraiser,

[3:20:50] our council would not have worked to enforce this ordinance and made her get licensed,

[3:20:55] background checked, and told she can only perform an industrial areas.

[3:20:58] I should not have to apply for a license every time I perform drag in this town with house

[3:21:04] abuse.

[3:21:05] The adult-oriented businesses, our drag shows and the brush shows in this community don't

[3:21:10] hurt children.

[3:21:11] In fact, our drag shows have protected children, providing a safe place for them.

[3:21:16] We had a family-friendly pride festival back in June, and that was highly successful.

[3:21:21] We allowed children into our drag shows only if they were attended with a guardian.

[3:21:25] It is so important to cultivate safe spaces for queer community a truly a suicide prevention.

[3:21:32] This ordinance is taking away parents' rights to choose what is best for their child,

[3:21:37] and that would end up being an abuse of your power.

[3:21:40] Drag is not inherently sexual, just like dancing isn't.

[3:21:44] Dancing ranges from ballet to strip shows, just like drag ranges from kid shows with storytime

[3:21:50] to run she late night performances.

[3:21:53] Video games are rated movies.

[3:21:55] All of those things parents get to decide

[3:21:56] for their children to participate in.

[3:21:59] Drag should be no different.

[3:22:00] It is a suppression tactic

[3:22:02] to isolate our shows to industrial areas.

[3:22:05] House of Hughes will not have venues to perform at

[3:22:07] if you zone us this way.

[3:22:08] It would be separate and unequal.

[3:22:11] The theaters that we perform at

[3:22:12] are in areas zone to different codes.

[3:22:14] You will have created a physical barrier

[3:22:16] that will prevent our shows from occurring.

[3:22:18] I wish the council would focus their energies on actual sex abuse happening to our children in our community.

[3:22:25] Why isn't the council outraged at these proven instances of abuse?

[3:22:30] Children and women in our community. Instead, I'm watching you buying into this fabricated message that all queer people potentially could be pedophiles, when the real pedophiles are out there. Those three child abusers convicted a month ago,

[3:22:44] Hojada Scarri arrested for sex trafficking, David Stringer, who was on the school board,

[3:22:50] and many more. As Officer Kasoon was quoted in the Currier, and the prevalence of child

[3:22:56] sex exploitation in the Quad City area is unfortunately very prevalent. It would be a better

[3:23:02] use of the council's time to make sure our children are safe from the real abusers out there.

[3:23:07] Our organization is one of the many organizations in this town that will be disproportionately

[3:23:12] affected by this ordinance. We've had representations speaking at city council meetings multiple times

[3:23:17] and multiple members of ours have emailed you asking to be part of the session.

[3:23:21] Hello, jury marks. I voted for you and I told my communities to vote for you.

[3:23:27] If you end up voting to pass these changes, I will not make the same mistake again. Thank you very much.

[3:23:35] Mayor, can I clarify that Mr. Stringer was never on the school board although we did elect him to the

[3:23:39] legislature. That's correct. Patty Christina Willis. And I would ask if unless you can add

[3:23:49] some additional information that we haven't yet heard, reciting the same concerns is not

[3:23:57] being very productive here. My name is

[3:24:04] I would state that unless you can add some new information

[3:24:10] that restating the same concerns are not effective for this public comment period.

[3:24:19] Is that sufficient for you?

[3:24:21] Excellent.

[3:24:22] And I will tell you that I've had a half of my vocal cords removed because I have a respiratory

[3:24:29] tumor tumor that I acquired by serving with the United States Army and Vietnam and being

[3:24:36] exposed to age and orange.

[3:24:38] So it's a disability and I'm sure that a lot of you people who are concerned about protected

[3:24:45] classes should also be concerned about someone who has a disability that you receive from serving

[3:24:53] as country.

[3:24:54] We want to do that as well as we recommend that you get the necessary equipment thank you.

[3:25:01] Thank you.

[3:25:01] Please proceed.

[3:25:02] Thank you, Mayor Good, Mayor Potem, and Council members, I am so impressed by the common sense

[3:25:12] I have been hearing through this meeting, I am the pastor, I'm Patty Willis, I'm the pastor

[3:25:19] of Granite Peak, Unitarian Universalist Congregation, and often with my congregation, I talk

[3:25:26] with them about intent and impact.

[3:25:29] And I believe that often the intent to, in this case,

[3:25:37] to protect children that came out in the words

[3:25:41] that you wrote, Mayor Good, the impact was

[3:25:47] in the LGBTQ community has been fear.

[3:25:51] And Rabbi Shonaman, in her invocation, I imagine that you heard, what is happening in

[3:26:03] synagogues that there have been bomb threats in Flagstaff and that many of the synagogues

[3:26:11] around the country are experiencing fear, there's a lot of fear, so the larger picture that

[3:26:18] see as a pastor is that targeting certain things and I was looking at the performances because

[3:26:30] of your article, Mayor Good, and I wrote you a letter that was signed by 46 people. I think

[3:26:39] you, I don't know if you remember receiving it, but the name that comes out to me is Briggy Dickens

[3:26:47] and sign this letter, bringy Dickinson is the cousin of Anne Frank, because the people who

[3:26:55] experienced what happened in Nazi Germany are trying to see the big picture whenever they

[3:27:03] do, are there groups that are feeling fear? Are there groups that are targeted? We don't

[3:27:09] need to like everyone, but we need to protect everyone's rights. And I thank you. I thank

[3:27:16] you may are good for your service. I had an uncle who was a pilot and who also experienced

[3:27:24] many things died recently of COPD from that time. So I thank you for your service and all

[3:27:34] of you for being here and for being so articulate through the whole thing. Thank you.

[3:27:54] That's all

[3:27:54] different aspects that I think almost everyone on this council has various concerns about

[3:28:01] amending to try to discuss it at this point I think would be unproductive and I think

[3:28:10] maybe we could individually send you some recommendations and see if you could incorporate that

[3:28:16] in our next draft version. I think at this point that makes sense and we can come back with some

[3:28:22] those changes made, and we'll talk about that.

[3:28:25] And in last, one of the recommendations

[3:28:29] is breaking things down to individual section,

[3:28:32] which would be a big project, but one that I think

[3:28:35] would make some sense of it.

[3:28:36] But if that were going that direction,

[3:28:37] I'd like to know that now.

[3:28:39] Otherwise, we can just send me input

[3:28:42] and we can make those changes.

[3:28:45] Councilman Sheshka.

[3:28:46] Thank you, Mayor, appreciate that.

[3:28:49] You know, when I was going back to the agenda,

[3:28:51] everything else is talking about passing, you know, this or that. And this one just says

[3:28:59] request for feedback on ordinance number 2023-1843. And I think that between the counsel

[3:29:09] and the folks out here, we got feedback. I'm not sure what else you'd like from us.

[3:29:16] I think the feedback's important as the council's a whole.

[3:29:20] I think that we have several different opinions of what it should look like and from the council and a lot more in the audience.

[3:29:28] To be honest, you seven are the ones I need to hear from.

[3:29:31] So the feedback that I've heard verbally is good, but to the extent that there is either vote, polling, or sending me information afterwards just helps know what the council thinks.

[3:29:43] Okay, so, excuse me, Mayor, so we don't necessarily have to make a motion to vote on something.

[3:29:50] Okay.

[3:29:52] And as I mentioned at the beginning, nothing we could do here would enact this or approve it as a lot.

[3:29:57] We still have steps to go through.

[3:30:00] Thank you, Mayor Joe. I am sorry to say this, but I am a fan of breaking into pieces. I think it's an unwieldy project. I'm sure for your office and you knew what you were getting into when you became attorney. I see them.

[3:30:14] So, but I think the only way this process is going to move forward with a way to achieve what we're trying to achieve here is to separate out these things.

