* This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting. GOOD AFTERNOON, [00:00:01] EVERYONE USUALLY ARE. SO [ 1. CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/MOMENT OF SILENCE] BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I'D JUST LIKE TO, UH, REMIND YOU ALL TO TURN OFF OR SILENCE YOUR ELECTRONIC EQUIPMENT AS I HAVE, BECAUSE INEVITABLY SOMEBODY'S PHONE GOES OFF. SO IF YOU WOULD INDULGE ME, I'D DEPRECIATE THAT. SO WE'LL CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. UH, PLEASE JOIN ME FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE PLEDGE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR, AND NOW A MOMENT OF SILENCE, IF YOU WILL. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. [ 2. ROLL CALL/MOMENT OF ART] MADAM CLERK, WOULD YOU, WOULD YOU PLEASE READ THE ROLL CALL? THERE YOU GO. MAYOR JALO. PRESENT VICE MAYOR PLU. HERE. COUNCILOR DUNN. PRESENT. COUNCILOR LTZ? HERE. COUNCILOR FURMAN. HERE. COUNCILOR KINSELLA. PRESENT. COUNCILOR WILLIAMSON. HERE. THANK YOU. OKAY. TODAY YOU ARE ALL VERY LUCKY TO, UH, OUR FIRST COUNCIL MEETING FOR THE MONTH. WE HAVE OUR MOMENT OF ART AND I'M TOLD WE HAVE SOME WONDERFUL SINGERS TODAY THAT ARE HERE TO SHOW THEIR CRAFT AND ENTERTAIN YOU. SO WE'LL HAVE NANCY LATTANZI COME UP AND DO THE INTROS. THANK YOU, MAYOR. GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND COUNSELORS. HAPPY AUGUST. UM, FOR TODAY WE HAVE A SPECIAL GROUP SURROUND SOUND, WHICH IS AN ACAPELLA QUARTET BASED IN SEDONA. AND THANK YOU COUNCILOR KINSELLA FOR RECOMMENDING THEM TO ME. I'M LARRY. LOOKING FORWARD TO THIS. UM, SO SURROUND SOUND IS PART OF THE HARMONY ON THE ROCK SINGERS WHO HAVE BEEN PERFORMING IN SEDONA FOR 23 YEARS. WE HAVE BARITONE KIT HENSLEY COME ON UP. YOU CAN START LINE THAT UP. UM, WE HAVE LEAD WALLY. RULE 10 ARE LUCY GOUDREAU AND THEY HAVE BEEN SINGING TOGETHER FOR 10 YEARS. AND THEN WE HAVE ON BASE MICHAEL MCCAFFREY, WHO RECENTLY JOINED THE QUARTET SURROUND SOUND AND HARMONY ON THE ROCKS, SUPPORT AND CONTRIBUTE ENTERTAINMENT FOR MANY COMMUNITY FUNCTIONS AT SEVERAL LOCATIONS SUCH AS THE SEDONA HERITAGE MUSEUM, SEDONA LIBRARY, AND OTHER CULTURAL CENTERS. LOCALS REQUEST THEIR TALENTED PERFORMANCES FOR EVENTS SUCH AS REMEMBRANCE SERVICES, BIRTHDAYS, VALENTINE'S, AND ANNIVERSARIES. THOSE IN THE VERDE VALLEY AND BEYOND ARE ENCOURAGED TO JOIN THE CHORUS DURING REHEARSALS AT CHURCH OF THE RED ROCKS ON BO STRINGING DRIVE IN SEDONA ON WEDNESDAYS FROM FIVE TO SEVEN. YOU'RE WELCOME TO JOIN THEM IN A SONG OR SIT BACK AND BE ENTERTAINED. PLEASE WELCOME SURROUND SOUND, PERFORMING TWO SONGS, RED ROCK RAG AND AN IRISH BLESSING. THANK YOU FOR THE CITY COUNCIL FOR INVITING US TO SING. THE FIRST SONG WAS WRITTEN A HUNDRED OVER A HUNDRED YEARS AGO FOR VAUDEVILLE. IT WAS CALLED RED ROSE RAG. UM, AND WE ALL KNOW HOW SOME SONGS, UH, STAND THE TEST OF TIME. THIS WAS NOT ONE OF 'EM. . THIS ONE NEEDED TO BE REWRITTEN. SO WE REWROTE THE LYRICS AND IT'S NOW CALLED RED ROCK RAG. AND IT'S A SONG ABOUT SEDONA FROM A LOCAL PERSPECTIVE. OH, RING AROUND THE ROSIE AND TAKE A LITTLE POSEY WHILE YOU DO WIN THE RED ROCK RAG. OH. DOWN IN SEDONA, WHERE THE VORTEX IS ALL OH MY. IT IS SO BIZARRE. YES. THERE YOU CAN BUY A TIMESHARE OH, AND LOVE YOU RED ROCK, RED MOUNTAINS, AND FOLD YOU IN THE CRIMSON YOU AND OH WOW. LOOK AT THAT. VIEW THUNDER MOUNTAIN. BE ROCK. SNOOPY WIND IS WOODSTOCK. OH, LET ME LEARN THOSE RED ROCK NAMES. THOSE NAMES. OH, TOURISTS COME FROM NEAR AND FAR. DON'T LEAVE A PLACE TO PARK YOUR CAR. TRAFFIC JAMS AND FLYING TO GROCERY STORE LOVE. LET ME LEARN THAT. RED ROCK RED. NOW GO OUT [00:05:01] FOR A PEACEFUL HIKE AND GET RUN DOWN BY A MOUNTAIN. LIKE NOT GOING TO SEE THE GATE, HONEY, YOU KNOW, UNDER THE SAKE OF OUR TREE. COME ON AND BUY ANOTHER T-SHIRT AT THE GENERAL STOVE. WHY DON'T YOU LEARN, LEARN ABOUT SEDONA ON WHO? BE THAT WONDERFUL THEREFORE WOO WOO TO MAKE THE BRICK LEAF BEAR AND A SEA FIRE SOMEBODY. OR RING YOUR ROSE. SEE ROUND THAT RED ROCK. RED ROCK. WHO WILL BE WITH THAT WONDERFUL RIDE? BRING SOMEBODY YOUR ROUND RED ROCK. BUY ANOTHER T-SHIRT. AGAR AGAR ROCK. ROCK. WOO. SHORT SONG IS OUR WISH FOR YOU AS YOU CONDUCT YOUR CITY BUSINESS. THE ROLL RISE TO BE YOU MADE THE WIND TO BE ALWAYS AT YOUR BACK, MADE THE SUN SHINE MORE UPON YOUR FACE, MADE THE RAIN UPON. AND UNTIL WE MEET AGAIN, HOLD YOU IN HIS HAND, MAY GOD HOLD YOU IN THE ALL NEWS. AND THAT WAS REALLY SPECIAL. I REALLY ENJOY NANCY, THANK YOU FOR ALL YOUR HARD WORK AND ESPECIALLY FOR WITH THIS GROUP AS WELL. SO THANK YOU. OKAY, UH, CONSENT [ 3. CONSENT ITEMS - APPROVE] ITEMS. UH, IT'S ITEM NUMBER THREE. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE THE COUNCIL, THE STAFF, OR THE PUBLIC CAN HAVE AN ITEM PULLED. I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE ITEM K AND ONE OTHER, UH, COUNCILOR FURMAN, DID YOU WANT TO PULL ONE? NO. K IS K'S THE ONE. OKAY. SO, UH, ANY OTHER ITEMS? OKAY, THEN CAN I HAVE A MOTION FOR A THROUGH J I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CONSENT ITEMS THREE A THROUGH THREE J SECOND. OKAY, ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NO. OKAY. SO WE'RE UNANIMOUS FOR A THROUGH J. UM, SO [3.k. AB 3105 Approval of a Contract Change Order with Banicki Construction, Inc for the Pedestrian Crossing at Oak Creek Project in the amount of $201,938. ] FOR ITEM K, WHO WAS IT THAT WANTED A COUPLE OF YOU? UH, COUNCIL FURMAN, YOU WANTED ITEM K POLL. CAN YOU ARTICULATE WHAT THAT IS AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THAT? THANK YOU MAYOR. APPRECIATE THAT. I JUST WANTED, UH, THIS, THIS IS OBVIOUSLY THE UNDERPASS AT AT LOCK. IT'S AN IMPORTANT PROJECT FOR OUR COMMUNITY. IT'S AN EXPENSIVE PROJECT AND IT'S A FAIRLY HIGH DOLLAR, UH, CHANGE ORDER. AND SO I, UH, JUST PHILOSOPHICALLY WANT TO, HE HAVE A PUBLIC DISCUSSION WHEN WE HAVE EXPENDITURES LIKE THAT. OKAY. THANK. WELL THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, WE HAVE KURT AND TEAM. THANK YOU MAYOR. COUNCIL, I DO YOU WANT TO SPECIFICALLY, UM, ASK, I'M WILLING TO HAVE YOU GUYS START. OKAY. [00:10:02] OKAY. UH, DOWN IN FRONT OF ME. OKAY. MAYOR COUNSEL, THANK YOU FOR, UM, ALLOWING ME TO BE HERE TONIGHT TO BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THIS, UH, CHANGE ORDER TO YOU. THIS IS A CHANGE ORDER FOR ING CONSTRUCTION RELATED TO OUR STATE ROUTE 89, A PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AT OAK CREEK. THIS CHANGE ORDER ENTAILS A NUMBER OF COMPONENTS. UH, I'LL JUST START, I GUESS WITH, UH, NUMBER ONE. THE FIRST, UH, CHANGE ORDER ON THIS PACKAGE HAS TO DO WITH THE VISIONARY LIGHTING PACKAGE CHANGE THAT WAS INSTITUTED AS PART OF THIS CHANGE ORDER HAS TO DO WITH LED LIGHTING THAT IS COMPLIANT WITH OUR CURRENT LIGHTING STANDARD. THAT WASN'T PART OF THE SPECIFICATIONS ORIGINALLY. THE COMPONENT TWO HAS TO DO WITH UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC SERVICE CONDUIT VIA DIRECTIONAL DRILLING. THIS IS, UH, A DIRECTIONAL DRILLING CONDU, UH, COMPONENT THAT HAS TO DO WITH THE CONDUIT RUN AND THE CONDUCTOR FOR ESTABLISHING THE ELECTRIC SUPPLY ON THE PROJECT. UH, THE INITIAL THOUGHTS ON WHERE THIS WAS AND WHERE WE WERE COMING FROM DIFFERED FROM ULTIMATELY WHAT A PS WAS REQUIRING FOR US. SO THIS WAS A CHANGE ORDER IN TERMS OF LENGTH, UM, OF THE CONDUIT AND, AND CONDUCTOR ITSELF. UH, CHANGE ORDER COMPONENT NUMBER THREE HAS TO DO WITH THE CONCRETE WALL AND BARRIER COLOR. ORIGINALLY WE HAD A, JUST A RAW CONCRETE COLOR. UH, VISUALLY IT DIDN'T REALLY MATCH UP VERY WELL FROM THE STEAM STREAM SIDE OF THINGS. SO WE ADDED A COMPONENT COLOR THAT MATCHED IN WITH THE COLOR THAT WAS FOR THE ABUTMENT. UH, UNDERNEATH THE BRIDGE, I THINK IT BLENDS MUCH BETTER. IT WAS A COST ADDITION TO THE PROJECT, THOUGH. THE, UH, NEXT COMPONENT FOR ADDITIONAL RETAINING CURB AND HANDRAIL. THIS HAD TO DO WITH SOME ADDITIONAL HANDRAIL ON THE, THE NORTH SIDE OF THE PROJECT THAT WAS ABUTTING UP AGAINST THE PARKING LOT FOR THE CENTER FOR NEW AGE. WE FELL SLIGHTLY SHORT WITH THAT UNDER THE PLANS AND UH, THE BEST WAY TO HANDLE THAT WAS TO EXTEND THAT, UM, BARRIER CURBING UP AND ADDITIONAL 15 FEET TO COVER THAT, UM, IMBALANCE, SO TO SPEAK WITH RESPECT TO THAT PARKING AREA AND KEEP, KEEP A HARD BARRIER BETWEEN THE PEDESTRIAN AREA AND THE PARKING AREA. COMPONENT FIVE HAD TO DO WITH THE, OR I'M SORRY, WE COVERED THAT. THE, UM, NO COMPONENT FIVE HAD TO DO WITH THE ADDITIONAL BARRIER AND HAND RAILING THAT WAS ROUGHLY 15 FEET. UM, COMPONENT SIX HAD TO DO WITH A FULL DEPTH SAW CUT IN SEAL. UH, ORIGINALLY WE WERE UTILIZING AN EXPANSION JOINT TYPE MATERIAL ALONG THE INTERFACE BETWEEN THE PATHWAY AND THE RETAINING WALL TWO SYSTEM AND A COUPLE OTHER AREAS, AREAS THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT IN ORDER TO RESOLVE THE, UM, AND ISOLATE THE TWO DIFFERENT SYSTEMS, CONCRETE RETAINING WALL VERSUS CONCRETE PATHWAY, UH, WE NEEDED SOME SORT OF, UH, SAW CUTTING SO THAT THE EXPANSION AND CONTRACTION DIDN'T DISTURB OR CRACK UP THE PATHWAY ITSELF. SO, UH, THAT ACTUALLY RESULTS FROM A ROUGH COBBLE SERVICE. WE POURED UP AGAINST THAT WITH A PATHWAY. AND BECAUSE THE TWO SYSTEMS HAVE DIFFERENT EXPANSION AND CONTRACTION, UM, THE ONE THAT WOULD OVERTAKE THE OTHER WOULD BE THE, THE RETAINING WALL. TWO, THE SUFFERING COMPONENT WOULD BE THE PATHWAY ITSELF. SO TO AVOID THAT CRACK, PREMATURE CRACK IN THAT PATHWAY, WE DID AN ISOLATION SI HUT TO SEPARATE THOSE TWO SYSTEMS. ANDY HAD SOMETHING HE'D LIKE TO, HOLD ON ONE SECOND. ANDY, CAN I JUST INTERJECT FOR JUST A SECOND? I JUST WANNA GIVE A HIGH LEVEL IDEA OF THESE CHANGES WERE NECESSARY ACCORDING TO STAFF, THESE CHANGES WERE NOT ERRORS CONTRIBUTED TO OUR DESIGN CONSULTANT AND THE COSTS, UM, WERE NEGOTIATED. SO THESE, THESE COSTS WERE SCRUTINIZED BY STAFF. WE WENT OVER THEM WITH THE, UH, CONTRACTOR BACK AND FORTH. THIS WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WE JUST QUICKLY SAID WE'RE GONNA PAY. UM, BUT IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC DETAILS THAT YOU'D LIKE TO GO INTO TO ON THESE ITEMS, [00:15:01] WE'D BE HAPPY TO GO THROUGH THAT WITH YOU. YEAH, THANK YOU. THANK YOU ANDY. AND, AND YOU WENT THROUGH THE MAJOR DRIVERS OF IT AS WELL. AND OF THOSE, THE PS THE UNDERGROUND ELECTRICAL SERVICE WAS ONE WHERE I SUPPOSE WE JUST COULDN'T GET THAT INFORMATION BEFOREHAND FROM AP PS TO REALLY DECIDE DURING THE DESIGN PHASE. AND THE REST OF 'EM SOUND LIKE THEY WERE KIND OF YOU. YOU'LL LEARN AS YOU DO THINGS AND YOU CAN'T SPEC AT A HUNDRED PERCENT ALL THE TIME. SO I, I SEE THAT. MIGHT YOU ALSO, UH, GIVE US AN UPDATE ON THE PROJECT AT THIS POINT AS WELL? SURE. SO WE, WE ARE EXPERIENCING SOME DELAY HONESTLY WITH, WITH THE PROJECT. UH, WE ARE PUSHING THE CONTRACTOR TO PUSH ON SOME OF THE SUBS. WE HAVE A HARD FAST DAY OF SEPTEMBER 6TH THAT WE ARE HOLDING THE CONTRACTOR TO. UM, I'M NOT SURE IF HE'LL HE WILL MAKE THOSE DATES, BUT THERE ARE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES ASSOCIATED WITH NOT MAKING THAT DATE. UM, BUT RIGHT NOW THE CONTRACTOR, UM, HAS GOT MOST OF THE BARRICADE RAILING IN PLACE. I SEE AS OF TODAY THERE ARE A COUPLE OF AREAS OUTSTANDING. HE'S WORKING ON THE NORTH SIDE. UH, IN TERMS OF THE BARRICADE WHEELING, HE STILL NEEDS TO COMPLETE THE HAND RAILING ON THAT SIDE. WE'RE HOPING TO HAVE MOST OF THE A DA NECESSARY STUFF IN PLACE AND PERHAPS ALLOWING US TO UTILIZE A SIDEWALK ON SEPTEMBER 4TH. UH, THERE IS SOME PAINTING THAT NEEDS, STILL NEEDS TO HAPPEN ON THE PROJECT. AND OF COURSE, UM, WHEN OTHER MATTER IS, UM, SOME OF THAT DIRECTIONAL DRILLING TO GET OUR ELECTRICAL SERVICE, UH, TO PUT IN PLACE TO THAT TRANSFORMER AND GET OUR METER SET AND ROUTE OUR ELECTRICAL IN THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT. SO WE HAVE LIGHTING, ET CETERA FOR THE PROJECT. CAN I, CAN I INTERJECT? SO WE EXPECT THE PROJECT TO BE OPERATIONAL BY THE WEEKEND OF LABOR DAY AND FINAL COMPLETION SOON THEREAFTER, A WEEK OR TWO AFTERWARDS. OKAY, SO THE WEEKEND BE THE WEEKEND BEFORE LABOR DAY, THE WEEKEND OF, SO, OH, YOU KNOW, WELL EVERY DAY BEING MONDAY. YEAH. BEING MONDAY, THAT'S CORRECT. YES. THAT'S ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE. MARY COUNCIL WILLIAMSON, YOU HAVE SOMETHING? I HAVE NOTHING. I WAS JUST GOING TO MAKE A MOTION WHEN YOU WERE READY. WELL, I JUST WANNA SEE IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. NO, I SAID I HAVE NOTHING. ANYTHING ELSE? COUNCIL DUNN. SO ON THE WEEKEND OF LABOR DAY, WE'RE GOING TO OPEN THE UNDERPASS, BUT WE WILL OR WILL NOT HAVE LIGHTING. I'M UNSURE OF WHETHER WE WILL HAVE LIGHTING AT THAT TIME. I'M HOPING, UH, COUNCILMAN DUNN THAT WE DO. BUT, UM, IF WE DON'T, ARE WE GOING TO CLOSE THE PEDESTRIAN PARK AT NIGHT SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE PEOPLE TRYING TO GO DOWN THERE IN THE DARK? CORRECT. YES. SO, SO ANOTHER, ANOTHER UPDATE HERE. WE'RE PREPARING RIGHT NOW A TEST PLAN TO DO SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID 4TH OF JULY WEEKEND, WHERE WE WILL BE RUNNING TRAFFIC CONTROLLED TESTING, UM, OPEN THE UNDER CROSSING, YOU KNOW, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE DID BEFORE. BUT YES, WHILE THAT MAY BE OPEN DURING THE TESTING PROCESS, IF WE DON'T HAVE THE LIGHTING IN PLACE, IT WILL BE CLOSED AGAIN DURING THE NINE HOURS. THANK YOU. MM-HMM. COUNSEL, THE RESULTS OF THOSE TESTS WILL COME TO US IN A NEXT SIM UPDATE. YES. YES. YEAH. LIKELY BEFORE THEN WE WERE HOPING TO GET THOSE BEFORE YOU. YEAH, COUNSELOR. OKAY. BECAUSE IT ACTUALLY WAS SOMETHING I WAS GONNA ASK SINCE THIS IS AGENDAS, I THINK I CAN BRING THIS UP NOW, BUT WHEN WE GOT TO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS, I WAS GONNA REQUEST IT. WE HAVE A VERY SPECIFIC PRESENTATION ON THAT TEST AND THOSE NUMBERS, UM, FOR DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE ACT GRADE CROSSING. SO WHAT IS, WHAT IS THE SOONEST THAT WE COULD EXPECT TO HAVE THAT DO YOU THINK IN, IN OCTOBER? THAT'LL BE OUR NEXT SIM UPDATE AND THAT'LL BE THE FOCUS OF THAT UPDATE. OKAY. THANK YOU PETE, ANYTHING ELSE? ARE YOU GOOD? I'M GOOD. OKAY. I'M GONNA MAKE THE MOTION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION. OKAY. YOU GOT IT. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONTRACT CHANGE ORDER NUMBER NINE WITH JAY VANKE CONSTRUCTION IN THE APP AMOUNT OF 201,938. I'D LIKE TO SECOND THAT. OKAY. UH, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? WE ARE UNANIMOUS. OKAY. THANK YOU. APPOINTMENTS ITEM FOUR, WE, WE HAVE BOB, KURT, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. OKAY. APPOINTMENTS, WE HAVE NONE. SUMMARY [ 5. SUMMARY OF CURRENT EVENTS BY MAYOR/COUNCILORS/CITY MANAGER & COUNCIL ASSIGNMENTS] OF CURRENT EVENTS BY MYSELF, THE COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER OR STAFF, ANYTHING FROM HERE? I HAVE SOMETHING THAT YOU'RE ALL GONNA BE EXCITED ABOUT. I'VE BEEN KEEPING UNDER WRAPS. I HEARD ABOUT YESTERDAY. SO YOU ALL KNOW ALEX, UH, SCHLUTER? MM-HMM. HE'S OUR, UH, HE WAS OUR INTERIM OR ACTING DISTRICT RANGER. HE HAS NOW BEEN PROMOTED TO THE POSITION. IT JUST CAME ABOUT JUST THE OTHER DAY AND I HEARD ABOUT IT IN CLARKDALE AT A MEETING AND I COULDN'T BE HAPPIER. I THINK WE ARE, WE'RE IN GOOD HANDS AGAIN. SO WAS VERY EXCITED TO HEAR THAT. I THOUGHT [00:20:01] I'D PASS THAT ALONG. OKAY. UH, ANYTHING ELSE? VICE MAYOR. I WENT ON A, A, UH, MEALS ON WHEELS RUN A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO AND THEY'RE VERY INTERESTED IN HAVING COUNSELORS, UH, GO OUT WITH THE DELIVERY FOLKS AND IT WAS VERY EYEOPENING. UH, THE, AND WE'RE GONNA TALK LATER ON THE AGENDA ABOUT SOME, UH, IMPROVE PROPERTY IMPROVEMENTS, BUT IT WAS, IT WAS VERY INTERESTING TO SEE A DIFFERENT SIDE OF SEDONA AND ONE IN WHICH PEOPLE, THIS IS WONDERFUL SERVICE FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE, WHO HAVE A DIFFICULTY IN, IN MAKING THEIR OWN MEALS, UH, AND SOME OF THEIR PROPERTIES ARE REALLY IN NEED OF REPAIR. UH, AND SO I I REALLY ENCOURAGE EVERYONE ON COUNCIL IF YOU CAN, TO GO OUT AND TO DO THIS BECAUSE I THINK IT WILL BE ENLIGHTENING. VERY MUCH SO. YOU'LL HEAR SOME STORIES FROM SOME OF THOSE RECIPIENTS THAT ARE JUST AMAZING, ESPECIALLY SOME OF THE HISTORY OF OUR CITY. SO, UM, OKAY. THANK YOU VICE MAYOR. ALRIGHT, WE'LL GO TO [ 6. PUBLIC FORUM] PUBLIC FORUM. I HAVE ONE CARD FOR PUBLIC FORUM. THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO, UH, TAKE THREE MINUTES AND SHARE SOME ISSUES THAT AREN'T, THAT'S NOT ON OUR AGENDA. IF ANYBODY HASN'T FILLED OUT A CARD AND IS INTERESTED, PLEASE DO SO. UH, RIGHT AWAY. UH, WE HAVE ONE CARD HERE FROM, UH, UH, JULIE RICHARD. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR JALO, VICE MAYOR PLU AND MEMBERS OF THE SEDONA CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS JULIE RICHARD. I'M THE CEO OF SEDONA ART CENTER AND I LIVE IN COVILLE. I'M HERE TO PROVIDE YOU WITH A QUICK UPDATE ON THE STATUS OF THE MURALS ON THE FRONT OF OUR BUILDING. AS A BRIEF REMINDER, THE 1999 MURALS FORMALLY ON THE FRONT OF OUR GALLERY BUILDING WERE MISTAKENLY COVERED UP DURING OUR GALLERY 9 28 PROGRAM EARLIER THIS SUMMER. GALLERY 9 28 IS A PROGRAM FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS TO GET PAID AND EARN COLLEGE CREDITS WHILE WORKING WITH A MASTER ARTIST TO COMPLETE A WORK OF PUBLIC ART . THIS FOUR WEEK PROGRAM PROVIDES STUDENTS WITH A PATHWAY TO POTENTIALLY BECOMING A PROFESSIONAL ARTIST. WE'VE MET WITH CITY STAFF TWICE ABOUT THIS ISSUE. FOLLOWING THE FIRST MEETING, WE CONTACTED SEVERAL ART RESTORERS AND HEARD BACK FROM ONLY ONE. SHE DID A TEST ON THE MURAL TO SEE IF IT COULD BE RESTORED, AND WE ARE WAITING TO HEAR BACK FROM HER WITH THE PRICE. WE MET AGAIN LAST WEEK TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE AND DISCUSS NEXT STEPS. THAT IS WITH CITY STAFF. UM, WE ARE GIVEN ADDITIONAL CONTACT INFORMATION ON TWO OTHER ART RESTORES FROM TUCSON. WE'VE CONTACTED THEM IN OUR AWAITING RESPONSES. ONCE WE GET THEIR ASSESSMENTS, WE'LL THEN GET BACK TOGETHER WITH THE CITY MANAGER AND DETERMINE NEXT STEPS. WE HOPE TO RESOLVE THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE WITH A SOLUTION AGREEABLE TO EVERYONE INVOLVED. I ALSO WANNA LET YOU KNOW THAT WE WERE RECENTLY AWARDED A LARGE GRANT TO CREATE AN ENTREPRENEURIAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR ARTISTS AT THIS PROGRAM WILL GUIDE EMERGING ARTISTS THROUGH THE STEPS NEEDED TO, UM, SUCCEED AS PROFESSIONALS FROM STRATEGIC PLANNING TO MARKETING, TO SOCIAL MEDIA, TO FINANCIAL LITERACY AND MORE. AND WE'RE GONNA BE DEVELOPING THIS, THE PARTICULARS OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS AND STAY TUNED FOR MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THAT. UM, IN THE MEANTIME, I'D LIKE TO IN, UH, INVITE YOU ALL TO OUR NEXT OPENING, WHICH WILL BE ON SEPTEMBER 6TH, UM, WITH OUR MYRNA HARRISON EXHIBIT IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE SEDONA HERITAGE MUSEUM. I HOPE TO SEE YOU THERE AND, UH, THANK YOU. AND FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME DIRECTLY IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ISSUE OR ANY OTHER ISSUES. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU JULIE. OKAY. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? NO. OKAY. WE'LL CLOSE OUT THE PUBLIC COMMENT PORTION. UM, BEFORE WE GO TO REGULAR BUSINESS, I WANT TO JUST MENTION TO, TO THE COUNCIL A COUPLE OF THINGS. UH, OUR MEETINGS WE ALL KNOW HAVE BEEN RATHER RUNNING LONG, SO I'M GOING TO INSTITUTE A HARD STOP AT 10 O'CLOCK. WHATEVER WE DON'T COMPLETE BY, HOPEFULLY WE CAN GET DONE BEFORE THAT. BUT IF WE CAN'T GET SOMETHING DONE, EVERYTHING DONE BEFORE, UH, 10 O'CLOCK, UM, WE'LL TRY TO FINISH OUT THAT ONE TOPIC AND THEN ANYTHING REMAINDER WILL GO TILL TOMORROW. OKAY. I'M ALSO GOING TO ASK THE COUNCIL TO PLEASE, UH, IN QUESTIONS OF ANY TYPE. PLEASE TRY TO BE SHORT AND SWEET AND TRY NOT TO, UH, CAUSE US TO HAVE TO GO, UH, GO OVER TO TOMORROW WITH THE AGENDA. SO I'M JUST GONNA ASK, IT'S HARD TO DO THAT. WE ALL HAVE SOME VERY IMPORTANT QUESTIONS TO ASK, BUT IF WE CAN'T DO THAT, IT WOULD BE APPRECIATED ALSO TO, I'M GOING TO AMEND THE AGENDA AND MOVE ITEM E, WHICH IS THE SMALL GRANT TO ITEM [00:25:01] B. THAT WILL BE AFTER THE AB HOTEL. SO, UH, I DON'T WANNA HOLD UP THE ANTE. THEY HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE, BUT, UM, THIS IS JUST HOW IT'S GONNA WORK TODAY. SO THAT BEING SAID, WE WILL START WITH [8.a. AB 3089 Public Hearing/possible action regarding a request for the Sedona City Council to take administrative action to extend or remove the schedule for development or take legislative action to cause the property to revert to its former zoning classifications. The property is currently zoned PD (Planned Development) - The Preserve at Oak Creek Condominiums and is located on both sides of N State Route 89A in the area generally surrounding the Owenby Way Roundabout. APN 401- 08-002A; 401-08-006A; 401-09-001A; 401-09-001B; 401-09-001C; 401-13-059; 401- 14-015; 401-14-016; 401-14-017; 401-14-064; 401-14-065; 401-14-075A; 401-14-163; 401-14-164. Case Number: PZ24-00008 (ZC) Applicant: Dutchman’s Cove, LLC Owner: Axys Capital Total Return Fund, LLC. ] ITEM A AB 30 89 PUBLIC HEARING POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A REQUEST FOR THE SEDONA CITY COUNCIL TO TAKE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION TO EXTEND OR REMOVE THE SCHEDULE DEVELOPMENT OR TAKE LEGISLATIVE ACTION TO CAUSE THE PROPERTY TO REVERT TO ITS FORMER ZONING CLASSIFICATION. THIS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED PLAN DEVELOPMENT TO PRESERVE AT OAK CREEK CONDOMINIUMS AND IS LOCATED ON BOTH SIDES OF 89 A IN THE AREA GENERALLY SURROUNDING OWENS B WAY ROUNDABOUT. OKAY. AND THE APPLICANT IS DUTCHMAN COVE, LLC. AND, UH, SORRY, I DON'T EVEN KNOW HOW TO SAY THIS. UH, AXIS, UH, ACCESS. ACCESS, OKAY. UH, CAPITAL TOTAL RETURN FUND. SO, HI THERE. UH, CARRIE, WILL YOU BE STARTING THE PRESENTATION? I WILL HAVE A BRIEF, UM, PRESENTATION THAT, UM, JOANNE IS JUST PULLING UP RIGHT NOW, AND THEN WE'LL TURN IT OVER TO, UM, THE APPLICANT. SORRY, THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM WHAT I HAVE. SORRY. SO GOOD, GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS. UM, THERE WAS, UH, MOST OF THE INFORMATION THAT I WOULD HAVE TO SHARE WAS IN THE AGENDA BILL. UM, SO I WAS ASKED JUST TO GIVE A BRIEF HISTORY, AN OVERVIEW OF THE, WELL, I GUESS AN OVERVIEW OF THE HISTORY OF THIS PARCEL AND HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE RIGHT NOW BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO THE APPLICANT. UM, SO THIS IS JUST GOING TO BE ESSENTIALLY BE A TIMELINE. UM, THIS PROPERTY, ORIGINALLY IN 1994 HAD A COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT THAT RE-DESIGNATED THE PROPERTY FROM A MULTIFAMILY DESIGNATION TO COMMERCIAL LODGING AND OPEN SPACE. AND THAT APPLICATION WAS APPROVED IN 1994. SUB TO THAT, THE APPLIC, THERE WAS AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO REZONE THE ENTIRE PROPERTY TO PLAN DEVELOPMENT. UM, THAT INCLUDED LODGING, RETAIL OFFICE, RESTAURANT, AND A PUBLIC PARK. AND I BELIEVE THERE ARE DETAILS ABOUT NUMBERS AND ALL OF THAT IN YOUR AGENDA BILL IN THE ATTACHMENTS. SO I'M NOT GONNA GO INTO THAT. BUT THIS ORIGINAL 19 95, 19 96 APPLICATION WAS WITHDRAWN. AND SO THEN WE JUMPED FORWARD A COUPLE YEARS TO 1998 WHEN ANOTHER ZONE CHANGE APPLICATION TO REZONE THE PROPERTY TO A DIFFERENT PD IN A PLAN DEVELOPMENT IS A SITE SPECIFIC ZONING DISTRICT. UM, SO THE 1998 PD INCLUDED TIMESHARES, APARTMENTS, RETAIL RESTAURANT, OUTDOOR DINING, CLUBHOUSE, PARKING AMPHITHEATER, AND A PUBLIC PARK. AND THAT APPLICATION WAS APPROVED. AND THEN WITH THAT ZONING APPLICATION BEING APPROVED, THERE WAS A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE FIRST PHASE OF THAT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, WHICH INCLUDED A PORTION OF THE TIMESHARES RETAIL RESTAURANT AND THE PARKING, THAT APPLICATION WAS APPROVED AND BUILDING PERMITS WERE APPROVED AS WELL. BUT THOSE BUILDING PERMITS EXPIRED BEFORE ANY CONSTRUCTION COULD BEGIN. SO THEN WE JUMPED FORWARD ANOTHER FEW YEARS TO 2004 WHERE THERE WAS ANOTHER APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO AMEND THAT PD. SO WE WENT FROM THE COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS TO A PD THAT PD DIDN'T GET BUILT. SO THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THAT PD. UM, AND AGAIN, THAT PD INCLUDED TIMESHARES RESORT AMENITIES, AFFORDABLE HOUSING, A SPA, PARKING STRUCTURES, AND A BOTANICAL RESERVE. THAT APPLICATION WAS APPROVED IN 2005 WITH BUILDING PERMITS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED WITHIN TWO YEARS. SO IF YOU ADD TWO TO 2005, YOU GET TO 2007, BEFORE THAT APPLICATION WAS ABLE TO BUILD, BUILDING PERMITS WERE NEVER ISSUED. BUT BEFORE IT EXPIRED, THE PROPERTY OWNER CAME IN AND SUBMITTED TO AMEND THAT PD IN 2006. AND, AND ESSENTIALLY THEY CONVERTED THE TIMESHARES TO CONDOMINIUMS AND INCREASED THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I THINK IT WAS FROM SIX UNITS TO 12 UNITS. AND AS PART OF THAT, BECAUSE BACK IN 1994, THERE HAD BEEN THE COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT TO GO TO A COMMERCIAL LODGING DESIGNATION IN ORDER TO APPROVE, BE ABLE TO APPROVE THE PD AMENDMENT ZONE CHANGE REQUEST TO GO FROM TIMESHARES TO CONDOMINIUMS. THAT APPLICATION INCLUDED A COMMUNITY PLAN AMENDMENT TO GO FROM THE COMMERCIAL LODGING [00:30:01] DESIGNATION TO A MULTI-FAMILY DESIGNATION. UM, SO THAT APPLICATION WAS APPROVED IN 2006. UM, AGAIN, WITH THAT TWO YEAR REQUIREMENT FOR BUILDING PERMITS TO BE ISSUED 2008, THERE WAS AN EXTENSION REQUEST THAT WAS APPROVED AND CONSIDERED WITH A NEW EXPIRATION DATE OF MARCH 14TH, 2010. AND THE PROPERTY IS STILL VACANT. SO THAT PRO PROJECT NEVER GOT BUILT. THERE WAS NEVER ANY PROGRESS AFTER THAT POINT. AND SO THIS APPLICATION THAT IS BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS TO ADDRESS THIS SITUATION, THE VARIOUS OPTIONS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO YOU. WERE IN YOUR AGENDA, BILL, UM, AND MYSELF, KURT, OUR CITY ATTORNEY, AND JUST A COUPLE OTHER PEOPLE AROUND TO ANSWER QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY. AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY FOR RIGHT NOW BEFORE, BUT I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNSEL BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO THE APPLICANT. WE GOOD THIS SIDE? WE ALL GOOD? OKAY. I THINK WE'RE GOOD WITH THE COUNSEL. MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, MY NAME IS STEVEN POLK, I'M WITH BOYLE PETRI KLEIN WINTON, STALLINGS 1 25 NORTH GRANITE STREET, PRESCOTT, ARIZONA. UH, THANK YOU FOR HAVING US TODAY. THE FIRST THING I'LL SAY IS THE ACAPELLA GROUP WE HAD WAS PERFECTLY APPROPRIATE BECAUSE WHAT WE ARE DEFINITELY NOT DOING IS TIMESHARES . UH, FIRST SLIDE PLEASE. HOW TO USE THIS COMPUTER. I MIGHT NEED, JOANNE, CAN YOU SHOW ME HOW TO FLIP FORWARD REAL QUICK? IS THERE A SPECIAL WAY TO DO THAT? OKAY. OKAY. AND IF I COULD JUST ASK EVERYBODY, I MEAN, STEVEN, YOU ALREADY DID IT, BUT START WITH YOUR NAME BECAUSE YOU KNOW THE PUBLIC WHO WATCHES US, THEY KNOW PRETTY MUCH WHO WE ARE AND OUR STAFF, BUT FOR YOU, IT WOULD BE SOMETHING UNIQUE, JEN. SO BY ALL MEANS, YOU'RE GONNA BE THE, UH, SPEAKER FOR EVERYBODY. JENNIFER MAY, UH, PRINCIPAL OMAR OF DUTCHMAN'S CO OF LLC. OKAY, THANK YOU MR. MAYOR. THIS IS STEVEN POLK, AGAIN, BOYLE PETRICH LAW FIRM. FIRST MEET OUR TEAM. THE APPLICANT IS DUTCHMAN'S COVE, LLC, THAT'S NAMED AFTER DUTCHMAN'S HOLE, WHICH IS THE SWIMMING HOLE LOCATED ON THIS PROPERTY. THE PRINCIPLES ARE MIKE STEVENSON, WHOM YOU KNOW AS THE, UH, HE DEVELOPED THE MARIOSA RESTAURANT IN, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE AWARD-WINNING CHEF LISA DAHL AND ALSO, UH, DEVELOPED AMBI A LANDSCAPE HOTEL. UH, THE OTHER APPLICANTS ARE HIS TWO DAUGHTERS, JENNIFER MAY AND COLLEEN TIEBREAK, WHO YOU MAY KNOW AS THE TWO SISTER BOSSES . AND THEY ARE THE, CERTAINLY THE, THE BRAINS AND BEAUTY BEHIND MAKING AMBI BEYONCE. WHAT IT IS, UH, YOU HAVE ME WITH BOYLE PETRICH LAW FIRM, AND THEN ALSO WE HAVE NICHOLAS J. WOOD WITH SNELLEN WILMER. HE IS A VERY EXPERIENCED LAND USE ATTORNEY, UH, WITH THE MOST PRESTIGIOUS LAW FIRM IN ARIZONA. YOU MAY BE FAMILIAR WITH HIM. HE REPRESENTS THE, UH, THE OAK CREEK HERITAGE LODGE. HE WAS IN FRONT OF YOU NOT TOO LONG AGO. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO YOU, HERE'S AN OVERVIEW OF OF WHERE THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED RELATIVE TO OTHER HOTEL AND LODGING USES IN THE AREA. UH, THE, THE BLACK PARCELS ARE THE SIX PARCELS THAT ARE BEING PURCHASED BY DUTCHMAN'S COVE AS PART OF THIS. AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S COMPLETELY SURROUNDED. WE HAVE LOMA TO THE NORTH AND THEN ARROYO ROBLE, UH, AMARA ORCHARDS IN BERGH AND CEDARS RESORT ALL ON THE EAST OF 89. A UH, SO THIS IS SQUARELY, SQUARELY SURROUNDED BY LODGING. IT'S, UH, CERTAINLY A LODGING AREA. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. AND SO I, I THINK THE FIRST QUESTION PROBABLY COUNCIL AND AND THE CITIZENS WANT TO KNOW IS WHY ARE WE DOING A ZONING REVERSION? THAT'S NOT TYPICALLY WHAT YOU WOULD SEE, RIGHT? YOU WOULD SEE A ZONING, A ZONING CHANGE APPLICATION, AND THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE. AND IT'S BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE EXPIRED IN 2010 THAT ALL THREE OF THOSE PRIOR PROJECTS WERE APPROVED CONDITIONED UPON COMPLETING THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE. AND SO WHEN THE, WHEN THE SCHEDULE EXPIRED IN 2010, ARIZONA STATE LAW SAYS THAT COUNSEL IS SUPPOSED TO SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKE A DECISION TO EITHER EXTEND OR REVERT THE ZONING. AND SO REALLY THE, IN AN IDEAL WORLD, THAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED BACK IN 2010. IT DIDN'T. BUT, BUT WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE LAW SAYS TO DO WHEN [00:35:01] THIS EXPIRES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UH, THE FIRST THING I REALLY WANT TO POINT OUT TO YOU HERE IS THAT THE CITY CODE THAT WAS IN EFFECT IN 2008 WHEN THE TIME EXTENSION WAS GRANTED. AND IN 2010 WHEN THE TIME EXTENSION EXPIRED, UH, VERY SPECIFICALLY SAYS YOU CANNOT GRANT A SECOND EXTENSION. SO THAT WAS THE LDC 400 POINT 11. A CONDITIONAL REZONING MAY BE EXTENDED ONLY ONE TIME FOR AN ADDITIONAL PRESCRIBED TIME PERIOD. AND SO THAT'S, IF, IF THIS HAD COME BACK TO YOU IN 2010, LIKE IT SHOULD HAVE, COUNSEL WOULD NOT HAVE HAD A CHOICE. THEY WOULD'VE HAD TO HAVE REVERT THE ZONING AT THAT TIME OR APPROVED SOME OTHER SORT OF PLAN DEVELOPMENT. THE CODE AT THE TIME DID NOT ALLOW A SECOND EXTENSION. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UH, REAL BRIEFLY ON ON THE HISTORY, KERRY WENT OVER IT WITH YOU. UH, SO WE HAVE THE, THE CITY WAS ACTUALLY INCORPORATED IN 1988. SO THIS PROPERTY CAME IN WITH, UH, IS COMMERCIAL GENERAL 10,000 SQUARE FOOT MINIMUMS IN 1995, UH, UH, THE PROPERTY WAS C ONE. UH, IT WAS NOT LIMITED TO SIX LODGING UNITS PER PARCEL. SO THAT WAS LODGING WAS REALLY CONTROLLED BY JUST MAXIMUM BLOCK COVERAGE ON THE PARCELS. UH, THEN IN, IN, UH, DECEMBER OF 1997 WAS WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE CLIFFS, WHICH IS A, A TIMESHARES PROJECT, WAS, WAS APPROVED. AND THEN IN 2005, IT WAS CONVERTED TO THE PRESERVE TIMESHARES. AND THEN IN 2006, THE PRESERVE CONDOS. AND, AND SO THE NEXT THING I REALLY WANNA POINT OUT FOR YOU IS THAT THE, THE FORMER ZONING CLASSIFICATION AS OF WHEN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WAS APPROVED IS C ONE NOT RESTRICTED TO SIX LODGING UNITS. AND SO, I, I REALLY FIRMLY BELIEVE IT, IT REALLY SHOULD REVERT TO C ONE UNRESTRICTED. AND, AND REALLY THAT WOULD JUST BE, UH, UH, LODGING UNITS WOULD BE RESTRICTED BY LOT COVERAGE. UH, AND THE OTHER THING I DON'T HAVE ON THIS TIMELINE IS, IS WHY, YOU KNOW, WHAT HAPPENED? WHY DID THE PROPERTY GO VACANT? AND THAT'S THE TIME EXTENSION WAS GRANTED TO THE DEVELOPER SCOTT COLE IN 2008. AND THEN THAT THE PROPERTY CRASH HIT. AND, UM, YOU KNOW, TRAGICALLY SCOTT COLE COMMITTED SUICIDE. AND SO THAT HAPPENED JUST ONE MONTH AFTER THAT TIME EXTENSION WAS GRANTED. AND, AND THAT'S WHY THE PROPERTY HAS, HAS GONE VACANT FOR SO MANY YEARS AFTER THAT. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UH, UH, NOW THE STEVENSON FAMILY, THEY HAVE A FAMILY HISTORY WITH THIS PROPERTY. AND I, SO I WANNA SHARE THAT WITH YOU BRIEFLY. IN 1911, THE FATHER OF MIKE STEVENSON, HIS NAME IS JOHN STEVENSON, AND THE FAMILY MOVED TO ARIZONA IN 1966, JOHN PURCHASED THIS EXACT PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY. AND ON IT, HE CONSTRUCTED THE DUTCHMAN'S, THE DUTCHMAN'S COVE RESTAURANT. AND SO YOU SEE SOME HISTORICAL PHOTOS OVER HERE. UH, THAT'S ACTUALLY THE, A PICTURE OF THE DUTCHMAN'S COVE RESTAURANT. AND, AND THEN DOWN BELOW IS ACTUALLY THE, UH, THE STEVENSON LADIES. AND, AND A PICTURE ON THE LEFT IS KATHY STEVENSON, WHO IS HERE TONIGHT. AND, AND, UH, SHE WAS ACTUALLY PREGNANT WITH, UH, UH, WITH JENNIFER AT THIS TIME. NEXT, NEXT PICTURE, NEXT SLIDE. UH, UH, THEN IN 1969, MIKE STEVENSON AND HIS FAMILY, UH, HE MOVED HIS, HIS WIFE AND A SIX MONTH OLD COLLEEN, TO THE PROPERTY. THEY, THEY'RE LIVING ON A, A TRAILER ON THIS PROPERTY. AND, AND YOU CAN SEE THE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE RIGHT HERE. IT SAYS DISNEYLAND COOK JOINS DUTCHMAN'S COVE. UH, 'CAUSE MIKE HAD ACTUALLY COOKED AND DEVELOPED CULINARY SKILLS AT THE DISNEYLAND. AND THEN HE MOVED OUT HERE TO WORK AT THE FAMILY RESTAURANT. AND THEN ONE YEAR AFTER THEY MOVED HERE, JENNIFER WAS BORN, SHE WAS BORN AT VERDE VALLEY MEDICAL CENTER. AND THEN ON DAY ONE, YOU KNOW, SHE COMES HOME, SHE'S LIVING ON THIS PROPERTY. UH, SO THAT'S, I, AND THIS IS MY LAST SLIDE HERE. SO I HAVE SHARED THE FAMILY HISTORY WITH YOU TODAY BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY, THIS PROPERTY IS SPECIAL TO THE STEVENSONS, AND THIS COMMUNITY IS SPECIAL TO THE STEVENSONS. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE MOST ICONIC RESTAURANT IN SEDONA, YOU THINK MARIOSA, THAT'S THE STEVENSON'S. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE MOST ICONIC HOTEL IN SEDONA, THAT'S AMANTE, THAT'S THE STEVENSON'S. WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT ONE OF THE LARGEST EMPLOYERS IN THE VERDE VALLEY, THAT'S A PRIVATE EMPLOYERS THAT'S MOLDING GRAPHICS, EMPLOYING OVER 100 PEOPLE THAT'S IN, IN CLARKDALE NEARBY. THAT'S THE STEVENSONS. THEY DEEPLY AND TRULY CARE ABOUT THIS COMMUNITY. AND, AND MY POINT IS THIS, THEY, THEY DEEPLY AND TRULY CARE ABOUT THIS COMMUNITY. THEY'RE GOING TO DO SOMETHING SPECIAL WITH THIS PROPERTY. THE LEGAL THING TO DO IS TO REVERT THE ZONING. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING, BUT IT'S ALSO THE RIGHT THING TO DO. AND THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO NICK WOOD TO TALK ABOUT THE LEGAL ISSUES. THANK YOU MAYOR. MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, NICK WOODS, SNELLEN, WILMER ONE, UH, EAST WASHINGTON STREET, PHOENIX. UM, THEN I REPRESENT, UH, THE STEVENSONS. UM, [00:40:01] I'VE BEEN A ZONING ATTORNEY FOR ALMOST 45 YEARS. AND, UM, I'VE DONE THOUSANDS OF HEARINGS AND THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER BEEN ABLE TO ENJOY A SERENADE, UH, WHICH WAS TRULY DELIGHTFUL. AND, AND I'LL HAVE TO TELL MAYOR GALLEGO DOWN IN PHOENIX THAT THEY SHOULD TRY THAT. UM, UH, WITH RESPECT TO THIS PROJECT, I WAS EXCITED WHEN THEY ASKED ME TO TAKE A LOOK AT IT. UM, AND ESPECIALLY FOR WHO THE STEVENSONS ARE. UM, MAYOR, YOU MENTIONED THAT A IN A PREVIOUS HEARING, UM, ABOUT AMANTE AND, AND REALLY THE SCALE OF THEIR PROJECT. AND, AND THEY HAVE A PROVEN TRACK RECORD OF BEING SENSITIVE AND CARING ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AND ABOUT THE CITY AND THEIR GREAT CORPORATE CITIZENS. SO AS I TOOK A LOOK AT THIS AND STARTED DIGGING INTO IT, UM, I WAS ALSO A, A LAW SCHOOL PROFESSOR AT MARQUETTE LAW SCHOOL. AND I ALSO AM A PROFESSOR AT A SU LAW SCHOOL. AND AS I'M DIGGING THROUGH THIS APP, THESE APPLICATIONS, ONE AFTER ANOTHER, AND I'M LOOKING AT PAGE AFTER PAGE, AND THAT BOOK IS ONLY PART OF IT. UM, THIS COULD BE A GREAT LAW SCHOOL FINAL EXAM QUESTION, UM, BECAUSE IT HAS SO MANY MOVING PARTS. BUT I THINK AT THE END OF THE DAY, WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO GET THROUGH IT. I THINK WE HAVE SOME SOLUTIONS THAT WORK FOR THE CITY AND WORK FOR THE DEVELOPER. AND THAT'S ALWAYS BEEN MY, UM, GOAL, RIGHT? IS TO MAKE SOMETHING THAT WORKS FOR THE COMMUNITY, FOR THE CITY, FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, FOR STAFF, BUT ALSO OBVIOUSLY FOR MY CLIENT. IF WE COULD TAKE A LOOK AT THE FIRST SLIDE, PLEASE. SO AS YOU, UH, HEARD STEVEN SAID, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE PROPERTY. UH, THESE ARE ALL OF THE, THE PARCELS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO, UH, THE PD, UH, ZONING APPLICATIONS THAT HAVE COME THROUGH. AND WE'RE REALLY FOCUSING MOST ON WHAT WAS THE C ONE SECTION, WHICH IS THE STUFF THAT'S JUST, UH, UM, ON THE CREEK SIDE OF 89 A. AND IT'S REALLY THOSE SIX PARCELS. UH, IF WE CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. UM, SO IN LOOKING AT THE AGENDA, UM, IT SAYS THAT CITY COUNCIL IS, UH, BEING REQUESTED TO TAKE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION TO EXTEND OR REMOVE THE SCHEDULE FOR DEVELOPMENT, OR TAKE LEGISLATIVE ACTION TO CAUSE A PROPERTY TO REVERT TO ITS FORMER ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS, WHICH WOULD'VE BEEN C ONE, THE ONE I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. BUT OF COURSE, UM, YOU CHANGED THAT BACK IN 2018 TO CO SO A REVERSION REALLY WOULD BE TO CO AND NOT TO THE FORM OF C ONE BECAUSE YOU BASICALLY GOT RID OF THAT IN YOUR CODE. BUT AS I DUG DEEP INTO ALL OF THESE APPLICATIONS AND I BEGAN READING ALL OF THE DECISIONS AND ALL OF THE STEPS THAT GOING IN, IT'S NOT AS CLEAR CUT AS IT WOULD APPEAR ON THIS REQUEST. AND, AND AS I WALK YOU THROUGH, I, I, I, I THINK YOU'LL SEE WHERE I'M COMING FROM. WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THIS IS THE STATUTORY PROVISION THAT DOES SEVERAL THINGS. NUMBER ONE, IN THAT FIRST SENTENCE IT SAYS THAT WHEN LEGISLATIVE BODIES, WHICH IS YOU POLICY MAKERS, AS YOU'RE LOOKING AT A ZONING CASE, IT GIVES YOU THE LEGAL AUTHORITY TO PUT SOME TIMEFRAMES AROUND ZONING APPROVALS. WE CALL 'EM TIME STIPULATIONS, TIME CONDITIONS. AND EACH ONE OF THESE CASES HAS THAT. SO YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THAT AT THE SAME TIME BECAUSE YOU'RE PUTTING RESTRICTIONS ON THE DEVELOPER. THE DEVELOPER REALLY HAS SOME DUE PROCESS RIGHTS. AND THOSE DUE PROCESS RIGHTS REALLY CENTER ON THE FACT THAT WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU DON'T HIT THOSE TIMELINES AND IN THE WORLD OF DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? IN MY WORLD, UM, THOSE TIMELINES, RIGHT, SOMETIMES THEY'RE DIFFICULT TO ADHERE TO. SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO COME BACK AND ASK FOR AN EXTENSION OF THEM. SO IN THE IDEA OF, WELL, WE'RE GONNA GIVE THE CITY THE ABILITY TO HOLD THEIR FEET TO THE FIRE, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S PUBLIC HEARINGS AND THINGS. IF THE CITY WANTS TO ACTUALLY GO AHEAD AND REVERT THE ZONING, RIGHT? WE'RE GONNA PUT SOME PARAMETERS TO THAT. AND THAT'S REALLY THE SECOND SENTENCE. IT SAYS, IF AT THE EXPIRATION OF THIS PERIOD, THE PROPERTY'S NOT BEEN APPROVED FOR THE USE FOR WHICH IT WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED, THE LEGISLATIVE BODY, YOU AFTER NOTIFICATION, UH, BY CERTIFIED MAIL TO GO ON AN APPLICANT, SHALL, SHALL, IT'S THE, THE MANDATORY SHALL NOT THE PERMISSIVE MAY SCHEDULE A PUBLIC HEARING TO TAKE ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION TO EXTEND OR REMOVE OR DETERMINE COMPLIANCE WITH THE SCHEDULE. AND THAT, OF COURSE IS ADMINISTRATIVE OR THE ALTERNATIVE, TAKE LEGISLATIVE ACTION TO CAUSE OF PROPERTY TO REVERT TO ITS FORMER RES RESORTING CLASSIFICATION. ORDINARILY, AND I'VE GONE THROUGH MANY OF THESE IN MY CAREER, ORDINARILY MY CLIENT IS SWEATING LIKE CRAZY 'CAUSE THEY DON'T WANT THE REVERSION TYPICALLY BECAUSE WHEN WE GO THROUGH A ZONING CASE, WE ACTUALLY MAKE THE CIRCUMSTANCES [00:45:01] BETTER. THE ZONING IMPROVES, IT'S CALLED UPZONING THAN ANYTHING ELSE. SO THE LAST THING THEY WANT IS TO HAVE IT BE DOWN ZONED. SO THIS SETS UP THE FRAMEWORK FOR ALL OF THAT, BUT IT GIVES THE COUNCIL SOME FLEXIBILITY. SO IN THE NEXT SLIDE, WE TALK ABOUT THE 1998 CASE, AND THE CITY COUNCIL PROPERLY FOLLOWED THE FRAMEWORK OF THE STATUTE, AND IT'S ALSO IN YOUR ORDINANCE. AND BASICALLY IT'S CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO THE 1998 CASE. AND IT BASICALLY SAYS IN THE EVENT THE DEVELOPER FAILS TO OBTAIN A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL FOR PHASE ONE IS A THREE PAGE PHASE PROJECT AND BUILDING PERMITS FOR PHASE ONE DEVELOPMENT. WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME SET FORTH IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THERE WAS A CORRESPONDING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH THOSE TIMEFRAMES. IF THEY FAILED TO DO THAT, THE CITY MAY REVERT THE PD ZONING DESIGNATION TO ITS ORIGINAL ZONING AS OF THE DATE OF THE APPROVAL OF THE PD, RIGHT? WHICH BASICALLY WOULD'VE BEEN TO 1998. SO YOU HAD THE REVERSIONARY RIGHT TO PUT EVERYTHING BACK THE WAY IT WAS IN 1998. AND THAT WOULD'VE BEEN TO C ONE AS OF THE 1998 DATE OF THE APPROVAL OF THE, OF THE PD. BUT THEN WE GO TO THE NEXT ITERATION OF THIS, BECAUSE REMEMBER WE HAD AN ORIGINAL PD, BUT THEN IT WAS AMENDED SEVERAL TIMES, RIGHT? CHANGES FROM CONDOS TO TIMESHARES AND ALL KINDS OF OTHER STUFF GOING BACK AND FORTH. WELL, IN THE NEXT ITERATION, RIGHT, IS 2006. NOW WE'RE EIGHT YEARS BEYOND THE DATE THAT THE ORIGINAL ZONING WAS APPROVED IN 1998. AND ORDINARILY COUNCILS GET ANNOYED, RIGHT? WHEN THERE'S TIME STIPULATIONS, THEY EXPECT PERFORMANCE. AND WHEN PERFORMANCE DOESN'T HAPPEN, THERE'S AN ANNOYANCE LEVEL AS SAYS. AND IT'S UNDERSTANDABLE BECAUSE THEY CAME TO YOU, THEY TOOK YOUR TIME, THEY TOOK THE RESOURCES OF STAFF, EVERYBODY SPENT HOURS AND MONEY PUTTING THIS THING TOGETHER, AND THERE'S A TIMEFRAME AND NOTHING HAPPENED. NOBODY CAME BACK, RIGHT? SO BY NINE, BY 2006 YOU HAVE CONDITIONS, GO BACK PLEASE. YOU HAVE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BUT THEY'RE DIFFERENT THAN THE ORIGINAL ONES. THE ORIGINAL ONES, YOU RESERVED THE RIGHT TO BASICALLY, UM, UH, REVERT THE ZONING TO THE PREVIOUS ZONING. THIS ONE YOU DIDN'T, I SHOULD SAY THE PREVIOUS CONSULATE DIDN'T. THIS ONE SAYS, AND I'LL SKIP FORWARD TO THE YELLOW IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 4 0 1 12 A, ONE OF THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, A VALID BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE PROJECT SHALL BE ISSUED. AND THE FIRST PHASE OF THE PROJECT SHALL BE UNDER CONSTRUCTION WITHIN TWO YEARS OF THE CITY COUNCIL ACTION ON THE PD AMENDMENT FOLLOWING ZONING CHANGE PROCEDURES AT TWO YEARS TO GET ALL OF THAT DONE. IT SAYS, UM, UM, AND THEN, OR COMMISSIONS AND COUNCIL'S APPROVAL WILL BECOME VOID. NOT A REVERSION ANYMORE. IT'S NOT, YEAH, YOU GET A HEARING, YOU GET TO, YOU KNOW, EXPLAIN WHY YOU WERE LATE, WHY YOU DIDN'T PERFORM TIMELY. BASICALLY, IT'S VOID. AND THAT HAS MEANING, IT HAS LEGAL IMPORT PARTICULARLY. NOW, THIS IS BEFORE PROP 2 0 7 WAS ADOPTED LATER IN 2006, AND THIS IS BEFORE THERE WAS WAIVERS AND OTHER THINGS, BUT YOU HAD A PROPERTY OWNER PARTICIPATING IN A ZONING CASE AGREEING TO THIS, AGREEING THAT YOU DON'T EVER HAVE TO HAVE THIS HEARING. BASICALLY IF YOU DON'T PERFORM IT'S VOID, PERIOD. SO THEN WE GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO ISSUE ONE, THE CONDITIONAL PD ZONING APPROVAL IS VOID AS A MATTER OF LAW, THEREFORE IT CAN'T BE RESURRECTED. IT'S GONE. THE CONDITIONAL ZONING WAS APPROVED AND TERMINATED LEGISLATIVELY AND CANNOT NOW BE RESURRECTED. SO NOW WE GET ONTO THE NEXT ISSUE, WHICH IS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL. IT SAYS THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, SHALL THIS IS 2006, SHALL BE IN SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PROJECT, INCLUDING LETTER OF INTENT, PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN. SO BASICALLY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, RIGHT, FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT INCLUDED A REQUIREMENT OF SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE. NOW, MOST OF THE CASES THAT I WORK ON, I TRY AND GET GENERAL CONFORMANCE RIGHT? BUT THIS SAYS SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE. IT MEANS WHAT YOU SEE IS WHAT YOU GET. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, RIGHT? IF I WAS SITTING ON A CITY COUNCIL, I WOULD BE DAMN FRUSTRATED IF SOMEONE SHOWS ME A SITE PLAN, SOMEBODY SHOWS ME BILLING ELEVATIONS AND THE THING GETS BUILT AND IT DOESN'T LOOK ANYTHING LIKE IT WAS PROMISED TO BE. SO UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES, NOW, AGAIN, YOU'VE GOT A DEVELOPER THAT HAS BEEN DRAGGING THEIR FEET, THEY HAVEN'T DONE ANYTHING, SO YOU'RE GONNA SCREW THEM DOWN A LITTLE MORE, RIGHT? A LITTLE MORE TIGHTLY TO MAKE SURE THEY PERFORM. SO THE DEVELOPMENT IS REQUIRED UNDER THE CONDITIONS TO HAVE SUBSTANTIAL CONFORMANCE WITH THINGS LIKE THE SITE PLAN. IF YOU CHANGE THE SITE PLAN, YOU CAN'T GO FORWARD [00:50:01] WITH THE PROJECT, YOU LOSE YOUR APPROVALS. SO WE GO ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE. THIS WAS THE SITE PLAN THAT THEY SHOWED YOU AND A WHOLE BUNCH OF OTHER ONES. AND IT'S, IT'S A WELL DONE SITE PLAN. IT'S PRETTY COOL ACTUALLY. UM, YOU HAVE THINGS DOWN ON THE, ON THE CREEK SIDE, YOU HAVE THINGS UP ABOVE 89 A, BUT THIS IS WHAT THEY WERE COMMITTED TO BUILD AND THEY CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING UNLESS THEY COMPLY WITH THIS. BUT THEN SOMETHING HAPPENED, RIGHT? AND IT WAS NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE CITY, AND IT'S ON THE NEXT SLIDE. AND THAT IS IN 2019, THE CITY DETERMINED THAT IT NEEDED RIGHTS OF WAY. SO THE CITY SAT DOWN AND WORKED WITH THE DEVELOPER, RIGHT? TO DO A LITTLE EXCHANGE, EXCHANGE OF LAND WHERE THE CITY GOT THE STUFF IN THE KIND OF PURPLISH COLOR. AND THEN THAT LITTLE CROSS HATCH STRIP ALONG THE ROADWAY WAS WHAT WAS GIVEN TO THE DEVELOPER IN EXCHANGE. UM, BY THE WAY, CONGRATULATIONS, THAT WAS A, A GREAT NEGOTIATION FOR THE CITY, UM, BECAUSE YOU GOT SOME TREMENDOUS RIGHTS OF WAY WHICH WORK IN YOUR CIRCULATION. AND THEY GOT A STRIP OF LAND, WHICH IS NOT INVALUABLE, BUT IT'S ALONG THE RIGHT OF WAY. AND OF COURSE THERE'S SETBACKS AND OTHER THINGS. BUT WHAT THIS DID IS IT CREATED A PROBLEM FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. AND I, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY PROBABLY EVEN THOUGHT ABOUT IT BECAUSE TYPICALLY YOU DON'T. BUT WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE AND YOU CAN SEE HOW THESE PURPLE THINGS NOW WILL RUN THROUGH THE PROJECT. AND WHAT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED BACK IN 2018 19 WHEN THIS WAS DONE? ESSENTIALLY THERE SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN AMENDMENT IF THEY WANTED TO GO THROUGH WITH THE PROJECT, RIGHT? WITH RESPECT TO THE SITE PLAN, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T BUILD THIS RIGHT NOW. WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT? WELL, WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE CONDITIONS AND ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS YOU HAVE TO BUILD THIS. WELL, YOU CAN'T BUILD THIS, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE. IT'S CALLED AN LEGAL SIDE. IT'S CALLED IMPOSSIBILITY OF PERFORMANCE. AND WHEN YOU CAN'T BUILD SOMETHING, YOU'RE EXCUSED FROM PERFORMANCE ESSENTIALLY. BUT THAT DOESN'T WORK IN OUR WORLD, YOURS AND MINE. 'CAUSE YOU WANNA SEE THINGS DONE. SO WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE. SO WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT THE CONDITIONAL PD ZONING APPROVAL IS SUBJECT TO A CONDITION REQUIRING COMPLIANCE WITH A SITE PLAN AND CANNOT BE IMPLEMENTED DUE TO THE ROADWAY TAKING. WHAT THAT MEANS IS, EVEN IF YOU WERE PERMITTED TO DO AN EXTENSION RIGHT OF THE TIME PER PERFORMANCE, AS YOU HEARD, YOU CAN ONLY DO ONE AND ONE'S ALREADY BEEN DONE. BUT EVEN IF YOU COULD DO A SECOND ONE, IT DOESN'T WORK BECAUSE THE CONDITION REQUIRES DEVELOPMENT OF THE SITE PLAN I JUST SHOWED YOU. AND THEY CAN'T DO IT BECAUSE OF THE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND, UH, THE DEVELOPER. SO WE'RE BACK TO THIS, THIS SITUATION OF YOU CAN'T EXTEND IT, YOU CAN'T EVEN REMOVE IT BECAUSE AGAIN, YOU CAN'T DEVELOP IT THE WAY IT IS. AND, AND THAT'S ALL ADMINISTRATIVE, RIGHT? SO YOU CAN'T CHANGE THE ZONING 'CAUSE THAT'S A LEGISLATIVE. SO WE GO TO THE THIRD ISSUE. THE THIRD ISSUE REALLY HAS TO DO WITH THE ZONING MAPS. AND I FOUND THIS FASCINATING, UM, 'CAUSE I'VE NEVER SEEN THIS BEFORE AND IT'S NOT A CRITICISM, RIGHT? NOT AT ALL. UM, BUT THIS IS THE 1995 ZONING MAP. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S C ONE, RIGHT? THE THE, THE PROPERTY BOUNDARIES ARE BASICALLY IN, IN RED. SO WE HAD C ONE IN THE 1995 ZONING DISTRICTS. AND THEN IN 2018 YOU CHANGED 'EM TO CO YOU HAVE EVERY RIGHT IN THE WORLD TO DO THAT. THERE'S NOT A LAW, THERE'S NOT A REGULATION, THERE'S NOT A RESTRICTION THAT SAYS THE CITY COUNCIL CANNOT CHANGE ZONING DISTRICTS, RIGHT? PERIOD. NOW THERE'S PROP 2 0 7 AND SOME OTHER THINGS THAT GO WITH THAT, DEPENDING UPON THE RESULTS OF THOSE CHANGES. BUT AS FAR AS THE CITY'S ABILITY TO MAKE THOSE CHANGE, YOU HAVE THAT RIGHT? YOU HAVE THAT ABILITY. BUT THAT'S WHERE WE WERE BACK IN 1995 F THIS MAP, THE ZONING MAP THAT IS A REGULATORY DOCUMENT. THAT MAP REPRESENTS WHAT PEOPLE CAN DO. SO IF SOMEONE'S BUYING A PIECE OF PROPERTY, RIGHT, THEY CAN SEE WHAT IT'S ZONED. IF YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO OWN PROPERTY NEXT DOOR OR NEARBY OR ANYWHERE IN THE CITY, THEY LOOK AT THE MAP. THE MAP IS A REGULATORY DOCUMENT AND IT HAS LEGAL IMPORT. BUT THEN WE GO TO THE, TO THE NEXT SECTION IN EACH ONE OF THE APPROVALS. AND THIS IS WHAT I FOUND FASCINATING. AGAIN, NOT A CRITICISM. I ACTUALLY LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU DID THIS. UM, IN EACH ONE OF THE RESOLUTIONS, WHICH OF COURSE WERE PART OF THE ORDINANCES FOR APPROVAL, EACH ONE OF 'EM SAID THE SAME THING. AND THAT IS THE ZONING MAP SHALL BE AMENDED TO REFLECT THE ZONE CHANGE UPON COMPLETION OF ALL ZONING CONDITIONS AS SET FORTH IN THE EXHIBIT. AND IT SAYS THE SAME THING AT 2 0 5, EXCUSE [00:55:01] ME, DIRECTING, UM, THE AMENDMENT OF THE ZONING MAP UPON COMPLETION OF ALL ZONING CONDITIONS SET FORTH HEREIN 2006, DIRECTING THE AMENDMENT OF THE ZONING MAP UPON COMPLETION OF ALL THE ZONING CONDITIONS SET FORTH HEREIN. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THIS MAP SHOULD NOT SHOW PD ON IT LIKE YOU SEE RIGHT THERE, RIGHT NOW. AND THE REASON IS, THE CONDITIONS OF THE ZONING WERE NEVER FULFILLED. IF THEY WERE FULFILLED, WE WOULDN'T BE HERE TONIGHT, RIGHT? BASICALLY, AIDS CONSTRUCTION WOULD'VE STARTED AND THINGS WOULD'VE BEEN BUILT. 'CAUSE THAT WAS A CONDITION YOU HAVE TO HAVE BUILDING PERMITS AND YOU HAVE TO BASICALLY DO YOUR CONSTRUCTION. SO THIS MAP SHOULDN'T BE PD BECAUSE THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION WAS THAT YOU DON'T CHANGE THE MAP FROM C ONE AT THE TIME OR NOW CO TO PD UNTIL ALL THE CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN FULFILLED. AND WE KNOW FOR A FACT THAT THEY HAVEN'T BEEN. SO IT TAKES US TO THE, TO THE NEXT ISSUE. SO THE CONDITIONAL PD ZONING APPROVAL WAS SUBJECT TO SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND NOT LAWFULLY MAPPED THE SITE CONTAINS THAT C ONE NOW CO WITH THE 2018 ZONING ZONING CLASSIFICATION. SO IT TAKES US TO ISSUE NUMBER FOUR, AND THAT'S THE, UH, LDC AMENDMENT IN THE CO DISTRICT. SO THE PROPERTY, THE MAP SHOULD SAY CO THE ZONING THAT WAS EXTENDED ONCE HAS A PROVISION THAT SAID THE ZONING IS VOID NOW, RIGHT? NOT THAT IT CAN BE REVERTED. BASICALLY THAT IS VOID. SO BACK IN LAST YEAR, LAST APRIL, UH, AND AGAIN, YOU CAN, YOU'RE PERMITTED TO DO THIS. THERE'S NO RESTRICTIONS AGAINST YOU DOING THIS. THE COUNCIL MADE A CHANGE TO THE CO DISTRICT. THE CO DISTRICT USED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE LESS THAN SEVEN, UM, LODGING UNITS OR HOTEL ROOMS IF YOU OR HOTEL UNITS PER PARCEL, RIGHT? UM, AND THERE'S SIX PARCELS THAT WOULD BASICALLY MAXIMUM OF SIX, THAT'D BE 36 BASIC UNITS ON THIS ENTIRE LARGE PROJECT. YOU MADE A CHANGE AND YOU REMOVE THAT FROM THE CO DISTRICT. SO TODAY, IF SOMEONE APPLIED FOR A LODGING UNDER THE CO DISTRICT, THEY CAN'T HAVE IT BECAUSE THE DISTRICT DOESN'T ALLOW IT. HOWEVER, THAT CHANGE, RIGHT, DOES AFFECT THE PROPERTY OWNER. AND IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, UM, THIS IS, THIS IS THE PROP 2 0 7 CODIFICATION. AS YOU MAY RECALL, BACK IN 2006, THERE WAS A STATEWIDE, UM, INITIATIVE, A PROPOSITION 2 0 7, WHERE, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE VOTED THAT CITIES, IF THEY ADOPT A LAND USE REGULATION THAT NEGATIVELY IMPACTS VALUE, THAT SOMEHOW THEY CAN RECOVER THAT VALUE. BUT IT ALLOWED FOR THINGS LIKE THIS, IT GAVE THE CITY THE ABILITY AND F THAT ANY DEMAND FOR LANDOWNER RELIEF OR ANY WAIVER THAT'S GRANTED IN LIEU OF COMP COMPENSATION WILL RUN WITH THE LAND. SO BASICALLY YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY, AND I'LL, I'LL GO THROUGH KIND OF A, AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THAT WORKS IN A MINUTE. BUT YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO GRANT THIS SITE THAT LESS THAN SEVEN UNITS PER PARCEL IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO. UM, AND AGAIN, I'LL, I'LL COME BACK TO THAT. UM, IF, IF I MAY, UH, NEXT SLIDE ISSUE NUMBER FOUR. SO THE PROPERTY CO ZONING WAS AMENDED IN 2023 TO REMOVE LODGING FEWER THAN SEVEN UNITS IN VIOLATION OF A RS 12, 11 34. AND A WAIVER OF THE 2023 AMENDMENT IS NECESSARY TO AVOID A TAKINGS CLAIM. AND AGAIN, I'LL WALK THROUGH THAT IN A MOMENT. UH, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. SO WHAT ARE WE ASKING YOU TO DO TONIGHT? ? OKAY, UM, NUMBER ONE, NOT TAKE ANY LEGISLATIVE ACTION TO REVERT THE CONDITIONAL PD ZONING APPROVAL BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO REVERT IT EXPIRED BY ITS OWN TERMS. IT SET ITS VOID IF NOTHING HAPPENS BY MARCH 14TH, 2010. AND THAT WAS THE EXTENSION DATE. NUMBER TWO, TAKE NO ADMINISTRATIVE ACTION TO EXTEND THE TIME PERIODS OF CONDITIONAL PD ZONING APPROVAL BECAUSE ONE, IT'S VOID, SO THERE'S NOTHING TO EXTEND, AND B, IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO COMPLY ANYWAY. AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'VE ALREADY HAD ONE EXTENSION ANYWAY. AND THEN A DIRECTION TO STAFF VIA A RESOLUTION, RIGHT? THAT SAYS THAT THE CONDITIONAL PD ZONING APPROVALS VOID AT, YOU KNOW, AS MARCH 14TH, 2010, AND DIRECTING STAFF TO CORRECT THE IMPROPERLY MODIFIED ZONING MAP TO SHOW THAT THE SITE IS PROPERLY ZONED CO. NOW, MR. CHRISTIANSEN, AND I DISAGREE ON THIS, AND WE KNOW LAWYERS NEVER DISAGREE ON [01:00:01] ANYTHING. UM, MR. CHRISTIANSEN IS VERY COMFORTABLE THAT EVEN THOUGH YOU HAD LANGUAGE IN THE 2006 THAT SAYS NO REVERSION, RIGHT, IT'S VOID THAT YOU STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO DO THE REVERSION, EVEN THOUGH WE RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE. AND, AND I, AND I HAVE A GREAT DEAL OF RESPECT FOR MR. CHRISTIANSEN. UM, IF YOU CHOOSE RIGHT TO TAKE HIS DIRECTION, UM, WHICH AGAIN, HE'S YOUR LAWYER, UM, THEN YOU WOULD DO A REVERSION. THE REVERSION WOULD BE BACK TO THE 2098 CASE BECAUSE THAT WAS THE FIRST ITERATION OF THE PD. YOU REVERTED BACK TO THAT. UM, AND WE'D BE DONE. NOW, THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE MY CLIENT WOULD FILE FOR SUBDIVISION PLAT. AND AS SUBDIVISION PLAT, OBVIOUSLY, 'CAUSE WHEN YOU, IF YOU GO, IF YOU GO BACK TO THE VERY FIRST SLIDE, THE THE PARCELS THAT ARE THERE ARE REALLY STRANGE LOOKING, RIGHT? THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE JUST WEIRD SHAPES. SO WE WOULD GO IN AND WE WOULD CLEAN THAT UP WITH A PLAT. THE OTHER THING IS ONE OF THE APPROVALS PROVIDED FOR A PUBLIC PARK, RIGHT? AND ACCESS, RIGHT, BASICALLY DOWN TO THE CREEK. UM, MY CLIENT WOULD BE VERY HAPPY AS PART OF THE, THE SUBDIVISION PLAT PROCESS, RIGHT? TO GO AHEAD AND INCLUDE A PUBLIC PARK. UM, AGAIN, HE FEELS, YOU KNOW, HE'S PART OF THIS COMMUNITY. HE WANTS TO MAKE A CONTRIBUTION TO THE COMMUNITY. SO WE WOULD BASICALLY DO THAT NEGOTIATION, YOU KNOW, AS PART OF THE, THE SUBDIVISION PLAT. AND WE WOULD END UP ADDING A COUPLE OF MORE PARCELS. SO HE COULD HAVE A TOTAL RATHER THAN 36, UM, UNITS, HE WOULD HAVE 50. UM, CURRENT AMBIENT DATE IS 40, BUT THIS IS A MUCH LARGER PIECE OBVIOUSLY. UM, AND THEN THE, THE, THE PARK AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO AGAIN, PARSING THIS THING DOWN TO ITS COMPONENT PARTS, THIS COUNCIL TOOK AN ACTION, YOU KNOW, BACK IN 2006 THAT SAID, HEY, YOU DON'T PERFORM ON TIME. LIKE YOU DIDN'T THE LAST TIME AND THE TIME BEFORE THAT WE'RE GOING TO IT'S VOID PERIOD. SO THERE'S NOTHING TO REVERT. UM, YOU CAN'T EXTEND ANYMORE 'CAUSE YOU ALREADY EXTENDED ONCE. AND EVEN IF YOU COULD EXTEND, YOU CAN'T EXTEND BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO EXTEND BECAUSE THEY CAN'T BUILD IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT'S REQUIRED. EVEN REMOVING THE LANGUAGE OF THE, OF THE TIMES STEP, YOU STILL CAN'T BUILD IT. SO I THINK AGAIN, TRYING TO ACHIEVE A BALANCE, TRYING TO ACHIEVE, UM, A FAIR RESULT FOR EVERYBODY, RIGHT? WE HAVE A SEAL VEHICLE THAT WE COULD ADD BACK, RIGHT? UM, AFTER THE FACT, A FEW MORE PARCELS AS PART OF THE, THE, UM, UH, THE PROP 2 0 7, UH, REQUEST. UM, MY STAFF USED CLAIM, I USED THE WORD REQUEST, UM, AND WE WOULD WORK THROUGH IT THAT WAY. SO AGAIN, MAYOR, COUNCIL, I'M SORRY FOR THE LONG-WINDED PRESENTATION. IT WAS A VERY COMPLICATED, THICK THING, BUT I THINK WE GOT OUR ARMS AROUND IT. AND LIKE I SAID, IF, IF, UM, UH, IF YOU FOLLOW MR. CHRISTIANSEN'S, UM, UH, OPINION REGARDING WHAT YOU CAN DO REGARDING, YOU KNOW, REVERSION, UM, AGAIN, I RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE, BUT YOU CAN DO IT THAT WAY, UH, FOLLOWING HIS DIRECTION AS WELL. SO I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. COULD I ASK THAT THE LAST SLIDE GO BACK UP THAT YOU HAD BEFORE YOU CAME BACK TO THIS ONE? THE ONE WITH YOUR, OH, THAT'S THE ONE. THANK YOU. IF YOU COULD JUST LEAVE THAT UP FOR REFERENCE. OKAY. I HAVE A QUESTION. OKAY. VICE MAYOR, WHY DON'T WE START WITH YOU. SO WHAT ARE YOU ASKING US TO DO? ? THAT'S WHY I, WE ARE ASKING FOR THE SLATE TO BE CLEAN FOR IT TO BE CO UM, AND THEN WE'LL FOLLOW UP WITH THAT REQUESTING THAT THE RESTRICTION FOR LAST YEAR, RIGHT, REGARDING THE LESS THAN SEVEN UNITS RIGHT PER PARCEL WILL BASICALLY BE REINSTATED. BUT THAT'S NOT FOR TONIGHT. FOR TONIGHT WE'RE JUST ASKING THAT IT GOES BACK TO CO WHICHEVER VEHICLE YOU USE AND THAT'S IT. AND OH, AS OF THE 1998 FIRST DATE, BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT REVERSIONS DO. THEY GO BACK TO THE DATE OF THE FIRST ZONING CASE. SO IT'S A SIMPLE ASK AND THAT IS JUST WHATEVER VEHICLE YOU USE, PUT IT BACK TO CO AND THEN, UH, EFFECTIVE THAT 1998 DATE. THANK YOU. OKAY, WE'LL STAY ON IT TO MY RIGHT. UH, COUNSEL DUNN, NOTHING AT THIS TIME. OKAY, BRIAN, MR. WOODS, YOU MENTIONED, UH, MAKING IT CO AND YOU MENTIONED 1998 A COUPLE TIMES. [01:05:01] WHAT'S SIGNIFICANT ABOUT 1998? IF, IF CO IS WHAT YOU WANT, THEN WHAT, WHAT DOES 1998 HAVE TO DO WITH THIS? WELL, UM, MAYOR, UH, COUNCILMAN FOLTZ, UM, THE WAY REVERSIONS WORK IS YOU REVERT THE ZONING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DATE OF THE, THE, THE ZONING IN QUESTION. OKAY? SO IT'S, IT'S SEMANTICS. WHEN THE DAY IS DONE, YOU'RE GETTING WHAT YOU WANT. IF THAT'S WHERE THIS LEADS TO, YOU'RE GETTING CO THAT'S ALL YOU CARE ABOUT. WHEN THE DAY IS DONE, AS LONG AS IT GOES BACK TO THAT DATE, YES, I, WHY DOES THAT DATE MATTER? I DON'T GET IT. WELL, THAT, THAT'S LEGALLY HOW, HOW IT WORKS. OTHERWISE, WE HAVE AN ILLEGAL CONDITION. OKAY? WHY? OKAY, HOLD ON, HOLD ON. WELL, IT'S RIGHT TO, YOU'RE NEXT. OKAY, BRIAN, YOU'RE DONE. I'M DONE, MAYOR. THANK YOU, KATHY. OKAY. WHY DOES THE, INCLUDING THE DATE CREATE A LEGAL CONDITION RATHER THAN LEAVING THAT UNREFERENCED, WHICH WOULD BRING US INTO THE CURRENT ZONING OPTION THAT EXISTS? I, I DON'T UNDERSTAND. 'CAUSE THEN IT'S NOT A REVERSION THEN, THEN IT BECOMES, UH, A LEGISLATIVE REZONING, WHICH IS IN VIOLATION OF YOUR ZONING ORDINANCES. KURT WHAT'S YOUR TAKE ON THAT, PLEASE? SO, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THE WAY, THE WAY I SEE IT IS, UH, THE C ONE, UH, ZONING DOESN'T EXIST ANYMORE. THAT WAS AMENDED BY COUNSEL IN 2018. UH, THE PROPERTY OWNER AND DEVELOPER WAS AWARE OF THAT AMENDMENT, UM, AND HAD ANY CHANCE TO COMPLAIN OR, UH, UH, STATING OPPOSITION TO THAT THEY DID NOT DO. SO, THE ONLY COMMERCIAL ZONING WE HAVE NOW IS CO RIGHT. BUT WHY DOES THE DATE NEED TO BE REFERENCED IN? I DON'T THINK THAT THEY, A REVERSION TO THE ZONING, DOESN'T MATTER THE DATE THAT IT'S, IT'S JUST WOULD BE REVERTED TO I THINK YOU BACK, THAT'S WHERE THE, THERE'S DISAGREEMENT AMONG YOU TO LEGAL MINDS, AND THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. GO BACK TO WHAT THE DISAGREE IS. MR. WOODS, WOULD YOU PLEASE WAIT, I'M SORRY. SO THAT WE DON'T, WE DON'T HAVE CROSS DISCUSSIONS HERE, PLEASE. THANK YOU. OKAY. GO AHEAD, KATHY. YEAH, SO, SO THAT'S KURT. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF YOU COULD INTERPRET FOR ME WHY THE APPLICANT FEELS THAT THERE'S A DATE DISTINCTION THAT NEEDS TO BE REFERENCED. 'CAUSE I'M NOT SEEING WHY IT WOULD AND I THINK YOU'RE NOT, BUT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. I'M LOOKING FOR AN INTERPRETER. , I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR 98. RIGHT. OKAY. IF, IF I MAY, MAYOR, AND AGAIN, I APOLOGIZE FOR INTERRUPTING. OKAY, GO AHEAD, MR. WOODS. AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS WAS THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE ATTACHED TO THE 1998 CONVERSION FROM THE C ONE TO THE PD. AND IT, IT SAYS THAT IN THE EVENT THE DEVELOPER FAILS TO OBTAIN A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW APPROVAL FOR PHASE ONE, THE PROJECT AND BILL BE PERMITS FOR PHASE ONE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE TIMEFRAME SET FORTH, THE CITY MAY REVERT THE PD ZONING DESIGNATIONS TO ITS ORIGINAL ZONING AS OF THE DATE OF THE APPROVAL OF THE PD. THE REASON IS WE'RE REVERTING IT BACK TO WHAT IT WAS. IF YOU, FOR EXAMPLE, CHOOSE TO DO CO AS OF TODAY, RIGHT? THAT'S A ZONING CASE. THAT'S A BRAND NEW ZONING CASE. REVERSION MEANS YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DATE. THAT'S WHAT THE CASE LAW SAYS, AND THAT'S WHAT THE LAW SAYS. SO THANK YOU MR. WOODS. UM, HOLD ON ONE SECOND. A FOLLOW UP ON THIS. GO AHEAD, MELISSA. IF IT'S A FOLLOW UP ON THIS, GREAT. 'CAUSE I DO HAVE ANOTHER POINT TO MAKE, BUT, OKAY. SO PERHAPS I AM CONFUSED, WHICH HAPPENED, BUT I AM PRETTY SURE THAT I'VE HEARD YOU STATE MORE THAN ONCE IN YOUR PRESENTATION THAT REVERSION IS NO LONGER ACTUALLY AVAILABLE BECAUSE THE, UM, EVERYTHING IS EXPIRED AND THEREFORE THERE'S NOTHING TO REVERT TO. NOW YOU'RE CONTINUING TO SAY THAT WE NEED TO REVERT. SO I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED AS TO WHETHER OR NOT YOU ARE OR NOT REVERTING AND WHY, THEREFORE, YOU WANNA REVERT TO 98. OKAY, SO MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBER DUNN, IF WE GO WITH WHAT I SUGGESTED, RIGHT, AND THAT IS YOU DO BASICALLY A RESOLUTION THAT SAYS THIS ZONING WAS VOID AS OF THE DATE IN 2010. I'M FINE WITH THAT, BUT I KNOW THAT MR. CHRISTENSEN BELIEVES THAT THE APPROPRIATE WAY FOR TO DO IT IS TO REVERSION. SO I HAVE TO NOW TALK ABOUT HOW REVERSIONS WORK, AND IN ORDER TO REVERT, REVERT MEANS YOU GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING. THAT'S THE DEFINITION. IF YOU DON'T GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING, RIGHT NOW, WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE REZONING THE CASE. LET'S SAY, LIKE I SAY, LET'S SAY TONIGHT YOU DECIDE THAT YOU'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, REVERT THE [01:10:01] ZONING AND IT'S GONNA BE EFFECTIVE TONIGHT. THAT'S NOT A REVERSION, THAT'S A REZONING. LIKE IT'S A BRAND NEW APPLICATION AND YOU, IT, IT'S ILLEGAL FOR YOU TO DO THAT. A ZONING CASE STARTS THROUGH THE PROCESS. YOU HAVE A PROCESS TO GO THROUGH. THE STATUTE HAS A PROCESS TO GO THROUGH PLANNING COMMISSION, THE WHOLE NINE YARDS. REVERSION BY DEFINITION MEANS YOU GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING. SO THAT'S, THAT'S WHY YOU GOOD. KATHY, YOU WANT TO CON, ARE THESE FOLLOW UPS TO THAT POINT? OKAY. IT WAS THERE A PROBLEM, KURT AND INCLUDING 19, WHATEVER IT IS, 98, 98 IN ANYTHING THAT WE MIGHT OR MIGHT NOT NO, I MOVE FORWARD WITH COUNSEL'S FREE YOU TO CONSIDER THAT. UM, I MET A PROBLEM FOR YOU. UH, SO MY OPINION, COUNSEL IS THAT WHAT'S CONTROLS HERE IS STATE LAW. UH, AND IT WAS CITED BY BOTH ATTORNEYS FOR THE DEVELOPER A RS 9 4 61, UM, OR 4 62 0.01 E. AND THAT IS CLEAR THAT, AND IT'S ALREADY, THE LEGISLATURE ALREADY ENVISIONED WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN THIS TYPE OF SCENARIO AND ENVISION THAT THIS WOULD COME UP. UH, AND IN THAT CASE, COUNCIL HAS THE OPTION TO EXTEND THE EXPIRED PD, UM, OR REVERT THE ZONING. UM, I CAN ARGUE ABOUT WHICH TYPE IT WOULD BE, BUT THE END RESULT, AS COUNCILOR FOLTZ SAID, WOULD BE, WOULD BE THE SAME. THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD, BUILD LODGING EITHER THE, THE C ONE IN 98 OR THE UM, 2024 CO WITH A PROP 2 0 7 WAIVER. EITHER WAY, THEY, THE, THE PROPERTY WOULD GET, UH, BE ABLE TO BUILD THE, THE LODGING UNITS THAT THE DEVELOPER DESIRE. SO THAT'S, UH, CERTAINLY ONE OPTION. BUT BOTH OF THEM ALSO READ THE, THE SAME LAW. AND IT SAYS CLEARLY THAT COUNSEL CAN EXTEND, UM, THE EXPIRED PD. AND THAT FACT IS, IS UNDERLINED THAT COUNSEL ALREADY DID THAT ONCE, IN THIS CASE IN 2008 TO THE 2010 EXTENSION. UM, COUNSEL'S TAKE ASKED, BEING ASKED TO MAKE EVERY DECISION TODAY IN 2024, YES, IT WOULD'VE BEEN BETTER. I AGREE WITH, UH, UH, MR. POLK THAT IT SHOULD HAVE HAPPENED BACK IN 2010, BUT UNFORTUNATELY THE DEVELOPER DIDN'T ASK ANYTHING AND THE CITY DIDN'T TAKE ANY ACTION. BUT COUNCIL'S, UH, SUBJECT TO 2024 LAWS AND CAN'T, UH, BE TAKE ACTION BASED ON 2010, UH, UH, LAWS. UH, AND SO MY ADVICE HASN'T CHANGED. IT REMAINS THE SAME THAT COUNCIL HAS THE AUTHORITY GIVEN IT BY THE STATE IN THE A RS SECTION. UM, AND THAT'S WHAT CONTROLS HERE. IF THERE'S ANY CONFLICT, THEN THE STATE LAW'S GONNA PREVAIL. UH, SINCE THE CITY IS A SUBDIVISION OF THE STATE AND ALL OF ITS ZONING AUTHORITY IS DERIVED FROM THE STATE AS WELL. CAN I ASK THIS YOUR QUESTION ON THE SAME ISSUE? YES. NOTHING PETE DOES SO WELL, PETE WAS A FOLLOW UP ON MINE. YEAH, MY FOLLOW UP SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THAT, AND IT GOES BACK TO MR. POLK, YOUR PRESENTATION ON PAGE FIVE, WHERE YOU ARGUE THIS SAME QUESTION TOO ABOUT EXTENDING ONE TIME ONLY YOU QUOTE AN LDC CHAPTER THAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND. 411 3 IS NOT OUR LDC CODE. SO THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. UH, COUNCILMAN FURMAN, STEVEN POLK ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. I, I QUOTED THE LDC THAT WAS IN EFFECT AS OF 2010 WHEN THAT, WHEN THE, UH, ZONING APPROVAL EXPIRED. AND SO THAT WAS, THAT, THAT IS YOUR CORRECT ZONING CODE AS OF 20 2008 AND THEN 2010, THEN THERE WAS A COMPLETE REWRITE OF OF YOUR LDC THAT HAPPENED LATER. LAWYERS NEVER AGREE . OKAY, SO KURT, HERE'S MY REALLY SPECIFIC QUESTION TO YOU. IF COUNSEL WAS INCLINED TO DO A REVERSION, THE CO, IS THERE AN ISSUE WITH PUTTING A DATE INTO THAT MOTION? THE DATE OF 1998? IS THERE, WHAT DOES THAT MEAN FOR US? SO MAYOR, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, UH, AND, AND VICE MAYOR, I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THE DATE'S NEEDED FOR ANY REASON. THE, IT'S THE, THE LAW ALLOWS COUNSEL TO REVERT THE ZONING. UM, AND I MEAN, THAT'S IT. THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY ZONING THE CITY HAS TO REVERT IT TO. UM, I DON'T, NOT SURE. I MEAN, AND, AND ACCORDING TO THEM, EVEN THIS PROVISION, THIS MAY REVERT AND THAT THIS IS ALL VOID, AND SPECIFICALLY THIS ONE HAS BEEN VOIDED. EACH TIME COUNCIL PASSED A SUBSEQUENT, UM, ORDINANCE PASSING A NEW PD, THE 90 EIGHT'S LONG GONE. UH, THE 2005 IS LONG GONE. THE ONLY THING LEFT STANDING IS THE 2006. 