[00:00:07]
OKAY.[1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/MOMENT OF SILENCE]
FOUR THIRTY ONE, WE'LL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER.PLEASE JOIN ME FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
AND NOW WE'LL HAVE A MOMENT OF SILENCE.
[2. ROLL CALL]
MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ THE ROLL CALL? SURE.[3. CONSENT ITEMS - APPROVE]
CONSENT ITEMS. UH, WE HAVE A MOTION FOR ACCEPTANCE OF THE CONSENT ITEMS. I MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS THREE A THROUGH E.IT'S A THROUGH F, RIGHT? SORRY.
OH, WELL THEN I HAVE TYPE UP THERE.
ANY OPPOSED? OH, I HAVE, AND THAT WAS THE VICE MAYOR ALSO SHE SAID.
SUMMARY OF, OF CURRENT EVENTS.
VICE MAYOR, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FROM THE PARKS AND REC? PROBABLY NOT.
UH, ANYTHING ON THIS SIDE? OKAY.
DO WE HAVE CARDS, MADAM CLERK? NO, WE DO NOT.
[7.a. Introduction of K9 Sam and Officer Beers. ]
PROCLAMATION, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS.INTRODUCTION OF K NINE SAM AND OFFICER BEERS.
WE ALL KNOW OFFICER BEERS, BUT CANINE SAM IS EXCITING.
SO, CHIEF, WHAT? HE'S SLEEPING.
SO, UH, I'LL JUST TAKE A MOMENT AND INTRODUCE THE, OUR NEW AWESOME TEAM.
SO, OFFICER BEERS, SHE'S BEEN WITH OUR DEPARTMENT FOR FIVE YEARS NOW AND OUR NEWEST EDITION, UM, CANINE SAM.
SO WITH THAT, THEY BECAME A CERTIFIED NARCOTICS DETECTION TEAM IN OCTOBER.
AND BECAUSE I KNOW HOW MUCH SHE'LL LOVE ALL THE PUBLIC SPEAKING PRESENTATIONS AND ENGAGEMENTS, I'M GONNA TURN IT OVER TO OFFICER BEERS NOW TO TALK TO YOU GUYS A LITTLE BIT.
THIS IS OBVIOUSLY MY PARTNER, SAM.
UM, LIKE CHIEF SAID, UM, I ACQUIRED SAM IN OCTOBER, UM, AND WE BECAME CERTIFIED ON OCTOBER 12TH, UM, FOR NARCOTICS.
SO SAM DETECTS, UH, HEROIN, COCAINE, FENTANYL, METHAMPHETAMINES.
HE ALSO DETECTS ECSTASY, UM, BUT WE HAVEN'T COME ACROSS THAT YET.
UM, HE CAME FROM WASHINGTON STATE, UH, FROM A COMPANY CALLED PACIFIC COAST CANINE, WHO SPECIALIZES IN POLICE DOGS AND MILITARY DOGS.
UM, AND HE'S ACCLIMATING TO NOT HAVING AS MUCH HUMIDITY AS BACK EAST.
UM, BUT OUR FIRST, UH, ARREST CAME, UH, JUST THIS PAST WEEK ON THE 13TH OF JANUARY.
SO HE WAS ABLE TO AID IN AN ARREST FOR METHAMPHETAMINES AND COCAINE.
THAT HERE IN THE CITY OR EL MM-HMM.
BECAUSE YOU'LL GO, UH, VERDE, UH, VERDE WIDE.
WON'T YOU SAY THAT AGAIN? YOU'LL RESPOND VERDE WIDE IF, IF CALLED.
SO WE'RE AVAILABLE FOR CALLOUTS.
UM, CURRENTLY I'M ON DAY SHIFT, UH, WEDNESDAY THROUGH SATURDAY, BUT WE CAN COME ANYTIME SOMEBODY ASKS FOR US.
SO JUST TO TOUCH ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT CATHERINE WAS SAYING.
SO RIGHT NOW THEY'RE SINGLE PURPOSE.
SO THEY'RE, UM, THEY CAN BE CALLED OUT FOR NARCOTICS SEARCHES.
THE NEXT PART OF CATHERINE AND, UM, SAM'S TRAINING WILL BE THE OFFICER BEERS AND SAM WILL GO AND, UM, BECOME TRACKING AND TRAILING CERTIFIED.
SO UNLIKE THE PREVIOUS, UM, THREE DOGS THAT THE SIT THE DEPARTMENT HAVE HAD, UM, SAM WILL NOT
[00:05:01]
BE TRAINED FOR APPREHENSION AS FAR AS IF THERE'S A SUSPECT.HE'S NOT TRAINED TO BITE AND RETRIEVE THE PERSON.
UM, SAM WILL BE UTILIZED MORE FOR TRAILING AND TRACKING.
HE CAN BE USED FOR FINDING, UM, SUSPECTS.
BUT THE, THE PURPOSE OF SAM WILL BE TO ASSIST MORE WITH LOST PERSONS MISSING.
AND, AND AGAIN, BECAUSE IT'S TRACKING HUMAN ODOR, HE CAN BE UTILIZED FOR SUSPECTS.
JUST THE END RESULT IS DIFFERENT.
UM, HE MIGHT WANNA LICK VERSUS BITE AND, UH, YEAH, I THINK SO BECAUSE IT COULD BE A BAD PERSON.
UM, HE'LL NEVER HAVE, YOU KNOW, NOT HAVE THE SUPPORT OF OFFICERS THERE TO, TO DO WHAT'S NECESSARY AT THE END, DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF PERSON.
WHAT KIND OF A DOG IS HE? HE'S A HUNDRED PERCENT LAB.
HE IS A GIANT LAB, SO HE'S 20 MONTHS OLD, UM, WHICH IS WHEN THEIR CHEST PLATE FULLY DEVELOPED.
BUT SINCE I ACQUIRED HIM, HE'S GAINED 20 POUNDS.
AND YOU MIGHT SEE HIM LOSE A FEW POUNDS ONCE THEY START THEIR TRAILING AND TRACKING, BECAUSE NOT ONLY WILL HE BE RUNNING, BUT, UM, OFFICER BEERS WILL BE ENJOYING SOME EXERCISE AS WELL,
SO THEY'LL BOTH PROBABLY HAVE TO, SHE'LL, SHE'LL NEED TO EAT MORE AND HE'LL LOSE SOME.
SO IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT HAS ANY QUESTIONS? WE JUST WANTED TO TAKE THIS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO INTRODUCE BECAUSE, UH, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE GONNA BECOME VERY, VERY BUSY, YOU KNOW, UM, WITH A LOT OF TRAININGS, YOU KNOW, THAT FIRST YEAR REALLY DOES FLY BY WITH EVERYTHING THAT GOES ON.
AND WE JUST DID AN EPISODE OF THE CHITCHAT WITH THE CHIEF AND WE HAD THE TEAM ON, AND WE, UM, SHOWED A VIDEO TOO, SO THAT EVERYONE COULD SEE WHAT, WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TO DO THE VEHICLE NARCOTICS SNIFFING.
SO, IN ADDITION, UM, BECAUSE HE IS SO LOVABLE, NOT THAT OUR PREVIOUS DOGS WEREN'T FRIENDLY, BUT HE IS DEFINITELY GONNA BE UTILIZED FOR PR STUFF.
SO, UM, WITH THE SPECIAL OLYMPIC STUFF THAT I DO, UM, HE ALREADY ATTENDED A GOLF TOURNAMENT AND THEN, YOU KNOW, HE ATTENDED, UM, OUR, UH, OUR COMMUNITY EVENT THAT WE HAD.
OH, THE, IT WAS JUST THE ONE THAT, THE WINTER PLAY DAY.
YES, THAT'S EXACTLY, THAT WAS GOOD.
YOU GUYS WERE THERE WAS CALLED? OH, YEAH, YEAH.
I WISH I WOULD'VE KNOWN ABOUT THAT IN ADVANCE.
UM, BUT I PLAN TO USE HIM AND HAVE HIM OUT IN THE COMMUNITY.
I'M MEETING, UH, AT THE LIBRARY THE FIRST WEEK OF FEBRUARY.
UH, SO THE COMMUNITY CAN MEET HIM OVER THERE AS WELL.
AND THEN WE'LL BE DOING SOME DEMONSTRATIONS AT THE HIGH SCHOOL AND WEST GO SCHOOL ON DETECTION SO THAT THEY UNDERSTAND, UH, WHAT SHOULDN'T BE IN THEIR BACKPACKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UH, CHIEF, I DON'T RECALL SEEING SAM'S PAPERWORK IN FRONT OF P-S-P-R-S YET, BUT I'M SURE THAT WE'LL SEE IT SOON.