[3:30:28] Because if we're trying to bite off too much, it's going to be, I can hear feedback, even the feedback we heard from the public today.

[3:30:37] We heard feedback on four different components of this.

[3:30:39] And so I think breaking it into four different pieces,

[3:30:42] well, I don't know if it's four, but whatever number

[3:30:44] that makes sense as it relates to the provision.

[3:30:46] So this just gives us more ability to a,

[3:30:50] try and get a little bit more precise and appropriate

[3:30:52] to what the community is responding with.

[3:30:55] And B, it also allows us

[3:30:56] that if we do venture down the path of unintended consequences

[3:31:01] that we have an easier remedy to fix this problem going forward.

[3:31:06] And that's the big part of it for me.

[3:31:07] I don't, I think they're, and I want to be clear, there are parts of this that are necessary

[3:31:12] to update and modify, but I do think that breaking into pieces makes sense, and that's

[3:31:18] my feedback.

[3:31:19] I can send you an email to that effect, too.

[3:31:22] noted.

[3:31:24] For those of you who are interested, the fillies scored on the bottom of the fourth, so they're

[3:31:29] ahead, due to one.

[3:31:32] Councilwoman, can tell me.

[3:31:35] Thank you, Mayor.

[3:31:37] Just for the record, we have all been receiving Gary emails and I counted, I have 109 emails

[3:31:45] and support.

[3:31:47] So, we can't discount the fact that we do have people that obviously couldn't be here

[3:31:51] today that do support this ordinance and we have to remember that.

[3:31:55] But we also have to remember the reason for an ordinance in the beginning.

[3:32:00] What is the intent of these ordinances?

[3:32:03] And there are many.

[3:32:03] I mean, look in the city ordinance book, there's hundreds of ordinances.

[3:32:07] This is really to give our attorney the tools in order to prosecute the bad offenders.

[3:32:15] And Joe, I'd like to hear from you, if you have to use this ordinance and exercise your

[3:32:21] legal ability to, you know, be able to prosecute somebody that has, again, as always, there's

[3:32:28] always an abuser that's going to ruin it for everybody.

[3:32:30] But in your opinion, if you had to go after somebody for an abuse of something, would this ordinance help you?

[3:32:39] Because I know in my own past, you can't have too little information.

[3:32:45] You have to have more tools when you go in front of a court or you're being prosecuted or you are the prosecutor.

[3:32:52] So what is your legal opinion on this ordinance?

[3:32:54] Do we have too much abusive

[3:32:58] Verbage in this ordinance is it better to have more or less?

[3:33:01] I'd like to have your opinion on that. I'm going to answer the question. I think you asked because

[3:33:08] Well, if you have an ordinance and you need to exercise

[3:33:12] The rights that are stated clearly stated in an ordinance. Do you think that this ordinance is too cumbersome?

[3:33:19] I think that

[3:33:21] simple ordinances are easier to enforce.

[3:33:24] And it was suggested to break it up to be honest,

[3:33:26] that would be a lot of work, but one that I would be happy to do

[3:33:30] because it does make it easier when we have more direct.

[3:33:34] A 25 page ordinance is pretty long.

[3:33:37] And so breaking it up would be something that would be a project

[3:33:41] that I'd be willing to do it to help us with enforcement.

[3:33:45] I think that that's pertinent information.

[3:33:47] And we need to remember that.

[3:33:49] I then I also want to address the woman who was the massage therapist.

[3:33:52] I think everybody in this room understands the value of a massage.

[3:33:58] Again, nobody is going after people that are legitimate.

[3:34:01] This ordinance is basically going to be used if people are abusing.

[3:34:06] These are the abusers.

[3:34:08] And we have to have the tools to be able to shut those places down.

[3:34:12] But I mean, I couldn't live without the massages, the chiropractic.

[3:34:15] I think many of us feel the same way.

[3:34:16] This is not, we're not going after people that have legitimate businesses in no way that is not the intent.

[3:34:25] Thank you.

[3:34:29] Councilor Moore.

[3:34:31] I just want to say that I'm in favor of breaking it up as well.

[3:34:34] Thank you.

[3:34:36] Councilor and Tanny.

[3:34:38] Thank you.

[3:34:39] Same feedback in terms of putting it in smaller chunks that we can more or more easily digestable for all of us.

[3:34:45] I really appreciate the points of view that we're brought up today.

[3:34:50] It's a strong contrast to, as Councilman Kuntelme mentioned,

[3:34:55] dozens of points of view that we've heard from other folks in the community.

[3:34:58] So I think it's important for all of us to recognize.

[3:35:00] If you showed up and just heard what was said here tonight,

[3:35:03] it would be easy to walk with, if you think everybody in the community thinks like this,

[3:35:07] because that we heard kind of one direction of voices,

[3:35:10] but we've heard another direction of voices from a lot of other people.

[3:35:13] So I really appreciate having heard from all different facets of the community and really

[3:35:20] glad that we're going to be doing more work on this and going to the public further with

[3:35:25] this before we move forward at all.

[3:35:27] It's certainly not ready to be baked.

[3:35:29] I think as somebody said earlier, well, Councilman Tenney and the other Councilman here

[3:35:35] that brought this up, I think we're on the right track here.

[3:35:39] I think casting too wide of a net and trying to cover all these different components or aspects of this area is just too difficult and it would probably generate some unintended consequences that we'd have to come back and look at the whole ordinance again.

[3:35:59] So I agree with Mayor Protown, this might put a little burden on your office there, but I think

[3:36:07] breaking a delta entertainment into one section, and then services and products into another

[3:36:14] section, and then massage therapy as a third area to be monitored is probably a better way of handling

[3:36:26] at that way if we do find unintentioned consequences in one or more of these areas, then we all

[3:36:34] all we have to do is look at those and correct them.

[3:36:41] Thank you.

[3:36:42] I think that gives me enough to start a pretty big project.

[3:36:48] And would look for more input as via email.

[3:36:51] And I want to add, when I talk to Attorney Young a number of months ago when, of course, we started on the charter review amendments as one project.

[3:37:04] But one of the things that came to my awareness is that we had so many ordinances that had been passed over the years that had never been looked at again

[3:37:13] and we're really out of date and not enforceable and not defensible when they came to

[3:37:22] trying to enforce them and then trying to defend those enforcement actions in a...

[3:37:31] Judicial environment, whether it's our city attorney or our city court or other places, it was just way overdue for a review in these areas.

[3:37:46] So it's not like we're picking out any particular area. We just realized that it was about time for us to take a good look at what our ordinances are and whether they're still legitimate and whether they are appropriate.

[3:38:01] And, like I said before, enforceable and defensible.

[3:38:06] So I think you have your guidance.

[3:38:09] Yes, Mayor, thank you.

[3:38:10] Time for extra school.

[3:38:16] And a little bird just told me that the Diamondbacks

[3:38:19] tied it up to two to two to two.

[3:38:23] So I think we can move on to the next item.

[3:38:31] They don't leave.

[3:38:32] There's some great stuff up.

[3:38:33] The pavement micro ceiling coming up.

[3:38:35] You don't want to miss that.

[3:38:44] Thank you.

[3:38:45] Mayor and Council just kind of helped move things along.

[3:38:48] here. Our next item is the presentation and the closing of the public hearing and comment

[3:38:54] period for the CDBG consolidated annual performance report and I have Mike McGinnis here

[3:39:00] to provide us in a quick overview. All right, good evening, Mr. Mayor and Council. Michael McGinnis,

[3:39:07] I am with the Community Development Team, I'm your CDBG coordinator here with the city.

[3:39:13] I'm gonna make this as short as possible okay so this is this whole consolidated annual

[3:39:21] performance and evaluation evaluation report also called the Caper basically it's our

[3:39:28] end-up program year report for program year 2022 that went from let's see July 1 2022 to June

[3:39:37] 30th, 2023, so it just closed and a lot of success with that program that I'm going to

[3:39:44] share real quick right now. This is the end of a 15-day public comment period that started

[3:39:49] October 9th and there was no public comment. Okay, Kaper Highlights. Last time I was here,

[3:39:59] I shared about a minor home repair program. At the end of the program year, we helped out eight

[3:40:05] residents benefited from the repairs through the CDBG program, a lot of this was done by the

[3:40:12] Chamber of Commerce Foundation and their Executive Director, Ms. Sherry Heini, so a shout out

[3:40:19] to her and all her hard work for that.

[3:40:23] Other parts of our program, we helped over 2,000-press get residents receive basic need services

[3:40:28] through transportation, people who care, new horizon, where the providers, a senior mentoring

[3:40:33] program through Player Health and Rental Assistance Program through Matt Force, Arizona Service,

[3:40:40] which is run by Prasket College and conjunction with AmeriCorps, 87 young adults with

[3:40:46] workforce development. The big project for the year was the community nature center ADA Trail,

[3:40:54] which was completed. I got pictures. You know, when I got here, this project was already kind

[3:41:01] going. So the people that were really pushing this project for, I want to recognize Ellen Bashar,

[3:41:09] who I think everybody knows, Joe Baines with Parks and Rec, and the contractor that we used

[3:41:17] was autumn blaze construction, defiantastic job. You have a chance to go check it out, please do.

[3:41:23] Projects that are on the way, the Offsour Quarters Project, we're looking at 2024. I believe that's

[3:41:30] going to be 24 units for homeless vats. Pictures, this was back in August. For the ribbon

[3:41:39] cut in ceremony, you have Ellen Bashar there. We had some great presentations to open up

[3:41:45] the trail. And as you can see, the trail right behind the young lady goes about 1,500 feet.

[3:41:54] And there's the actual ribbon cut. Again, if you have a chance to check it out, it's over

[3:41:59] by a grant at middle school, right across from their drop-off parking lot, highly encouraged

[3:42:07] it. They did a real great job.

[3:42:12] So with that, that's it. That's all I got. If there's

[3:42:14] questions, I'm here.

[3:42:19] Council, I'm Tammy.

[3:42:22] I didn't press my request to speak button, but

[3:42:24] as the council is not to CDBG. I've seen a lot of this great work in action. I just want

[3:42:29] to commend you Michael for the great work that you've done. Thanks for the good presentation

[3:42:32] tonight about the positive ways that this has impacted our community.

[3:42:38] Thank you.

[3:42:46] It is a public hearing that open with the public comments.

[3:42:51] We do not have any public comment.

[3:42:53] Mayor Proto.

[3:42:55] Mayor, I'll make a move.

[3:42:57] I'll make a motion to move to close the public hearing on the 2020 CDB CG consolidated annual performance

[3:43:05] report.

[3:43:06] Man, it's been a long day. I'll make a motion to move to second that motion that was moved

[3:43:11] Thank you both

[3:43:14] Harry no other comments. Please vote

[3:43:24] passes seven zero. All right. Thank you

[3:43:32] Okay, we're moving on to item 10 C

[3:43:36] Like a mayor and members of the council the next item is a site plan review for a 223 unit residential rental complex

[3:43:46] located in deep well ranch

[3:43:48] It is a rental community that was passed by the Planning and Zoning Commission with some stipulations.

[3:43:54] And I've got George Worley here who is going to talk about this item.

[3:43:57] Thank you very much.

[3:43:59] I'm going to go through this pretty fast as well.

[3:44:01] We'll try and keep it to a half an hour if I can.

[3:44:07] Sorry.

[3:44:11] Real quick, you were somewhat familiar with this.

[3:44:14] I think some of these projects have been talked to you previously.

[3:44:18] we have talked to you previously. Wow, it is a long day. This one is a rental community. It is

[3:44:24] located at Piner Parkway and Willow Creek Road in northwest corner. The purpose of the community is

[3:44:30] provide rental housing. There are 223 units. It's within deep-low ranch master plan, the gold color

[3:44:36] area.

[3:44:38] The area is located in an impact zone 6, which is one of the areas that allows for residential

[3:44:44] So uses there's a little strip of property that I'll show you again that's an impact zone

[3:44:48] for that's limited and not allowed to have residential units.

[3:44:52] The developer has laid it out as a parking area overflow parking area for the community.

[3:44:58] It is within noise contouring.

[3:45:00] At this time, the noise contour of 60 and 55, both allow for residential uses. The AVO should

[3:45:08] it ever make it forward and be approved would have some additional restrictions that would apply.

[3:45:15] Another noise contour, this is a future.

[3:45:19] Just a quick point out, it is a permitted use listed within the

[3:45:23] people on master plan designation of land use group V for a village which is a

[3:45:28] higher density residential type use. Unit mix is shown on the right. It's a

[3:45:36] little blurry I apologize that's just how it came out of the program. Again it's

[3:45:41] 223 units on 28 and a half acres so about seven and a half units per acre.

[3:45:50] This is

[3:45:50] visual diagram showing that location of impacts on four boundary. You can see the area

[3:45:56] to the upper left is the area within zone four. It's parking at open space.

[3:46:03] There's some addition of drainage in one part of the area. So they've managed to keep all of the residential units out of that area

[3:46:11] and in the area that permitted buyer codes for residential.

[3:46:19] I'll let this run part way through.

[3:46:21] this was a short video provided by the developer just to give a feel for what the community might

[3:46:26] look like. We'll note specifically all of those trees are less than the heights of the buildings

[3:46:32] and will be maintained that way and you'll see a note in a moment or two that address that

[3:46:42] and rather than go to the inside. We'll talk about the conversation of the current planning commission

[3:46:48] with the airport director and the developer and the commission agreeing to four

[3:46:54] stipulations effectively

[3:46:56] adding to the approval process the commission recommended in favor unanimously subject to these four criteria being included

[3:47:05] the developer is here and can answer additional questions should you have them

[3:47:11] but based on inclusion of those the recommendation was unanimous to approve

[3:47:15] and the motion that we've prepared for you based on the Planning Commission

[3:47:20] recommendation is before you and I'm happy to answer questions. Again, the

[3:47:24] developer is here also. Mayor Protem. Thank you, Mayor. I have a ten-part

[3:47:30] question, George. No, I'm kidding. Actually, I kind of did want to hear from the

[3:47:35] developer because I think this is a bit of an interesting approach to trying to

[3:47:46] The video kind of showed it a little bit. I liked the idea of those car guards and I think I heard you talk about this

[3:47:52] Maybe not at the most recent planning zone in commission, but maybe the first one before and I think it might be worth kind of talking about that and

[3:47:59] You know what you think of this as kind of the vision that you guys are trying to treat with this development. Thank you mayor for some days

[3:48:05] Thank you for hanging in there

[3:48:07] I know it's been a long evening

[3:48:09] I apologize, I'll try to speak quickly and succinctly.

[3:48:15] Thank you, Members of the Council.

[3:48:17] This is substantial development.

[3:48:19] So we appreciate you being here.

[3:48:23] So before I answer that question, I wanted to first mention

[3:48:28] top of my, because it seems like it's the largest concern,

[3:48:32] which is the airport proximity.

[3:48:34] So what we've done from day one is work directly with Dr. Sabata

[3:48:37] to make sure that this complies, we had 36 points on the site submitted to FAA. They were all approved.

[3:48:47] We also agreed that before we ever start construction, if it's approved, it is a project.

[3:48:52] That we would do the temporary 7460, so we alert the airport and get permission before we can use cranes to lift the trust or to have our concrete pumps out there.

[3:49:03] Um, these things that I'm going to mention to you were agreeing to tonight, some of them

[3:49:07] are addition to the four, and we just want to be an example for you, uh, for future

[3:49:13] developers.