WE'RE WE'RE GONNA GET HIM ON THE ROLL SOON.
HE WAS A BIG HIT LAST WEEKEND, REALLY.
I'M GLAD YOU WERE ABLE TO MAKE IT.
THE INTERACTION WAS GREAT BETWEEN YOU AND THE, THE PUBLIC.
WELL, THANKS FOR LETTING US TAKE A MOMENT.
WE WON'T, WE WON'T TAKE ANY MORE.
WE JUST, WE'RE REALLY EXCITED TO HAVE THEM AS OUR, OUR NEW TEAM, SO.
[8.a. AB 3027 Discussion/possible direction/action regarding proposed State legislation, short-term rental legislation and State budget and their potential impact on the City of Sedona. ]
BUSINESS ITEM EIGHT.THIS IS THE BEST PART OF THE WHOLE MEETING.
DISCUSSION POSSIBLE DIRECTION REGARDING PROPOSED STATE LEGISLATION, SHORT-TERM RENTAL LEGISLATION AND STATE BUDGET, AND THEIR POTENTIAL IMPACT ON THE CITY OF SEDONA.
KURT, IS YOU UP WITH THIS? THANK YOU MAYOR.
UH, WE'LL PULL IT UP HERE ON THE, IN FACT, I'LL MOVE OVER THERE, I THINK SO WE CAN SCROLL THROUGH IT.
UH, THERE ARE, AS YOU MAY HAVE NOTED ABOUT 24 BILLS IN THIS FIRST REPORT.
I EVEN CUT OUT AS AS MANY AS I THINK I COULD.
BUT A LOT OF THESE, UM, ARE DIRECTLY RELEVANT TO WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE CITY.
AND ALSO, UM, BILLS THAT THE LEAGUE, UH, OF ARIZONA CITIES AND TOWNS HAS ASKED THE CITIES, UH, TO WEIGH IN OPPOSITION TO A NUMBER OF THEM.
ANY QUESTIONS ON THE COUNCIL BUDGET OR THE PROPOSED, UH, GOVERNOR'S BUDGET, I SHOULD SAY? THERE'S BEEN NO, UM, MEETING, THERE'S BEEN A JOINT MEETING BETWEEN, YEAH, I THINK WE'RE ALL AT THE SAME PAGE.
I EMAILED IT OUT TO ALL OF COUNSEL.
HE MAY HAVE, I'M NOT SAYING NO, BUT YOU MAY HAVE, WE DON'T HAVE IT IF HE MAILED IT, BUT STUCK IN THE SERVER SOMEWHERE.
I CAN, I CAN SEND IT AGAIN REAL QUICK.
I WONDER WHERE ALL THE CONFUSED LOOKS WERE COMING FROM.
[00:10:03]
AS OPPOSED TO OUR USUAL CONCERNS.WELL, THAT, THAT'LL MAKE THIS TAKE A LITTLE LONGER.
I WAS HOPING WE COULD, UH, FLY THROUGH THIS, BUT SINCE I, SO I MEANT TO MAIL THIS, EMAIL THIS OUT LAST NIGHT AND APPARENTLY FAILED TO DO SO.
I JUST YESTERDAY, WELL, I MEAN, IT'S, I USUALLY CEASE B, C, C BLANK COPY COUNSEL.
AND SO MAYBE I FORGOT TO BLANK.
SO THIS WILL USUALLY BE SENT OUT, UM, MONDAY NIGHT OR TUESDAY MORNING BEFORE COUNCIL MEETINGS, UM, TO GET THE LATEST INFORMATION.
WE HAVE A, A LEAGUE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE, UM, MEETING ON MONDAYS.
AND THERE'S OFTEN A LOT OF COMMITTEE MEETINGS.
AND SO WE CAN TRY TO GET THE MOST UP-TO-DATE MEETINGS.
SO, UH, WE NORMALLY DON'T PUT IT IN THE COUNCIL PACKET BEFORE, 'CAUSE OTHERWISE IT'S, IT'S COMPLETELY OUTDATED A WEEK EARLIER.
SO, SO THE GOVERNOR'S PROPOSED, UH, BUDGET IS, THE STATE BUDGET IS LISTED THERE.
SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS FROM THAT.
UH, THEY DID HAVE A JOINT MEETING WITH THE, UH, SENATE AND HOUSE APPROPRIATION COMMITTEES.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THE RESULTS OF THOSE YET.
UH, OBVIOUSLY THE SENATE AND HOUSE APPROPRIATION COMMITTEES HAVE NOT PROPOSED THEIR OWN, UM, COUNTER BUDGETS YET.
UM, THERE'S GONNA BE OBVIOUSLY A LOT OF NEGOTIATIONS, UH, GIVEN THE, UH, UH, EXPECTED DEFICIT AT THE STATE LEVEL.
UH, FIRST IN THIS REPORT, I HAVE THE LEAGUE RESOLUTIONS.
UH, THIS IS AGENDA FOR ACTION TONIGHT.
SO I'M LOOKING FOR SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION FROM COUNSEL.
UH, ALSO JUST LAYING DOWN A LITTLE BIT OF THE GROUND RULES.
IF COUNSEL WOULD LIKE ANY OTHER BILLS LISTED ON THIS REPORT THAT I DON'T HAVE HERE, UM, LET ME KNOW.
UM, AND IF, IF I AGREE THAT IT'S DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE CITY BUSINESS, I'LL PUT ON THERE.
IF I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, THEN I'LL REFER BACK TO COUNCIL AND GET A MAJORITY OF COUNCIL'S VOTE TO SUPPORT, UH, IN ORDER TO PUT IT ON HERE FOR, FOR US TO SPEND OUR TIME TRACKING IT.
UH, SO THE FIRST ONE ARE THE LEAGUE RESOLUTIONS FOR SHORT-TERM RENTAL RE UH, REGULATION, UH, HB 24 89, SPONSORED BY REPRESENTATIVE BLISS AND SB 1205, SPONSORED BY SENATOR KAVANAUGH.
UH, AND THESE ARE THE ONES THAT SCOTTSDALE PROPOSED, UH, AND WE AGREED WITH, UH, LAST SUMMER AND NOW MADE IT FORWARD INTO, UH, TWO COMPANION BILLS.
UH, SO WE'RE, UH, WE CAN JUST GO THROUGH, UM, WOULD COUNCIL LIKE TO SUPPORT THIS BILL? WEIGH IN, AND THIS IS ON THE RTS SYSTEM.
IT'S CALLED THE REQUEST TO SPEAK SYSTEM.
AND ON THERE YOU CAN WEIGH IN FOR, UM, FOR ENTITIES IN ADDITION TO YOUR INDIVIDUALS CAN GO REGISTER AND YOU COULD GO ON AND WEIGH IN YOURSELF IF YOU WANTED TO.
BUT FOR THE CITY OF SEDONA, UM, WE CAN PUT IN WHETHER THE CITY'S IN SUPPORT OR OPPOSITION OR NEUTRAL ON ANY BILL.
JESSICA, WELL, I SUPPORT SUPPORTING THIS BILL, BUT I HEARD FROM SOMEBODY, I DON'T REMEMBER WHO THAT WARNED PETERSON SAYS THAT NO BILL THAT PROPOSES CAPS WILL BE ASSIGNED TO ANY COMMITTEE EVER.
I HAD A DISCUSSION YESTERDAY WITH, UH, SENATOR KAVANAUGH ABOUT THAT AND OKAY.
UM, HE SAID, YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
AND HE SAID THE BIGGEST PROBLEM IS THE WAY IT WAS DRAFTED.
'CAUSE THERE WAS NO PERCENTAGE LISTED.
AND THE, UH, PRESIDENT, AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER, YOU KNOW, REALLY, I HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO THE PRESIDENT THE, UH, YOU KNOW, OF THE SENATE, BUT THAT THEY'RE WORRIED THAT A CITY IN TOWN WE'RE ALREADY IMPLEMENTED, WE'RE ALREADY ARE INUNDATED, BUT THEY'RE WORRIED THAT A TOWN WILL SAY, ALRIGHT, WE'LL ONLY HAVE 10 OF THEM.
WHO'S WORRIED THE KAVANAUGH OR PENIS? WELL, THE, UH, UH, PETERSON.
SO HE'S SAYING THAT THIS IS GOING TO BE A REAL UPHILL BATTLE.
AND, UM, BUT THAT'S THEIR EXCUSE THAT, UH, THAT THEY'RE USING.