[3:49:14] So you can say, hey, they did it right, and I'll just list them quickly.

[3:49:19] And if we don't honor these, we're inviting you to freeze permits, please, because we're

[3:49:26] going to put our money where our mouth is.

[3:49:28] And then once the project is completed, it's a rental community.

[3:49:31] We're inviting the city to come in and audit our files whenever they want while we're open.

[3:49:41] And if you find a customer that's not signed the navigation easement properly, then we welcome fines per discovery.

[3:49:49] We want to be completely transparent and we're happy to have a big punishment if we're not honoring what I'm telling you tonight.

[3:49:57] So number one, we're agreeing to have the placard on the wall and they come in to have a monument when people pull in.

[3:50:04] It'll show the distance to the airport.

[3:50:06] Three, we're going to include in the lease agreement, the airport influence map.

[3:50:12] Four, obviously we're including the obligation easement.

[3:50:18] Five, we're inviting community development inspections on our files six.

[3:50:24] In addition to what was asked of us, we're adding more additional sound mitigation systems.

[3:50:29] So we're installing a millguard homemaker window with the sound transmission class of 28 to 34 on the majority of the windows.

[3:50:40] When a normal window is 22 to 26, so we're stepping up the windows.

[3:50:45] We're also doing a weapon on cellulose on the insulation so that we honor that concern.

[3:50:52] Number nine, we've agreed to the height.

[3:50:54] Dave, are you talking about insulation in the attic or in the, in the walls in the, in the attic?

[3:51:00] Yeah, in the attic.

[3:51:03] The height of 30 feet, five and one-eighths, inch, is, that's just the top of the barn.

[3:51:09] The majority of the homes will be 18 feet or 25 feet.

[3:51:13] And we've agreed that the trees will always be maintained in a perpetuity so they can never go above 30 feet.

[3:51:18] five and an eighth inch.

[3:51:21] We've honored the zone four, the only thing that's in that zone four, like you mentioned,

[3:51:25] is parking and some garages, because some people are going to want garages, and those

[3:51:31] would be limited to a 14 foot to inch height.

[3:51:37] The whole community's low water, that turf that you saw is artificial, those trees that

[3:51:42] you saw were animation, and I wish we would have not allowed them to make them so big, but

[3:51:47] They're all going to be low water use plants.

[3:51:52] And then that may or pro-tim to your question.

[3:51:56] So I'm circling back.

[3:51:57] But all those things I just mentioned were

[3:51:58] happy to put into an agreement and to have penalties

[3:52:01] if they're ever not honored and to perpetuity on the design.

[3:52:07] We felt there was a need in press kit to have rental homes

[3:52:13] that were not the traditional rectangle or three-story tan box, which is called a guard-in apartment.

[3:52:21] I'm just kind of an oxy-more on it.

[3:52:24] Those apartments generally have steps, and you've got to walk up the steps to get to the third floor.

[3:52:29] They're huge.

[3:52:30] And there are also bad for view, visibility. This community was designed with architecture and

[3:52:37] theming in mind. So it's craftsmen, it's farmhouse, we're honoring the original, not original, but

[3:52:45] high design and it's multi-sided architecture. So you don't just see beauty in the front, you'll

[3:52:51] see it wherever it's highly visible. We didn't want to have people driving in and seeing the typical

[3:52:56] covered metal parking that you generally see in all apartment communities. So we

[3:53:02] we hid the parking in different areas. So as you drive through it, it looks like

[3:53:07] a traditional old town that you'd see on Mayberry somewhere. It has the great street,

[3:53:13] so when you drive in, it'll look like the great street we created it one that we just built in

[3:53:17] Preske Valley. And our goal, we would love to win best architecture in the country on this,

[3:53:23] just like we did at a story, which you also

[3:53:26] honored us with your approval years ago.

[3:53:28] That was a highly visible corner on 89 and Prescott Lake's Boulevard.

[3:53:36] And we redesigned the whole thing to go with a great theme

[3:53:39] to honor the city.

[3:53:41] And we're doing the same thing here.

[3:53:45] I'm here to answer any of all questions or concerns.

[3:53:49] I, I, I, I, I, I, I stayed, thank you for that. I guess, I guess, I guess, I, I guess, I, and I, first

[3:53:56] off, I want to compliment you. The, the due diligence your, your team has done around the

[3:54:00] concerns around the airport is, is, is top notch and I really appreciate you going the extra

[3:54:04] miles to, to deal with those concerns. I, I guess, one of the things that I heard you talk about

[3:54:09] initially in the planning zone is that you, you, you really do intend for this, to be a community

[3:54:14] that competes for rental business and press kit and the idea of the kind of the houses are facing

[3:54:22] out and to a shared courtyard is designed to build the community within that and I was wondering

[3:54:26] if you didn't just briefly touch on that. So this is all about connectivity and we want to celebrate

[3:54:31] neighbors, I'm getting to know each other and socialization. The best example I can use is what we're

[3:54:39] at Mulberry Farms in Prescott Valley where we brought in a special team to run the socialization.

[3:54:45] So the events and activities are way over the top on what it's like to live in a rental community.

[3:54:52] The courtyards were designed for that reason, so you can sit on your front porch, you can get to know your neighbor.

[3:54:59] Regardless of the demographic, if it's a young family and they have little kids, they could be playing on that artificial turf.

[3:55:05] If it's a retired couple they could be sitting there, it's it's open to all is our intention.

[3:55:12] I think I lost a train of thought on if I answered that that's great.

[3:55:16] That's great.

[3:55:16] You did answer my question.

[3:55:17] Thank you.

[3:55:18] Oh no.

[3:55:18] You know what?

[3:55:19] The one thing I didn't answer.

[3:55:21] We want to compete directly with apartments.

[3:55:23] And I know a lot of the apartment developers in town.

[3:55:27] I know what their costs are, per door.

[3:55:29] And we're excited that we think we're going to beat their costs in many cases, and by beating

[3:55:35] costs, that means our rents can be very competitive against a three-story garden apartment.

[3:55:43] Council member Rusein.

[3:55:47] Thank you.

[3:55:47] I know it's been a long day, and you're still very enthusiastic.

[3:55:52] I wanted to ask you, and maybe George can answer about sub-metering to encourage water conservation,

[3:55:59] have each unit individually metered so that they will be getting a water bill or how is

[3:56:05] that going to be handled?

[3:56:06] Great question and I don't know if I have a super strong answer for you yet, but I can

[3:56:12] find one and have it to the city council tomorrow.

[3:56:19] Generally, we'll meet or I think the buildings, so if it's a six-plex, it'll be a meter

[3:56:25] to the six-plex.

[3:56:26] If there's technology that allows us to determine how much water's going to each unit, we can do that.

[3:56:32] But if we put individual meters on each unit, it's going to drive the cost up considerably,

[3:56:37] is my understanding, and I'm trying to stop meters, not regular water meters.

[3:56:42] If there's an affordable solution to do that, that would benefit us as well.

[3:56:46] Because we also want to be able to see it, because if it's being abused, we can address it with the customer.

[3:56:53] there's a leak. The good news is there's not a lot they're going to be able to

[3:56:57] landscape because the backyards are brickpapers and artificial turf and then

[3:57:03] the fronts, there's that artificial turf courtyard. So there's not a lot they

[3:57:08] can really water and that's where most of the abuse happens is on landscaping and

[3:57:13] then all the fixtures are low water use fixtures in the house. But I'm open to

[3:57:19] If there is a solution that we can deploy that's affordable, I'm all for it.

[3:57:25] Also, I just want to note that you have just one city dedicated street in and out for over 250 people.

[3:57:33] Yes, we did a loop system.

[3:57:34] So, as you drive in on the great street up at Jenelaine, you'll drive through the community.

[3:57:40] And there's an emergency access that is shown with a hatched mark below that white box.

[3:57:46] The white box is on the right side of the screen in the middle.

[3:57:49] That's the existing Deep Well Ranch Monument, and so right below that is a gray line.

[3:57:55] That's the secondary access to leave the community if there's ever an emergency or a fire,

[3:58:01] and the transportation department did not want that to be full-blown dumping cars on to

[3:58:06] Willow Creek, because that's a busy street, so it's going to be a breakaway gate for

[3:58:11] emergency vehicles only. Okay. And then, um, you know, I, I hate to be cynical, but many times

[3:58:20] we have people appear before us who, um, make all, give us a big sales pitch and all kinds

[3:58:27] of promises. And then we okay it and then retroactively try to get it in writing and it never

[3:58:35] happen so we've been using the word agree a lot and but agree isn't the same as getting

[3:58:43] it actually in writing and I want to ask legal do we have anything in writing, concerning

[3:58:47] this stipulations that planning and zoning requested.

[3:58:52] There is a term sheet in writing that was worked out in terms of the conditions those four.

[3:59:00] Sorry. Thank you. In terms of the four conditions that are brought to you today, that, as far

[3:59:07] as I know, is not part of any writing, but would be part of their approval. So that would,

[3:59:11] we would have that as part of the approval and wouldn't need it in writing. It would, in fact,

[3:59:15] carry somewhat more weight. It would be your determination here today.

[3:59:21] But I don't know if you're,

[3:59:23] but the initial part of the initial, the conditions that he mentioned, he had agreed to,

[3:59:27] is in writing. Okay. So these the stipulations that planning and zoning requested we have to include

[3:59:35] those in the motion or Mr. Worley, do you have a comment? The only comment was I think the

[3:59:41] city attorney covered it is if you follow the motion language you're including those four

[3:59:46] conditions as part of your recommendation or your motion to approve. Okay and also I have one question

[3:59:53] for Mr. Grounds. Previously, you'd said something about if tenant is unhappy.

[4:00:00] Be with the overflights. He'll be able to collect his deposit and be released from his lease.

[4:00:08] No, that was what Dr. Spotta asked us if we would do. It was a fifth question from her that after

[4:00:16] our research with all the construction lenders, they're not going to let us put a clause in a lease that says,

[4:00:22] Come on in, lease this unit, and then if you decide you don't want to live here and you can just leave

[4:00:28] because the cost for us to change over a customer is very expensive.

[4:00:34] So that's the only one that we didn't agree to because for us it's not practical to close a

[4:00:39] 56 million dollar construction loan with that clause in there.

[4:00:43] The banks want to see a healthy thriving community for them to lend on.

[4:00:51] That one would make them nervous if people can leave for no reason, but that is the reason why we're agreeing to all these other

[4:00:58] Things even the ones that we're volunteering to do to make sure everybody knows

[4:01:02] There's an airport right there and there's 877 flights that happen every day and that'll change as it grows will update the number

[4:01:11] It's full disclosure

[4:01:13] And and and I'm happy to work with you may be renting to a lot of Emory riddle students who will not be bothered by the overflights

[4:01:20] Yeah. Well, and you know, I built a lot of the houses that were in deep well before we sold

[4:01:26] years ago and the community that I was most responsible for was Saddlewood and those

[4:01:32] folks for the most part by far love their homes and they're much closer to the airport than

[4:01:38] this community is. So we're very optimistic and hopeful that they'll love this and that's why

[4:01:47] willing to invest so much into it. Okay, thank you. Thank you.

[4:01:51] Councilor and more. Thank you, Mayor. You mentioned parking structures. Are you going to have

[4:01:56] parking covered parking? No, we're going to have garages and we don't know how many garages

[4:02:01] we're going to have yet, but it'll probably be somewhere between 60 and 150 garages. We're going to

[4:02:17] of and beyond the parking requirement.

[4:02:20] Yeah, my question really wasn't about parking.

[4:02:21] It was more about if you had a covered parking,

[4:02:23] would you be using solar in this project

[4:02:25] because that would be a strong proponent

[4:02:27] for using solar as part of this project?

[4:02:31] Yes.

[4:02:32] Yeah.

[4:02:33] If we do some covered, we would want it hidden

[4:02:36] because we're still going to back to our discipline

[4:02:38] of trying to make it look like the antithesis

[4:02:40] of an apartment project.

[4:02:44] So solar panels on parking grudges

[4:02:46] are not that expensive, you know, if we, if we, so I'm open to the idea, I don't know if

[4:02:51] I'd asked to have that as a requirement at this meeting, but it would give me a chance

[4:02:56] to do some research.

[4:02:57] We are going to have quite a few charging stations for electric vehicles at our last rental

[4:03:04] community, every resident has an electric vehicle charge.

[4:03:08] We don't know what we're going to do here yet, because we haven't until we pass this level,

[4:03:14] we haven't finished all the plans and costs and all those things.

[4:03:19] I would appreciate you considering it.

[4:03:20] I think that's environmentally a good idea for the future.

[4:03:24] I agree.

[4:03:26] So I'm assuming those are level one.

[4:03:28] Charger ports in the parking garage of the unit,

[4:03:34] or you're going to have some outside that could be level two.

[4:03:38] There's going to need to be like in a garage,

[4:03:41] any garage that we have would automatically have

[4:03:43] electric charging to 20 in the garage. So that's a given. The question we haven't decided yet is how many are on the outside

[4:03:51] or people can just pull up anywhere and they can find their charging stations, but you see more and more and more EVs.

[4:03:59] So if we don't have enough EV charging stations, we're going to lose in the marketplace. So it's a it's a good motivator

[4:04:07] and our actions hopefully speak louder than words that you see what we did at the last one

[4:04:12] with everyone going.

[4:04:14] And what about the long-term management of this rental facility?

[4:04:20] Is that going to be you or are you going to contract that out?

[4:04:24] We'll contract it out.

[4:04:25] Currently, we use a company called cohere, which is the owners of cohere did all of the DMB projects

[4:04:32] for decades.

[4:04:33] DMB has an incredible reputation for socialization.

[4:04:37] That's why we sought them out because we want to have that same level,

[4:04:40] like Virato and DC Ranch, and so we brought them in, and currently we think we're going

[4:04:48] to use them, but that's not fully decided yet, but they're doing a great job, and I don't

[4:04:52] see why we wouldn't use them. So they would be our third-party property manager.

[4:04:58] Well, we're making the decision on proving this based upon all of the components of your

[4:05:05] proposal and having a rental location allows you to control a lot of the things that we

[4:05:17] are very concerned about in a residential community.

[4:05:20] So your ability to control landscaping and control water use and control the heights of

[4:05:27] trees and other things that we have to consider in the long run and knowing that you're

[4:05:34] all these disclosure, transparency issues when somebody comes in to first look at it and decide

[4:05:41] they want to, want to lease a location from you, then we've got to make sure that these

[4:05:49] continue on over the long run. I know sub-metering can be somewhat expensive, but it should

[4:05:57] be in your best interest to control the water use within those rental units because you're

[4:06:03] one paying the bill. Yes. And you would then, how do you how do you go about

[4:06:11] including that in the rental fee? So we we do an average kind of a guest

[4:06:16] of what the water use will be. And then that's a line item in their lease.

[4:06:21] So we are hyper-focused on what what the water is. So if we have a six-plus and it's this sixplex

[4:06:28] is a lot higher than this one over here. We know there's a problem. So we'd have to dig in to figure

[4:06:32] why, because it is going right to our pocketbook, if it's being abused, and then on electricity,

[4:06:42] the people would pay their own electric bill. But there's generally on sewer and water,

[4:06:47] that's a community fee that is added to their lease.