BUT SINCE THIS DOESN'T HAVE ANY AMOUNT, AND IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY, IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY AMOUNT, AND PETERSON SAID IT, WELL, HE WON'T EVEN ASSIGN IT.
WHICH IS, IS IT DEAD IN THE WATER, KURT? WE DON'T KNOW YET.
UH, I MEAN, SO TECH TECHNICALLY, UM, THE, UH, PRESIDENT, UH, OR THE SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE, UH, THEY, THEY DO ASSIGN BILLS.
UH, THEY CAN BE, THAT CAN BE OVERCOME, UM, BY A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF, OF SENATORS OR REPRESENTATIVES.
BUT YES, USUALLY THAT MEANS WITHOUT AN ASSIGNMENT, THEN IT'S DEAD.
AND THERE'S AS CITED HERE, THERE'S NO BEEN NO COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS YET IN EITHER THE HOUSE OR AS OF LAST NIGHT ANYWAY, UH, THE HOUSE OR,
[00:15:01]
UM, AND THE, UM, THE BILLS JUST DROPPED YESTERDAY, BUT NO ASSIGNMENT YET.SO THEY, IT'S NOT LIKE THEY'VE BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME.
SO WHAT THE SENATOR KAVANAUGH HAD SAID TO ME IS THAT HE'S HOPING FOR IT TO, TO TALK TO, UH, UH, PETERSON AND COME UP WITH A COMPROMISE.
MAYBE IF, YEAH, BECAUSE BILL'S CHANGE, THEY GO IN ONE, ONE END, THEY COME OUT THE OTHER TOTALLY DIFFERENT.
HE'S HOPING THAT THEY CAN COME UP WITH A, A LIMIT.
LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TO HAVE NO LESS THAN 5% OR NO LESS THAN 3% OR 10%, WHATEVER IT IS.
BUT HE'S WILLING TO, TO, UH, WORK THAT FIGHT.
SO DOES EVERYBODY ELSE WANNA SUPPORT THIS? YEAH, YOU JUST GIVE A THUMBS UP IF YOU AGREE WITH THE CITY WEIGHING IN.
I GOT THE, I GOT THE MAJORITY.
I MEAN, SELENA BLISS HAS THE COMPANION BILL, RIGHT? RIGHT.
SO THE HOUSE COULD MOVE THE LEGISLATION IF TOMA HAD SPEAKER TOMA ASSIGNED THE SAME BILLS THROUGH THE HOUSE.
NOW WHEN THEY GET TO THE SENATE, THAT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STORY, BUT AT LEAST WE COULD GET IT THEORETICALLY MOVING THROUGH THE HOUSE.
WAS ANYBODY THINKING ABOUT THAT? YES.
YES, THERE WE'RE AWARE OF THAT.
WE DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT'S GONNA GO.
KATHY, DID YOU HAVE YOUR HAND? OKAY, PETE, ANYTHING? OKAY.
UH, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, HOLLY? NOT REALLY.
I MEAN, WELL, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE TOMA IS.
HE, HE MADE A COMMITMENT TO YOU WHEN I LAST YEAR.
UH, WE, WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GONNA BE HONORED OR NOT.
SELE, I HAVEN'T TALKED TO SELENA BLISS, REPRESENTATIVE BLISS IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS.
WHAT IS THE LEAGUE'S PERSPECTIVE ON THAT? UH, I, THE, THE LEAGUE'S DOING THEIR BEST TO, TO LOBBY FOR THESE BILLS.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY HAVE HAD ANY RECENT CONVERSATIONS.
IT DID SOUND LIKE, UH, SPEAKER TOMO IS MORE OPEN, UH, THAN HE HAS BEEN IN PAST, UM, TO SOME TYPE OF CAP.
UM, BUT THAT'S AS FAR AS THOSE CONVERSATIONS HAS GONE, AS FAR AS I KNOW AT THIS TIME.
THIS IS ANOTHER LEAGUE, UH, SPONSORED BILL LEAGUE RESOLUTION.
UH, IT WAS SIGNED INTO THE HOUSE GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE AND, AND WAS PASSED OUT EIGHT TO ZERO.
UH, CURRENTLY IN ORDER TO SELL ANY MUNICIPAL REAL PROPERTIES, WE, IF ABOVE $1.5 MILLION, WE'D HAVE TO GO TO A VOTE AND THE CITIZENS WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE IT.
IT WOULD HAVE AN INTERIM, UM, SECTION OF, IF IT'S BETWEEN 1.5 MILLION AND 15 MILLION, UH, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING AND WITH NOTICE AND INVITATION FOR BIDS.
AND AS LONG AS THERE'S A MAJORITY OF CITY COUNCIL APPROVES OF THE SALE AT, AT AT LEAST THE APP PRAISE VALUE OR HIGHER, THEN IT CAN BE SOLD.
UM, AND THEN THE VOTER REQUIREMENT TO APPROVE SALES OF REAL PROPERTY WOULD ONLY COME IN AT 15 MILLION OR HIGHER.
SO A LOT OF THE LARGE CITIES THAT OWN, UH, LARGE TRACKS OF PROPERTY, UH, ARE HAVING TROUBLE FINDING DEVELOPERS, UH, AND BEING ABLE TO ENGAGE IN THAT PROCESS WHEN THEY NEED TO THEN GO TO THE VOTERS TO EVEN SELL THE PROPERTY.
AND SO THIS GIVES, UH, SOME LEEWAY FOR THAT MIDDLE GROUND OF PROPERTY VALUE.
KATHY, AND THEN, UH, YOU JUST THUMB UP.
SO ON THE FACE OF THIS, I MEAN, IT LOOKS FINE, BUT MY CONCERN IS ABOUT THE PART ABOUT MANDATES THAT ANY REAL PROPERTY SOLD UNDER THIS PROVISION MUST BE SOLD AT THE APPRAISED VALUE OF, OR OF THE PROPERTY OR HIGHER.
COULD THERE CONCEIVABLY BE AN INSTANCE WHERE YOU WOULD WANT TO LET A PROPERTY GO FOR LESS THAN APPRAISED VALUE? BECAUSE MAYBE YOU WANT TO ENCOURAGE THE USE OF THAT PROPERTY OR WHATEVER THE REASON IS.
AND THIS WOULD TIE HANDS, IS THAT, AM I READING THAT CORRECTLY? SO GENERAL, GENERALLY, UH, THE, THE GIFT CLAUSE IS GONNA PREVENT YOU FROM GIFTING PROPERTY TO SOMEONE FOR LESS THAN THE APPRAISED VALUE ANYWAY.
SO I DON'T KNOW THAT I'VE EVER SEEN A CITY SELL PROPERTY FOR LESS THAN APPRAISED VALUE.
UM, THAT'S JUST THE, THE, THE, THE, THE COST OF SELLING PUBLIC PROPERTY.
IS THERE NO SCENARIO AT THE MOMENT WHERE YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO USE SOMETHING BECAUSE IT'S FOR A PUBLIC BENEFIT, BUT, SO IT WOULDN'T BE A GIFT CLAUSE VIOLATION, BUT IF THIS PASSES, IT WOULD BE A VIOLATION.
SO YOU COULD RETAIN THE PROPERTY AND LEASE IT LONG TERM AND IT WOULDN'T BE UNDER THIS SECTION OF THE STATUTE AT ALL.
SO IF THAT WAS, UM, FOR A PUBLIC PURPOSE, YOU COULD STILL DO IT THAT WAY, JESSICA, BECAUSE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT IN FACT CURRENTLY IF YOU DID THAT, IT WOULD BE IN VIOLATION OF THE GIFT CLOGS.
CORRECT? UH, I MEAN, POTENTIALLY THERE'S
[00:20:01]
OTHER BENEFITS THAT COULD COME INTO THE DEAL.AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT COUNCILOR KINSELLA IS SAYING IS THAT THERE COULD BE OTHER PUBLIC BENEFITS THAT OUTWEIGH UHHUH
UM, AND, AND YOU, THAT DOESN'T, THAT DOESN'T TRIP THE GIFT CLAUSE.
THE, THE GIFT CLAUSE, UH, REQUIRES A, UH, DIRECT BENEFITS BACK TO THE CITY IN THE SAME VALUE AS WHAT THE CITY'S PROVIDING THE CONTRACTOR.
RIGHT? DOES ANYBODY JUST THUMBS UP OR? I YES, I SUPPORT IT AS WELL.
I HAVE A MAJORITY SUPPORT, UH, THE MUNICIPAL GENERAL PLAN.
THIS IS THE BILL THAT THE CITY SPONSORED LAST, UH, YEAR.