[4:06:53] Tree, I can't, in terms of meter. Well, those are all the questions that I have, I know.

[4:07:00] I've kind of toured your mulberry farms facility and boy, this looks very similar.

[4:07:07] And I know a lot of the components of your presentation, new included there.

[4:07:16] So that's something that we all can look on to know that Mr. Rounds and the great

[4:07:24] Street's program isn't just a nice proposal on paper.

[4:07:30] We're hit to currently exist down in Prescott Valley and apparently it's very, very popular.

[4:07:37] You're excited about it? Thank you.

[4:07:42] Any other concerns?

[4:07:44] I know at the bottom of the fifth inning Arizona now is a head 3 to 2.

[4:07:54] Well, I'm only giving you updates if the conclusion of an inning.

[4:08:00] Okay, I mean, it's exciting to talk about the middle, but, you know, we're trying to run a city council meeting here.

[4:08:07] Okay.

[4:08:08] Mayor, can I may or may I make it just a quick comment?

[4:08:13] Go ahead.

[4:08:13] I wanted to thank you also.

[4:08:15] was in planning and zoning when you were there for how amenable you've been. And instead of

[4:08:21] resisting every suggestion, I'm glad you had an open mind to understand the wise and the house

[4:08:26] of being asked to do some of those things. So I appreciate that. Thank you. Thank you.

[4:08:33] We have any

[4:08:34] public comment. Nope. I'll entertain a motion. May I move to approve site 22-004. Second.

[4:08:44] question in second please vote

[4:08:53] passes seven zero. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Brown.

[4:08:57] Good luck and I welcome to North Prescott. Very grateful. Thank you.

[4:09:18] It's a big one. I know, impressed.

[4:09:29] Would you like me to introduce the next item, Mayor?

[4:09:32] Okay. Yep. No problem. Sure. The next item is the approval of multiple contracts related to the fiscal year

[4:09:46] I'm going to let Tim see her, so I'm going to let him talk about it, and what I love about Tim is he likes to just move through these things very quickly, don't you, Tim?

[4:09:54] Good morning, Mary and Council.

[4:09:57] Before I get started, joining me today is Greg Patrick, and while Council may not be familiar with Greg, Greg has been with the city for nearly 20 years in our street maintenance department, and recently he's been serving as our infrastructure analyst to keep our

[4:10:11] to help us advance our payment management program.

[4:10:13] Greg has a great expertise in performance and life cycles

[4:10:16] and his extensive knowledge of the city's

[4:10:18] payment network has been a huge asset for public works.

[4:10:21] And what I'm done, Greg and I can help take questions.

[4:10:25] While I'm asking for you to approve a contract,

[4:10:27] Greg did the Yomans work on securing these two contracts

[4:10:29] for this particular item.

[4:10:33] So the project is primarily along Willick Creek Road

[4:10:38] from Green Lane down to Iron Springs Road

[4:10:40] over the hospital that. As many of you know, and if you drive it, it's pretty much the worst part

[4:10:44] of the worst section of Willick Creek Road, this kind of remaining. The other sections

[4:10:47] north of here have had a various payment. Rehabilitations or treatments over the last few

[4:10:52] years. So the project will include a profile meal and double micro seal type 3 installation

[4:10:57] along that yellow line from Greenland down to the hospital. The current PCI for this section

[4:11:02] The road is about a 55, and then we'll apply a double micro seal tree application on this

[4:11:10] road.

[4:11:10] And then the other, atcillary roads next to it, stuff like that, we're going to be in this

[4:11:14] area.

[4:11:14] These will also get micro seal treatments.

[4:11:18] They will not get the micro mill, like Willick Creek Road will.

[4:11:20] This is a project we just recently completed on Prescott Lake's Parkway, not that long ago

[4:11:25] from 89 over to Willick Road, so we have a similar look and feel to it when it's done.

[4:11:30] We are also doing pavement repairs on southbound Willow Creek Road at Rossor between Delano and

[4:11:38] Rossor about 360 linear feet.

[4:11:40] Both those lanes are pretty trashed.

[4:11:43] We had a series of water leaks in the intersection over the number of years.

[4:11:46] A lot of pavement repairs have been done that.

[4:11:47] So we're going to, the two southbound lanes are going to be completely milled and three

[4:11:50] inches of new asphalt put in before we do the micro seal.

[4:11:54] The PCI in that area right there is averaging about a 35.

[4:11:57] We would expect the road to come up to a between an 80 and 85 when we're done with the whole corridor.

[4:12:03] Advantage is that this type of treatment is very cost effective and it'll increase our PCI.

[4:12:09] Microceal consists of applying a mixture of a most vital and aggregates in the existing roadway surface.

[4:12:14] Treatment helps to preserve the underlying pavement.

[4:12:16] The annual IPA in this area is in pretty good shape.

[4:12:19] I know it may not look like it, but a lot of what you're seeing coming off there is 8 old ACFC.

[4:12:24] The project will support City's strategic goals, the City Council's strategic goals for highly rated services and well-maintained streets.

[4:12:31] Cities permitted by code to purchase services under another publicly bid contract.

[4:12:35] This project will use the most, will use cost-competitive procurement process completed by the City of Glendale,

[4:12:40] Southwest Slurry Seal, entered into a one year contract with Glendale in December of last year,

[4:12:45] and that contract expires December 13th of this year.

[4:12:47] The public work staff also selected to use the city's job order contracting or the

[4:12:53] jock method for delivery method which a banicky construction for the payment

[4:12:57] removals.

[4:12:58] Public works is recommending a ward of contracts to southwest slurry seal in the amount

[4:13:02] of $1,178,355, and a job order contracting contract to a banicky construction for

[4:13:11] for $98,624 in 20 cents.

[4:13:14] Funding for the project is budgeted in FY24

[4:13:16] and available in the streets fund.

[4:13:19] Thank you, Tim.

[4:13:20] The mayor stepped out.

[4:13:21] I'm gonna, who has questions over there?

[4:13:24] I'll go with Eric first, because he's closer.

[4:13:26] Go, Eric.

[4:13:27] Thank you, Mayor Protein.

[4:13:29] I have several questions.

[4:13:30] I know, Rue Street,

[4:13:33] and I believe Willow Creek Down near the hospital

[4:13:35] has several springs underneath the roadway surfaces

[4:13:39] that continue to affect the quality of the road is that being addressed, I mean, how do you deal with springs?

[4:13:45] Some pumps, whatever. That's one question. The other question is the duration of the project and how will impact businesses on Willow Creek Road?

[4:13:55] It says, the interest of Bizzle and all.

[4:13:59] Very good.

[4:14:00] Take a look at that.

[4:14:00] You want me to.

[4:14:02] Mayor Council.

[4:14:04] So the, as far as the springs go and stuff, this is just a surface treatment.

[4:14:09] So we're not going into any kind of base or any dealing with any kind of groundwater at this point.

[4:14:14] This is intended to, you know, last for about seven years.

[4:14:19] As far as the impact to business isn't stuff, we're going to do a community out there.

[4:14:24] reach talk to the businesses and stuff. We're going to try and keep the work zones rather small

[4:14:31] about a half a mile at a time or so and then do that work in that area complete that and then

[4:14:37] move down to the next section to try and keep the impact as small as possible. The impact area.

[4:14:44] Councilman Moore, I would note as a business center who has a property on Willick Creek Road where

[4:14:48] The road is currently torn up on polyamion.

[4:14:51] Is it polyamion?

[4:14:53] Yes, polyamion.

[4:14:54] They have been the outreach and communication that they have done has been amazing.

[4:14:59] And I've been meaning to tell you.

[4:15:00] Hey, that time. You guys have been top notch. Any time the road, the street was closed today, and

[4:15:04] I got notified a week in advance. So I think they're using the same same PR company.