UM, IT WAS A LEAGUE RESOLUTION AND THE LEAGUE'S PUSHING IT AGAIN.
UH, THERE IS A SCHEDULE FOR THE HOUSE GOVERNMENT COMMITTEE TOMORROW AT 9:00 AM.
UM, AND THIS WILL PERMIT, AS YOU KNOW, CITIES THAT WERE ONCE ABOVE 10,000 ARE GROWING AT MORE THAN TWO THOU, 2% PER YEAR.
UM, AND AS RELATED TO THE LAST CENSUS, UM, TO RESUBMIT THEIR COMMUNITY PLANS TO THE VOTERS FOR RATIFICATION.
UH, WHEREAS CURRENTLY WE ARE NOT ABLE TO DO SO.
UH, THIS WON'T HAVE AN EFFECT FOR US THIS TIME AROUND BECAUSE IF IT, EVEN IF IT IS APPROVED AND VOTED IN, IT WOULD NOT GO INTO EFFECT UNTIL THE END OF 90 DAYS AFTER THE END OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
SO USUALLY IN SEPTEMBER OR OCTOBER, UM, WHICH WE WILL ALREADY HAVE PASSED, BUT IT WILL HAVE AN EFFECT IN 10 YEARS.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT, UM, UH, SELENA BLISS MOVED FORWARD, EVEN THOUGH WE HAD SAID NOT TO.
SO I THINK WE HAVE A, YEAH, I DON'T THINK SEDONA WILL BE THE ONLY CITY EVER IN THAT, IN THAT SITUATION.
SO IT'LL, UH, MAKE SENSE TO ME.
SOME OTHER BILLS OF INTEREST, THESE ARE NOT LEAGUE RESOLUTIONS.
UM, THE FIRST ONE IS, UH, REPRESENTATIVE BLISS, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL BILL.
THIS IS THE SAME ONE THAT SHE RAN LAST YEAR, UH, WITH THE EXCEPTION IT WAS BEFORE FOR CITIES UNDER 17,000.
UM, AND SO IN SOME WAYS IT'S SIMILAR TO THE LEAGUE RESOLUTION.
UM, BUT IT'S WORDED DIFFERENTLY AND IT JUST ALLOWS THE CITY TO LIMIT SDRS BASED ON A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL HOUSING STOCK WITHIN THE CITY.
AND THEN ALSO, UH, REGULATE SHORT-TERM RENTALS IN THE SAME MANNER AS OTHER TRANSIENT LODGING ACTIVITIES.
UM, SO HOTELS, AND AGAIN, NO, AS, NO ASSIGNMENT ON THAT ONE.
UM, BUT IT WAS AGAIN, JUST DROPPED.
UM, AND THEN THESE NEXT ONES ARE, UM, ARE OTHER, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTAL BILLS, UM, THAT ALSO HAVE NOT RECEIVED ASSIGNMENTS.
UM, AND THEY BOTH, UM, THEY, THEY TAKE THE LEAGUE BILLS AND I DON'T KNOW, UH, WHERE THE REPRESENTATIVE, WHETHER THEY WERE LOOKING AT THE LEAGUE'S BILL OR THEY CAME UP WITH THE EYES INDEPENDENTLY, THE IDEA INDEPENDENTLY.
UH, BUT THE FIRST ONE PER PERMITS CITIES TO REGULATE SHORT TERM RENTALS, UH, AS A, A SPACING REQUIREMENT, 400 LINEAR FEET.
UM, SO A SIMILAR ONE TO COMPARE TO IS OFTEN, UH, UH, GROUP HOMES HAVE TO BE A THOUSAND, SOMETIMES A LITTLE MORE 750 FEET APART FROM EACH OTHER.
SO YOU DON'T END UP WITH A NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S JUST A STREET FULL OF, OF GROUP HOMES.
SO THE SAME THING WOULD BE, THAT'S THE IDEA HERE.
UH, AND THEN THE SECOND ONE, THE 2220, UM, ALLOWS IT TO BE, UH, A CAP.
IT LOOKS LIKE I HAVE A MAJORITY OF THAT TOO.
WELL, ISN'T THAT SIMILAR TO THE LEAGUE'S BILL? MM-HMM.
THEY ARE, THEY'RE, IT'S THE LEAGUE'S BILL.
TWO PARTS OF THE LEAGUE BILL SPLIT OUT INTO TWO SEPARATE BILLS.
ALRIGHT, SO THOSE ARE THOSE TWO.
UM, THIS IS A REPEAL OF SB 1487, THE SB 1487 COMPLAINTS.
UM, SEDONAS HAD TWO FILED AGAINST IT IN OUR, IN THE SHORT HISTORY OF THIS, UH, THIS, UH, BILL, UH, BEING IN, IN, UH, IN PLACE THE STATUTE WHEN IT WAS FIRST PASSED.
UH, AND THEN IT ALSO REPEALS ALL THE LANGUAGE ALLOWING THE TREASURER TO WITHHOLD, UM, TAX OR FEES FROM COUNTIES AND CITIES.
BRIAN, DO YOU HAVE A COMMENT QUESTION? YEAH, KURT.
UM, I MEAN, KURT ISN'T JUST LIKE A DEAD ON ARRIVAL KIND OF BILL.
I MEAN, IT FLIES COMPLETELY IN THE FACE OF SEIZING LOCAL CONTROL THAT THE STATE LEGISLATURE LOVES TO ACT UPON.
UH, IT DID GET A COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENT, SO, UM, SPEAKER
[00:25:01]
TOMA ASSIGNED IT TO THE HOUSE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE.IT HASN'T GIVEN, IT HASN'T BEEN PUT ON AN AGENDA YET.
SO I I I WOULD SAY THE BILLS AFTER A WEEK OR TWO OF NEVER GETTING AN ASSIGNMENT, THOSE WOULD BE DEAD ON ARRIVAL.
THOSE THAT AT LEAST GET AN ASSIGNMENT, ALTHOUGH THEY ARE SOMETIMES ASSIGNED TO COMMITTEES THAT SPEAKER CAN BE CONFIDENT WOULD KILL IT.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT IT, UH, I MEAN, LIKELY I WOULD, I WOULD SURMISE IT DOESN'T HAVE A LOT, A HIGH CHANCE OF PASSING THIS LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
I WANNA MAKE SURE SHE'S HEARD.
SHE MAY HAVE SOMETIMES YES, SHE SAID YES.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ALSO.
UH, THIS IS ONE THAT AT FIRST I WASN'T, UH, DIDN'T THINK APPLIED TO US MUCH 'CAUSE IT WAS A LOT ABOUT, UM, UH, ONLINE PURCHASES AND THEN ALSO, UM, UH, VEHICLE SALES AND WHERE THE, WHERE THE TAXES.
UM, BUT IT DOES ACTUALLY COME UP, I FOUND OUT HERE WITHIN THE CITY FOR SOME ART SALES.
AND SOMETIMES THE, SOME OF THE ART GALLERIES I'VE, IS RUMORED ANYWAY, WILL, UH, HAVE SHIP THE ART TO THE PERSON'S HOME ADDRESS AND THAT WAY THEY DON'T PAY, UH, ANY STATE OR LOCAL TAX.
THIS WOULD CLOSE THAT LOOPHOLE.
UM, AND ALSO ESTABLISH A TEAM TO, AT THE ARIZONA DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, UM, TO ASSIST, UM, ANYTIME THERE'S, UH, UH, CONCERN ABOUT VIOLATIONS OF, OF LOOPHOLES LIKE THAT.
SO IT WOULD ENSURE THAT THE TAXES IS PAID WHERE THE TRANSACTION OCCURS.
I DO WANNA MAKE A POINT DURING THE RETREAT, IT WAS BROUGHT UP FROM THIS DAY, IS THAT, UH, WE WANT TO CUT BACK ON THE AMOUNT.
AND I'M, I'M FINE WITH DOING ALL THESE, SUPPORTING ALL OF THEM, BUT JUST TRY TO KEEP IN MIND THAT IT WAS, IT DID COME FROM THE DAYS THAT WE WANTED TO CUT BACK ON SOME OF THE THINGS WE WERE TRACKING BECAUSE IT WAS, IT WAS A LOT LAST YEAR.
SO MY INTENTION IS ONCE WE WEIGH IN ON THESE, THE, THESE BILLS WON'T NECESSARILY SHOW UP ON FUTURE REPORTS UNLESS THEY'VE MOVED AND SOMEHOW OKAY.
EITHER BEEN PUT ON AN AGENDA, UM, YOU KNOW, PASSED OUT OF A COMMITTEE, SOMETHING TO TAKE ACTION.