[4:15:12] Yeah, and they're amazing. By the way, they do good work. Council Member Rucing.

[4:15:18] Thank you. I would just like to say thank you for getting this project underway. Will O Creek is a critical

[4:15:25] our artory here through our community, it's an economic generator.

[4:15:31] We have a lot of businesses that front it, and it's just a coincidence that we have

[4:15:37] two council members whose businesses were definitely be appreciated by this.

[4:15:51] So what's the score?

[4:15:58] In that case, I'll entertain a motion.

[4:16:02] May I move to approve city contract number 2024-085?

[4:16:09] Second.

[4:16:11] Motion is second please vote.

[4:16:19] So much confidence I have in you, Tim.

[4:16:21] Passes 7-0.

[4:16:23] And I move to approve city contract number 2023-211.

[4:16:32] Is vote?

[4:16:40] Passes 7-0.

[4:16:50] Right.

[4:16:50] I'll take us to the next and final agenda item, which is the approval of the purchase of the Arizona State

[4:16:56] Land Glassford Hill open space in the amount of $6,553,767.

[4:17:04] I do have Joe Baines here, our Parks and Recreation Director.

[4:17:07] This has been a long, long-awaited and great project that talks about the partnership, the

[4:17:13] regional partnerships between the city of Prescott Valley and the county, and I'm super excited

[4:17:18] for this coming up, so let's go ahead, Joe.

[4:17:22] Thank you, Katie, and thank you, Mayor and Council.

[4:17:24] Yeah, let's talk about 30 years to put it together

[4:17:26] and I'm going to do this presentation in about 10 minutes.

[4:17:32] So just a little bit of background, really this process

[4:17:34] started in 1998, when the City of Prescott

[4:17:37] and Prescott Valley petitioned the Arizona,

[4:17:39] or petitioned the Arizona State Land Department

[4:17:42] through the Arizona Premonition Preserve Initiative

[4:17:46] to set aside 1893 acres of this as suitable

[4:17:49] for conservation, which really, at the end of the day,

[4:17:54] was very important, because the appraisal value

[4:17:56] then became quite a bit less 20, 25 years later.

[4:18:01] In 2000, the Prescott Voters pass a 1% streets

[4:18:04] in open space tax that a lot of this money

[4:18:06] was spent on for acquiring open space

[4:18:08] that's contiguous to glass for heel.

[4:18:11] So really, what we're talking about here

[4:18:12] is glass for heel, but we're also talking

[4:18:14] about all of the properties around it that have been

[4:18:16] require that make the regional park.

[4:18:20] In 2021, one of those pieces that we put together,

[4:18:23] I think with this council, was the annexation

[4:18:28] with Arizona Eco Development, which added 474 acres of this

[4:18:32] regional park into the city of Prescott.

[4:18:36] And in 2019 and 2019 and 2021, we were successful

[4:18:42] in acquiring 468 acres of North Storm Ranch.

[4:18:45] It's also in the heart of the granite del's and can take you as again to glass for a hill as well as the AED property and Watson Lake.

[4:18:56] Then in 2022, May 26, we went into an intergovernmental agreement with our partners in Prescott Valley in the county for the purpose of trying to purchase this stateland property of glass for a hill.

[4:19:10] And then, with the help of Selena Bliss, who sponsored the bill and Kwan and Senator Bennett

[4:19:16] that helped us pass House Bill 2518 each Prescott Valley and Prescott received $1.75 million

[4:19:25] from the state to help with this purchase.

[4:19:27] So a lot of things that had to happen in the background to make this thing where it is today.

[4:19:33] So there's a lot of numbers on this page, and really I think what's important here is this

[4:19:38] out the parcels. And by the way, I have Brian Sparks, our real estate administrator, who's been

[4:19:43] a huge help on this whole thing here. If there's any questions you might have for him. But really,

[4:19:48] this is just breaking it down by a personal number and the price per parcel. But the important

[4:19:53] stuff here is how we worked it down through the partnership. We worked it down through the partnership

[4:19:58] with the county agreeing to pay 35% of the city's purchase as well as the town of Prescott Valley's

[4:20:06] The state appropriation that I just spoke to you about that worked it down in the real number here that's important for this discussion is the taxpayers of the city of Prescott.

[4:20:17] The cost for this 953 acres of property, your $960 acres, excuse me, is under $700,000.

[4:20:26] So I think our partners helped us get this down to I think a palatable level for a purchase for something as significant as what we're looking at here.

[4:20:36] And I will show you a video.

[4:20:44] I'll see you in the next one.

[4:24:09] So that is basically about 4,000 acres all together when you consider it. And I call this the puzzle right

[4:24:15] here. These are the pieces of the puzzle that have been put together over the years, 1998, the purchase

[4:24:21] of Watson Lake, Watson Woods proceeded that all of these pieces fit the puzzle that gives us a

[4:24:27] contiguous about its well over 4,000 acres of contiguous property with our neighbors and

[4:24:33] and our partners in the county that becomes a regional, a regional draw and it will draw people from across the country for sure.

[4:24:42] So this is kind of the doorstep of what we're at right now. The green is the proposed purchase that's in front of you today.

[4:24:50] A couple of kind of moving forward things here.

[4:24:54] Here, per the intergovernmental agreement, press-get and press-caballi and the county will continue

[4:24:59] to meet at least annually to strategize the future, glass-for-kill property purchases.

[4:25:04] In the IGA, we identified about 3,500 acres in total.

[4:25:08] This purchase is around 2,400 acres, so there's still, or 2,300 acres, there's still some

[4:25:14] acreage in there that's left to be contemplated.

[4:25:16] This, of course, is the most prominent parts of glass-for-deal, and I think probably deserves

[4:25:21] more of the attention. Also, the Arizona State Land Department will be holding an auction for

[4:25:29] this property, they have to auction it off just for the public. I know it counts when

[4:25:33] those this, but the State Trust land is mainly there to benefit financially schools, K through

[4:25:40] 12 education. So they do have to offer their property to the highest bidder that funds that

[4:25:45] education in the state. So there will be an auction on November 21st at 10 AM on the courthouse

[4:25:51] steps. After that we'll have a celebration with more details to come and I thought it was really

[4:25:57] important to point out I think it's epic this partnership that we've had not only with the county

[4:26:03] and Prescott Valley but the state to all pull the rope in the same direction is pretty amazing.

[4:26:09] We did this process in 18 months. Again I've got to hand it off to Brian Sparks helping us on the city

[4:26:15] and with the state land permit which can be very cumbersome to work with but Brian helped

[4:26:20] kind of weaver way through that process and got us to the courthouse steps on November 21st.

[4:26:26] This purchase is budgeted in this fiscal year budget in the general fund.

[4:26:31] And with that, I'd be happy to answer any questions and Brian is also here if you have any questions specifically about the process.

[4:26:40] Councilmember Rucing.

[4:26:42] Thank you.

[4:26:44] This is really an exciting day.

[4:26:46] It's been a long time coming and I just want to thank everyone involved for bringing this to.

[4:26:51] This is a legacy project and it's been a dream for many people. I just want to clarify the

[4:27:00] The public notice in the October 20 career has a very small map and

[4:27:08] I was looking at it and there seemed to be a discrepancy between the map that we got in our packet

[4:27:14] But I see the map that you have in your presentation

[4:27:18] Corresponds with the map that's in the state land public notice, so that's been taken care of and also I want to remind people that this is just phase one that we've got a phase two in the works hopefully.

[4:27:34] Thank you.

[4:27:35] Thank you.

[4:27:38] Mayor.

[4:27:39] Thank you, Mayor.

[4:27:41] I think there's a couple of things I want to say.

[4:27:42] First off, I want to say thank you to Joe.

[4:27:44] I know that that puzzle piece picture you showed us

[4:27:47] that you've been a real integral part of making that happen.