A AS, AS YOU KNOW, THE MAJORITY OF BILLS GO TO THE LEGISLATURE AND JUST DIE.
AND SO I WON'T JUST KEEP THESE ON HERE.
UM, BUT THESE, THERE IS A NUMBER TO PUT ON HERE AT THE BEGINNING JUST TO GET COUNSEL'S.
UM, SUPPORT FOR OPPOSITION OR, I UNDERSTAND.
SO WE WON'T GO THROUGH 'EM EACH TIME.
I WILL TRY TO, THIS WILL BE THE STARTING LIST.
UM, AND THEN THE WEEKLY, UH, OR EVERY TWO WEEKS, THE REPORT WOULD BE SMALLER.
SO THIS IS THE SENATE CONCURRENT, UM, RESOLUTION, THE HOUSE.
I'M NOT SURE WHY THEY'RE, THEY'RE THE EXACT SAME THING, UM, AS FAR AS I I SAW.
BUT IT WOULD REPEAL, UM, SB 1350, WHICH IS THE WHOLE SECTION THAT ALLOWS, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTALS.
THEREFORE, CITIES WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO, UM, REGULATE AND RESTRICT, UH, SHORT-TERM RENTALS IF APPROVED.
AND THIS ISN'T FOR THE LEGISLATURE TO APPROVE THIS REFERS IT TO THE ELECTORATE TO VOTE ON.
I, I MEAN THESE WOULD BE, WOULD BE, UM, I DON'T SEE THIS HAPPENING AT ALL.
UH, THESE ARE, WE TALKED ABOUT PROBABLY THE ONLY WAY THAT WE'RE EVER GOING TO REALLY BE SUCCESSFUL UNLESS THE LEGISLATURE CHANGES, IS TO HAVE VOTERS TAKE ACTION, WHICH IS A VERY LONG, DIFFICULT, EXPENSIVE PROCESS.
SO I THINK THESE BILLS ARE GREAT, BUT WE HAVE PREP 2 0 7 CONCERNS.
IF THEY WERE TO, UH, CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES.
I MEAN, IT'S, UH, THIS WOULD BE A VERY LONG HAUL.
PLUS THEY'RE BEING PROPOSED BY DEMOCRATS.
SO I DON'T SEE THEM GETTING MUCH ATTRACTION, BUT I REPRESENT, UH, SCOTTSDALE, PARTIALLY REPRESENTS SCOTTSDALE.
SO I THINK THAT'S WHY THEY'RE THERE.
REP REPRESENTATIVE, SWEETER, UH, RUN THIS BILL.
I THINK THE, TO PROPOSE SEND THIS TO THE VOTERS, UH, HAS NOT MOVED YET.
SO, UM, NO DATES, NO ASSIGNMENTS, UH, OR I'M SORRY, THE, I HAVE ONE HERE.
IT SOUNDS LIKE THE SENATE GOVERNMENT COMMITTEES ASSIGNED, UH, THE ONE BUT NO DATE YET.
[00:30:03]
OKAY.THIS IS, WOULD CHANGE THE ANNEXATION PROCESS.
UM, AND, AND CURRENTLY IN ORDER TO ANNEX ANY PROPERTY, YOU NEED 50% OF THE VOTERS, UH, MORE THAN 50%.
SO JUST A SIMPLE MAJORITY OF THE VOTERS.
AND THE VALUATION, THE PROPERTY VALUATION WITHIN THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA, THIS WOULD INCREASE IT TO 60%.
UM, SO THAT YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT, YOU COULD CALL IT A SUPER MAJORITY OF PROPERTY OWNERS AND PROPERTY VALUATION IN ORDER TO APPROVE ANNEXATION.
JESSICA, WHY, WHAT'S GOING ON BEHIND THIS? RIGHT.
I DON'T KNOW WHAT, UM, REPRESENTATIVE SMITH'S PURPOSE WAS FOR PUSHING THIS.
OBVIOUSLY IT MAKES ANNEXATION HARDER.
UM, AND WOW, I WOULD OPPOSE THIS.
I, I SEE NO REASON IF I DON'T HEAR A REAL LIFE, I GUESS, LET ME TELL YOU, MY SQUIGGLY LINE THERE, RIGHT HERE IS THE, THE, THE, FROM THE, WHAT I PRESUMED, UM, WOULD BE SOME SUB SUPPORT FROM THE CITY TO THESE NEXT BILLS ARE, UM, PRESUMED OPPOSITION.
UM, AND SO WE'RE GONNA START GOING THROUGH THOSE.
JUST SO YOU KNOW, UM, NOT TO BE TOO PRESUMPTUOUS.
I'LL TAKE DIRECTION FROM COUNSEL ON ANY OF THESE BILLS.
PETE, DID YOU HAVE ONE? YEAH, I, I, I DON'T FEEL I KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THIS.
I MEAN, MY FIRST INSTINCT WOULD BE TO OPPOSE IT 'CAUSE IT'S LIMITING THE ABILITY OF THE PUBLIC TO ACHIEVE WHAT THEY WANT AND GET SOMETHING ON.
BUT I DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT THIS ONE YET.
WHAT I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST IS MAYBE IF YOU COULD BRING BACK FURTHER INFORMATION THE NEXT TIME WE GO THROUGH THE REVIEW AND THAT MAYBE WE NOT TAKE A POSITION ON THIS ONE YET.
BRIAN, BEFORE I THANK YOU, MAYOR, I WOULD AGREE WITH COUNCILOR KINSELLA ON, UH, HOLDING OFF TO LEARN A LITTLE BIT MORE.
BUT MY GUESS ON WHAT'S BEHIND THIS IS, IS THAT IF A COUNCIL TRIES TO PUSH AN ANNEXATION FORWARD AND GETS MINIMAL SUPPORT, BUT ENOUGH, UM, THAT COULD BE CREATING TAX, FUTURE TAX BURDEN ON THE COMMUNITY THAT MIGHT NOT BE APPRECIATED ONCE IT'S BEEN AFFECTED.
SO THAT WOULD BE MY GUESS OF WHAT'S BEHIND IT.
BUT IT IS MERELY A GUESS RIGHT.
FOR ME, I JUST WANT THE, I, AS I SAID, MY INSTINCT IS TO OPPOSE, BUT I WANT THE INFORMATION BEFORE I GO ON RECORD WITH IT NOW.
THANK YOU MAYOR PETE, YOU WEIGH IN.
I AG AGREE WITH THAT POSITION ABOUT TRACKING WEIGHT.
I'D LIKE TO HEAR THE STORY OF WHAT WENT WRONG.
WHAT ARE WE TRYING TO FIX? I MEAN, RATHER THAN JUST THE SPECULATION.
MELISSA, DO YOU HAVE ANY? OKAY, THANK YOU.
UH, HOLLY, ANY ANYTHING? I, I THINK WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND.
WE MEAN, MY INSTINCT IS TO IS TO OPPOSE IT, AS I SAID EARLIER, BUT WE NEED MORE INFORMATION.
SO I GUESS YOU KEEP TRACKING IT.
I'D LIKE TO KNOW WHO SUPPORTS IT AND WHO OPPOSES IT, AS AN EXAMPLE.
DOES THE LEAGUE SUPPORT IT? THE LEAGUE OPPOSES, I BELIEVE.
UM, SO THEY MUST, BUT I CAN, I CAN GET THAT INFORMATION AND ADD IT.
WELL, THE LEAGUE PUBLISHES THEIR BULLET AND THEN IN THEIR BULLET AND THEY MUST HAVE THEIR REASONS.
SO MAYBE YOU COULD, YOU KNOW, WE DO GET THAT.
MAYBE WE CAN MAKE SURE THAT WE HAVE IT, THE INFORMATION IN THIS LIST IN YOUR REPORT.
YES, I CAN GET THAT INFORMATION AND ADD IT FOR THE NEXT REPORT.
SO THIS IS A, THIS IS A REPEAT BILL THAT PROHIBITS, UM, CITIES FROM REDUCING THE ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET, UM, PRIOR FROM THE PRIOR YEAR BELOW THE PRIOR YEAR, UH, FOR POLICE DEPARTMENTS, UM, OR DIRECTLY THE CITY.
UH, THIS HAS ISSUES, UH, FROM FINANCE BECAUSE, UH, IF WE MAKE EXTRA PAYMENTS, UH, SAY TO THE P-S-P-R-S THAT WOULD ARTIFICIALLY INFLATE THE BUDGET THAT YEAR AND THEN WE'D BE STUCK AT THAT LEVEL FOREVER MORE SO.
BUT IF I UNDERSTAND THIS, THIS IS PROHIBITING DEFUNDING, CORRECT.
SO WE SHOULD WANT TO, WE WANT TO SUPPORT THIS THEN? NO, NO.
SO
[00:35:01]
DOES PROHIBIT DEFUNDING BELOW THE PRIOR YEAR IN ANY AMOUNT, EVEN A PENNY LESS.AND SO YOU'D ALWAYS BE STUCK EVEN IF YOU NO LONGER NEEDED THAT, THAT AMOUNT.
UM, THE, THE NEXT COUPLE, UM, WELL I I SHOULD HAVE GROUPED 'EM TOGETHER.
THERE'S A HANDFUL OF ZONING ONES AND SOME OTHER ONES.
BUT THIS NEXT ONE IS, UH, MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
IT REQUIRES, UM, EVERY URBANIZED AREA, UM, TO, CAN'T REQUIRE MORE THAN ONE MOTOR VEHICLE PARKING SPACE PER RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNIT.
UH, WE ARE PER THE US CENSUS OR AN URBANIZED AREA.
UM, AND, AND SO AS, AS APPROVAL FOR A, A BUILDING OR USE PERMIT, SO THIS WE CURRENTLY WOULD REQUIRE, DEPENDING ON THE SIZE, UH, IF THE BUILDING GETS BIGGER, IF THE RESIDENTIAL UNIT GETS BIGGER.
'CAUSE WE HAVE SOME VERY LARGE, UH, UNITS PROPOSED, WE WILL REQUIRE MORE THAN ONE PARKING SPACE.
THIS IS ESSENTIALLY ANTI LOCAL CONTROL, CORRECT? CORRECT.
HOLLY, ANYTHING I WOULD OPPOSE THAT? RIGHT.
UH, THIS IS INSERTS THE LEGISLATURE AND THE GOVERNOR IN CITY SETTLEMENT PROCESSES.
UM, FOR ANY TERMS MORE THAN 500,000.
UM, NOW WE HAVE NOT IN THE HISTORY OF SEDONA, I DON'T BELIEVE EVER HAD TO SETTLE, UM, ANYTHING FROM THAT AMOUNT.
UH, BUT IF IT IS LARGE THAN 500,000, UM, IT REQUIRES THE, UM, IT REQUIRES THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, UM, TO REVIEW AND AGREE THE SETTLEMENT.
IF IT'S MORE THAN A MILLION, THEN IT GOES TO THE GOVERNOR FOR APPROVAL.
UM, AND YOU HAVE TO GIVE THEM AT LEAST 90 DAYS TO REVIEW BEFORE ENTERING TO THE AGREEMENT.
IS THIS JUST AN ANTI LOCAL CONTROL OR ANTICO OR ANTI, WHAT IS THIS INTENDED TO DO TO, TO REMOVE SETTLEMENT AUTHORITY? UM, FROM LOCAL, FROM LOCALITIES, FROM CITIES.
UH, HB 2303, UM, REQUIRES, UM, CITIES TO ALLOW MIDDLE HOUSING DEFINED AS DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, QUADPLEXES, COTTAGE CLUSTERS, WHICH YOU SEE DOWN IN THE VALLEY.
NOW ARE THOSE, THOSE TINY LITTLE HOUSES THAT ARE NOT, THEY'RE DETACHED, BUT THERE'S WHOLE LITTLE COMMUNITIES OF THEM, UM, AND TOWNHOUSES IN ALL AREAS.
ZONE RESIDENTIAL, SO SINGLE FAMILY, UH, AND ANY LEVEL, UM, WHETHER IT'S IN ANY DENSITY, UH, WOULD HAVE TO ALLOW UP TO, UM, QUADPLEXES AND COTTAGE CLUSTERS.
KATHY, THIS IS ANOTHER ONE WHERE I THINK I MIGHT NEED A LITTLE MORE INFORMATION BECAUSE IT DOES PERMIT, ALTHOUGH IT, IT'S AN INTER-LOCAL CONTROL IN THIS AREA OF HOUSING, IT DOES PERMIT A MUNICIPALITY TO REGULATE THE DESIGN, UM, TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH LAND USE PLANNING GOALS, IF THE GOVERNING REGULATIONS SHOULD NOT PROHIBIT OR PROHIBIT OR DISCOURAGE MIDDLE HOUSING DESIGNS.
SO WE ARE, THAT'S GRAY ENOUGH FOR ME TO WANT MORE INFORMATION.
SO WE ALREADY CAN COMPLETELY REGULATE MIDDLE HOUSING.
UM, AND, AND, AND, AND I THINK, I BELIEVE KAREN COULD CORRECT ME, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE DIRECTED TO BRING BACK MORE IDEAS ABOUT ADUS, RIGHT? UH, ALLOWING THAT TYPE OF, UM, OF, UH, OF ZONING AND HIGHER DENSITY USE IN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, UH, DISTRICTS, UH, THIS COMPLETELY PREEMPTS THAT AND ALLOWS UP TO THESE COTTAGE CLUSTERS AND QUADPLEXES ON ANY PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY.
IT PRE IT PREEMPTS IT, BUT IT SAYS THAT IT PERMITS.
THAT'S WHAT I'M, THAT'S WHAT I'M CONFUSED ABOUT.
IT'S, IT'S, THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.
THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR THE MORE YEAH.
I, I, I, I JUST DON'T, I'M JUST, I'M SEEING A CONTRADICTION HERE.
SO WE CAN STILL REGULATE THE DESIGN, BUT WE CAN'T PROHIBIT THEM.
DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? WE COULD, WE COULD REGULATE HOW THEY LOOK.
THE ROOF LINES, UH, MASSING, THINGS LIKE THAT ARE, WOULD STILL BE ALLOWED.
UH, BUT NOT PROHIBIT THEM IN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS.
THANK YOU JESSICA AND THE PETE.
WELL, BRIAN, JESSICA, WELL, I ACTUALLY SUPPORT DOING THIS, BUT I, THIS TAKES AWAY LOCAL CONTROL AND I'M OPPOSED TO THAT.
DID YOU WANNA WEIGH IN? I AGREE WITH WHAT COUNSEL WAS JUST, OKAY.
THIS IS JUST A OPINING SORT OF QUESTION TO ALL OF US.
IF WE, IF, IF, IF WE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A CAP AND A CARVE OUT OF 2 0 7 AND COULD REDUCE THE NUMBER OF STR IF WE WERE ABLE TO GET THAT, BUT THE LEGISLATURE SAID, OH, YOU GOTTA GIVE US THIS MIDDLE HOUSING BILL.
[00:40:01]
FOR THAT? THE DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS, RIGHT? WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A LOT MORE TO KNOW.ALRIGHT, SO I, I SAW ONE THUMBS.
UM, HB 25 70 AND SB UH, 1112, UM,
INITIALLY IT WAS, IT WAS TOLD THE LEAGUE THAT THIS WAS JUST GONNA BE, WE'RE TIRED OF CITIES TELLING PEOPLE WHAT COLOR THEY CAN PAINT THEIR HOUSES.
SO WE'RE GONNA JUST LET PEOPLE PAINT THEIR HOUSES, WHATEVER COLOR THEY WANT.
UM, THE PROPOSED BILL IS A LOT MORE THAN THAT.
UM, IT, IT ELIMINATES THE CITY'S ABILITY TO, AND AGAIN, THE CITY GENERALLY DOESN'T CHOOSE FEATURES AND AMENITIES, UM, OR THE FLOOR PLAN OF A HOUSE, BUT IT HAS TO MEET MINIMUM STANDARDS AND BUILDING REQUIREMENTS.
UM, SO, AND, UH, AND THEN IT, IT GUTS THE ABILITY TO, UM, CONTROL THE EXTERIOR DESIGN, UH, OF A HOME.
UM, AND SO THAT COULD BE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS, UH, COLORS, DIFFERENT THINGS LIKE THAT.
IT WOULDN'T APPLY TO US ANYWAY.
RIGHT? 'CAUSE IT'S OVER 50,000, BUT, OH, THE FIRST PART DOES APPLY TO US.
OH, THE SECOND PART PART WOULD NOT APPLY TO THE CITY.
UM, THE 50,000 WHERE THEY ALSO GET RID OF MINIMUM LOT SIZES, SQUARE FOOTAGE, LOT COVER SETBACKS GREATER THAN FIVE FEET IN ALL AESTHETIC ELEMENTS FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.