[4:27:50] So I want to give you some kudos on that.

[4:27:53] I also know that that work doesn't happen

[4:27:55] without a lot of other hands within the city staff

[4:27:58] working to do that too.

[4:28:00] So I just want to thank directly all the city staff

[4:28:03] that was part of this acquisition.

[4:28:04] It's been a long time coming, and it is a very exciting moment.

[4:28:08] And I also just want to echo what Joe has said,

[4:28:11] which is, this is really a pretty big achievement

[4:28:13] for a region, not least of which because it was, it took a lot of regional cooperation.

[4:28:20] And, and that goes from President Prescape Valley up by county, you know, even our local

[4:28:25] representatives were involved in kind of making sure we got state allocation from this.

[4:28:30] It's, it's a real, this is what, in my mind, good government looks like when it's doing

[4:28:34] good work.

[4:28:34] So I just want to thank all the folks that had, whose hands touched this project along

[4:28:39] the way.

[4:28:43] Council on Taney. Thank you. I just echo as well. What we're talking about super exciting to put this this piece together. Can you reiterate first one more time how many acres we're looking at a acquiring

[4:28:54] With this potentially on November 21st and then the total cost of the city is less than $685,000. That's correct. So nine hundred and fifty three acres in this purchase and a six hundred and eighty four thousand dollars in some odd change.

[4:29:10] The total of the, the city of Prescott is 953 acres for $680,000,000 and Prescott

[4:29:19] Valley's is 1253 acres, yeah, 1,300 in change for a little over a 1.3 million I believe

[4:29:29] it is.

[4:29:32] That's fantastic.

[4:29:33] Thank you so much for both of you for everything that you've done and again, Kathy and

[4:29:37] and I mentioned a lot of people who've been putting effort into this, but I know that you've

[4:29:41] been running point on this for us. And I'm excited to see what Chris Hoskins gonna do with

[4:29:45] this.

[4:29:50] Mr. Mayor. Councilmember Rucing. Oh, yeah. Is Mr. Sparks here? Oh, there he is. Okay. I haven't

[4:29:59] match you yet.

[4:30:00] And I was wondering who you were. And I just wanted to thank you for all your expertise and work

[4:30:07] and bringing this to fruition.

[4:30:08] Please, Brian Sparks, I'm the new city of Prescott Real Estate Administrator. And ironically,

[4:30:12] I came from the state land department. So, and I was the chief administrator for the

[4:30:17] state land department on this, Glassford Hillfile. So, I wonder how I got to know everybody.

[4:30:20] And they stole me from the state. But I'm glad to be here glad I got to work on this.

[4:30:26] But all the credit goes to Joe.

[4:30:27] He's been working on this for a long time.

[4:30:30] And this, like you said, this is a legacy project.

[4:30:32] And it's going to be fantastic for the community.

[4:30:35] So, well, welcome to Prescott.

[4:30:36] Thank you.

[4:30:37] Thank you.

[4:30:38] I did some quick math.

[4:30:39] I may have done wrong, but the total access of acres

[4:30:42] that we're getting here and what we're paying is about $300

[4:30:45] an acre to this cost to this people of the city of Prescott.

[4:30:49] That's fantastic.

[4:30:50] You can't buy land in like Paul denner someplace

[4:30:52] that nobody wants to be for that.

[4:30:56] Well, I know when I was involved in almost all of the meetings that went on here and I know

[4:31:05] having a combination of the State Land Department, the State Department of Parks and Recreation,

[4:31:12] both of all of the communities, the county involved, Alecco, what the Mayor Protem said that,

[4:31:19] And this is an example of how multiple jurisdictions can work together for the betterment of the community.

[4:31:28] So I think the fact that we got this thing done in 18 months is pretty darn remarkable in and of itself.

[4:31:34] So I want to thank you, Joe, and everybody that was involved here to get to this point.

[4:31:42] And even though I think a lot of people in the community will see this $6.55 million number first,

[4:31:53] emphasizing the fact that the net cost to us is less than $685,000.

[4:31:59] And we even had some controversial issues when the appraisal first came up when the appraisal hadn't even visited the area.

[4:32:08] So when he walked up on top of this dormant volcano and then realized that the slope there was really not very

[4:32:18] developable it caused the appraisal value to approach a more reasonable number and that's why we're here today.

[4:32:27] So thank you all for doing this and I think the community at large and having a regional park now that can be made available for

[4:32:36] not only our residents, but people in the broader community, and as we continue to be known

[4:32:45] as an eco tourism location, this just adds to the interest here. Originally, it was going

[4:32:53] to be called the Glassford Hill Regional Park, but I figured we needed to kind of change that name

[4:33:03] for marketing purposes.

[4:33:05] So a lot of people realize the unique aspects

[4:33:09] are the granite dells.

[4:33:11] And I think a lot of people want to come here

[4:33:14] to see the granite dells, not necessarily a dormant volcano.

[4:33:18] So that's why we just had to change the name

[4:33:20] to the glass for dells region apart.

[4:33:24] So we can probably market it with a little more effectively

[4:33:27] in the future.

[4:33:28] So, thank you for that, and do we have any public comment?

[4:33:33] We do.

[4:33:34] Tom Rusning?

[4:33:39] Good evening, everybody.

[4:33:42] The comments I'm going to make tonight are really those of Joanne Holler's Chairman

[4:33:46] of Save to Dells, but because of the late hour she had to leave, and it's really a pleasure

[4:33:52] to be here.

[4:33:53] This is really the culmination of the last Joe said probably 30 years of efforts by many

[4:33:59] people, including early on, Lisbeth Ruffner and the Open Space Alliance, and it is a story

[4:34:05] of building of relationships, of negotiations, and of persistence on the part of many

[4:34:11] people that make this happen. It also highlights the importance of glass-ford hill to the creation

[4:34:17] of what we still will say as a grandadelle's regional park and preserve. And when savedadelle's

[4:34:22] first started the two main goals of Save Badells was to preserve the area, the 500 acres

[4:34:31] in the AEDD annexation in perpetuity as open space. And that was accomplished in the last couple

[4:34:39] years. And the other goal was creation of the regional park and preserve. And so this is an amazing

[4:34:44] steps towards that goal.

[4:34:48] David Elz also one of our extended missions is to foster collaboration, and this is a great

[4:34:55] example of collaboration between the elected leaders of the Prescott Prescott Valley

[4:35:02] and the county, and we applaud that.

[4:35:06] We also want to say that we appreciate Joe Baines' leadership in this project, not only

[4:35:14] of Glassford Hill, but as was stated in the acquiring some of the other properties.

[4:35:19] Well, the other thing we really appreciate is he and Chris Hoskins, the loss of if you

[4:35:24] have a light touch on the land, and so we really hope that that is carried on as this regional

[4:35:30] park is formed. And so

[4:35:37] I guess that I'll close by just saying that this is another big step,

[4:35:41] but we anxiously await the auction coming November 21st and hopefully we'll have a lot

[4:35:46] to celebrate afterwards. Anyway, thank you all.

[4:35:52] Thanks, everyone. I'll entertain a motion on this item.

[4:35:56] there

[4:36:00] I move to approve the purchase of glass for deal second motion is second

[4:36:06] please vote

[4:36:14] passes seven zero thank you

[4:36:22] that concludes our meeting today where we

[4:36:26] with the diamond back side think we're ahead four to two after the seven

[4:36:33] anything.

[4:36:36] Come on, positive, okay. I'm going to close this city council session with a quote from

[4:36:45] our great President Ronald Reagan, live each day to the fullest, live each day within

[4:36:51] enthusiasm, optimism, and hope. If you do, I'm convinced that your contribution to this

[4:36:58] wonderful experiment we call America will be profound. This meeting is adjourned.

City Council Voting Meeting

Agenda

Transcript