AND SO IN SOLIDARITY WITH THE, THE LARGER CITIES, UH, TO THE LEAGUES ASKING THE CITIES TO OPPOSE THIS, WELL, WE DO HAVE REQUIREMENTS FOR SCREENING WALLS AND FENCES, SO, OKAY.
UM, PUBLIC RECORDS, UH, TIMEFRAMES.
THIS ONE'S, UH, I BELIEVE THE LEAGUE'S BEING NEUTRAL ON, UH, BUT IT DOES HAVE AN EFFECT.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE COUNSEL AWARE.
UM, SO CURRENTLY IN, WHEN WE RECEIVE A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST, WE'RE REQUIRED TO PROMPTLY FULFILL THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST.
UM, AND THAT'S JUDGED ON HOW HARD IT IS TO FULFILL THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST.
SO IF WE COULD HAVE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST THAT RETURNS 25,000 EMAILS, AND WE NEED TO REVIEW EACH OF THOSE EMAILS FOR ANY PERSONAL, UH, IDENTIFYING INFORMATION, THINGS LIKE THAT, WE HAVE TO REDACT THAT CAN TAKE MONTHS, UM, OF STAFF TIME TO DO IT.
AND SO, UH, A PROMPTLY IN THAT SCENARIO WOULD BE MONTHS.
UM, THIS GETS RID OF THE PROMPTLY REQUIREMENT AND INSTEAD REQUIRES YOU JUST TO, WITHIN FIVE DAYS, ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF THE REQUEST AND, AND THEN PROVIDE THE EXPECTED DUE DATE.
SO THE EXPECTED DUE DATE WOULD BE IN THAT CASE, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD SAY TWO MONTHS AT THAT POINT.
SO IT DOESN'T HAVE THE PROMPT REQUIREMENT ANYMORE.
SO IT'S KIND OF A, UH, IT JUST CHANGES, CHANGES IT UP.
UM, IT DOES SAY ANY INTENTIONAL REFUSAL TO COMPLY WITH THE PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST WILL RESULT IN A CIVIL PENALTY.
UH, CITIES HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED CIVIL PENALTIES FOR FAILING TO COMPLY.
THIS ACTUALLY CAPS IT AT $5,000.
UM, SOME CIVIL PENALTIES HAVE BEEN HIGHER THAN THAT.
UM, AND SO IT'S, UM, YEAH, IT'S KIND OF, WE'RE IN, I'M INDIFFERENT TO IT AS THE MORE I LOOK AT IT.
AND IT DOESN'T HOLD YOU TO THAT PROCESSING TIMELINE.
YOU CAN AMEND THAT TIMELINE LATER ON IF IT TURNS OUT IT TOOK YOU LONGER.
SO JESSICA, YEAH, I, I KIND OF THINK THIS IS A GOOD IDEA.
SO I, I I CAN'T OPPOSE, I WOULDN'T OPPOSE IT.
DOES THE, IS THIS LEAGUE OPPOSING IT? UH, NO, I DON'T BELIEVE SO.
WELL, THEN I WOULD TAKE THE LEAGUE'S POSITION ON IT IF THEY'RE SORT OF NEUTRAL ON IT.
SO, KURT, I'D LIKE TO KNOW, I MEAN, I KNOW ABOUT THE 25,000 EMAIL.
UH, WOULD THIS HELP HURT THE CITY? IT'S, THAT'S JUST WHERE IT COMES IN NEUTRAL.
SO, UH, THE COURTS HAVE ALWAYS INTERPRETED PROMPTLY BASED ON THE REQUEST.
AND SO IF A REQUEST LITERALLY IS GONNA TAKE YOU MONTHS TO FULFILL, THEN IT TAKES YOU MONTHS.
AND SO THAT'S AS PROMPT AS YOU CAN.
UM, SO, UH, IN ONE WAY IT WOULD BE, IT'S HARD FOR US TO KNOW WITHIN FIVE DAYS SOMETIMES TO KNOW HOW LONG IT'S GONNA TAKE US TO FULFILL A REQUEST.
UM, IT WOULD PROBABLY, WOULD'VE BEEN BETTER IF IT WAS, YOU KNOW, WITHIN 10 DAYS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
THEN MAYBE I'D BE MORE SUPPORTIVE OF IT.
'CAUSE WE HAVE TO RUN MULTIPLE SEARCHES IN SOME NOT VERY HELPFUL, UH, MICROSOFT PROGRAMS THROUGH EVERYONE'S EMAILS AND SEE HOW MANY IT PULLS OUT.
UM, IT'S HARD TO EVEN COME UP WITH A NUMBER SOMETIMES.
UM, WELL THEN MAYBE WITHIN, WITHIN FIVE DAYS, IT DOESN'T EVEN SPECIFY FIVE BUSINESS DAYS.
IT'S, IT'S FIVE CALENDAR DAYS.
SO IF WE GET A REQUEST ON WEDNESDAY, THEN WE GOTTA LET 'EM KNOW BY MONDAY.
UH, KATHY, YEAH, NO, I'M CONCERNED THAT THIS ONE WILL LIMIT THE PUBLIC'S ASSET ACCESS TO INFORMATION BECAUSE
[00:45:01]
I MEAN, I HAVE NO DOUBT THAT WE WOULD ALWAYS ACT RESPONSIBLY AND GIVE EVERYBODY ACCESS AS QUICKLY AS WE COULD, BUT REMOVING THE REQUIREMENT TO COMPLY COULD, COULD BE MISUSED.UM, AND I CAN'T, I DON'T SUPPORT THAT.
OKAY, SO WE GOT A COUPLE NEUTRALS AND, AND OPPOSE.
YEAH, SO, SO, UH, JUST, I BELIEVE WHAT THIS IS DOING IS MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT FOR THE STAFF BECAUSE PROMPTLY COULD BE TWO MONTHS IN ORDER TO GET IT DONE, VERSUS THIS WOULD HAVE TO BE FIVE CALENDAR DAYS.
SO IT'S NOT FULFILLING THE REQUIREMENT WITHIN FIVE CALENDARS.
IT'S NOTIFYING, IT'S ACKNOWLEDGING RECEIPT AND PROVIDING A TIMELINE OF WHEN YOU WILL.
SO IT'S NEUTRAL THEN REALLY THAT'S, YEAH, BECAUSE I CAN SEND YOU A NOTICE TOMORROW THAT SAYS THIS IS GONNA TAKE ME FOREVER.
THAT'S APPEARS TO BE, COULD BE THE RESULT.
SO I, I GATHER WE'LL JUST WON'T TAKE A POSITION ON THIS.
SO WE GOT ONE DOWN AND THE RESTS NEUTRAL.
AND, AND WHEN I HEAR NEUTRAL, THAT MEANS WE'RE JUST NOT GONNA WEIGH IN, RIGHT? HOLLY? HOLLY, WEIGH IN ON THAT.
HOLLY, YOU HAVE A COMMENT? NO, UH, I'M NEUTRAL ON IT.
I'D LIKE TO SEE WHAT HAPPENS AND WHERE IT GOES AND TRACK IT, BUT NOT TAKE A POSITION AT THIS TIME.
I, I DO INTEND ON TRACKING IT IN CASE SOMETHING CHANGES IN IT.
UM, 'CAUSE BILLS, YOU KNOW, DO GET AMENDED AND THEY CAN BECOME QUICKLY BETTER OR WORSE.
SO KURT, I'D LIKE TO ASK ON, ON THIS, I MEAN, EXCEPT FOR THIS ANOMALY THAT YOU HAVE 25,000 EMAILS TO GO THROUGH, AND OF COURSE REDACTING AND EVERYTHING ELSE, WHAT'S THE NORMAL TURNAROUND? I MEAN, ON AVERAGE, I KNOW YOU, UH, USUALLY WE CAN OFTEN TURN AROUND THE SAME DAY, IF NOT THE NEXT DAY.
AND JUST FOR, UH, THE MAJORITY OF OUR PUBLIC RECORD RECORDS REQUESTS ARE FOR PERMITS, UM, FOR NEW BILLS.
PEOPLE WANNA SEE WHAT'S GOING ON.
UM, OTHER, UH, PEOPLE ARE INTERESTED IN WHAT, SO, AND THOSE ARE USUALLY TURNED AROUND THE SAME DAY, IF NOT THE NEXT DAY.
UM, FOR EXAMPLE, WE GOT A REQUEST TODAY, A DIFFERENT EXAMPLE FOR ALL, UH, ACCOUNTS PAYABLE THAT THE CITY PAID OUT TO LAST YEAR, UH, CALENDAR YEAR 2023.
AND THAT'S AS SIMPLE AS RUNNING THE SPREADSHEET AND THE, AND THE SOFTWARE.
AND SO THAT WAS PROVIDED WITHIN A COUPLE HOURS, UM, OF EVERY ACCOUNT AND THE AMOUNT THAT WE PAID OUT TO, UH, TO CONTRACTORS AND VENDORS.
AND WE TYPICALLY RESPOND WITH, WELL, WITHIN 48 HOURS THAT WE'VE ACKNOWLEDGED THE RESPONSE.
AND LIKE KURT SAID, MOST OF THEM ARE, IF NOT THE SAME DAY, THEY'RE FULFILLED WITHIN A WEEK.
SO THERE'S NO ISSUE THAT THIS IS FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE, UH, FIXING OR CORRECTING, BUT WE'LL, I'LL WATCH IT AND WE'LL REMAIN NEUTRAL FOR NOW.
AND THEN, UH, SO YOU HAVE A DIRECTION FOR THAT? YES.
UH, SO THIS WOULD, UM, ALLOW PROPERTY OWNERS TO REQUEST A REFUND.
UH, SO THIS IS THE, THIS COMES FROM THE PHOENIX, UH, ENCAMPMENT CASE.
UH, THE, THE LARGE ENCAMPMENT DOWN THERE, UH, THAT PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, SUED THE CITY OVER AND SAID, LOOK, YOU, YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO CLEAN UP ENCAMPMENTS, BUT YOU CAN ENFORCE OTHER, UM, RULES LIKE, UH, RIGHT OF WAY ORDINANCE AND, AND ENCROACHMENTS.
AND THE JUDGE AGREED WITH THEM, AND THEN PHOENIX CLEANED UP THE CAMP.
THIS WOULD ALLOW THEM TO DEDUCT ANY OF THEIR PROPERTY TAXES, UM, BASED ON ANY DEVALUATION IN THEIR PROPERTY OR ANY EXPENSES THEY INCURRED, UH, BECAUSE OF THE CITY FULFILLING TO, UM, UH, FOLLOW THEIR, THEIR RULES.
WELL, SINCE IT'S KIND OF LIKE A, UH, A PROP 2 0 7, BUT A DIFFERENT ANGLE, RIGHT.
SO I WILL REGISTER OPPOSITION.
UM,
THIS PROHIBITS CITIES FROM, FROM, UM, REQUIRING ANY EMPLOYEE, UH, TO PARTICIPATE IN A DIVERSITY EQUITY OR INCLUSION PROGRAM.
WE'RE SPENDING ANY MONEY ON D-E-A-D-E-I CONTRACTS OR PROGRAMS. UM, SO AGAIN, IT REMOVES LOCAL CONTROL AND IF, UH, BASED ON WHATEVER CITY FEELS IS IMPORTANT FOR ITS EMPLOYEES TO LEARN.
WE'LL REGISTER THAT, UH, SB 10 50 TWOS, UH, A REPEAT FROM LAST YEAR INCREASES THE WEIGHT OF OHVS FROM 2,500 POUNDS TO 3,500 POUNDS.
UM, IT DID PASS OUT A COMMITTEE SIX TO ONE.
UH, AND I PROVIDED OH, AND SO YOU DIDN'T GET THAT EMAIL.
I'LL FORWARD TO COUNSEL IF YOU DIDN'T GET MY OTHER EMAIL ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE COMMITTEE MEETING.
UM, I THINK WE ALL RECEIVED IT.
[00:50:01]
UM, I DIDN'T, WE RECEIVED MAIL FROM DEANNA, RIGHT? FROM DEANNA.OH, MAYBE DEANNA GAVE A SIMILAR SUMMARY.
I'LL, I'LL PROVIDE ONE FROM, FROM P-D-D-P-D-G GROUP FROM TODD, UM, AND SOME OF HIS THOUGHTS ON HOW THAT WENT.
UM, AND THE LAST ONE, UH, SB 10 56.
UM, SO THIS, UM, IS, IS LIKE, SO CURRENTLY THE LEGISLATURE NEEDS A SUPER MAJORITY TO IMPOSE NEW TAXES, UM, IN THE HOUSE OR THE, IN THE SENATE.
AND THAT'S FROM, UH, 1992 PROPOSITION THAT THE VOTERS ENACTED.
THIS EXTENDS THAT BASICALLY TO CITIES AND COUNTIES.
UH, AND SO IN ORDER TO IMPOSE ANY NEW TAX IN THE CITY, SO IT INCREASE THE, THE SALES TAX, UM, UH, THE, SO THE TPT OR, OR HOTEL BED TAX, UM, OR ANY OTHER TAX THE CITY WANTED TO, UH, OR FEE.
UH, SO THAT INCLUDES OUR CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE EVERY, UH, YEAR, YOU WOULD NEED TWO THIRDS VOTE OF COUNCIL INSTEAD OF A SIMPLE MAJORITY.
SO NOW I'LL REGISTER OPPOSITION.
LUCKILY, I THINK WE'RE HAVE ALMOST ALWAYS BEEN UNANIMOUS.
UH, 'CAUSE THE CITY'S PRETTY JUDICIOUS IN ITS TAXES AND FEES.
SO WE USUALLY GET UNANIMOUS SUPPORT FROM COUNCIL ANYWAY.
BUT, UM, I'LL REGISTER OPPOSITION.
IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER BILLS, I AGAIN APOLOGIZE THAT THIS WAS NOT SENT OUT TO COUNCIL LAST NIGHT.
IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER THOUGHTS OR QUESTIONS ON THIS, THEN LET ME KNOW.
AND, UM, I CAN CONSIDER INCLUDING THEM OR BRINGING UP TO COUNCIL AT OUR NEXT COUNCIL MEETING.
UM, AND I WILL LOOK INTO, UM, THE, THE HB 31 20 OR 2125.
UM, A LITTLE BIT MORE AS, AS DIRECTED BY COUNCIL.
BRIAN, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? THANK YOU, MAYOR.
UM, I THOUGHT WE WOULD SEE OUR LEGISLATIVE ADVOCATES TODAY.
WAS THAT A, THEY WERE AVAILABLE.
I DIDN'T, I TOLD 'EM I DIDN'T THINK THEY WERE NEEDED TODAY.
UM, IF YOU WANT THEM AT FUTURE COUNCIL MEETINGS OR ANY COUNCIL MEETINGS, LET ME KNOW.
I MEAN, SPECIFICALLY, I WANNA KNOW WHAT THEY'RE DOING.
UM, THIS IS THEIR THIRD BITE AT THE APPLE GOING AFTER STR REFORM, AND I WANNA KNOW WHO THEY'RE MEETING WITH AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING TO INFLUENCE.
SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THEIR SMILING FACES.
UH, WOULD YOU LIKE A, I'M SURE THEY CAN GET YOU A REPORT THIS WEEK ON EVERYTHING THEY'VE DONE.
UM, TO COVER THE INTERIM PERIOD AND THEN WE CAN HAVE 'EM HERE AT THE NEXT COUNCIL MEETING.
WE ALL AGREE WITH THAT? I THINK.
I FIGURED EVERYBODY WOULD, BUT I DIDN'T WANNA JUST TAKE FOR ONE.
UH, SORRY, I DIDN'T KNOW IF WE WERE GONNA HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, YOU KNOW, OR, OR NOT ON THIS.
UH, BRIAN AND, AND I DO HAVE A DISCUSSION ITEM.
SO WE'RE GONNA OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.
AND THEN ON THIS TOPIC, YOU HAD A DISCUSSION TOO.
JUST ONE, ONE COMMENT THAT, YOU KNOW, FOR ALL THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING ALONG WITH OUR MANY GUESTS HERE IN THE AUDIENCE,
AND THE FACT THAT THIS COUNCIL APPEARS TO PRETTY MUCH UNANIMOUSLY NOT WANT TO PRECLUDE FUTURE COUNCILS FROM BEING ABLE TO MAKE DECISIONS THAT THEY THINK ARE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COMMUNITY.
SO, UM, I JUST WOULD WANT THE COMMUNITY TO KNOW ALL THOSE WHO ARE WATCHING OUT THERE.
[8.b. Discussion/possible action regarding future meeting/agenda items. ]
EIGHT B, DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING FUTURE MEETING AGENDA ITEMS. THERE WILL BE NO WORK SESSION TOMORROW.IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE FOR A FUTURE AGENDA ITEM? OKAY.
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS BEFORE WE CLOSE THE MEETING? WE'VE COVERED EVERYTHING.
[10. ADJOURNMENT]
HEARING NOTHING ELSE, THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.