'CAUSE UM, WHEN THEY PASSED THE NEW ORDINANCE, IT VOIDED THE PRIOR ORDINANCE ON THIS. SIMILARLY, WHEN COUNCIL PASSED NEW UPDATES TO, TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, LIKE IN 2018, IT VOIDED THE PRIOR ONES, UH, SUPERSEDED THEM. THERE'S ANYTHING IN CONFLICT IS WOULD BE VOID. UM, SO WHAT WE'RE LEFT WITH IS 2024 RULES. OKAY. BUT THE QUESTION [01:15:01] IS, IS REFERENCING A DATE, PUT US AT ANY RISK PUTTING A DATE IN THERE, A REFERENCE TO 1998, SPECIFICALLY FROM THE CITY'S POINT OF VIEW. IS THERE ANY POTENTIAL DETRIMENT TO REFERENCING THAT YEAR? NO. COUNSEL COULD REFERENCE THE YEAR IF THEY WANTED TO. I DON'T. THANK YOU. I DON'T, I DON'T SEE ANY PURPOSE THAT IT SERVES IN DOING SO. RIGHT. UM, BUT IT COULD BE REFERENCED. OKAY. SO IF OKAY, WE'VE GOT ALL THE FOLLOW-UPS, IF WE'VE THAT POINT. SO YOU HAVE OTHER POINTS? YEAH, I DO. PERFECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. . OKAY. SO MY, YOU HAD SAID, UM, I WANNA GET YOUR WORDING RIGHT THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR A CLEAN SLATE, I THINK WAS WHAT YOUR, YOUR, YOUR QUOTE WAS THERE. UH, AND THEN THERE WOULD BE FOLLOW UP AFTER THAT. SO THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR TONIGHT IS THE CLEAN SLATE SO THAT A PROPOSAL COULD COME FORWARD. WHAT WOULD THAT PROCESS THEN BE AT THAT POINT, STARTING WITH A CLEAN SLATE? IF SOMETHING CAME FORWARD, WHAT DOES THAT IN YOUR MIND ENTAIL? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT THEN GOES THROUGH A NORMAL PROCESS FOR REVIEW OF A DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL, WHICH WOULD GO THROUGH OUR, HAVE COMMUNITY NOTIFICATION AND GO THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING REVIEW FOR THEIR SORT OF, UM, OPINIONS THAT GET FORWARDED TO COUNCIL? OR WHAT'S IN, IN YOUR MIND, WHAT DOES, WHAT'S ENTAILED? SURE. UM, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBER KINSELLA, UM, IT'S A MULTI-STEP PROCESS. AND WE END UP HERE A NUMBER OF TIMES. UM, THE FIRST ONE WOULD BE WE WOULD THEN, SINCE YOU MADE THE CHANGE TO THE CO DISTRICT LAST YEAR, REMOVING LODGING, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE TO HAVE LODGING. SO WE WOULD HAVE THROUGH OUR SELLER, BASICALLY WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY, UM, THEY WOULD BASICALLY, UM, ASK YOU TO WAIVE WHAT YOU DID LAST YEAR AND PERMIT LESS THAN SEVEN LODGING UNITS PER PARCEL ON THIS PROJECT. THEN ASSUMING THAT YOU DO THAT, UM, 'CAUSE WITHOUT THAT THERE'S, THERE'S, THEY CAN'T MOVE FORWARD. AND THEN YOU END UP WITH A PROP 2 0 7 CLAIM FROM THE SELLER. SO THAT'S, THAT'S THE PROBLEM. UM, BUT, BUT THEN THE STEVENSON FAMILY CAN'T BUY IT 'CAUSE IT CAN'T BUILD WHAT THEY WANT TO BUILD. SO THAT'S THE FIRST STEP. AND THAT WOULD, OF COURSE, WE HAVE TO BE APPROVED HERE AT A PUBLIC HEARING. THEN THE SECOND THING IS WE STILL HAVE TO DO, GO THROUGH OUR DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW, RIGHT? A DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO WE WOULD HAVE TO COME TO YOU WITH SITE PLANS, BUILDING ELEVATIONS, ALL THE THINGS THAT, UM, WE DISCUSSED WITH THE RD OLSEN CASE, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE MONTHS AGO. UM, AGAIN, ALL PUBLIC PROCESSES. SO ALL THIS BASICALLY DOES TODAY, AND THAT'S WHERE I MET WITH CLEAN SLATE. IT GETS US BACK TO WHAT WAS C ONE, WHICH IS NOW CO AND THEN LETS US TAKE THE NEXT STEP FORWARD. OTHERWISE, UM, I DON'T REPRESENT THE SELLER. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SELLER WOULD DO BY WAY OF, I, I DON'T, THERE'S A REASON I'M NOT A LITIGATOR. I HATE LITIGATION. I HATE, I HATE IT, RIGHT? I'M A PROBLEM SOLVER. THAT'S WHO I AM. BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE SELLER'S GONNA DO. 'CAUSE NOW HE'S GOT A PIECE OF LAND THAT HE CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH, ESSENTIALLY. UM, AT LEAST AT ANYWAY. SO FOR ME, ALL I WANT IS MY CLIENT TO BE ABLE TO BUILD SOMETHING EVEN BETTER THAN AMTE. AND IF YOU MAYOR WITH, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, HE'LL TELL YOU WHAT HIS, AT LEAST HIS HIS IDEA IS FOR THE SITE. BUT, SO WE END UP WITH THESE ADDITIONAL STEPS THAT ARE ALL PUBLIC HEARINGS. BUT FOR ME, PUTTING MY PROFESSOR HAT ON THE REVERSION HAS TO BE TO THE BEGINNING OF THE PRIOR ZONING. NOW, ARGUABLY, YOU KNOW, YOU HAD THE FIRST PD WAS IN 1998, YOU AMENDED IT, RIGHT? THEN YOU AMENDED IT AGAIN AND AGAIN. SO DO YOU GO TO THE LAST AMENDMENT? I DON'T CARE. ALL I CARE IS THAT IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE AND FEEL LIKE, AND LEGALLY BA REZONING TO A CO WITHOUT A REVERSION TO THE BEGINNING OF THE PREVIOUS ZONING CASE. SO I'M, I'M HAPPY WITH 2010 IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT, BUT I I, THERE'S TOO MUCH RISK INVOLVED IF YOU DON'T, FOR MY CLIENT. SO NOW, KURT, MY QUESTION IS FOR YOU, DO YOU AGREE IF THERE WAS, UNDER WHAT WAS JUST DESCRIBED IN RESPONSE TO MY QUESTION, IF THERE WAS A REVERSION AND THAT CREATED A QUOTE, CLEAN SLATE, DOES THAT PROVIDE THE MOST AND BEST OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC PROCESS TO PLAY OUT OF WHAT [01:20:01] WE USUALLY GO THROUGH WITH ANY SORT OF LAND DEVELOPMENT REVIEWS? SO THE, THE, THE ONLY WAY TO FULFILL OR, OR TO COMPLY WITH A NORMAL ZONING WOULD BE IF THEY WERE APPLYING FOR A REZONE AND THEN IT WOULD GO THROUGH A PUBLIC HEARING AT P AND Z BEFORE IT COMES TO CITY COUNCIL. THAT'S NOT REQUIRED IN THIS CASE. UM, THE STATE LAW ALLOWS A REVERSION OR EXTENSION THAT CAN BE DONE SO BY ONE PUBLIC HEARING AND, AND HAS TO BE DONE SO BY, UM, CITY COUNCIL AT A PUBLIC HEARING. THERE'S NOT AN OPPORTUNITY FOR IT TO GO, UM, TO P AND Z FIRST. UM, COUNCIL CERTAINLY, UM, THE APPLICANT CAN CERTAINLY, UH, DO MORE PUBLIC OUTREACH, UM, IF, IF EITHER SIDE WANTED MORE TO BE DONE. UM, BUT IT, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE EXTENT OF THIS. I MEAN, IT WAS ALREADY POSTED ON THE PROPERTY, UM, AND WE FOLLOWED OUR NORMAL OR OTHERWISE OUR NORMAL, UM, UH, NOTICE PROCEDURES. OKAY. THAT, THAT, THAT ANSWERS PART A. BUT PART OF MY QUESTION THOUGH IS LEAPING AHEAD IN TIME. OKAY. AND IF WE'RE AT THAT CLEAN SLATE AND THEN THERE'S A, A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, THE FACT THAT THE ZONING REVERTED THAT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW, AND MAYBE CARRIE CAN JUMP IN ON THIS OR, OR STEVE, UH, PLEASE, THIS WOULD GO BACK AND GO THROUGH THE REGULAR P AND Z PROCESS. THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO KNOW. YEAH, SO IF THE COUNCIL, UH, REVERTS THE PROPERTY, UH, TO THE COMMERCIAL ZONING, UH, AT THAT POINT THEY STILL DON'T HAVE ANY SET PLANS. AND IF THEY'RE GONNA BUILD ANY BUILDINGS, UM, DEPENDING ON THE SIZE OF THE BUILDINGS, THEY WILL HAVE TO GO THROUGH A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW WITH P AND Z. UH, THE PROJECT THEY'RE ENVISIONING WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH P AND Z FOR DEVELOPMENT REVIEW. OKAY. ALRIGHT. THANK YOU VICE MAYOR. SO, UH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT CO BUT IN OUR PACKET WE ALSO INCLUDE RS 35 AND RM TWO FOR THIS PROPERTY ON CERTAIN PARCELS. ARE YOU IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT? UM, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND MAYOR AND VICE MAYOR, IF I MIGHT JUST ADD THAT THE, THE RM PARCELS ARE ON THE WEST, UM, SIDE OF STATE ROUTE 89 A, THE DEVELOPER, UM, THE, UH, DUTCHMAN COVE IS MY UNDERSTANDING, IS NOT LOOKING TO PURCHASE THOSE. AND SO THE ARGUMENTS ABOUT IT BEING ONE, THAT SIDE BEING EXCUSED FROM PERFORMANCE, I, I, I AGREE WITH THAT. THEY HAVE BEEN EXCUSED FROM PERFORMANCE BECAUSE OF THE SUBSEQUENT AGREEMENT WITH ACCESS CAPITAL IN THIS CITY. UH, BUT TWO, THEY'RE REALLY NOT EVEN PART OF THIS REQUEST. THEY DIDN'T REQUEST THEM, UH, STAFF INCLUDED THEM AS A WHOLE BECAUSE WE HAVE ONE PD HERE. UM, AND WHATEVER YOU DO WITH ONE SIDE OF THE PD SEEMS LIKE IT SHOULD BE DONE AT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PD INSTEAD OF LEAVING SOME, SOME PARCELS OUT THERE AND, AND MORE LIMBO. OKAY. SO GOING BACK TO KATHY'S POINT, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE, THE REVERSION TO CO TONIGHT, THERE WOULD STILL BE NECESSARY SET OF NEGOTIATIONS IN ORDER TO WAIVE THE RESTRICTION AGAINST LODGING. MM-HMM. AND, RIGHT, UM, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS OUR SELLER RIGHT, WOULD SUBMIT THE, THE REQUEST, RIGHT? AND THEN IT'D BE UP TO COUNCIL BASICALLY TO GRANT A WAIVER OR NOT. IF YOU DON'T, THEN HE'S FREE TO FILE A LAWSUIT FOR TAKING HIS CLAIM, RIGHT? BUT THE IDEA AGAIN, IS TO DO THIS COOPERATIVELY IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY AND THEN, YOU KNOW, UM, HAVE THE STEVENSON BE ABLE TO DO THEIR NEW RESORT. AND THEN AS WE GO THROUGH THE PLANNING PROCESS, WHICH IS IN ADDITION, THAT'S ANOTHER SET OF HEARINGS, WHICH IS IN ADDITION TO GOING THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW FOR PLANNING COMMISSION, ET CETERA, WE WOULD, AND I'VE GOT A COMMITMENT FROM MR. STEVENSON AND I'LL ASK HIM TO CONFIRM IT, THAT WE WILL GIVE THE CITY OF PARK. AGAIN, WE'RE NOT DOING THIS AS, YOU KNOW, TRYING TO NEGOTIATE, RIGHT? IT'S WHAT HE'S ALWAYS WANTED TO DO. SO, UM, BUT THESE ARE ALL THINGS THAT HAVE TO FOLLOW. 'CAUSE AFTER, I MEAN, WITHOUT SOMETHING DONE BY THE COUNCIL, WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING. BUT, BUT I, I REALLY, I, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR BEING REDUNDANT, MAYOR, BUT HAVING THIS BE REVERTING BACK TO ONE OF THE DATES FOR ONE OF THE PDS IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT FOR THIS TO BE A LEGAL SITUATION WHERE MY CLIENT IS COMFORTABLE BUYING THE PROPERTY AND DOING WHAT HE WANTS TO DO. YOU, YOU GOOD, BRIAN? THANK YOU, MAYOR. UH, KURT, IF THIS GOES BACK TO CEO, THEN THERE IS A RIGHT TO 36 UNITS. HOW, WHAT, WHAT IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE RIGHTS TO 50 UNITS? WHAT ACTION WOULD ADDITIONALLY BE REQUIRED FOR THAT TO OCCUR? [01:25:01] SO THE, THERE ARE, I'M NOT SURE THE EXACT ACREAGE, SOMEWHERE AROUND 10 ACRES, MAYBE A LITTLE LESS. THAT WOULD BE ZONED COMMERCIAL IN A REVERSION. UM, THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE IN A COMMERCIAL ZONING IS 10,000 SQUARE FEET. UM, AND SO THERE JUST NEED TO BE A SUBDIVISION, UM, UH, DONE. AND THE SUBDIVISION COULD INCREASE THE, THE NUMBER OF PARCELS FROM SIX TO SAY NINE. AND IF THERE IS NINE, THEN YOU COULD GET UP TO 54 LODGING, WHICH WOULD ALLOW THE, THE DEVELOPER, THE 50 LODGING UNITS THAT THEY'RE SEEKING. SO MY GRANTING CO WE'RE GRANTING 50 PLUS. SO IN, IN ACTUALITY, CORRECT. AND THAT'S ASSUMING A WAIVER ALSO? YES. YES. SO COUNCIL'S OPTION, OF COURSE, IN THE, THE WAIVER PERIOD IS TO, TO ALSO TO THE DIMINUTION IN VALUE. UM, THAT'S AN OPTION. UM, ALTHOUGH PROBABLY EXPENSIVE IN THIS CASE. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR. OKAY. UM, I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE PUBLIC OUTREACH PORTION AND SOME OF YOUR STUDIES. UH, IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO BYPASS, ARE YOU LOOKING TO BYPASS P AND Z? NO. MAYOR, NO, NOT AT ALL. SO THE TRAFFIC STUDY WOULD STILL BE DONE? UH, PUBLIC OUTREACH WOULD STILL BE DONE? MM-HMM, . OKAY. MOST OF MY OTHER QUESTIONS WERE ALREADY ANSWERED FROM THE DAY OR SO. UM, MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO WOULD I, BUT LET ME ASK YOU THIS. BEFORE WE DO THAT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO HAVE AUDIENCE, UH, QUESTIONS FIRST? YES. SO THEN WE COULD DISCUSS THOSE AS WELL. SO I'D LIKE TO OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC BEFORE WE GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION. SO WE HAVE, UH, HEINER, YOU WANNA STEP UP? UH, ALRIGHT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU'VE DONE THIS BEFORE. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. YOU HAVE THE CLOCK ON THE WALL, THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS, UH, WHATEVER ISSUES YOU HAVE. SURE. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR BLO, VICE MAYOR, COOK COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS HI ZACKER. I LIVE IN VILLE. I'VE LIVED AND WORKED IN THE AREA FOR ABOUT FOUR YEARS NOW. I LOVE IT HERE. AND I GOT MARRIED HERE 14 YEARS AGO, AND SEDONA IS A BEAUTIFUL SPOT. AND I WANT TO JUST TOUCH BASE ON A FEW THINGS THAT SEEM LOGICAL. AND AFTER HEARING THIS DISCUSSION, IT SOUNDS LIKE CURRENTLY OR LATE LATEST ZONINGS HAVE BEEN FOR TIMESHARES WITH THREE, THREE STORY BUILDINGS UP TO 150 UNITS. AND SO A FEW THINGS I WANNA ADDRESS IS TRAFFIC IMPACT, RIGHT? SO AM BTE ALWAYS HAS STAFF ON HAND TO DRIVE PEOPLE TO AND FROM WHEREVER THEY PLEASE. SO THAT WOULD MITIGATE A LOT OF TRAFFIC THROUGH PEOPLE DRIVING THEIR OWN VEHICLES AROUND ECONOMIC IMPACT. UM, AMBIENTE DOES ATTRACT HIGH NET WORTH INDIVIDUALS TO THE AREA THAT WOULD ALSO SPEND MONEY AND SURROUNDING BUSINESSES, AND THUS, POSITIVELY IMPACT LOCAL ECONOMIES. AMBIENT HAS ALWAYS BEEN INCREDIBLY ECO-CONSCIOUS LOOKING TO DO RIGHT BY THE ENVIRONMENT AND HAVING ESSENTIALLY, UM, THE ENVIRONMENT, UM, IN ITS BEST INTEREST. OBVIOUSLY I LIVE HERE, I'VE WORKED IN MANY PLACES IN THE AREA, AND THIS WOULD CONTRIBUTE TO JOB CREATION, WHICH IS CRUCIAL TO PEOPLE THAT TRY TO MAKE A LIVING HERE. ONE OF THE FOCUSES ALWAYS HAS BEEN TO HAVE LOCAL PARTNERSHIPS, WHICH I BELIEVE IN STRENGTHENING THE LOCAL ECONOMY. UM, ON A PERSONAL NOTE, I'VE WORKED ALL OVER THE WORLD IN VERY BIG CORPORATIONS IN HOSPITALITY. I'VE WORKED FOR THE UNITED NATIONS, UH, I'VE WORKED IN GERMANY, FRANCE, AFRICA, MIAMI, DC AND NOW FI PHOENIX, AND FINALLY HERE IN SEDONA. AGAIN, I LOVE IT HERE. AND I WANNA STATE FOR THE RECORD THAT I HAVE NOT EVER COME ACROSS SUCH A GENEROUS AND HUMBLE EMPLOYER AS THE STEVENSON FAMILY. I THINK THEY HAVE OUR BEST INTERESTS AT HEART, AND THUS, I THINK ANYBODY THAT IS A POTENTIAL FUTURE EMPLOYER WOULD BE LUCKY TO HAVE THIS PROJECT GO THROUGH. AND WITH THAT, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANKS YOUR HONOR, AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. THANK YOU. COUNCIL MEMBERS. OKAY, SO NOW WE HAVE, UH, JOE HUFF WILL BE FOLLOWED BY NICHOLAS, UH, SPA GOTTI, IF I HOPE I DIDN'T BUTCHER YOUR NAME TOO MUCH, BUT, SO JOE, IS JOE STILL HERE? I THINK HE HAD TO LEAVE. [01:30:01] OKAY. THEN, UH, NICHOLAS WILL BE FOLLOWED BY LOU WHITE. GOOD EVENING COUNSEL. THANK YOU. AND NO, YOU DID NOT BUTCHER MY LAST NAME, ALTHOUGH THAT DOES HAPPEN PRETTY FREQUENTLY. I AM NOT NICK SPAGHETTI . RIGHT. MY NAME IS INDEED NICK TI THANK YOU AGAIN. UH, I'VE WORKED FOR THE STEVENSON FAMILY AT AMBI SEDONA. UM, I'VE WORKED IN THE HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY FOR OVER 20 YEARS, UH, AND I'VE SPENT ABOUT 10 OF THOSE YEARS, UH, WORKING AT SOME OF THE TOP RESORTS HERE IN THIS TOWN. UM, AS HAINA MENTIONED, I LOVE SEDONA. THIS IS A, IT'S A UNIQUE PLACE, A MELTING POT, AND, UH, GENUINELY A CONGLOMERATION OF PEOPLE JUST FROM AROUND THE WORLD. UM, I'D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT THE STEVENSON FAMILY. UH, THEY ARE ALL LONGTIME RESIDENTS OF SEDONA AND THE VERDE VALLEY, UH, AND THEY ARE ONE OF THE LARGER EMPLOYERS. UM, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I'D LIKE TO MENTION IS THE POSITIVE CULTURE THAT THE STEVENSON FAMILY HAS. THEY HAVE MOLDING GRAPHICS IN CLARKDALE, THEIR MEDIAN TENURE. THERE IS 17 AND A HALF YEARS. I CAN'T THINK OF ANOTHER PLACE THAT HAS THAT KIND OF TENURE. UM, THAT ONLY HAPPENS BY OPERATE, OFFERING A PLACE TO WORK THAT PEOPLE ENJOY WORKING AT. UM, I'LL SAY HERE IN IN SEDONA AS WELL. UH, I BELIEVE GENUINELY THAT THE MOST PROFITABLE THING ANY ORGANIZATION CAN HAVE IS A POSITIVE CULTURE. THAT POSITIVE CULTURE IS TRULY AT THE CORE OF THE STEVENSON FAMILY. UM, THIS IS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY HOLD VERY TRUE AND NEAR TO THEIR HEARTS. AND, AND, AND I DO AS WELL. I THINK THIS POSITIVE CULTURE IS DRIVEN THROUGH STRONG ETHICS AND MORALS. UM, AND THAT THAT IS REALLY GENUINELY WHAT CREATES A POSITIVE CULTURE. THE STEVENSON FAMILY EMPLOY ALL LOCAL STAFF, VENDORS AND CONTRACTORS, MYSELF BEING ONE OF THOSE. UM, A LOT OF RESORTS IN THIS TOWN REQUIRE J ONE TEMP, UH, LABOR TO KEEP THE DOORS OPEN AND OPERATE. UM, IT'S A, IT'S A VERY HIGHLY DEMANDING INDUSTRY THAT REQUIRES A LOT OF STAFF TO TO, TO KEEP THE DOORS OPEN. UM, THE STEVENSON FAMILY HAS MANAGED TO, TO TAKE CARE OF BOTH MOLDING GRAPHICS AND ONTE WITHOUT ANY OVERSEAS HELP. THEY'RE OPERATING YEAR ROUND WITH LOCAL TALENT, LOCAL ASSETS. UM, MYSELF, AGAIN, BEING ONE OF THOSE LOCAL ASSETS, UM, THE BENEFITS AND WAGES THAT THE STEVENSON FAMILY OFFER TO THEIR EMPLOYEES ARE INCREDIBLY COMPETITIVE. UH, AND THEY ALLOW A LOT OF LOCAL RESIDENTS, UH, A QUALITY OF LIFE THAT JUST IS DIFFICULT TO COME BY, UH, ELSEWHERE. UM, I SUPPORT THE ZONING CHANGE TO ALLOW LODGING AT THE NEW PROPERTY NEXT TO OAK CREEK. THIS WOULD ALLOW ANOTHER ECO-CONSCIOUS AND SUSTAINABLE CONCEPT THAT WOULD ATTRACT THE TYPE OF TOURISTS THAT WE AS A COMMUNITY ARE LOOKING FOR. PEOPLE THAT AREN'T JUST GOING TO COME UP FOR THE DAY, DESTROY OUR TRAILS AND LEAVE. I KNOW THAT'S NOT WHAT ANY OF US WANT HERE AND THAT I'M SURE THE CITIZENS IN THIS TOWN WANT. UM, AS HAINA MENTIONED, WE STAFF 24 7, SO IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO COME UP AND ENJOY THOSE TRAILS, THEY'LL BE PERSONALLY DELIVERED BY OUR TEAM THAT'S GOING TO LIMIT THE TRAFFIC. AND THAT'S GOING TO, SORRY ABOUT THAT , BUT THANK YOU. I GOT THE GIST OF WHAT EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR SPEAKING. UH, LOU HOYT WILL BE, UH, FOLLOWED BY JOE FRIEND GOFO. I KNOW I SCREWED THAT ONE UP, BUT JOE, ARE YOU HERE? OKAY, GOOD. LOU? YES, SIR. UM, MY NAME IS LOU WHITE. MY WIFE AND I LIVE HERE IN SEDONA. I AM HERE TODAY TO SUPPORT THE STEVENSON FAMILY PROJECT. LET ME BEGIN BY THANKING EACH OF YOU ON THE CITY COUNCIL. WE HAVE A GREAT CITY BECAUSE YOU'RE HARD WORK BECAUSE MY CAREER IN THE NAVY AND MY CAREER IN THE AIRLINE, I LIVED ALL OVER THE COUNTRY. I LIVED ALL OVER THE WORLD. AND, UM, FIRST OFF, I AM A CHRISTIAN. I LOVE THE, THE BLESSING OF HEAVEN, JESUS CHRIST AS OUR LORD AND SAVIOR, AND THAT GOD LOVED THE PSALM. I SERVED 23 YEARS AS A COMBAT FIGHTER PILOT, FLEW IN VIETNAM. I WAS AN INSTRUCTOR AT TOP BEND FOR FOUR YEARS AFTER RETIRING FROM THE MILITARY, I FLEW THE CAPTAIN FOR DELTA AIRLINE FOR ANOTHER 25 YEARS. I HAD A HOME IN SEDONA FOR 40 YEARS. MY WIFE AND I HAVE LIVED HERE IN SEDONA FOR 20 YEARS. I AM INVOLVED IN THE SEDONA HIGH SWIM, THE TEACHERS, THE PRINCIPALS, THE [01:35:01] SUPERINTENDENT, AND OF COURSE THE SUPERINTENDENT. AND MOST ESPECIALLY THE STUDENTS. I'VE HELPED COACH THE ATHLETIC TEAMS AT THE HIGH SWIM FOR OVER 20 YEARS. I'VE APPROACHED THE STEVENSON GRANDKIDS, ALL OF THE NUMEROUS OUTSTANDING GRANDKIDS IN SPORTS. AND, UM, I'M A PAST MEMBER OF SEDONA INTERNATIONAL FILM FESTIVAL BOARD OF DRESSERS, AND I WAS HONORED IN 2006 AS SEDONAS CITIZEN OF THE YEAR. I MENTIONED ALL THIS TO BRING ANY, SO NOT BRINGING ANY FLU AWAY TO MYSELF, BUT TO LET YOU KNOW THAT I LOVE SEDONA AND I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN SEDONA. THIS IS WHY I SUPPORT THE STEVENSON FAMILY PROJECT SO MUCH. I'VE KNOWN THE STEVENSONS, MIKE STEVENSON, HIS WIFE FOR MANY YEARS. HIS FAMILY HAS BEEN HERE SINCE THE 1960S. HE LOVES SED DUNUM AND WANTS THE BEST FOR SAD DUNUM. HIS PROJECT WEEE HELPS SAD DUNUM, AND THEY'RE ALL IN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE. I URGE THE CITY COUNCIL TODAY TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT FOR THE STEVENSONS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU, LOU. BOY, DID YOU MAKE IT RIGHT ON TIME? BOY, . BUT I'M NOT SURPRISED THAT YOU WOULD DO PERFECT TIMING LIKE THAT. THANK YOU. OKAY, SO WE HAVE, UH, JOE, YOUR NEXT WILL BE FOLLOWED BY UH, CHRISTINE CHRISTINA HAMMINGTON. MM-HMM. . ARE YOU STILL HERE, CHRISTINA? OKAY, GOOD. I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE. OKAY, GO AHEAD JOE. IT'S JOE FRAN CARROLL. BY THE WAY, WHEN I CAME UP HERE, UH, ALMOST FIVE YEARS AGO, MIKE STEVENSON, AND AT THAT TIME I WAS WORKING FOR PHIL MORRIS, THEY SAID, WOULD YOU COME UP HERE FOR SIX OR EIGHT MONTHS? I THINK IN SEPTEMBER IT'LL BE FIVE YEARS. RIGHT MIKE? THE REASON I SUPPORT THE PROJECT IS NOT SIMPLY BECAUSE THE STEVENSON FAMILY, BUT BECAUSE OF HOW THEY DO THINGS. AND I'VE WORKED WITH MIKE DAILY FOR ALMOST FIVE YEARS. HE NEVER TELLS ME DON'T TRY SOMETHING. HE NEVER TELLS ME NOT TO, UH, LOOK AT OTHER, OTHER WAYS OF DOING IT. WHEN HE INHERITED THE AMANTE PROPERTY AND PURCHASED IT, IT HAD A SINGLE UNIT APPROVAL FOR A SINGLE UNIT DEVELOPMENT OF A, OF A SINGLE BUILDING, 40 ROOM HOTEL. AND IMMEDIATELY THAT WAS THROWN OUT. SO WHAT YOU SEE THERE IS THE FIRST LANDSCAPE HOTEL IN NORTH AMERICA. AND TO TELL YOU HOW MANY TIMES WE'VE CHANGED AND REWORKED, AND WITH THE HELP OF PEOPLE LIKE STEVE ES OVER HERE AND HANCO FROM ENGINEERING AND WITH BRUCE SOMAN, THEY MADE EVERY EFFORT TO LOOK AT WHAT WE WERE DOING AND TRY TO MAKE IT BETTER. AND SO WE REALLY APPRECIATE, ESPECIALLY STEVE MURTI. YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE A COUNT OF HOW MANY TIMES I'VE TALKED TO HIM ON THE PHONE OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS. BUT THE VISION OF THAT SITE IN AMBI AND THE VISION ON THE SITE AT CREEK SITE IS TO PERVER PRESERVE THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. AND IF YOU, IF YOU GO LOOK AT AMBI, WHAT YOU SEE IS 40 SINGLE UNITS BUILT INTO THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT. AND UM, THAT'S WHY IT'S A LANDSCAPE HOTEL. AND THAT'S WHY WE NEED MIKE STEVENSON AND HIS FAMILY TO DO THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JOE. ALRIGHT, CHRISTINA, WE'LL BE FOLLOWED BY DEBORAH. UH, VOGEL. I WAS NOT PREPARED TO SPEAK AND I'VE NEVER SPOKEN IN COURT. THAT'S OKAY. WE DON'T MIND. . I'VE BEEN IN SEDONA SINCE OH EIGHT. HOLD ON, HOLD ON. START. YOU HAVE TO START WITH YOUR NAME. OH, CHRISTINA HEMINGSON, CITY OF RESIDENCE. AND YOU ONLY HAVE THREE MINUTES. UH, SEDONA UPTOWN . THAT'S OKAY. UM, I'VE BEEN IN THE WINE BUSINESS HERE AND BEEN VERY, VERY ACTIVE SINCE 2008, COMING FROM THE WINE BUSINESS. ABOUT 10 YEARS BEFORE THAT, I INVESTED IN HEAVEN LEAF WITH ROD AND CYNTHIA. I PUT THEM ON THE MAP. I'VE WORKED VERY CLOSELY WITH ALL THESE PROPERTIES. I'VE MET THE STEVENSONS, UM, ABOUT A YEAR BEFORE THEY OPENED AMBIENTE, MAYBE A YEAR AND A HALF, AND FELL IN LOVE WITH THE FAMILY AND THE CULTURE AND THE SUPPORT. THERE'S NOT AN ACCOUNT THAT I CALL ON THAT DOESN'T WANT ME TO TAKE 'EM TO LUNCH THERE. ALL OF MY RESORTS LOVE AMANTE. I THINK THAT THERE'S NO BETTER FAMILY TO DEVELOP SEDONA. THEY ARE SEDONA AND I LOVE THEM. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. WELL, THANK YOU. WE SEE WE DIDN'T BITE AT ALL. UH, JOETTA WINTER IS NEXT. FOLLOWED BY PATRICK SCHWEISS. [01:40:05] I THOUGHT, I THOUGHT YOU SAID DEBORAH FIRST. YEAH, YOU DID. YOU DID SAY DEBORAH. I APOLOGIZE. YES. ALRIGHT, SO JOETTA, YOU'LL BE NEXT. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. MY NAME IS DEBRA WALL BOGLE. I AM A RESIDENT OF WEST SEDONA AND I'M THE DIRECTOR OF SPA AND GUEST PROGRAMS AT ABONTE. MY FAMILY AND I FIRST RELOCATED TO SEDONA IN 1999, WHERE MY TWO CHILDREN GREW UP ATTENDING WEST SEDONA ELEMENTARY AND RED ROCK HIGH SCHOOL. OVER THE YEARS, I'VE WORN SEVERAL HATS. I OWNED A LOCAL BUSINESS HERE, BEEN ACTIVE ON THE CHAMBER, AND WAS PART OF THE OPENING TEAM AT MIMO IN 2001. ADDITIONALLY, MY HUSBAND AND I WERE INVOLVED WITH THE SEDONA SWIM TEAM BOARD FOR MANY YEARS. MY CAREER IN HOSPITALITY IN SEDONA HAS ALLOWED ME TO EDUCATE GUESTS ABOUT HEALTHY LIVING AND TO SHARE MY RESPECT FOR AND APPRECIATION OF THE CULTURE AND STUNNING ENVIRONMENT THAT MAKE THIS PLACE SO SPECIAL. THIS FIELD HAS ALSO PROVIDED FINANCIAL STABILITY FOR ME AND MY NOW ADULT CHILDREN, ENABLING THEM TO BUY HOMES AND RAISE THEIR OWN FAMILIES. HERE. A FRIEND ENCOURAGED ME TO TOUR ANTE DURING ITS CONSTRUCTION. ALTHOUGH I WASN'T ACTIVELY SEEKING A RETURN TO SPA AND RESORT OPERATIONS, I WAS CAPTIVATED BY THE PROPERTY AND THE STEVENSON FAMILY'S VISION. THEIR COMMITMENT TO PRESERVING THE LANDSCAPE, CREATING A SUPERIOR WORK ENVIRONMENT, AND CONTRIBUTING POSITIVELY TO THE COMMUNITY'S LONG-TERM SUSTAINABILITY DEEPLY RESONATED WITH ME AT ABONTE CREEKSIDE. I'M EXCITED TO ELEVATE THESE PRINCIPLES FURTHER WITH OUR EXPANDED SPA FACILITIES AND PROGRAMS. I LOOK FORWARD TO OFFERING GUESTS A RANGE OF EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES AND EXPERIENCES THAT PROMOTE SELF-CARE AND DEEPEN THEIR APPRECIATION FOR OUR BEAUTIFUL HOME. THANK YOU SO MUCH, AND I DEFINITELY SUPPORT THIS ZONE. THANK YOU, DEBORAH. OKAY, DUETTA, YOU'RE NEXT. I'M SORRY FOR THE DELAY. AND PATRICK SCHWEISS, YOU'LL BE NEXT. HI, MY NAME'S JOTA WINTER. I LIVE IN SEDONA. I'M SURE MOST OF YOU KNOW WHO I AM. UM, I'M HERE TO SUPPORT AND SPEAK TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF AB 30 89 TO REVERT THE ZONING BACK TO CO. I LIVE IN THE THICK OF UPTOWN, UH, AND HAVE FOR THE PAST FOUR YEARS. I'M JUST A FEW BLOCKS FROM THE HYATT OPINION, SO I AM IN THE MIX OF ALL THE TOURISTS AND ALL THE TRAFFIC. UM, BUT I HAVE TO HONESTLY SAY WITHIN THE LAST YEAR OR SO, I'VE NOTICED, UH, QUITE A DIFFERENCE IN THE TRAFFIC AND THE, UM, TYPE OF TOURIST THAT WE HAVE AROUND UPTOWN. UH, I ATTRIBUTE IT PROBABLY TO MOSTLY DAY TRIPPERS, BUT, UM, THEY JUST DON'T HAVE THE RESPECT IN THE SAME, UM, THE, THEY DON'T TREAT SEDONA THE WAY IT SHOULD BE TREATED. UM, OKAY. SEDONA IS A SPECIAL PLACE AND WE ALL KNOW THAT WE WILL NEVER DETER TOURISTS, BUT WE CERTAINLY CAN HAVE A SAY IN THE TYPE OF TOURISTS THAT VISIT US. I HAVE TOURED ONTE DINED AT THEIR FABULOUS RESTAURANT, AND I'VE HAD CLIENTS RAVE ABOUT STAYING THERE. AMTE CREEKSIDE WOULD BRING A TOUCH OF CLASS TO UPTOWN JUST AS LEBER HAS. AND I HOPE THAT A CITY WILL DO THE RIGHT THING AND SUPPORT THIS PROJECT. WE ARE BLESSED AS A CITY TO HAVE LOCAL RESIDENTS. THE STEVENSONS ARE AMAZING, UM, THAT INVEST IN OUR COMMUNITY BY DEVELOPING ANOTHER UNIQUE RESORT THAT WILL BRING THE KIND OF TOURISTS THAT WE DESERVE AND WANT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. JOTA. PATRICK SCHWEISS WILL BE FOLLOWED BY MIKE WISE. ARE YOU HERE, MIKE WISE? YEAH. THERE WE, OH, BACK IN A CORNER. OKAY. PAT, YOU KNOW, HELLO MAYOR, VICE MAYOR AND CITY COUNSELORS. THANK YOU. I'M PAT SCHWEISS AND I LIVE IN SEDONA IN WEST S IN FACT, I LIVE IN CASAA THAT OVERLOOKS AMTE. UM, AND THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'D LIKE TO START. I'VE BEEN A VERY DEAR FRIEND OF THE STEVENSON FAMILY FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. UM, BUT I WANNA SPECIFICALLY TALK ABOUT THE DUE DILIGENCE THAT THEY DID. UH, LOU AND I ARE NEIGHBORS IN CASCA DENTA. AND WHEN THEY WERE BUILDING AMBI BEYONCE, I'VE NEVER SEEN SOMEONE GO THROUGH MORE OF A DUE PROCESS WITH THE NEIGHBORS TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE WAS HAPPY WITH WHAT THEY WERE DOING. AND EVERYONE WAS IN AGREEMENT. THEY SPENT SO MUCH TIME ON PUBLIC INPUT. AND I KNOW THEY WILL DO THAT VERY SAME THING ON THIS PROJECT. AND I'M VERY MUCH IN SUPPORT OF MAKING THIS CHANGE. UM, I'M PROUD BECAUSE THE SLIDE THAT THEY SHOWED OF MIKE, THE DISNEY RESTAURATEUR COMING AND JOINING THE FAMILY BUSINESS WAS MY IN-LAW'S NEWSPAPER. I'M MARRIED TO THE RED ROCK NEWS. SO MY MOTHER-IN-LAW, REST IN PEACE, PROBABLY WROTE THAT STORY AND RAN THOSE PICTURES. UM, AND THEY OFTEN TALKED. UNFORTUNATELY, I NEVER GOT TO EXPERIENCE DUTCHMAN'S CO. BUT MY WIFE ATE THERE WITH HER FAMILY. ROBERT AND LORETTA LARSON USED TO LOVE THAT PLACE AND RAVED ABOUT IT. AND I THINK IT'S ADMIRABLE. THEY WANNA BRING THAT SPIRIT BACK. WE ALL LONG [01:45:01] FOR SEDONA OF YESTERYEAR. THEY'RE BRINGING A LITTLE BIT OF THAT BACK, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN. AND I'M REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THAT. AND, UH, MY KIDS GREW UP PLAYING LITTLE LEAGUE WITH MATT AND ALLISON'S KIDS. WE'VE KNOWN COLLEEN FOR YEARS. MY WIFE ELIZABETH GRADUATED WITH JENNIFER MAY FROM, UH, AT MINGUS HIGH SCHOOL. SO WE HAVE A LONG, LONG FAMILY HISTORY AND, AND EVERY ONE OF THOSE, THIS IS THE KIND OF FAMILY, THIS WONDERFUL GROUP, IS AT EVERY ONE OF THOSE LITTLE LEAGUE GAMES. NO MATTER HOW BUSY GRANDMA AND GRANDPA WERE, MIKE AND KATHY WERE ALWAYS THERE CHEERING ON THEIR GRANDKIDS. ALLISON AND MATT WERE ALWAYS THERE. THIS IS A FAMILY ROOTED IN THIS COMMUNITY, ROOTED TO FAMILY, ROOTED TO THE ENVIRONMENT. THEY'RE SUCH GOOD STEWARDS OF THE ENVIRONMENT AND SUCH GOOD STEWARDS OF SEDONA. THIS WILL BE A PROUD, PROUD PROJECT TO WELCOME PEOPLE COMING IN FROM THE NORTH. AND IF YOU HAVE EXPERIENCED AMBI BEYONCE, WHICH I HOPE YOU ALL HAVE, AND THE MOST EXTRAORDINARY RESTAURANT, 41, UM, YOU WILL KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. AND THEY WILL BRING THAT SAME EXCELLENCE TO UPTOWN SEDONA. AND ON A, ON ANOTHER VERY PERSONAL NOTE, I'M VERY GOOD FRIENDS OF THEIR CONCIERGE, UH, KELLY IRELAND. AND WE HAD OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS MEETING THERE A FEW WEEKS AGO, AND I HAD A CHANCE TO TALK TO KELLY AND JUST AS HEINER AND NICKI BEEN SAYING, SHE SAID, I'VE NEVER WORKED FOR A FINER FAMILY. SHE'S, AND IT'S SO REFRESHING TO HEAR IN SEDONA. MM-HMM, , THEY TREAT THEIR EMPLOYEES WELL. IT'S GOOD BONUSES, GOOD BONUS PROGRAM, UH, ALL SORTS OF, UM, BENEFITS. THANK YOU. BENEFITS. I'M BLANKING ON WHAT THAT WORD IS. BENEFITS. I HAVE NEVER EXPERIENCED SOMETHING LIKE THIS. SHE SAID, ON MY DAYS OFF, ALL I WANNA DO IS COME INTO AMANTE. THIS FAMILY TAKES SUCH GOOD CARE OF US AND WE SHOULD BE PROUD AND WE SHOULD BE SUPPORTING THIS. WE SHOULD HAVE MORE FAMILIES LIKE THE STEVENSON FAMILY HERE IN SEDONA. SO I VERY, VERY STRONGLY SUPPORT THIS. I'M VERY BIASED. THEY'RE A VERY BIG SPONSOR OF THE SEDONA FILM FESTIVAL. THEY GIVE US A BUNCH OF ROOMS. JUDD HIRSCH WAS THE FIRST TO STAY IN A ROOM. HE WALKED ON STAGE AND SAID, I CAN'T BELIEVE WHERE YOU PUT ME. I'M IN HEAVEN. THANK YOU STEVEN'S FAMILY. WE LOVE YOU. I HOPE YOU PASS THIS. THANK YOU. BOY. PATRICK, YOU KNOW, PASSIONATE AT ALL. MIKE, UH, WISE WE, HOW DO YOU TOP THAT? WELL JUST HOLD ON. LIKE, BE FOLLOWED, MAYOR BY GABRIEL BROWN. . OKAY. I'M GLAD YOU'RE HERE. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME KNOW. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, UH, COUNSELORS, UM, I WANNA SPEAK TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THE CHANGE BACK FROM PD TO CO FOR THE STEVENSON'S RECENTLY ACQUIRED PROPERTY ALONG OAK CREEK. PATRICK, UH, MIKE BROTHER? YES. MIKE SAYING YOUR NAME WASN'T ENOUGH. CAN YOU SAY IT ON THE, ON THE VIDEO? SO, WHO YOU ARE, WHERE YOU LIVE, MIKE WISE? SEDONA. MY APOLOGIES. I I SORRY TO BREAK YOU DOWN. , UM, THE CITY HAS LAUDABLY BEEN LOOKING FOR AREAS TO LOCATE NEW MULTIFAMILY TO HOUSING OUR WORKERS. THE MOVE TO ZONE THIS PARCEL TO PD MAY HAVE BEEN WITH THAT GOAL IN MIND. HOWEVER, THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL BY OPINION IS NOT MALTA FAMILY. THIS PARCEL DUE TO ITS LOCATION ALONG OAK CREEK IS PRIME FOR RESORT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN EASY WALKING DISTANCE TO SHOPS, GALLERIES, AND RESTAURANTS. THE IMPACT ON TRAFFIC ON UPTOWN IS MINIMIZED. STEVENSON FAMILY ARE LOCAL, HAVE DEMONSTRATED A SENSITIVITY TO THE ENVIRONMENT WITH THEIR RECENTLY CONSTRUCTED AMTE HOTEL. THE SISTER LOCATION WOULD BE AN EX EXCELLENT ADDITION TO OUR RESORT COMMUNITY. CITY'S PRIMARY SOURCE OF REVENUE IS TOURISM SOME 70, 77% OF THE REVENUE I'M TOLD. LET'S IDENTIFY OTHER LOCATIONS IN UPTOWN FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING. I'M A FIRM BELIEVER IN MORE HOUSING. WE NEED ALL TYPES, WORKFORCE, APARTMENTS, CONDOS, SINGLE FAMILY. HOWEVER, LET'S LOCATE THAT HOUSING ON LAND MOST SUITED FOR WHICH IN MY OPINION THIS IS NOT. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDER CONSIDERATION. I HOPE YOU'LL SUPPORT THE ZONING THAT STEVENS STEVENSONS ARE ASKING FOR. THANK YOU MIKE. UH, GABE BROWN, YOU ARE THE LAST CALL. DOES ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ONE ITEM? UH, IF SO, FILL OUT A CARD NOW OR YOU COULD FILL OUT AFTER YOU SPEAK. BUT NOW THIS IS THE LAST SPEAKER. OTHERWISE GABE, START WITH YOUR NAME. CITY OF RESIDENCE. HELLO, MR. MAYOR. MY NAME IS GABRIEL BROWN. MR. STEVENSON AND COUNCIL, THANK YOU GUYS FOR DOING THIS TODAY. I ACTUALLY REALLY ENJOYED YOUR PRESENTATION AND OF COURSE I ENJOYED OUR ACAPELLA GROUP AS WELL. I'VE BEEN IN TOWN SINCE I WAS 14 YEARS OLD SINCE 1990. UM, SO I'VE SEEN SEDONA CHANGE A FAIR AMOUNT. I CURRENTLY LIVE IN UPTOWN SEDONA, UH, RIGHT ON O AND B WAY. AND SO WHAT'S KIND OF BEING PROPOSED HERE IS FAIRLY DIRECTLY, YOU KNOW, AFFECTING FOR ME. SO MY COMMENT IS ACTUALLY MORE OF A QUESTION THAT I'D LOVE TO POSE TO MR. STEVENSON AND COUNCIL IF YOU WOULD BE ABLE AT THIS TIME TO ANSWER IT. AND IF NOT, PERHAPS IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL WOULD WANT TO ASK THEM THEIRSELVES AT SOME POINT, WHICH IS, I DON'T THINK I'VE HEARD A VERY CLEAR ANSWER TO THE QUESTION OF WHAT IS THE PROPOSAL FOR THE PROPERTY THAT'S DIRECTLY ADJACENT O AND B WAY ON THE WEST NORTHWEST [01:50:01] SIDE OF 89 A. WE CAN'T ANSWER THAT QUESTION NOW, BUT YOU'VE ASKED IT SO WE CAN LOOK AT IT LATER. LOOK AT IT LATER. AND THE REASON THAT I ASK THAT IS A, IT WOULD BE A FAIRLY INTENSIVE PROJECT ON TRAFFIC AND, YOU KNOW, THINGS LIKE THAT SINCE IT'S DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE HIGHWAY. AND, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE A A FAIRLY DIRECTLY IMPACTFUL THING FOR ME SINCE I DO LIVE THERE. AND AS I HEARD, UH, I THINK IT WAS MR. SWE SAY THAT MR. STEVENSON, IF YOU ARE REALLY INTERESTED IN WORKING WITH US NEIGHBORS, UM, I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW MORE ABOUT WHAT YOU WOULD INTEND TO DO WITH THAT PROPERTY AS IT WOULD KIND OF DIRECTLY AFFECT MY OWN AS I DO OWN THAT PROPERTY. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LISTENING AND HOPEFULLY YOU GUYS WILL ASK THAT QUESTION AT SOME POINT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. THAT'S THE LAST CARD WE HAVE, RIGHT? UH, MADAM CLERK, WE DON'T HAVE ANY, ANYTHING FURTHER. WE'LL CLOSE OUT, UH, THIS PORTION AND BRING IT BACK TO COUNSEL. UM, YOU HAVE A MOTION FOR ME? I DO. I MOVE THAT WE HOLD AN EXECUTIVE SESSION PER AGENDA ITEM NINE A FOR LEGAL ADVICE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY REGARDING AGENDA ITEM EIGHT A, THE REVERSION OF THE PRESERVE AT OAK CREEK. BEFORE THAT GETS SECONDED, UM, I HAD A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT'S ATTORNEY THAT I'D LIKE US TO BE ABLE TO DISCUSS IN EXEC. SO IF I COULD ASK, OKAY, WELL COULD WE GET A SECOND FOR THIS AND WE CAN THEN HAVE A DISCUSSION? THAT'S FINE. I SECOND. OKAY. BEFORE WE MOVE ON, WELL, WE HAVE A QUESTION ON THE, ON THE ITEM. I I DO, UM, YOU'VE SEEN THE, THE PACKET THAT'S IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT, AND YOU'VE SEEN THE SAMPLE DRAFT MOTIONS THAT ARE IN THERE. AND I UNDERSTAND FROM YOUR PRESENTATION BEFORE WHAT I'M ASSUMING YOUR POSITION WOULD BE ON THE FIRST SAMPLE, BUT ON THE SECOND ONE, I WAS WONDERING WHAT YOUR, WHAT YOUR CONCERN ABOUT WORDING ON THAT MOTION WOULD BE. AND THIS GOES BACK TO MY QUESTIONS ABOUT DATES, NO DATES, 1999. I JUST WANNA UNDERSTAND SO THAT WE TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION WHEN WE'RE SEEKING LEGAL ADVICE. DOES THAT GO, EXCUSE ME, CAN I GET SOME CLARIFICATION? DOES THAT GO TO THE LAST SLIDE THAT WAS UP? NO, IT DOES NOT. IT GOES TO OUR PACKET. OKAY. UM, MAYOR COUNCILMAN KINSELLA, COULD WE HAVE THAT PUT UP ON THE SCREEN? POSSIBLY? I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T HAVE IT IN FRONT OF ME. YEP. SPECIFIC MAYOR AND COUNSEL, THIS IS THE SECOND MOTION THAT'S IN THE PACKET. OKAY. MAKE IT A LITTLE BIGGER. SO WHAT IS YOUR QUESTION? SO MY QUESTION AGAIN IS I THINK THE ATTORNEY'S READING IT. MM-HMM. , UM, WE'VE ONLY SEEN ONE. THAT'S THE ONLY ONE THAT MY QUESTION IS ABOUT. PERFECT. THANK YOU. I DIDN'T HEAR THAT. MM-HMM. , I THINK YOU HAD A LEGAL POINT THAT YOU WERE TRYING TO MAKE BEFORE ABOUT A DATE. AND THIS IS NOT A REFERENCE IN HERE, SO I WANNA KNOW WHAT YOU THINK SURE. WHAT LEGALLY YOU WOULD BE LOOKING FOR. WHAT WHAT YOU THINK IS NOT COVERED BY THIS LANGUAGE IS, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET CLARIFICATION SO I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR, WHAT YOU'RE PROPOSING FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE AND WHAT OUR ATTORNEY'S PROPOSING FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE. AND WHILE MR. WOODS LOOKS AT THAT, UM, I'LL STATE THAT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THIS MOTION IS IT IS BEING REVERTED TO C ONE MM-HMM. RS 36 AND RM TWO. BUT BECAUSE OF THE 2018 LDC CONVERSION, IT'S AUTOMATICALLY CONVERTED TO CO RS 35 RM TWO. THAT'S HOW I SEE THIS TYPE OF REVERSIONARY ACTION TAKING PLACE. OKAY, SURE. DO YOU AGREE, UM, UM, MAYOR COUNCILMAN KINSELLA, IF I WAS GONNA PUT, UM, I WOULD SAY I MOVE TO PROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2 0 2 4, CASE NUMBER BLANK RE AVERTING THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY IDENTIFIED HEREIN, UM, TO THE DATE [01:55:01] OF THE ORIGINAL PD PLAN DEVELOPMENT. ALRIGHT, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT THAT IN EXECUTIVE SESSION. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE HAVE TO VOTE ON YES, YES. I'M, NO, I'M TALKING TO KATHY. NO. OKAY. WE BOTH UNDERSTAND THAT. OKAY. ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? OKAY. UH, ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? UH, NONE. AND FOR THAT QUESTION THAT WE HAD, WE'RE GONNA GET TO THAT. I WILL NOT FORGET THAT. IF I DO REMIND ME, , WE ACTUALLY DON'T. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. MAYOR, IF YOU JUST ANNOUNCED THAT WE'RE BACK IN OPEN SESSION. OKAY. SO WE ARE IN OPEN SESSION AND, OKAY. ALRIGHT. I DO WANNA ADDRESS, UH, MR. BROWN'S QUESTION. I BELIEVE IT WAS MR. BROWN. YES. UH, AS FAR HIS QUESTION WAS, WHAT DO YOU PLAN TO DO WITH THE, THE PROPERTY, HOW IT'S GONNA AFFECT HIM ON OWENS B WAY? AND I THINK THAT THAT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE, UH, DISCUSS BEFORE WE APPLIED FOR THE MIKE. CAN YOU YEAH. UM, SAY YOUR NAME. YES. MIKE STEVENSON. UH, MR. MAYOR AND COUNSEL, UH, WE ACTUALLY HAD A CONVERSATION AND I THINK WE'VE SOLVED ANY ISSUES AT ALL. AM I CORRECT? SO WE EXPLAINED THAT WE ARE NOT BUYING THE PROPERTY, UH, EAST OF THE HIGHWAY AND THAT IT WILL REMAIN, UH, FOR SALE. I BELIEVE IT IS FOR SALE. SO GOOD. THAT CLEARS IT UP. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT, BUT I DO, I DON'T WANNA SPEAK FOR YOU. YEAH. OKAY. UH, QUESTIONS FROM NADE, UH, COUNCILOR KINSELLA AND THEN THE VICE MAYOR. THANK YOU. JUST WANT TO GET THIS OUT THERE AGAIN, VERY CLEARLY. IF THIS PROPERTY IS, IF THIS IS REVERTED, WHAT WILL YOU BE CONSTRUCTING? YOUR APPLICATION WILL BE TO CONSTRUCT WHAT? JUST SO THAT WE CAN CLEARLY GET THAT DEFINED FOR THE UNDERSTANDING OF EVERYBODY HERE. THAT THE REVERSION WILL BRING YOU FORWARD WITH AN APPLICATION FOR, UH, AN EXPANSION OF, UH, AMANTE, UH, ON THE CREEK. AND IT WOULD BE CALLED AMANTE CREEKSIDE. SO IT WOULD BE BASICALLY WHAT WE HAVE, YOU CAN GO LOOK AT IT RIGHT NOW. THE ONLY THING WE HAVE, UH, THE HOTEL THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW IS ON THREE ACRES WITH A MUCH MORE SPACE DOWN THERE. WE WOULD HAVE A LOT MORE OPEN AREA, UH, IN THE LOWER IN THAT WHOLE EIGHT OR SEVEN OR EIGHT ACRES, WHATEVER'S BUILDABLE DOWN THERE. AND HOW MANY KEYS WOULD YOU BE LOOKING FOR? UM, WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE 50 KEYS. OKAY. THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT. VICE MAYOR, YOU HAD A QUESTION? I DO. SO YOU SAID YOU WERE GONNA SUBMIT A SUBDIVISION PLAT AND YOU HAVE 10 ACRES IS WHAT WE WERE TOLD. 10 PROPERTIES THERE FOR THE SUBDIVISION? YEAH. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, THAT'S CORRECT. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE, IF YOU CAN PULL UP THAT SLIDE RIGHT NOW, THE DIMENSIONS OF THE EXISTING PARCELS, THEY DON'T WORK REALLY MUCH FOR ANYTHING. BUT THE IDEA IS WE WOULD HAVE, WE'D HAVE TO HAVE, I THINK, UM, UH, KURT SAID NINE, UH, SIX NINES WOULD BE 54, ESSENTIALLY NINE PARCELS. SO WE'D TAKE THE SIX, WE WOULD CHANGE THE PROPERTY LINES OF EACH ONE OF THE PARCELS AND JUST CREATE NINE OF THEM. AND THEN PART OF THAT, AS I MENTIONED, AND I'LL LET MIKE CONFIRM THAT IS A, IS THE IDEA IS TO INCLUDE IN THE PLATA PUBLIC PARK WHO WOULD PAY FOR THE PUBLIC PARK. WE WOULD, UH, IT WOULD BE PRIVATELY OWNED PARK, BUT IT WOULD BE AVAILABLE JUST MUCH LIKE WE HAVE IN AMBI RIGHT NOW. WE HAVE A TRAILHEAD, WE HAVE SEVEN PARKING PLACES FOR THE PUBLIC, AND IT'S, UH, IT'S RIGHT AT A TRAILHEAD. SO, UH, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD WORK OUT WITH, UH, UH, WITH THE NEGOTIATION WHEN WE, WE BRING FORWARD THE PLAN. AND SO IF THE CITY, FOR EXAMPLE, BUILT A SHARED USE PATH FROM THE MUNICIPAL PARKING LOT THAT WENT DOWN O AND B AND PEOPLE COULD WALK TO THE HOTEL THAT YOU'RE PROPOSING? YEAH, THERE WAS, UH, AS I READ BACK IN THE HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT, THERE WAS CONVERSATIONS GOING BACK AND FORTH. A LOT OF PEOPLE HAD A LOT OF INPUT. SOME WERE FAVORABLY FOR A PARK, SOME WERE AGAINST THE PARK. UH, AND WE MIGHT EVEN PROPOSE A, AN ADDITIONAL TRAIL HEAD AS OPPOSED TO PARK SO THAT PEOPLE CAN COME, UH, FROM ALL OVER TOWN DOWN, UH, AND BE ABLE TO GET ACROSS THE CREEK AND UP TO HUCKABEE TRAIL. I THINK THAT WOULD BE MUCH MORE USEFUL, BUT THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE DISCUSSIONS THAT I WOULD HAVE WITH THE CITY. RIGHT. SO THE SEVEN PARKING SPACES WOULDN'T LIMIT, IT WOULD LIMIT SEVEN CARS OR SEVEN VEHICLES, BUT IT WOULDN'T LIMIT THE AVAILABILITY TO SEVEN PEOPLE AT ANY GIVEN TIME, OR NO? NO. IN FACT, WE'VE ALREADY TALKED TO, UH, UH, ROYAL ROBLES TO RANDY ABOUT ALLOWING HIS PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO COME DOWN AND GET DOWN BY THE CREEK [02:00:01] AND THEN ACROSS THE CREEK AND, UH, UP THE OTHER SIDE INTO THE HUCKABEE TRAIL. SO IT WOULD INVOLVE SOME TIME WITH THE FORESTRY SERVICE WORKING SOMETHING OUT. BUT I UNDERSTAND THEY HAVE A PROGRAM THIS YEAR OF ADDING TO THE TRAIL SYSTEM. YES. THEY JUST PROVE THAT. THANK YOU. FOLLOW UP TO MY OWN QUESTION BEFORE, UM, AND IN YOUR APPLICATION, THAT WOULD GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE PUBLIC PROCESS BECAUSE YOU WOULD BE BEING, YOU WOULD BE BRINGING SITE REVIEW, UH, ALL OF THAT THROUGH, IT WOULD GO THROUGH PLANNING AND ZONING, AND IT WOULD GO THROUGH A PUBLIC PROCESS AND THE HEARING AND BEFORE IT CAME BACK TO US, UH, AT COUNCIL, THAT'S YOUR COMMITMENT, IS THAT RIGHT? YES, ABSOLUTELY. IT'S JUST THE NORMAL PROCESS. YEAH. OKAY. JUST AGAIN, WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THERE WAS SO MUCH INFORMATION THAT SOME OF THOSE DETAILS I THINK NEED TO BE RESTATED. SO THANK YOU. AND I REMEMBER WHEN YOU DID MEOSA, YOU DID AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC OUTREACH. I I WOULD EXPECT TO SEE NO LESS FOR THIS PROJECT. WE JUST STARTED TONIGHT. . YEAH, MAYOR, WE WOULD HAVE A, A PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN AND WE'VE OF COURSE SHARE THAT WITH STAFF IS SOMETHING THAT WE, I'VE ALWAYS DONE. THE OTHER CASE I WAS BROUGHT IN AT THE LAST MINUTE. SO, UM, BUT THIS ONE WE'RE WAY OUT AHEAD OF IT, SO, YES. OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? MADEAS MAY, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, JUST ONE POINT. UM, IF COUNCIL DECIDES TO DO THE ORDINANCE, UH, REVERTING THE ZONING, UM, WE'RE NOT GONNA BE ABLE TO SIGN THE ORDINANCE RIGHT AWAY. WE'RE GONNA NEED LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS OF THE PARCELS. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THAT 1998 ZONING MAP, IT'S NOT VERY CLEAR, JUST KIND OF HIGHLIGHTED IN THERE, WHICH ONES ARE. AND SO, UM, THE ORDINANCE SPECIFICALLY IN THE EXHIBIT A SAYS THAT THE, UM, WE WILL NEED LEGAL, LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS PRIOR TO EXECUTING THE ORDINANCE SO COUNSEL CAN APPROVE IT AND IT'LL GO IN EFFECT IN 30 DAYS. UH, IT WON'T NECESSARILY BE SIGNED BY THE CITY, UH, UNTIL WE GET THOSE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS TO ATTACH. HOW SOON CAN WE GET THOSE TO ENGINEER? THERE IS OUR CIVIL. OKAY. WELL THAT'S UP TO YOU GUYS. YOU CAN'T YEAH, IT'S FOR, IT'S THE DEVELOPER TO THE, THE PROPERTY OWNER ACCESS CAPITAL AND, UH, DUTCHMAN COAST TO FIGURE OUT. THAT DOESN'T CHANGE THE WORDING. NO, THANK YOU. I'M ALREADY WRITTEN INTO THE ORDINANCE. OKAY. NOW THE COMMENTS, DO WE HAVE A MOTION? I'LL MAKE A QUESTION. I MEAN COMMENTS. WHAT'S THAT? COMMENTS? COMMENTS? YEAH, I JUST, O'NEAL I JUST, OKAY. I ASKED. THANK YOU, MAYOR. SEE YOU MAYOR. OKAY. YES. UM, THE STEVENSON FAMILY, YOU HAVE RECEIVED THE MOST GLOWING ENDORSEMENTS THAT, UH, YOU KNOW, PRETTY MUCH WE SEE, UM, THE COMMUNITY THAT HAS CHOSEN TO SPOKE, SPEAK TONIGHT HAS SPOKEN VERY FAVORABLY ABOUT YOU AND YOUR PROJECT. I KNOW SOME OF THOSE FOLKS WHO'VE SPOKEN ON YOUR BEHALF BETTER THAN I KNOW YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR THE INVITATION TO BEGIN TO GET TO KNOW YOU. I HOPE THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET TO KNOW ONE ANOTHER BETTER. MY COMMENTS TO YOU ARE, I'M COUNTING ON YOU TO DELIVER ON YOUR PROMISES TO CONTINUE TO DELIVER THE WAY THAT YOU'VE BEEN DELIVERING AND TO BE, UH, A GREAT EXAMPLE OF AN EMPLOYER IN OUR COMMUNITY AND LEADERS IN THE COMMUNITY. I'M COUNTING ON YOU, UH, TO DO THAT, UM, TO THE COMMUNITY IN GENERAL. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY A LODGING PROJECT IS OF THE HIGHEST VISIBILITY. UM, AND THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT, YOU KNOW, GEE, ARE WE JUST MORE, MORE, MORE? WELL, NO, WE'RE NOT JUST MORE, MORE, MORE. BUT LAND THAT'S PRIVATELY OWNED HAS RIGHTS ASSOCIATED WITH IT AND IT WILL DEVELOP. AND AGAIN, COUNTING ON WHAT YOU'VE SAID IS YOUR INTENTIONS, IT'S A LIGHTER LOAD ON THAT LAND AND ON OUR COMMUNITY COMPARED TO OTHER POTENTIAL PROJECTS THAT COULD GO ON THAT LAND. SO, UM, FOR THESE REASONS, I WILL SUPPORT A REVERSION, UM, AS I THINK WE'LL BE HEARING A, A MOTION SHORTLY. SO, THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU COUNCIL. DONE. SO FIRST OF ALL, WHAT HE SAID, UM, SO I DON'T HAVE TO REPEAT IT. UM, AS WE DISCUSSED WHEN WE MET, THERE ARE GOING TO BE CONCERNS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY AROUND TRAFFIC. YOU'RE AT THE VERY END OF UPTOWN. UM, WE ALREADY KNOW WHAT HAPPENS AT THE Y WE ALREADY KNOW THAT A LOT OF THAT TRAFFIC IS PASSING THROUGH TO GO INTO THE CANYON AND TO GO BEYOND THE CANYON. UM, SO I'M HOPING THAT AMONG OTHER THINGS, YOU REALLY KEEP THAT IN MIND AND TRY TO FIGURE OUT HOW YOU'RE GOING TO ENSURE THAT WE DON'T END UP WITH MORE ISSUES UP THERE. UM, [02:05:01] EVEN WITH A PUBLIC PARK, YOU'RE GONNA BE DRIVING POTENTIALLY VISITORS UP THERE. OUR PARKING GARAGE WILL ONLY HOLD SO MANY CARS. SO AGAIN, JUST I'M ASKING FOR YOU TO PLEASE KEEP IN MIND AROUND TRAFFIC, AROUND THE, THE LOAD YOU'RE GONNA BE BRINGING INTO UPTOWN, POTENTIALLY. UM, JUST, JUST MAJOR CONCERN. I ALSO WILL, AGAIN, EXPRESS MY CONCERN AROUND, UH, YOUR EMPLOYEES AND THAT WE'LL HAVE ENOUGH HOUSING FOR THEM, UM, BECAUSE WE CAN ONLY BUILD SO MUCH HOUSING, UM, AS A CITY. SO JUST KEEPING THOSE THINGS IN MIND, UM, ALONG WITH ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU KNOW, BRIAN LAUDED YOU WITH, UM, I TOO AM INCLINED TO, UM, TO GO FORWARD WITH THE REVERSION ORDINANCE, VICE MAYOR SMEAR. I WANNA THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMITMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY AND, UH, FOR THE BEAUTIFUL HOTEL THAT YOU'VE BUILT CALLED AMANTE AND FOR THE RESPECT FOR THE LAND AND RESPECT FOR THE EMPLOYEES WHO WORK FOR YOU AND THE SUPPORT. UH, OVER THE YEARS, BOTH WHILE I WAS ON COUNCIL AND BEFORE THAT, WITH MY RELATIONSHIP WITH THE ART CENTER, THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE COME FORWARD WITH PLANS FOR THAT PROPERTY AND IT'S ALL BEEN EXTREMELY DENSE AND, UH, I DON'T THINK IT FIT AT ALL. UH, WITH OUR GOALS, UH, THE PD HAD 158, UH, UNITS AND THE DEVELOPERS WHO DIDN'T WANT TO BUILD THE RESIDENTIAL, THEY WANTED TO BUILD HOTELS. ONE IN 158 PLUS KEYS OR HOTEL ROOMS, WHICH WAS NOT APPROPRIATE, I THINK, FOR THAT LAND. SO YOU'RE THE FIRST PEOPLE TO COME IN AND PROPOSE SOMETHING THAT ACTUALLY COULD BE BUILT. YOU'VE ALREADY DEMONSTRATED HOW YOU CAN REDUCE TRAFFIC THROUGH AMBI. BEYONCE HAS NOT CAUSED ANY PROBLEMS AT ALL WITH TRAFFIC IN A, ON COOKS HILL, WHICH IS A HIGHLY PROBLEMATIC TRAFFIC AREA. SO I THINK YOU'VE DEMONSTRATED THAT YOU KNOW HOW TO DO THIS AND I THINK YOU WILL DEMONSTRATE THAT YOU CAN DO IT AGAIN AND IT'LL BE A LOVELY RESORT BRINGING IN THE TYPE OF TOURISTS THAT WE SO DESPERATELY WANT AND IS PART OF OUR COMMUNITY PLAN. SO I ALSO WILL SUPPORT THE REVERSION. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COUNCILOR WILLIAMSON. YEAH, I'M, UM, I'M PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE TO AND IMPRESSED BY AN EMPLOYER WHO PAYS HIS STAFF AND PROVIDES BENEFITS. THAT TO ME IS VERY, VERY IMPORTANT. THAT, AND I, I WOULD, I WOULD FEEL SO GOOD IF EVERY EMPLOYER IN THE CITY DID THE SAME THING. SO THAT'S, FOR ME, SOMETHING THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. I ACTUALLY THINK IT'S A GOOD PLACE FOR A RESORT. I THINK YOU OWN IT. I I THINK IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE ONE THERE. UM, IT SHOULD NOT BE DENSE. UM, AND I'M GLAD TO, TO HEAR THAT YOU DON'T INTEND IT TO BE DENSE, THAT YOU INTEND IT TO BE 50 UNITS. UM, AND THAT THERE'S A, AN ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT. UM, WE ALSO, NOBODY, NONE OF THE OTHER HOTELS I THINK ARE OWNED BY PEOPLE. . THEY'RE ALL OWNED BY CORPORATIONS. SO, UH, MY SENSE IS THAT IT'S GOOD THING TO HAVE LOCAL OWNERSHIP OF, OF BUSINESSES. AND SO I THINK IT'S TIME. I DON'T EVER WANNA HAVE TO SIT HERE AGAIN AND TALK ABOUT THIS SO BECAUSE THERE'LL BE EVEN MORE RANDOM DATES UP ON THE PARK. SO I WOULD SUPPORT A REVERSION. THANK YOU MAYOR. UH, MR. STEVENSON, YOU AND YOUR FAMILY ARE VALUED MEMBERS OF OUR COMMUNITY. I, AS A COUNCIL MEMBER, AM PROUD OF THE ASSET THAT THE CITY OF SEDONA HAS. IT'S CALLED AMANTE. I, IT'S A TREMENDOUS PROJECT, UH, AND GETS RAVE REVIEWS. AND I KNOW A FEW OF YOUR EMPLOYEES, AND I KNOW HOW WELL YOU TREAT THEM. I WISH YOU WOULD MOVE YOUR COTTONWOOD BUSINESS TO SEDONA AS WELL. COCKTAIL. YOU'RE, YOU'RE COCKTAIL BUSINESS. THANK YOU, MAYOR. I, UH, I'M A PROCESS. I'M AN ENGINEER. I'M A PROCESS PERSON. [02:10:01] AND I'M UNCOMFORTABLE THAT WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE WE HAD A, A, A CITY PROCESS THAT DIDN'T WORK RIGHT, AND WE LET A PD PLAN EXPIRE WITHOUT HAVING TAKEN ACTION ON WHAT WE DO. UH, AFTER THAT STATE LAW ALLOWS, UH, THE OWNER TO COME AND ASK FOR SOME ACTION TO HAPPEN. UH, I THINK IT COULD EITHER BE A REVERSION OR A EXTENSION. I PERSONALLY THINK IF I HAD, IF I WAS KING OF THE WORLD, I WOULD, I WOULD, UH, UH, EXTEND THE, THE, THE, UH, APPLICATION ON THE PD AND LET IT SHUT DOWN ORDERLY AND MAKE SURE THAT OUR PROCESS WORKS THIS TIME. UH, AND I WOULD GIVE YOU, UH, TIME TO WORK THROUGH THE NORMAL PROCESS TO BUILD YOUR, YOUR, YOUR PROJECT. THERE IS A PROCESS TODAY. YOU CAN COME IN WITH AN APPLICATION AND GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND BUILD YOUR AMBIENTE, AND I THINK THAT ALTOGETHER WOULD BE BETTER. BUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE LE WE HAVE OUR, UH, LAWYERS IN FRONT OF US ARGUING IN DIFFERENT CASES. UH, IT'S MESSY. I DON'T LIKE IT. SO THAT'S WHERE ME AS A PROCESS GUY, I DON'T LIKE SORT OF BEING PUT IN THE POSITION OF HAVING TO SHORTCUT SOME OF THE PUBLIC PROCESS THAT WOULD NORMALLY APPLY HERE, UH, IF WE WERE TO DO A, A ZONING APPLICATION. UM, BUT I, I, I THINK IT'S A, A GREAT PROJECT. UM, AND KIND OF RELUCTANTLY I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE REVERSION AS WELL. UM, AND I HOPE THAT WE NEVER GET HERE AGAIN AND DON'T LET A, A PROCESS SORT OF DISRUPT THIS WAY. COUNCILOR KINSELLA, A LOT HAS BEEN SAID ABOUT THE BENEFIT OF, OF, OF YOU AS APPLICANTS AND THE PROJECTS THAT WE ANTICIPATE YOU WILL BE BRINGING FORWARD. UM, AND AGAIN, ANTICIPATE BECOMES KEY TO ME BECAUSE I DON'T THINK ANY ASSUMPTIONS SHOULDN'T BE MADE BECAUSE YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT I SUPPORT THE REVERSION IS BECAUSE IT ALLOWS THAT FULL REVIEW FOR YOU TO PUT SOMETHING FORWARD THAT WILL THEN OPEN THIS UP TO PUBLIC INPUT, TO PUBLIC NOTIFICATION, TO, UM, COLLABORATION. SO THAT, THAT'S A PROCESS I VERY MUCH, UH, SUPPORT. SO AS WAS SAID ON THIS END OF THE DAY, AND I THINK THAT, UH, COUNCILOR FOLTZ PUT IT VERY ELOQUENTLY, THIS WHAT YOU, WHAT WE ANTICIPATE YOU WILL BRING FORWARD WOULD HAVE A MUCH LIGHTER IMPACT ON THE LAND THAN ANYTHING THAT THUS FAR HAS BEEN DISCUSSED IN THAT AREA OR THAT WE WOULD NORMALLY EXPECT. SO FOR, BECAUSE OF THAT, UH, I'M VERY INTERESTED IN MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT DOES PRESERVE THE INTEGRITY OF THAT AREA. AND AGAIN, THAT THERE'S A PROCESS THAT ALLOWS FOR THE COMMENTARY AND THE PUBLIC PRESSURE THAT WILL ENSURE THE, THE PRESERVATION OF THE INTEGRITY OF THAT AREA. UM, SO FOR THAT, I WILL BE SUPPORTING. UM, AND IF IT'S ALL, MAKE THE MOTION, IF YOU'RE READY AT SOME POINT, UH, THE REVISION. REVERSION. REVERSION. OKAY, SO NUMBER THREE, MIKE. PEOPLE DON'T KNOW. I MET MIKE IN THE FAMILY FOR, UH, MARIPOSA, AND YOU KNOW, WE TALKED ABOUT P AND Z AND I CAN'T WAIT FOR HIM TO GO THROUGH IT 'CAUSE HE'S GONNA ROCK THAT P AND Z HEARING BECAUSE HE'S A MAN THAT HAS PROVEN TO ME. IT'S ALL, YOU KNOW, TALK IS CHEAP. HE'S ACTUALLY PRODUCED TWO GREAT PROJECTS AND HE DID OUTREACH, LIKE I MENTIONED EARLIER, I HAVEN'T SEEN BEFORE. WELL, AND REALLY HAVEN'T SEEN EVER SINCE. HE'S DONE EXTENSIVE OUTREACH, ACTUALLY KNOCKING ON PEOPLE'S DOORS AND GOING TO PEOPLE'S HOMES FOR THE MARIOSA RESTAURANT. I REMEMBER WITH THE, UH, HEADLIGHTS GOING TO, INTO PEOPLE'S WINDOWS, AND HE ACTUALLY WENT AND TALKED TO PEOPLE AND, AND SOLVED THE PROBLEM. WE DON'T SEE THAT OFTEN HERE. UH, IT WAS ON THIS SIDE. WE TALKED ABOUT FAMILY VERSUS CORPORATE. I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY MORE FAMILY RUN BUSINESSES HERE. AND THE FACT THAT THIS IS A, A CARING FAMILY THAT HAS PROVEN OVER THE YEARS THAT THEY CARE ABOUT THIS COMMUNITY AND THE FACT THAT THIS PROJECT IS NOT OVERLY DENSE LIKE WE'VE HAD BEFORE. SO I'M LOOKING FORWARD TO THE P AND Z PROCESS. I THINK THAT OUR COMMUNITY, WHEN WE DO THE OUT, YOU DO THE OUTREACH, THEY'RE GOING TO BE IMPRESSED. I HOPE THEY WILL BE BECAUSE I'VE BEEN IN THE PAST. SO I, I WILL ALSO SUPPORT THE REVERSION AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING, UH, WHATEVER TRANSPIRES THERE AND I'M SURE IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF YEARS. SO, CAN I HAVE A MOTION THEN TO MAKE A MOTION? COUNCIL KINSELLA, I MOVE TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2024 DASH TWO TWO, CASE NUMBER PZ 24 DASH 0 0 0 8 ZCC REVERTING THE ZONING OF THE PROPERTY IDENTIFIED HEREIN FROM PLANNED DEVELOPMENT TO COMMERCIAL RS 35, WHICH [02:15:01] IS SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND RM TWO, WHICH IS MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL BASED ON CONFORMANCE WITH THE 2018 LDC CONVERSION CHART AND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR REVISIONARY REVERSION REVERSIONARY REZONING, THAT'S NOT EVEN LATE OF A RS NINE DASH 4 6 2 0.0. ONE E AND LDC SUBSECTION 86 B 3G TWO . CAN YOU SAY THAT SECOND? CAN YOU SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME? NO, NO. 10 TIMES FAST. 10 TIMES, YES. OKAY. WE HAVE A SECOND. UH, ANY DISCUSSION? FURTHER DISCUSSION? EITHER SIDE. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. GO FORTH AND CONQUER . OKAY. THANK YOU. WE'RE GONNA TAKE A, UH, WE'RE GONNA GO RIGHT INTO THE NEXT HEARING. I'LL TAKE FIVE, BUT, OKAY. THE GRANT? YES, IT JUST HAPPENED. OKAY, SO WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GOING TO BE, WHAT ARE WE DOING? WE'RE GOING FOR ITEM [8.e. AB 3075 Discussion/possible action regarding approval of the Small Grant Review Committee recommendations for the fiscal year 2025 small grants program in the amount of $350,000. ] E, AB 30 75. DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION. THANK YOU. REGARDING APPROVAL, UH, OF THE SMALL GRANT REVIEW COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FISCAL YEAR 25 SMALL GRANTS PROGRAM IN THE AMOUNT OF $350,000. MIKE, HAVE A GREAT NIGHT. GOOD NIGHT. OH, STEPHANIE. STEPHANIE, STEPHANIE THERESA, WELCOME. DO YOU KNOW WHAT PAGE THIS IS ON SINCE IT'S OUT OF ORDER? ANYONE HAVE IT? WHAT IS, WHAT WHAT PAGE? YEAH, I'LL GET IT IS 1 39 2 66. THANK YOU. IF MY MINE IS RIGHT, I DON'T KNOW. I THINK IT IS. MINE SAYS 2 66. OKAY, THANK YOU. 2 66. TWO, LISA. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR. GOOD EVENING COUNSEL. I AM HERE WITH THE SMALL GRANTS COMMITTEE CHAIR STEPHANIE GERICH, AND SHE IS HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND ANY DISCUSSION AROUND THE FISCAL YEAR 25 RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE SMALL GRANT COMMITTEE. OKAY. DO YOU WANT ANY OTHER PRESENTATION OR LOOKS LIKE STEPHANIE'S BITING AT THE BIT TO SAY SOMETHING? YEAH, THE ONLY PRESENTATION I HAVE, I WANTED TO POST, UH, THE DOCUMENT OF THE COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATIONS UP ON THE SCREEN SO THAT YOU COULD REFER TO IT, UM, RATHER THAN SQUINTING AT THE PAPER COPY, WHICH I TEND TO DO, I'LL GO WITH THIS. SO MY ASSUMPTION IS THAT THE COUNCIL IS, IS WELL VERSED IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND GIVEN THE, THE LENGTH OF THIS MEETING AND THE EFFORT THAT YOU'VE GONE THROUGH, UM, WITH YOUR PERMISSION, WE COULD GO RIGHT TO QUESTIONS AND, AND MOVE THIS ALONG FOR, FOR EVERYONE'S BENEFIT. BRIAN, YOU LOOK LIKE YOU HAVE, YOU'D LIKE TO START? NO, I HAVE NO QUESTIONS, ACTUALLY. THE WORK IS EXCELLENT. SO I'LL SAVE FOR COMMENTS IN A MOMENT. MR. MAYOR, IF I MAY, UH, I KNOW, UH, I JUST WANNA REMIND COUNSEL THAT THIS YEAR IN PARTICULAR, I'M VERY PLEASED THAT YOU'VE, UM, THOUGHT TO CREATE A CONTRACT BETWEEN THE ORGANIZATIONS AND THE CITY FOR THE USE OF THE MONEY. AND BECAUSE OF THAT CONTRACT, WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO STIPULATE CONTINGENCIES THAT MUST BE MET IN ORDER FOR THE, UM, ORGANIZATION TO, UH, A KEEP THE MONEY AND OR APPLY FOR FUTURE REQUESTS. AND I THINK THAT'S GONNA BE VERY HELPFUL FOR US MOVING FORWARD. SO EVEN IF AS WRITTEN, THE, UH, REQUEST IS NOT, UM, MAY, YOU CAN PUT CONTINGENCIES ON IT IS ALL I'M SAYING. IF YOU WANTED TO SEE SOMETHING FROM THE ORGANIZATION IN ORDER TO GIVE THEM A CHANCE TO PROVE THEMSELVES OR HANG THEMSELVES OR DO A GOOD JOB, UH, FOR FUTURE CONSIDERATION, I'D LIKE TO JUST THROW THAT ON THE TABLE AS WELL. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. UH, COUNCIL DUNN QUESTIONS? NO QUESTIONS. CAPTAIN, VICE MAYOR. JESSICA? NO QUESTIONS. PETE. KATHY, JUST TO COMMENT WHEN WE GET TO COMMENTS. MM-HMM. . OKAY. AND I'M JUST LOOKING FOR THE BRIDGE CLUB. YES. [02:20:01] IS THAT SOMETHING UNIQUE FOR THIS APPLICATION? AND I THOUGHT IT WAS KIND OF INTERESTING. I WAS WONDERING IF THE COUNCIL WOULD AGREE. WE PUT A RESTRICTION OR, AND ASK SO THAT THEY, THEY DO THEIR OUTREACH TO GET NEW MEMBERS. YES. AND IF THEY COULD WORK WITH THE COMMUNITY CENTER AND TRY TO GET SOME OF THE YOUNGER AT HEART YES. MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY CENTER, POSSIBLY THOSE ALSO THAT, UH, FREQUENT THE LIBRARY AND TO GET THOSE NEW, THOSE PEOPLE WHO DON'T HAVE A LOT TO DO ANYMORE EXCEPT TO GO TO THE LIBRARY AND COMMUNITY CENTER. AND I GO TO THE COMMUNITY CENTER A LOT FOR, FOR MEALS IF WE CAN HAVE THEM DO THEIR OUTREACH FOR NEW MEMBERS IN, IN THOSE AREAS. SO WE, THIS WAY WE KNOW WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON SEDONA RESIDENTS. YES, I WOULD AGREE, MR. MAYOR AND I, UH, I THINK THAT'S AN EXCELLENT RECOMMENDATION AND I CERTAINLY WOULD WRITE THAT INTO THE REQUEST, AND I KNOW THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO DO THAT. PERFECT. THAT'S GREAT. OTHERWISE, I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER, I I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT. OKAY. SO STEPHANIE, WHAT IN THEIR APPLICATION DID THEY, DID THEY HAVE A, UM, GOAL OR TARGET OF HOW MANY ADDITIONAL PARTICIPANTS THEY WANTED TO SEE? NO, THEY DID NOT. UM, I'VE SPOKEN TO THEM ABOUT THIS AND THEY, UH, THEY DON'T HAVE A TARGET. THEY, THEY ADVERTISE ON A REGULAR BASIS IN THE NEWSPAPER. AND AFTER, UM, AFTER SOME DISCUSSIONS OFFLINE WITH, UH, THE MAYOR AND YOURSELF, I DID SPEAK WITH THEM AND SAY THAT WANTED TO DRIVE TO AND TRY TO ENGAGE MORE SENIORS IN PARTICULAR. AND I EVEN ASKED THEM ABOUT THE HIGH SCHOOL, ACTUALLY, THERE'S, UM, A FORMER PRINCIPAL HERE, AND SHE SAID, OH, IT'D BE GREAT, YOU KNOW, IF THE, THEY WOULD REACH OUT TO THE HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS. SO I DID DISCUSS WITH THAT, WITH THAT, WITH THEM AS WELL. AND THEY'RE CERTAINLY WILLING TO DO THAT. THE ONLY PROBLEM BEING IS THAT, UH, THEY MEET DURING THE DAY, AND THAT WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS. HOWEVER, OF COURSE, DURING THE SUMMER MONTHS AND WHATNOT, THAT WOULD ALSO BE AN OPTION. I BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE WILLING TO DO WHATEVER THEY POSSIBLY CAN TO SHOW THEIR GOOD FAITH IN RETURNING, UM, BENEFITS TO, TO THE CITY ITSELF. I'D LIKE TO SEE SOME METRICS ADDED TO THEIR CONTRACT SO THAT IF THEY COME IN AND FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDS NEXT YEAR, WE WOULD KNOW HOW TO MEASURE THEIR SUCCESS. YES, I THINK, I THINK THAT'S EXCELLENT. AND I THINK IT'S FOR THIS ORGANIZATION AND ANY OTHERS THAT, THAT STICK OUT THAT MAY, THAT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL AS WELL. STEPHANIE, AREN'T METRICS REQUIRED IN THE NEW CONTRACT TO SHOW THAT THEY'VE ACCOMPLISHED THEIR GOALS THAT THEY APPLIED FOR? YES, THEY'RE, UH, WE, WE DO ASK FOR METRICS. AND BELIEVE ME, UH, DATA FOR US IS SO EXTREMELY IMPORTANT. WE HAMMER THAT HOME IN THE WORKSHOPS AND WE ASK THEM SPECIFICALLY THE, THERE ARE SOME ORGANIZATIONS THAT, ESPECIALLY THE NEW ONES THAT APPLY FIRST THAT DON'T HAVE THEIR DATA COLLECTION PROCESSES IN ORDER, WE OFFER TO HELP WITH THAT. UH, BECAUSE DATA, OF COURSE, IS SO EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO MEASURE THE OUTCOMES OF THE SUCCESS OF WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING WHAT THEY, THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING. UM, AGAIN, THE NEW ONES ARE RUSTY, BUT BELIEVE ME, AS THEY COME BACK FOR MORE AND MORE MONEY, THEIR METRICS GET BETTER AND BETTER AND BETTER. I'M JUST GONNA JUMP IN AND SPEAK FOR A MOMENT AND SAY, I'VE WORKED WITH THE SMALL GRANTS COMMITTEE FOR SIX YEARS. MM-HMM. . AND I WANNA COMPLIMENT STEPHANIE IN HER GENEROSITY, IN BEING WILLING TO REALLY STEP FORWARD AND BE EXTREMELY HELPFUL IN THE EDUCATION OF ORGANIZATIONS AND VERY CLEAR AND VERY DETAILED. SO HER STATEMENT ABOUT MAKING THIS HAPPEN IS NOT AN IDLE COMMENT. UM, I'VE SEEN THE PROOF OF IT FOR SIX YEARS AND I'M CONFIDENT THAT THIS WILL CONTINUE. I ALSO WANNA SAY, MR. MAYOR, VICE MAYOR, COUNSELORS, YOUR SUPPORT IN THIS, UH, FOR THIS PROGRAM IS, GIVES ME GOOSEBUMPS. IT ABSOLUTELY DOES. UM, I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR THE NONPROFITS AND A GREAT BENEFIT TO THE CITY. AND WE GET MORE AND MORE COMING TO PARTICIPATE. AND I THINK THAT'S AN ABSOLUTE CROWN FOR YOU GUYS. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT, LET'S GO FOR, UH, COMMENTS. JESSICA, I'LL WORK OUR WAY DOWN. MM-HMM. . YEAH. I HAD NO QUESTIONS. IT'S NOT THAT I HAD NO ISSUES WITH SOME OF THESE PERSONALLY, BUT, YOU KNOW, I TRUST, I, I TRUST THE COMMITTEE. I TRUST YOU, UM, TO HAVE OVERSEEING, UH, YOU KNOW, AND THAT YOU HAVE REASONS FOR, FOR, AT MY NITPICKING KIND OF [02:25:01] PERSONAL, KIND OF A QUESTIONS ABOUT CERTAIN THINGS WE'RE REALLY NOT SOMETHING THAT I WANTED TO TAKE UP TIME WITH. AND SO I'M PERFECTLY HAPPY WITH WHAT THE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDED. AND I DON'T WANNA BE HERE UNTIL 10. THANK YOU. SO I SUPPORT THIS AND I DO WANNA THANK YOU STEPHANIE, ONCE AGAIN FOR THE YEARS AND YEARS OF YOUR REALLY DEDICATED FOCUS ON THIS PROGRAM. IT'S REALLY, I MEAN, IT'S REALLY QUITE AMAZING TO ME THAT YOUR COMMITMENT TO THE SMALL GRANT PROGRAM AND WATCHING IT GET BETTER AND BETTER OVER THE YEARS. SO THANK YOU. THAT'S MY PLEASURE. AND MY RETURN IS SEEING IT GET BETTER AND BETTER AND HAVING YOU UP THERE JUST SHOWING UP EVERY TIME AND SUPPORTING US. I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, PETE. THANK YOU, MAYOR. YEAH. I'LL ADD ON A LITTLE BIT TO COUNCILOR WILLIAMSON'S COMMENTS ABOUT TRUST. BUT IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, THIS TRUST IS EARNED. YOU'VE EARNED THIS TRUST FROM US BECAUSE OF THE WAY YOU, YOU BOTH RUN THIS PROGRAM. UH, AND I FOR ONE, THINK IT'S REMARKABLE THAT THERE'S A $350,000 SPENDING DECISION AND COUNCIL IS KIND OF MINIMALLY, UH, ACTIVE IN, IN, UH, WEIGHING IN AND PERHAPS WANTING CHANGES. AND SO, THERESA, THE WORDS THAT YOU SAID, UM, ABOUT STEPHANIE'S, UH, COMMITMENT AND FOLLOW UP AND ENGAGEMENT WITH THE, UH, WITH THE, UH, APPLICANT'S, UH, IS WHAT MAKES THIS PROGRAM SUCCESSFUL. AND SO, YOU KNOW, I'M FULLY SUPPORTIVE OF WHAT YOU'VE DONE AND, AND DEFINITELY APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU COUNSELOR FOR, FOR A MOMENT THAT DOES, THAT DOOR DOES SWING BOTH WAYS. AND YOU ALL, UM, HAVE BEEN EXCELLENT IN YOUR COMMUNICATION WITH US AS TO WHAT IT IS THAT YOU WANNA SEE. SO WE APPRECIATE THAT YOUR FEEDBACK IS INVALUABLE. COUNCILOR ILLA, I WANNA THANK THE COMMITTEE VERY MUCH FOR ALL THE WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE AND I WAS REALLY GLAD TO SEE THAT THE APPLICATION OF THE 40, 40 20 SPLIT, UM, I THINK WHAT, WHEN WE HAD A CONVERSATION HELPED GUIDE THE, THE COMMITTEE A BIT AND I'M JUST GLAD THAT, I'M REALLY HAPPY TO SEE THE WAY THAT IT WAS APPLIED BECAUSE I THINK IT ALSO HELPS TO, UM, SUPPORT SOME OF THE WORK OF THE ARTS THAT WAS MAYBE BEING SEEN IN COMPETITION WITH SOME OF THE SOCIAL SERVICE PROGRAMS. SO, I MEAN, I THINK THIS WAS A REALLY GREAT APPLICATION OF, OF THE SPLIT FORMULA THAT WAS, THAT WE CAME UP WITH LAST YEAR. UM, I WAS ALSO GLAD TO SEE THAT FROM WHAT I THINK THE INCREASED AMOUNT OF MONEY, UM, THAT WAS AWARDED THIS YEAR REALLY MAKES A DIFFERENCE INTO SOME OF THESE VERY COMMUNITY MINDED, VERY SPECIFIC PROGRAMS. SO I WAS HAPPY TO SEE THAT. AND I REALLY WANTED TO JUST ACKNOWLEDGE AND THANK THERESA FOR STEPPING IN WHEN THERE WAS A STAFFING GAP, UM, AND STEPPING IN AND USING YOUR EXPERTISE THAT YOU'VE HAD OVER THE YEARS WITH THIS AND GETTING THIS PROCESS SHEPHERDED THROUGH. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. AND STEPHANIE OWEN, TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THE COMMITTEE AND FOR YOUR AVAILABILITY TO COUNCIL. I MEAN, I LEARNED A LOT MEETING WITH YOU AND GOING OVER SPECIFICS. THERE WASN'T A PIECE OF MINUTIAE THAT YOU DIDN'T KNOW WHEN, WHEN ASKED. SO I REALLY WANT TO THANK YOU AND SAY THAT, THAT BASED ON ALL THE INFORMATION THAT WAS PROVIDED, I ABSOLUTELY HAVE NO RESERVATION IN SUPPORTING, UM, THIS, THE WAY IT'S PRESENTED TONIGHT. THANK YOU. AND I ALSO WANNA SHOUT OUT TO MY COMMITTEE, IT'S NOT A ONE MAN SHOW BY ANY MEANS. UM, THE COMMITTEE, SOME OF THEM AM WITH DOING THIS FOR THE LAST 6, 7, 8 YEARS AND, UM, THEY JUST ARE MARVELOUS WHEN IT COMES TO PICKING APART, UM, THE APPLICATIONS. AND WE HAVE TWO OF OUR COMMITTEE MEMBERS HERE, DEAN GAIN AND PATTY RUSKY IN THE BACK. TEACHER AND PHYSICIAN, RETIRED PHYSICIAN, RETIRED TEACHER. THANK YOU BOTH. THANK YOU. AND ALL OF YOUR COLLEAGUES. WELL, YOU, YOU WANNA MENTION THE OTHER, I THINK YOU'S FOUR MORE THAT YOU HAVE. YES, CHRIS, SIT AWAY. UM, AND, UH, UH, ED SOUTHWELL, THEY'RE BOTH, THEY WERE BOTH THIS YEAR AND THEN WE'LL HAVE TWO NEW ONES. LYNN ZAKA AND, UM, ROSEMARY ZIMMERMAN WILL BE JOINING US NEXT YEAR. OH, NEXT YEAR? OKAY. YES. THEY WEREN'T AVAILABLE THIS YEAR BECAUSE THEY'D HAD, THEY HAD, UH, PRE-ARRANGED TRAVEL PLANS FOR THE TIME PERIOD WE HAD TO MEET. OH, GOOD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU BRIAN. THANK YOU HERE. UH, THERESA, THANK YOU FOR STAFF LEADING. AND STEPHANIE, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR LEADING THE COMMITTEE AND TO THE OTHER OTHER COMMITTEE MEMBERS THAT ARE HERE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO SEDONA. UM, WE'RE, WE'RE FORTUNATE TO HAVE FOLKS THAT ARE AS ENTHUSIASTIC AND COMMITTED TO HELPING FUND THESE NON-PROFITS THAT REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE COMMUNITY. I'M GRATEFUL THAT AS A CITY WE HAVE THE RESOURCES TO HAVE BEEN ABLE TO INCREASE THE BUDGET TO SMALL GRANTS. [02:30:01] I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT DISCUSSION AGAIN IN THE COMING BUDGET YEAR, UH, TO SEE WHERE THAT LEADS. UM, BUT OVERALL, YOU GUYS ARE DOING A GREAT JOB AND REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU CAST DUNN. THANK YOU MAYOR. I THINK PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY PRETTY MUCH SAID IT, BUT I'LL SAY IT YET. SO THANK YOU TO THERESA AND THE STAFF, UH, FOR HELPING. AND YOU KNOW, STEPHANIE. YEAH. I KNOW HOW HARD YOU WORK FROM OTHER ENDEAVORS THAT WE WORK ON TOGETHER, UM, TO THE PEOPLE WHO ALSO SAT ON THE COMMITTEE. THANK YOU. UM, WE DON'T HAVE A LOT OF VOLUNTEER OPPORTUNITIES IN THE CITY THAT ARE AS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO, UM, SMALL NONPROFITS AS THIS PROGRAM. AND IT MUST BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO GET MORE APPLICATIONS THAN YOU CAN FUND AND TO, UM, HAVE TO GO TO SOME APPLICANTS AND SAY, UM, YOU DON'T MEET THE CRITERION THIS YEAR, HERE ARE THE THINGS YOU NEED TO DO. SO THAT'S ALL VERY HARD WORK. UM, AND I UNDERSTAND IT AND I APPRECIATE IT, UM, VERY, VERY MUCH. I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION THAT I REALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THERE'S A LOT OF RISK TAKING, UM, SHOWS THAT YOU HAVE FUNDED TO COME HERE, THE MULTIMEDIA SHOWS AND YOU KNOW, ALL THE THINGS WITH THE KIDS. AND, UM, IT'S, THAT'S JUST GREAT FOR THIS COMMUNITY TO JUST KEEP EXPOSING EVERYONE WHO LIVES HERE TO THE WIDE VARIETY OF WHAT'S OUT THERE BEYOND THE KIND OF ARTS THAT WE NORMALLY SEE HERE. YOU KNOW, THE, THE SYMPHONY AND THE, AND THE CHAMBER. BUT TO BRING NEW THINGS IN AND TO ENGAGE OUR KIDS, UM, AND, AND GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO, TO UM, BE CENTER STAGE. I WENT TO THE LAST PERFORMANCE, UM, AND THOSE KIDS WERE HAVING A BLAST AND I COULD EASILY SEE THAT SOME OF THOSE KIDS ARE EITHER GONNA BE ACTORS OR POLITICIANS 'CAUSE THEY LOVE THE STAGE. SO, UM, I WANNA THANK YOU. I WANNA THANK YOU FOR ALL THE HARD WORK. AND THAT'S NOT TO PUT DOWN ANY OF THE SOCIAL SERVICES 'CAUSE THOSE ARE ALSO CRITICALLY IMPORTANT. UM, BUT I JUST GET REALLY EXCITED TO SEE THAT WE'RE GONNA BE BRINGING ALL KINDS OF REALLY NEW EXPERIENCES FOR PEOPLE HERE IN THE CITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. COUNCIL OONE. WHAT, WHAT THEY ALL SAID , BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE TRIED TO EXPERIMENT THIS YEAR WITH AN ALLOCATION SYSTEM AND INCREASING THE BUDGET. NOW I LOOK AT, WE STILL HAD $541,000 OF REQUESTS FOR OUR $350,000, UH, ALLOCATION. SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT AGAIN AND SEE, WE APPRECIATE, WE'LL TALK ABOUT WHERE YOU THINK WE SHOULD BE. AND LAST YEAR I REMEMBER WOULD'VE FUNDED THEM, WOULD'VE FUNDED THEM FULLY, WOULD'VE FUNDED THEM FULLY IF WE HAD THE MONEY AND TO SEE WHETHER THAT IS STILL TRUE. BUT I AGREE WITH COUNSELOR FOLTZ THAT WE ARE IN A FORTUNATE POSITION THAT WE HAVE THE RESOURCES TO FUND OUR NONPROFITS WHO BRING SO MUCH TO THIS COMMUNITY. AND, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THEM STILL STRUGGLE WITH FUNDING, BUT WE AT LEAST GIVE THEM AN EVEN NEW ONE, NEW, UH, GROUPS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROVE THEMSELVES AND AN OPPORTUNITY TO GO FORWARD. YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE, YOU DO TAKE RISKS AND WE, WE DO CONSIDER YOUR JUDGMENT AS GOOD JUDGMENT. AND UH, IT'S A GREAT PROGRAM AND IT'S A GREAT WAY IN WHICH THE COMMUNITY AND THE CITY WORK TOGETHER. SO I'M VERY APPRECIATIVE OF THAT. WELL YOU'VE, BECAUSE OF THE, THAT FUNDING YOU, WE BIRTHED WHEEL FUND HERE AND NOW IT'S GONE STATEWIDE. SO THAT'S JUST ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE SEE. YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS SEEDED IT AND NOW IT'S EVERY SCHOOL IN THE STATE WANTS TO HAVE THAT PROGRAM IN THEIR SCHOOLS. IT'S GREAT, GREAT TO KNOW. SO WHAT A TEAM YOU ARE. I APPRECIATE YOU BOTH. THERES, I CAN'T BELIEVE IT'S ONLY SIX YEARS THAT YOU'VE BEEN DOING THIS BECAUSE I KNOW HOW MUCH WORK YOU PUT INTO IT IN ADDITION TO ALL YOUR OTHER DUTIES AROUND CITY HALL. IT'S, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU HAVE THE TIME, BUT I KNOW THE DEDICATION THAT YOU PUT INTO THIS PROJECT AS WELL AS THE OTHERS. STEPHANIE, I SO APPRECIATE YOU. YOU KNOW THAT WE WORK ON OTHER, UH, PROJECTS AS [02:35:01] WELL TOGETHER. YOUR DEDICATION TO THIS COMMUNITY AND THE FAIRNESS IN WHICH YOU DO THIS PROJECT, YOU PUT THOUGHT AND CONCERN AND YOUR HEART AND SOUL INTO IT. AND I APPRECIATE THAT AS WELL AS YOUR COMMITTEE. I KNOW MANY PEOPLE ON THAT COMMITTEE AND IT'S, IT'S REALLY LIKE THE VICE MAYOR SAID, I THINK IT WAS THE VICE MAYOR, THE BAD VOLUNTEERS. WE DON'T HAVE. WAS THAT YOU? YEAH, I THINK IT WAS YOU. YEAH. OKAY. BUT ANYWAY, THANK YOU SO MUCH, UH, FOR WHAT YOU DO. UH, AND I'M, I'M TOTALLY SUPPORTIVE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS MOVING FORWARD AND UH, I'M LOOKING FOR A MOTION NOW. I MAKE, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. GEE, DON'T EVERYBODY ONE TIME ALI, SHE'S THE YES. I MOVE TO APPROVE THE SMALL GRANTS REVIEW COMMITTEE FISCAL YEAR 2025 RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF $350,000 AS ITEMIZED IN AGENDA BILL 30 75 EXHIBIT A AND SUBJECT TO APPROVAL BY THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE OF A SMALL GRANTS AGREEMENT WITH EACH GRANTEE SECOND. OKAY. ANY DISCUSSION? I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED IT ALL THE WAY. OKAY. CAN I, UH, HAVE A VOTE FOR IN SUPPORT? THOSE IN SUPPORT, AYE. AYE. AYE. AND ANY ANYBODY AGAINST? NO UNANIMOUS. THANK YOU AGAIN, MAYOR. VICE MAYOR, COUNSELORS. THANK YOU. OKAY, THIS IS FOR OKAY. ITEM B. JOE, THESE CARDS ARE FOR ITEM B, C, C. OKAY. BUT WE'RE GOING TO GO TO B NOW. MAYOR, WHEN ARE YOU THINKING OF A NEXT BREAK OR A BREAK ACTUALLY? OH NO, WE DON'T, WE DON'T, NOT GOOD. MIDNIGHT. WE'RE GONNA HAVE, UM, OKAY, SO THIS IS C ACTUALLY, MAYOR, IF THERE ARE PEOPLE, IF THERE'S NO PUBLIC SPEAKERS ON B BUT THERE ARE ON C, PERHAPS WE WOULD TAKE C FIRST. WELL THAT'S I THINK WHAT JOE WAS TRYING TO RELATE TO ME. NO, SHE WAS NOT. NO. OKAY, SO NOW I'M CONFUSED. YOU GAVE, THIS IS FOR HC, BUT WE DIDN'T DO EIGHT B YET. RIGHT. BUT PERHAPS SINCE THERE ARE, WE KNOW THAT THERE'S AUDIENCE INTEREST IN C, PERHAPS WE COULD MOVE THAT IN FRONT OF B AND THAT'S FINE. OKAY. ALRIGHT. [8.c. AB 3072 Public hearing/possible action regarding adoption of a Resolution and Ordinance updating the City of Sedona's Fee Schedule to reflect a 3.6% Wastewater rate increase, effective October 2024. ] ALRIGHT. SO HC AB 30 72 PUBLIC HEARING POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION. AND, UH, THAT'S RESOLUTION NUMBER R 2 0 2 4 DASH 18. I HAVE IT ON MY PAPER. UH, ORDINANCE UPDATING THE CITY'S CITY SEDONAS, UH, FEE SCHEDULE AND REFLECT, UH, REFLECT A 3.6 WASTEWATER RATE INCREASE EFFECTIVE OCTOBER, 2024. NOW, I KNOW, UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO RELAY TO ME, JOE. SO, UH, IS THAT GONNA BE ANNETTE OR AH, ROXANNE. I BELIEVE IT'S FINANCE. FINANCE. EVERYBODY'S HERE. YOU GUYS DIDN'T WANNA HANG AROUND TILL 10 O'CLOCK? I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY I, OH, I'LL JUST LOOK AT IT. THE OLD OLD SEE? YES. YEAH, NOW YOU'RE GOOD. OKAY. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, VICE MAYOR COUNCIL MEMBERS, I AM GOING TO PRESENT FOR YOU A QUICK OVERVIEW OF, UM, THE WEIGHT WA WASTEWATER RATE INCREASE AND DO SOME Q AND A SLIDES, UM, FOR SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN ASKED BY THE COMMUNITY. MM-HMM, . SO THE FIRST QUESTION, WHY DOES THE CITY NEED TO INCREASE WASTEWATER RATES? THE CITY OF SEDONA WASTEWATER DEPARTMENT HAS EXPERIENCED AN INCREASE IN OPERATING COSTS AND WASTEWATER COLLECTIONS AND TREATMENT PRICE INCREASES IN MATERIALS, OPERATING SUPPLIES, LABOR CONTRACTED WORK AND LAB TESTING HAVE RESULTED IN A 22% INCREASE OVER THE LAST SIX YEARS. FACTORS CONTRIBUTING TO THESE INCREASED COSTS INCLUDE INFLATIONARY COST INCREASES, REPAIRS, AND OR UPGRADES TO AGING INFRASTRUCTURE [02:40:01] AND ADDITIONAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS. CASHFLOW STATEMENTS THAT WERE POSTED TO THE CITY'S WEBSITE FOR FISCAL YEARS ENDED JUNE 30TH, 2022 AND 2023 SHOW DEFICITS OF 1.4 MILLION AND 2 MILLION RESPECTIVELY. THE WASTEWATER PLANT HAS BEEN RECEIVING ANNUAL CITY SALES TAX SUBSIDIES SINCE 1989, TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 136 MILLION AS OF FISCAL YEAR 2023. NOW, IN FISCAL YEAR 2026 PER CITY POLICY, WE HAVE TO CEASE THE SALES TAX SUBSIDY. SO WE ARE LOOKING TO, UH, TURN THE WASTEWATER FUND INTO A FULLY SELF-SUSTAINING ENTERPRISE FUND BY FISCAL YEAR 2027. WHEN WAS THE LAST WASTEWATER RATE INCREASE? THE LAST RATE INCREASE WAS IN JULY OF 2017. A RATE STUDY IN 2019 RESULTED IN A RESTRUCTURING OF CAPACITY FEES, BUT THERE WAS NO CHANGE TO THE MONTHLY RATES AT THAT TIME. AT THE MARCH 26TH, 2019 CITY COUNCIL REGULAR MEETING, AFTER REVIEWING A PRESENTATION OF THE STUDY BY A MAJORITY CONSENSUS COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF AND THE CONSULTANTS NOT TO INCREASE RATES UNTIL 2025, ASSUMING NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN FINANCIAL NEEDS. SINCE THAT TIME, THERE HAVE BEEN MULTIPLE MAJOR ECONOMIC CHANGES THAT WOULD POTENTIALLY IMPACT THE FINDINGS OF A NEW RATE STUDY. AND WE ARE DUE FOR A NEW RATE STUDY. AS I LEARNED TODAY, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT WE DO ONE EVERY FIVE YEARS. AND THESE ARE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS THAT WERE BROUGHT TO US FROM THE RESIDENTS. WHAT IS A LOW FLOW TOILET AND HOW DOES IT FACTOR INTO BILLING? IN 2011, THE CITY IMPLEMENTED A NEW DISCOUNTED LOW FLOW RATE FOR RESIDENTS TO QUALIFY FOR THE LOW FLOW RATE. THE TOILETS IN THE RESIDENTS MUST USE 1.6 GALLONS OF WATER PER FLUSH OR LESS. ALL TOILETS PRODUCED IN THE UNITED STATES AFTER 1994 ARE LOW FLOW AND USE NO MORE THAN 1.6 GALLONS OF WATER PER FLUSH. RESIDENTS VERIFY THAT THEY HAVE LOW FLOW TOILETS BY CHECKING THE STAMP BETWEEN THE SEAT AND THE TANK AND PROVIDING THE INFORMATION TO THE WASTEWATER BILLING DEPARTMENT. THIS STAMP WILL READ A DATE OF 1994 OR LATER, OR WE'LL STATE 1.6 GALLONS PER FLUSH, WHICH IS WHY WE DON'T NEED A SEPARATE METER TO DETERMINE IF THEY'RE TOILET OR NOT. AND THE RATE AND THE RATE FOR THAT IS LOWER THAN A RATE, UH, UH, HIGH FLESH, HIGH RATE TOILET BECAUSE THAT WASN'T PART OF THAT. SO THE LOW FLOW RATE IS 47 52. STANDARD IS 61 11. THANK YOU. SO BEFORE YOU MOVE ON ON THAT TOPIC, WHAT HAPPENS ULTIMATELY WHEN THE ENTIRE CITY CONVERTS OVER TO LOW FLOW? BECAUSE WELL, PEOPLE HAVE THE LOWER RATES, EVERYBODY ELSE IS PICKING UP THE, THE DIFFERENCE. SO IS THERE ANTICIPATED, UH, TIME YEAR THAT THAT WILL EQUAL OUT? WELL, WE WERE, WE ARE ANTICIPATING AN INCREASE IN LOW FLOW RATE APPLICATIONS AFTER THIS PRESENTATION. SO , UM, THE, THIS HOPEFULLY WILL BE ADDRESSED IN THE 2025 WASTEWATER RATE STUDY. UM, WE NEED THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS TO GUIDE US ON HOW TO PROCEED WITH AN EQUITABLE AND FAIR BILLING. FOLLOW UP TO THAT. WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF HOMES CURRENTLY ON THE LOW FLOW RATE? 64%. 64, THANK YOU. CAN THE FUTURE RATES STRUCTURE UTILIZE WATER CONSUMPTION DATA FROM THE PRIVATE WATER COMPANIES AS A BASIS FOR THE WASTEWATER RATE? YES. THE CITY CAN PARTNER WITH ARIZONA WATER COMPANY AND OAK CREEK WATER COMPANY TO UTILIZE WATER CONSUMPTION DATA AS A BASIS FOR THE MONTHLY WASTEWATER RATES. STAFF HAVE BEEN MOVING FORWARD BY CREATING OPTIONS. ONE EXAMPLE IS THE RECENTLY SIGNED DATA SHARING AGREEMENT WITH THE ARIZONA WATER COMPANY. UTILIZING WATER CONSUMPTION DATA IS A COMPLEX MATTER CONSIDERING USES SUCH AS IRRIGATION SYSTEMS, WATER FIXTURES, POOLS, AND OTHER NON CONTAMINATED WATER SOURCES THAT DO NOT FLOW INTO THE CITY SEWER SYSTEM AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL WATER METERS THAT MAY BE REQUIRED TO DIFFERENTIATE THE USAGE. A NEW WASTEWATER RATE STUDY WILL INVOLVE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS TO ASSIST CITY STAFF WITH DETERMINING THE BEST PATH FORWARD. AND HOW ARE PRIVATE WASTEWATER SYSTEMS IN HOAS THAT CONNECT TO THE CITY'S CONVEYANCE AND TREATMENT DISCHARGE SYSTEM CHARGED? INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS ARE REQUIRED TO PAY THE SAME RATES FOR SERVICE IN THESE INSTANCES. AS EVERYONE ELSE, THESE SYSTEMS CONNECT TO THE OVERALL [02:45:01] CITY COLLECTION SYSTEM AND THE CITY INCURS THE SAME COST TO COLLECT, TRANSPORT AND TREAT ALL THE SANITARY SEWER ORIGINATING FROM WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION BOUNDARIES. ANY ADJUSTMENTS TO THE STANDARD RATE BASED ON THE MINIMAL LENGTH OF PRIVATELY OWNED SEWER LINES IN COMPARISON TO THE OVERALL SYSTEM WOULD BE NEGLIGIBLE. SEWER RATES ARE ESTABLISHED TO PROVIDE FOR AN EQUITABLE CONTRIBUTION TO THE OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE OF THE CITY'S WASTEWATER AND COLLECTED COLLECTION TREATMENT SYSTEM. THE RATES ARE DETERMINED THROUGH EXTENSIVE RATE STUDIES THAT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT OPERATIONAL COSTS, CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS, EXPANSION OF SEWER SERVICES, REPAIRS, AND DEPRECIATION OF INFRASTRUCTURE. I HAVE A QUESTION ON THAT SUBJECT. SO DID WE IN 2013 WAS I THINK THE LAST RATE ADJUSTMENT OR SET SETTING OF RATES? IS THAT RIGHT? ROXANNE? 20 20 14 WE ADOPTED NEW RATES AND THEY INCREASED BY 4% ANNUALLY UP TO 2017. BUT IT WAS BASED ON THIS 2013 STUDY, RIGHT? OR IT WAS RATE SETTING, RIGHT? YES, YOU'RE CORRECT. OKAY. SO, UH, THERE THE PRIVATE WASTEWATER SYSTEMS AND HOAS, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY THERE ARE. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY ROXANNE? UM, THERE ARE THREE. THREE, OKAY. UH, DID WE CONSIDER AT ALL IN THE PRIOR STUDY THE WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD BE ADJUSTED BECAUSE THEY'RE ALREADY PAYING FOR COLLECTION UP TO THE POINT WHERE THEY ENTER INTO THE CITY SYSTEM? IS THAT, HAS ANYBODY LOOKED AT THE EQUITY AROUND THAT AND IS THAT GENERALLY CONSIDERED IN OTHER RATE RATES? SO GENERALLY WHOEVER DUMPS INTO OUR COLLECTION SYSTEM PAYS WHATEVER RATES ARE SET. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT STUDY IN 2014 LOOKED AT AT BREAKING THAT OUT INTO A SEPARATE RATE OR NOT. I WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND RESEARCH THAT BECAUSE I'M JUST WONDERING, I DON'T, I DON'T BELIEVE SO BECAUSE IT DIDN'T COME. YEAH, IF WE COULD ASK WHOEVER, HAVE WE IDENTIFIED THE, THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERT COMPANY THAT WE ARE GONNA USE OR IS THAT RFP IS IN PROCESS OR NOT YET? UM, WE HAVE NOT STARTED THE PROCESS YET, BUT UM, FROM CONVERSATIONS I'VE HAD WITH ROXANNE, OUR FORMER FINANCE DIRECTOR, I BELIEVE DID SOME SORT OF ANALYSIS ON THIS AND SHE DETERMINED IT WOULD BE PENNIES. IT WOULD, THE DIFFERENCE WOULD BE SO NEGLIGIBLE THAT IT'S NOT REALLY MAKING A DIFFERENCE FOR THE, THE RATE PAYERS. UM, BUT I CAN DO SOME FURTHER RESEARCH ON THAT. I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU. ABSOLUTELY. JUST SO I UNDERSTAND AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE SYSTEM TOTALLY, BUT IF IT COMES OUT OF A COM, A PRIVATE SYSTEM, BUT ULTIMATELY PROCESSES THROUGH INTO OUR PIPING SYSTEM, EVERYTHING ELSE IS THE SAME MOVING DOWNHILL ESSENTIALLY, RIGHT? SO WHAT IS IT THAT THE PRIVATE HOA SYSTEMS DO? IS IT JUST A COLLECTION? SO THEY MAINTAIN THE, THE SEWER LINES WITHIN THEIR HOA BOUNDARIES, THEIR RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MAINTENANCE REPAIR. SO, SO OTHER THAN THAT, HOW ARE THEY, IS THERE NO OTHER DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SO IT'S JUST THE PIPING CORRECT? THEY'RE NOT GRINDING, WE STILL GET 100% OF THE FLOW THAT COMES FROM ALL THOSE HOMES IN THAT HOA THAT COMES OUT TO OUR TREATMENT POINT. SO, AND THEY'RE NOT, I KNOW SOME HOUSES HAVE GRINDERS IF THEY HAVE TO GO UPHILL, EXCUSE ME, IF, I MEAN THAT'S, IT STILL HAS TO COME TO OUR, OUR PIPING GRINDING OR GRAVITY. IT REALLY DOES NOT MATTER HOW IT GETS TO OUR TREATMENT PLAN. IT'S ALL TREATED THE SAME WAY IN THE END AND THERE'S NOTHING ON THEIR SIDE THAT MAKES IT EASIER AND LESS, UH, COST SAVINGS. I, I SHOULD SAY FOR US. NO, I LET, LET ME HAVE THE EXPERT, SO THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO BE SURE THAT I I HAD A GOOD UNDERSTANDING. THANK YOU. UH, YES, JESSICA AND THEN KATHY. AND SO IF, IF IN FACT PEOPLE WHO IN HOAS WHO CURRENTLY PAID THE SAME BECAUSE THEY BASICALLY STILL USE THE SAME SEWER FACILITIES, IF THEIR RATES WERE CUT, WE WOULD, THE REST OF US WOULD HAVE TO PICK UP THE DIFFERENCE, CORRECT? CORRECT. THANK YOU CASTA. [02:50:01] ELLA, THANK YOU. THE THREE PER 3.6% INCREASE THAT'S PROPOSED. UM, WHAT IS THE PROJECTED AMOUNT OF REVENUE THAT THAT WILL BRING AND WHAT IS THE, WILL THAT CLOSE THE, ON YOUR PAGE ONE OF YOUR PRESENTATION, IT SHOWED THAT FISCAL YEAR 2022 HAD A $1.4 MILLION GAP AND 2023 HAD A TWO POINT MILLION DOLLARS GAP. WOULD THIS CLOSE THE GAPS? BECAUSE WE'RE PROJECTING OBVIOUSLY FY 25 GAP. SO WOULD THIS IS THE 3.6, WILL IT CLOSE THE GAP? SO WE HAVEN'T PREPARED THOSE PROJECTIONS YET. UM, WE CAN WORK ON THAT. I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO CLOSE THE GAP JUST BASED ON SUCH A, IT, IT BEING SUCH A, THERE WILL STILL BE A GAP. YOU'RE SAYING IT'S A MINIMAL INCREASE. WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WORK ON THE RATE STUDY TO CLOSE THAT GAP. OKAY. SO RENEE DID, WHEN WE RECEIVED THE DIRECTION FROM COUNSEL DURING THE BUDGET WORK SESSIONS TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS CPI INCREASE, WHICH IS WHAT THIS REFLEX, UM, DID WE NOT ADJUST THE REVENUE SIDE OF THE WASTEWATER FUND? UM, ALREADY ISN'T THE WASTEWATER FUND BUDGET FOR FY 25 REFLECTING THAT UNDER OUR TENTATIVE MAXIMUM BUDGET THAT WAS ADOPTED? I DON'T THINK THAT THE REVENUE WAS ADJUSTED. NO. 'CAUSE IT WASN'T APPROVED AT THE TIME. OKAY. WE HADN'T GONE THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO, OKAY. MOVE ON. AND THAT WAS ALL I HAD. ROXANNE IS GOING TO ADD SOME ADDITIONAL CONTEXT FROM THE OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT AS WELL. YEAH, SO, UM, I, I KNOW THAT WE DIDN'T COMPLETE THE RATE STUDY IN 2019 IN, IN WHOLE, UM, FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. IT COULD BE A BLESSING IN DISGUISE BECAUSE A LOT OF HIPS CHANGED FROM 2019 TO CURRENT DAY. SO WE'RE SEEING INCREASE IN OPERATIONAL COSTS. WE'RE SEEING CONSTRUCTION COSTS SOMETIMES EVEN DOUBLING WHAT WE HAD ANTICIPATED BACK WHEN THAT RATE STUDY WAS BEING DONE. UM, ADDITIONALLY WE ARE FACING SOME ADDITIONAL REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE COMING UP IN THE NEAR FUTURE THAT WE WILL HAVE TO MEET. UM, AND THE COST TO MEET THOSE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED AS PART OF THE OVERALL RATE STUDY. AND THEN LAST, UM, UH, WE NEED TO LOOK AT OUR CAPACITY OF OUR TREATMENT PLAN. SO YOU ALL APPROVED A CONTRACT TODAY FOR A FACILITY PLAN IN THE CONSENT AGENDA. THAT FACILITY PLAN IS GOING TO BE LOOKING AT THOSE UPCOMING REGULATIONS AND WHAT THE CITY WOULD HAVE TO DO TO MEET THOSE BASED ON OUR WATER QUALITY TODAY. AND WHAT WE, UM, ASSUME THE REGULATIONS ARE GOING TO BE BASED ON PROPOSED DRAFT REGULATIONS. UM, THEY WILL PUT COST ANALYSIS TOGETHER AND OPTIONS ON HOW WE SHOULD TREAT THAT AND WHAT THAT MAY COST US IN TERMS OF CAPITAL AND OPERATIONAL COSTS. THEY'LL ALSO BE TAKING A LOOK AT, UM, OUR EFFLUENT MANAGEMENT LONG TERM TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY ALTERNATIVES. BETW, BESIDES THE IRRIGATION AND THE INJECTION THAT WE HAD PUT OFF TILL NEXT FISCAL YEAR. UM, THEY WILL ALSO BE TAKING A LOOK AT OUR CAPACITY, BOTH HYDRAULICALLY IN TERMS OF THE NUMBER OF GALLONS WE SEE, BUT ALSO IN NUTRIENT LOADING FOR THE STRENGTH OF THE WASTEWATER AS CON WATER CONSERVATION, UM, INCREASES WE'RE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE INCREASE IN, UM, THE STRENGTH OF OUR WASTEWATER, WHICH WILL CHANGE THE WAY WE TREAT IT AND POTENTIALLY LEAD TO ADDITIONAL COSTS FOR ADDITIONAL TREATMENT PROCESSES. SO WE'RE DOING THIS FACILITY PLAN TO GET A WHOLE HOLISTIC VIEW OF LIKE WHAT ARE THE NEXT 10, WHAT ARE THE NEXT 10 YEARS, WHAT CAN WE EXPECT IN TERMS OF INCREASED COST AND CAPITAL THAT WE HAVEN'T FORECASTED YET IN ADDITION TO OPERATIONAL COSTS THAT MAY, MAY COME ALONG WITH THAT. SO HAVING THAT INFORMATION BEFORE WE COMPLETE THE RATE STUDY WOULD PROBABLY BE VERY BENEFICIAL. UM, AND THAT FACILITY PLAN IS SET TO WRAP UP END OF DECEMBER, EARLY JANUARY. SO WE SHOULD HAVE THOSE NUMBERS OF THIS YEAR. YES. SO WE KNOW, WE KNOW THAT OUR COSTS ARE GOING TO INCREASE BEYOND WHAT THEY ARE TODAY. SO DOING THIS RATE INCREASE IS A PROACTIVE STEP TOWARDS MEETING THAT GOAL TO BE SELF-SUSTAINING ENTERPRISE FUND. BRIAN, THANK YOU MAYOR ROXANNE, THE ONE COMMENT YOU MADE THAT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME, YOU SAID IT MAY HAVE BEEN A BLESSING NOT TO HAVE COMPLETED THE 2019 RATE STUDY, BUT WE HAVEN'T RAISED RATES SINCE 2017 AND WE'RE STILL RUNNING A SIGNIFICANT DEFICIT. [02:55:01] SO A 2019 RATE STUDY WOULD'VE LED TO SOME KIND OF RATE INCREASE FROM NOW FROM THEN TO NOW. SO HOW IS THERE A BLESSING IN THAT? SO I JUST MEANT THAT LIKE WE DIDN'T HAVE A GOOD PICTURE IF WE'RE GOING TO DO ANOTHER RATE STUDY, IT'S BETTER TO HAVE WHAT WE KNOW TODAY RATHER THAN WHAT WE KNEW BACK THEN. AND, AND WE DID ADJUST RATES SOMEWHAT WITH THE CAPACITY FEES AND THAT HELPED US A LITTLE BIT. BUT, UM, HAVING A BETTER IDEA OF THE LONG-TERM IMPACTS NOW IS, IS A BLESSING TO RATE PAYERS SO THEY DON'T CONTINUE TO. OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MAYOR. MAYBE THAT WAS THE WRONG CHOICE OF WORDS. BLESSING . SO ROXANNE, I REMEMBER THAT, UH, THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLAN IS SUPPOSED TO BE TOTALLY SELF-SUPPORTING BY A CERTAIN POINT IN TIME. AND I FORGET WHAT THAT YEAR IS. I THINK COUNCIL DECIDED THAT WOULD BE 2026. SO OUR, OUR SUBSIDY FROM THE GENERAL FUND ENDS IN 2026. BUT THAT'S A LEGAL REQUIREMENT. WE'VE PUT A DATE ON IT, RIGHT, KURT? CORRECT. SO IT'S, IT'S UH, AN ENTERPRISE FUND IS A GOVERNMENT, UM, UH, AGENCY AND IT'S MORE OF A AN ACCOUNTING REQUIREMENT THAN NECESSARY THAN LEGAL. AND THE IDEA IS THAT IT, THE USERS OF THAT RIGHT, UM, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION IN THIS CASE, THE WASTEWATER PAY FOR THE COST OF IT AND THAT NON-USERS IN THE CITY DON'T PAY FOR THE COST OF THAT. UH, AND THE, AND SO COUNCIL ADOPTED THAT BY RESOLUTION, ESTABLISHING THAT AND SETTING THAT END DATE OF THAT SUBSIDY FROM THE GENERAL FUND OF AS OF THE END OF 2026. OKAY. COUNCILOR KINSELLA. BUT IF, AND WE'RE PROBABLY, THIS IS A CONVERSATION HAS TO HAVE ACTUALLY ONCE WE HAVE THE STUDY, BUT WE, THAT COULD BE CHANGE THAT POLICY AS WELL BECAUSE WE'VE ALWAYS BEEN USING THE TAX SUBSIDIES, UH, TO SUPPORT THE SYSTEM. I MEAN, AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT LEGALLY COULD CONTINUE, IS THAT CORRECT? SO STAFF, UH, WON'T, UH, CAN'T RECOMMEND THAT, UM, BASED ON THE, THE GENERAL, UH, REQUIREMENT, NOT NECESSARILY, UH, THAT I'M AWARE OF. IT HASN'T BEEN SPELLED ON THE STATE STATUTE OR ANYTHING, BUT THAT THE USERS OF A ENTERPRISE FUND PAY FOR THE COST OF THAT FUND AND THEN NOT BE PAID BY NON-USERS. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE ROXANNE? THAT THE WHOLE ALL OKAY, RENEE, YOU, YOU'RE DONE TOO. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS? OKAY. WE HAVE UM, DO YOU WANT A MOTION? YES, THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR. I'LL MAKE THE MOTION PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. THAT WAS THE POINT. SEE ALMOST 10 O'CLOCK WE RIGHT. WE HAVE THE COURTS. SO THANK YOU FOR REMINDING ME 'CAUSE IT GOT BURIED UNDER ALL THE PAPERS I HAVE HERE. SO WE'RE GONNA OPEN UP THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND UH, WE'LL START WITH DONNA FOREMAN AND WE'LL BE FOLLOWED BY KATE. UH, BOLDEN. OKAY. UH, DONNA, WOULD YOU START WITH YOUR NAME, CITY OF RESIDENCE? YOU DON'T HAVE TO GIVE THE EXACT ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES TO, UH, TO BRING THE, THE TIME IS ON THE CLOCK AND I BRING THE MIC DOWN TO YOUR LEVEL. YEAH. OKAY. OKAY. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR DLOW AND, UM, VICE MAYOR AND THE CITY COUNCIL. UM, MY NAME IS DONNA FOREMAN. I LIVE IN SEDONA IN WEST SEDONA. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH YOU TODAY. UM, THE PRESIDENT OF THE THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. I'M HERE TO SHARE OUR COMMUNITY'S ONGOING CONCERNS REGARDING THE RATES CHARGED FOR WASTEWATER SERVICES IN OUR COMMUNITY. THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH OWNS AND MAINTAINS APPROXIMATELY TWO MILES OF LOW FLOW SEWER INFRASTRUCTURE. A RESPONSIBILITY WE HAVE UPHELD FOR OVER TWO DECADES. FOR AS LONG AS WE'VE BEEN WASTEWATER CUSTOMERS, OUR RESIDENTS HAVE STRUGGLED TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE ARE CHARGED THE SAME FULL SERVICE RATES AS THOSE WHO DEPEND ENTIRELY ON WASTEWATER SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM. IT HAS NEVER SEEMED FAIR OR JUST OR REASONABLE THAT OUR RESIDENTS ARE BURDENED TWICE FIRST BY MAINTAINING AND PAYING FOR OUR OWN SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM AND THEN BY PAYING AGAIN FOR WASTEWATER SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM FROM WHICH THEY RECEIVE MINIMAL BENEFIT. THE MATTER HAS REMAINED UNRESOLVED FOR YEARS UNTIL KATE MALDEN, A THUNDER MOUNTAIN RESIDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANT AND FORMER ALASKA PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSION CHAIRMAN EXPLAINED THAT WASTEWATER HAD NEVER PREPARED A RATE FOR CUSTOMERS RECEIVING A LOWER LEVEL OF SERVICE BECAUSE THEY ONLY HAVE FULL SERVICE RESIDENTIAL [03:00:01] RATES AND NOTHING ELSE. THEY LUMPED OUR SEWA COLLECTION SYSTEM AND PROBABLY ALL THE OTHER SEWA COLLECTION SYSTEMS INTO THE FULL SERVICE RESIDENTIAL CLASS OF CUSTOMERS. WE ARE HERE TONIGHT TO REQUEST THAT YOU NOT APPROVE THE REQUESTED RATE INCREASE UNTIL THE SERVICE DIFFERENTIALS BETWEEN FULL SERVICE AND PRIVATE SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEMS CAN BE RESOLVED. WE BELIEVE THIS WOULD DECREASE PRIVATE SEWER SYSTEM RATES BY APPROXIMATELY HALF OF THE FULL SERVICE RATE AND THAT REFUNDS WOULD BE WARRANTED FOR THE OVERCHARGES THAT HAVE TAKEN PLACE OVER 20 YEARS. OUR COMMUNITY IS SEEKING A FAIR RESOLUTION TO THIS ISSUE, ONE THAT ACKNOWLEDGES THE UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES OF PRIVATE SEWER SYSTEMS AND ENSURES THAT ALL SEDONA WASTEWATER TAXPAYERS ARE TREATED EQUITABLY. WE'D APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS MATTER FOR OUR S OUR SUBDIVISION AND ALSO THE OTHERS IN SEDONA WHO ARE PAYING FULL RATES WHEN THEY'RE GETTING MINIMAL SERVICES FROM THE CITY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU DONNA. SO, UH, KATE, YOU'LL BE FOLLOWED BY UH, GLENN MANN. I'M JUST A PROB GUY. AND A FINE ONE. HE IS. OKAY. START WITH YOUR NAME AND CITY OF RESIDENCE. UH, OBVIOUSLY YOU SEDONA, BUT YOU HAVE TO SAY IT FOR THE VIDEO. I WILL. AND, UM, YOU'LL HAVE THREE MINUTES WE'D KNOWN WE WOULD'VE, UH, DONE THAT, BUT IT'S AS AS GOOD AS YOU CAN GET, I GUESS. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS KATE MALDEN. YOU SPEAK CLOSE TO THE MIC, RIGHT? GOOD, I HAVE A FROG. YEAH, SO DO I. SO GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS KATE MALDEN. I NOW LIVE IN ORACLE, ARIZONA, BUT RESIDED IN THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH SINCE 2017 AND SEDONA SINCE 2010. I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH HOMEOWNERS REGARDING THE PRIVATE SEWER SYSTEMS THAT FUNCTION WITHIN WASTEWATER SERVICE TERRITORY. AND BECAUSE I HAVE, UH, A RATHER EXTENSIVE BACKGROUND IN RIGHT MAKING, UM, I HAVE SAT ON OVER A HUNDRED CASES UTILITY, RIGHT, MAKING CASES WHERE, UH, FOR WASTEWATER, FOR WATER, FOR ELECTRIC, FOR PIPELINES, ALL IN ALASKA. SO I HAVE A VERY STRONG BACKGROUND IN RATE MAKING AND I UNDERSTAND JUST IN REASONABLE RATES AND I UNDERSTAND HOW THEY'RE PUT TOGETHER. WHAT MAKES A RATE? THE RATES THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT TONIGHT ARE STANDING ON TOP OF RATES THAT WERE CREATED IN 2013 THROUGH THE RATE CASE THAT YOU'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT. AND I WANNA SAY THAT IT IS NO ONE'S FAULT THAT THERE'S A TERRIFIC MISUNDERSTANDING IN WHAT COMPRISES A RATE AND HOW THE RATES ARE CALCULATED AND WHY THUNDER MOUNTAIN KEEPS KNOCK, KNOCK KNOCKING ON YOUR DOOR. YOUR RATE COMPRISES THREE COMPONENTS, SEWER COLLECTION, WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND ADMIN, AND YOU CAN FIND THOSE AND ADMIN TABLE 16, YOU MOVE THE MIC RIGHT TO YOUR MOUTH, IT WOULD HELP US. OKAY? YOU CAN FIND THOSE ON TABLE 16. IN YOUR RATE CASE, 20 OR 43% OF YOUR COSTS ARE SPENT ON THE SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM. AND IT'S NOT JUST THAT YOU TRANSPORT EFFLUENT, YOU MAINTAIN, YOU IMPROVE, YOU EXPAND, YOU REPAIR, YOU HAVE 24 BY SEVEN SERVICE AND ALL OF THAT IS $2.2 MILLION WORTH OF COST THAT THE FULL SERVICE RATE PAYERS BENEFIT FROM. BUT YOU WILL NOT COME TO A PRIVATE UTILITY SYSTEM AND OFFER THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICE. YOU WON'T FIX A BROKEN LINE, YOU WON'T MAINTAIN, INVESTIGATE, INSPECT, OR UPSIZE. AND THAT'S THE ESSENTIAL DIFFERENCE HERE BETWEEN A PRIVATE SYSTEM AND A FULL, FULLY SUPPORTED SYSTEM. SO YOU CAN'T CHARGE THE GUYS THAT ARE IN THE MOTEL SIX THE SAME RATE, YOU'RE GONNA CHARGE 'EM IN THE HILTON DOWNTOWN BECAUSE THE SERVICE LEVELS ARE DIFFERENT. AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU FOR THE PROPS. GLENN, ARE YOU HERE STILL? I [03:05:01] WILL BE FOLLOWED BY PATRICIA CARRELL. GOOD EVENING MAYOR JABO, COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CITY STAFF. MY NAME'S GLENN MANN. I'M A RESIDENT OF SEDONA AND I'M A MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. FOR FOR AS LONG AS I'VE LIVED IN THE THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH, OUR BOARD HAS BEEN APPROACHING THE CITY WITH CONCERNS THAT RATES THAT WE HAVE BEEN PAYING DO NOT ACCURATELY REFLECT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE WE ARE RECEIVING. DESPITE OUR REPEATED EFFORTS, THERE HAS BEEN LITTLE PROGRESS AND THE UNDERLYING PROBLEM REMAINS. THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH IS BEING CHARGED FOR FULL SERVICE SEWER COLLECTION SERVICES, YET WASTEWATER DOESN'T LIFT A FINGER TO PERFORM SERVICE ON OUR SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM. IT'S ESSENTIAL THAT THE COUNCIL ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THE WASTEWATER PROVIDES THAT WASTEWATER PROVIDES DIFFERING LEVELS OF SERVICE AMONG ITS CUSTOMERS AND THAT MORE THAN JUST THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH IS IMPACTED. THERE ARE SEVERAL PRIVATE SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEMS OPERATING IN SEDONA AND WE WANT TO KNOW IF THEY ARE ALSO BEING OVERCHARGED. WE AREN'T ASKING FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT, WE'RE ONLY SIMPLY ASKING FOR FAIRNESS. RATES SHOULD BE BASED ON THE ACTUAL COSTS AND SERVICES PROVIDED. NOTHING MORE, NOTHING LESS. WE ARE ASKING THAT THE COUNCIL NOT APPROVE THIS RATE INCREASE UNTIL THIS DISPARITY IN THE PROVISION OF WATER WASTEWATER, UH, SERVICES IS FULLY ANALYZED AND A NEW SET FOR PRIVATE SEWER SYSTEMS AND REFUNDS OVER OVERCHARGES ARE ESTABLISHED. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER. WE'RE EAGER TO FIND A RESOLUTION THAT ENSURES THAT ALL TAX BASE PAYERS ARE TREATED JUSTLY AND THAT THE INTEGRITY OF THE RATE MAKING PROCESS IS UPHELD. THANK YOU. THANK YOU GLENN. UH, PATRICIA CARRELL WILL BE FOLLOWED BY RON VEG, WHOSE LAST. IF ANYONE ELSE WISHES TO ADDRESS THIS TOPIC, PLEASE FILL OUT A CARD NOW. OTHERWISE, UH, RON ICK WILL BE THE LAST. OKAY. PATRICIA, YOU START WITH YOUR NAME, CITY OF RESIDENCE, AND YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES ON THE CLOCK. OKAY. MY NAME IS PATRICIA CORRAL. I LIVE IN SEDONA. UM, I SERVE ON THE BOARD OF THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION AND I WANNA TALK ABOUT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH HAS BEEN RECEIVING COMPARED TO WHAT WE HAVE BEEN PAYING FOR. THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING, REPAIRING, AND UPGRADING OUR OWN SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEM, WHEREAS WASTE WATER'S, OTHER CUSTOMERS ENJOY A FULL SERVICE OFFERING. PRIVATE SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEMS IS A SEPARATE CLASS OF CUSTOMER THAT RECEIVES A LOWER LEVEL OF SERVICE FROM SEDONA WASTEWATER AND AS A RESULT HAS BEEN UNJUSTLY OVERCHARGED FOR SEWER SERVICES FOR YEARS. WE ALSO BELIEVE OTHER PRIVATE SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEMS ARE BEING BILLED AT A FULL SERVICE RATE AND ARE HERE TO ASK YOU TO FIND OUT WHETHER OVERCHARGES TO THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH ARE AN ISOLATED ISSUE OR ENDEMIC OF A LARGER RATE ERROR THAT HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO CONTINUE AND ABATED FOR YEARS. CHARGING CUSTOMERS FOR SERVICES THAT THEY DO NOT RECEIVE IS A CLEAR EXAMPLE OF UNJUST AND UNREASONABLE RATES. AND IN ARIZONA, NOT ONLY IS THIS UNJUST AND UNREASONABLE, IT'S UNLAWFUL, WE ARE URGING YOU TO NOT APPROVE THIS RATE INCREASE UNTIL YOU UNDERSTAND THE MAGNITUDE OF THE INJUSTICE THAT EXISTS IN WASTE WATER'S. CURRENT RATES, THIS IS NOT JUST ABOUT CORRECTING PAST OVER CHARGES, IT'S ABOUT ENSURING THAT MOVING FORWARD, ALL RATE PAYERS ARE CHARGED RATES THAT ARE ACCURATELY REFLECT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE THEY RECEIVE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU PATRICIA. OKAY, RON . RON WILL BE OUR LAST SPEAKER FOR THIS TOPIC. MAYOR, EXCUSE ME, MAYOR COUNCIL AND STAFF. MY NAME IS RONALD ROY. I HAVE RESIDED AT ONE 40 NORTHVIEW ROAD SINCE MARCH OF 1976. MY LAW OFFICE HAS BEEN IN THE FIRST STATE FINANCIAL CENTER AT 1785 WEST STATE ROUTE 89 A SUITE THREE I SINCE 1988. I OPPOSE INCREASING SEWER ASSESSMENTS BECAUSE I OPPOSE AND OBJECT TO HAVING THERE BEING SEWER ASSESSMENTS AGAINST MY COMMERCIAL OFFICE UNIT IN THE FIRST STATE FINANCIAL CENTER, THE FIRST STATE FINANCIAL CENTER IS A COMMERCIAL OFFICE CONDOMINIUM DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS BUILT IN 1983, WHICH HAS COMMON RESTROOMS FOR USE BY ALL THE CONDOMINIUM UNITS IN THE DEVELOPMENT. SINCE MY UNIT WAS BUILT IN 1983, IT HAS NEVER HAD ANY WATER SERVICE. MY OFFICE UNIT DOES NOT [03:10:01] CONTRIBUTE ONE SINGLE DRIP OF WATER TO THE CITY'S SEWER SYSTEM BECAUSE FIRST STATE FINANCIAL CENTER OFFICES, OUR CONDOMINIUM UNITS, EACH UNIT HAS AN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER. SO THE CITY LEVIES A MONTHLY SEWER ASSESSMENT AGAINST EACH UNIT THE SAME AS THE CITY DOES FOR EACH ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUM NUMBER WITHIN THE CITY. EVEN THOUGH MY OFFICE UNIT HAS NO WATER SERVICE, CONTRIBUTES NOT ONE DROP OF WATER TO THE SEWER SYSTEM AND NEVER WILL, THAT IS EFFECTIVELY AN UNCONSTITUTIONAL TAX WITHOUT ANY RATIONAL OR REASONABLE BASIS. IT IS PATENTLY UNFAIR AND UNREASONABLE FOR A CITY TO COLLECT ASSESSMENTS. THE CITY MUST PROVIDE SOME SERVICES OR BENEFITS FOR THAT ASSESSMENT. FOR THE CITY SEWER ASSESSMENTS ON MY OFFICE UNIT, THE CITY PROVIDES ABSOLUTELY NO SERVICES OR BENEFITS WHATSOEVER FOR MY OFFICE UNIT. IF THE FIRST STATE FINANCIAL CENTER WERE AN ORDINARY COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING WITH LEASED OFFICE SPACES, THE ENTIRE OFFICE BUILDING WOULD HAVE ONLY ONE SEWER ASSESSMENT WITHOUT SEPARATE SEWER ASSESSMENTS FOR EACH LEASED OFFICE SPACE, I OBJECT TO THE CONTINUED LEVIES OF SEWER ASSESSMENTS AGAINST MY OFFICE UNIT SOLELY BECAUSE IT IS A CONDOMINIUM OFFICE UNIT WITH AN ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER. I ASK THE CITY TO STOP LEVYING SEWER ASSESSMENTS AGAINST MY OFFICE UNIT BECAUSE THE CITY PROVIDES NO SERVICE, SEWER SERVICE OR BENEFITS, I TRUST THAT THE CITY WILL TAKE FAIR AND APPROPRIATE ACTION TO RECTIFY ASSESSMENTS ON OFFICE CONDOMINIUM UNITS. THEY HAVE NO WATER AND NO USE OR CON CONTRIBUTION TO THE SEWER SYSTEM. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU. THANK YOU SIR. ALRIGHT, WE'RE BRING IT BACK TO COUNCILS. SEEING NOBODY ELSE HAS A QUESTION. UH, ? NO, I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING FOR A MOTION. I'M SORRY. NO, I'M NOT ASKING. WE'RE NOT ANYWHERE NEAR FOR A MOTION YET. QUESTIONS? QUESTIONS? YES, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AS WELL. UM, THESE ARE TWO INTERESTING EXAMPLES THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD BY OUR SPEAKERS. UM, UH, WANNA ASK ROXANNE, ARE DO YOU KNOW REGARDING THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, UH, THE COMMERCIAL CONDOMINIUM IS, IS THIS AN ISOLATED EXAMPLE AS WELL? OR IS ARE THERE OTHER EXAMPLES OF THAT WITHIN SEDONA? WHERE DO WE KNOW THIS AT ALL? UH, I'M GONNA DEFER TO WASTEWATER BUILDING FOR THAT ONE. OKAY, THANK YOU. BUT WE BILL BY PARCEL NUMBER, SO EVERY PARCEL IS BILLED. SO, SO WE, WE HAVE NO WAY OF KNOWING IF THIS IS ANY ISOLATED SITUATION OF THESE OFFICE CONDOMINIUMS THAT ARE BEING, I DON'T BELIEVE IT WOULD BE ISOLATED. THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES OF THIS, YOU THINK? UM, I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. I'M JUST, UH, YOU KNOW, I WOULD HAVE TO ASSUME, BUT I WOULD HOPE THAT THE, THE RATE STUDY WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD HELP US RECTIFY THOSE THINGS. OKAY. I THINK, ANDY, DID YOU WANNA JUMP IN WITH THAT? JUST FROM MY EXPERIENCE BEING CITY ENGINEER , I CAN TELL YOU THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES OUT THERE, BUT THERE, THERE AREN'T A LOT OF THEM. BUT I DO AGREE THAT I THINK DOING THE STUDY WILL HELP TO CLARIFY WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THAT SITUATION. OKAY. AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION, AND MIGHT, THIS MIGHT GO RIGHT TO YOU AS WELL, IS, UM, THE THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH SITUATION, I, I, I, I HEAR THE POINT THAT THE SPEAKERS ARE MAKING, BUT I'M TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND IT BECAUSE AT THE END OF THE DAY, UNLIKE IN THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WHERE HE'S ACTUALLY NOT CONTRIBUTING ANYTHING INTO THE SYSTEM, YOU, YOU'RE STILL, THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT THE CITY IS DOING IS STILL THE SAME BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE TREATING YOUR WATER, UM, THE, THE, YOU'RE NOT, YOU'RE JUST COLLECTING IT. EVEN THOUGH YOU'RE COLLECTING THE WATER, IT'S STILL BEING RELEASED INTO THE SYSTEM AND GOING THROUGH THE EXACT SAME PROCESS AS EVERYBODY ELSE'S. SO DO I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY? I'M GETTING NODS. YEAH. YEAH. ALL AROUND. OKAY. SO THAT'S NOT REALLY A DIFFERENT SCENARIO, IT'S JUST THAT YOU HAVE IF, IF, UH, AND DO WE KNOW IF THERE ARE OTHER HOAS THAT ALSO MAINTAIN THEIR OWN PIPES AS WELL THAT ARE YEAH, I SAID THREE AND I WAS LOOKING AT THE MAP WHEN I LOOKED AT THAT. IF I ZOOMED IN A LITTLE BIT, THERE'S FIVE. UM, THERE'S A COUPLE CONDOS THAT MAINTAIN THEIR OWN PRIVATE, THERE'S [03:15:01] ONE, UM, MOBILE HOME PARK AND THEN THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY'RE ALL TAKING THEIR EFFLUENT AND DUMP TREATED BUT STILL RELEASING IT INTO OUR SYSTEM. IT GOES TO THE NOT TREATING IT, COLLECTING IT, RELEASING IT INTO THE SAME SYSTEM THAT EVERYBODY ELSE IN INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY IS, IS RIGHT. SO THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE IN THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT THE CITY IS DOING, IS THAT CORRECT? SO I WILL SAY THAT, LET'S TAKE CHAPEL FOR EXAMPLE. THOSE ARE ALL CITY MAINTAINED LINES. IF SOMETHING HAPPENS IN THE CHAPEL AREA AND THERE'S A SEWER LINE BREAK, THE CITY WILL COME IN THERE AND REPAIR THAT SEWER LINE BREAK. IF THERE IS A SEWER LINE BREAK WITHIN THE PRIVATE BOUNDARIES OF THE THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH SUBDIVISION, THEIR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT SAYS THAT THEY MAINTAIN THAT AND OPERATE THAT. SO THEY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMING IN AND PAYING FOR AND HIRING CONTRACTORS TO MAKE THAT REPAIR. THE CITY WOULD NOT MAKE THAT REPAIR ON THEIR BEHALF. THEY DO DUMP INTO OUR SEWER SYSTEM JUST OUTSIDE OF THEIR, THEIR HOA BOUNDARY. SO OUT OF 160 PLUS MILES OF SEWER PIPE, THE 1.2 OR I, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY MILES OFFHAND THEY MAINTAIN, IT'S, IT'S LESS THAN 1% OF OUR ENTIRE SYSTEM THAT THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR. AND IN YOUR SCENARIO OF THE, USING AN EXAMPLE OF SOMEBODY IN THE CHAPEL NEIGHBORHOOD, IF THE SEWER LINE, IF THE BREAK IS WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINE OF THE PRIVATE PROPERTY, DOES THE CITY STILL COME IN AND DO THE REPAIR? NO, THAT'S UP TO THE HOMEOWNER TO THAT REPAIR. SO, SO IT'S AGAIN, IT'S THE SAME. CORRECT. ALRIGHT, THANK YOU FOR HELPING ME UNDERSTAND THIS HANDY. THEN I WANT TO TAP, TAP ON ON THAT. I WAS JUST, SORRY. EXCUSE ME. PLEASE DON'T QUOTE FROM THE AUDIENCE. THANK YOU. I I WAS JUST GONNA MAYBE THROW OUT THE DISTINCTION WHY THE SYSTEM IS BUILT THE WAY IT IS WITHIN THE THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH, UM, SUBDIVISION COMPARED TO ANOTHER SUBDIVISION WHERE THE PRIVATE LINE SIMPLY JUST RUNS FROM THEIR HOME TO THE EDGE OF STREET AND THEN IT, IT SPILLS INTO A GRAVITY SYSTEM MOST OFTEN AND THEN RUNS THE REST OF THE WAY THROUGH OUR WHOLE SYSTEM. AS I UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF THAT PARTICULAR SUBDIVISION WHEN IT WAS BUILT, THEY CHOSE TO BUILD THE A WHAT'S CALLED A LOW PRESSURE SYSTEM. THAT'S A CHEAPER SYSTEM THAN BUILDING A GRAVITY SYSTEM. AND BASED ON THAT, THAT IS WHY THE CITY WOULD NOT TAKE OVER THE FULL SYSTEM AS PUBLIC. SO YES, IT'S NOT THE SAME SYSTEM THAT SOMEONE ELSE MIGHT DRAIN TO WHAT WHO, WHO DRAINS TO A, A FULLY GRAVITY SYSTEM. BUT THERE WAS A REASON FOR THAT. THERE IS A HISTORY THERE. AND, AND FOLLOWING UP ON THAT, AND IF, IF THAT HOA OR ANY HOA WANTED TO UPGRADE THEIR SYSTEM TO A GRAVITY SYSTEM, THEN THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO BE UNDER THE SAME EXACT RIGHT. OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S, THAT HELPS. SO, UH, ANDY OR ROXY, PROBABLY MORE ANDY, BUT IT'S A LITTLE SIMILAR TO THE HOAS THAT OWN THEIR OWN ROADS. SURE. SO THERE'S SOME HOAS THAT WISH US TO TAKE OVER THEIR ROADS AND WE WOULD, IF, WELL WE CONSIDER IT IF WE BROUGHT UP TO THE SAME STANDARDS AS THE REST OF THE CITY IT, SORRY. IS THAT ABOUT RIGHT? THAT'S, THAT'S A VERY GOOD SIMILARITY TO COMPARE THAT TO. IT WOULD BE MUCH LIKE AN HOA BEING DEVELOPED WHERE THEY BUILD THEIR ROAD SYSTEM SUBSTANDARD AND THEN LATER ASKED THE CITY TO TAKE OVER THE ROAD SYSTEM. AND THEN THE CITY POINT TO YOU DID NOT BRING IT TO CITY STANDARD AT THE TIME BECAUSE YOU CHOSE TO MAKE IT PRIVATE AND NOW YOU WANT IT TO BE PUBLIC. AND IT'S SIMILAR TO THAT. YES, PETE. OKAY. CAN I ASK ANDY FOR THE SUBDIVISIONS THAT CHOSE A LOW PRESSURE SYSTEM RATHER THAN OUR GRAVITY SYSTEM, UH, DID THEY PAY FEWER FEES BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T GETTING THE FULL SERVICE WHEN IT WAS BUILT AS FAR AS CAPACITY FEE THEY WOULD NOT HAVE. BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT THE FULL CITY SEWER SYSTEM, YOU KNOW, YOU, YOU LOOK AT THE MILES FROM HERE IN TOWN OUT TO THE WASTEWATER PLANT THAT THE CITY HAS TO CONTINUE TO MAINTAIN AS WELL AS THE, THE MILLIONS OF DOLLARS WORTH OF IMPROVEMENTS THAT TAKE THE SEWAGE THROUGH THE TREATMENT PROCESS. IT'S ALL THE SAME. THE, THE DIFFERENCE, AS ROXANNE SAID EARLIER IS JUST THAT, THAT SHORT AMOUNT AT, AT THE END OF THE BEGINNING OF THEIR SYSTEM. RIGHT. BUT IN A TYPICAL SUBDIVISION, WE WOULD PAY THE COST OF THE SEWER IN THE STREETS UP TO THE STREETS OF THE PROPERTY LINE, AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD PAY FOR THE REST OF IT. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE, WE DIDN'T DO ANY OF THAT. JUST [03:20:01] WAS CURIOUS WHETHER THERE WAS ANY LOWER FEE. WE DIDN'T WANT THE SYSTEM IN OUR, THEIR SYSTEM. IN OUR SYSTEM. BUT WAS THERE ANY TYPE OF FEE BREAK BECAUSE OF THAT? NO. AND, AND YOU KNOW, IF YOU LOOK AT ANY OTHER PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BUILT TODAY, IF THEY WANTED THE SEWER SYSTEM TO BE TAKEN OVER AND MAINTAINED BY THE CITY, WE WOULD SAY OKAY. IF YOU BUILD IT TO THIS LEVEL OF, OF, YOU KNOW, SYSTEM. YEAH. UM, SO YEAH. THANK YOU MAYOR. OKAY. UH, VICE MAYOR AND KEL WILLIAMSON. YOU KNOW, I, I THINK THERE ARE A LOT OF, OF INDIVIDUAL SITUATIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, AT MY HOUSE, I HAD SEPTIC THAT WAS CONVERTED TO SEWER. MM-HMM. I STILL HAVE TO CLEAN THE SEPTIC SYSTEM AND I HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT. MM-HMM. . SO I DON'T GET THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICE THAT SOMEBODY ELSE GETS. AND I THINK THERE'S ALL KINDS OF SITUATIONS, UH, THAT EXIST BECAUSE WE BUILT A SEWER SYSTEM AFTER HOUSES WERE BUILT AND DEVELOPMENTS EXISTED. BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT THE, AND, AND, AND SOMEBODY BROUGHT THIS TO UP THE OTHER DAY TOO, IF YOU LOOK AT THE CHAPEL, THE CHAPEL IS 10 MILES FURTHER AWAY. I'M MAKING UP A NUMBER. UH, THEN WHERE I LIVE, CL I LIVE CLOSER TO THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT THAN THE CHAPEL. SO SHOULD THEY PAY MORE BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO, THE WASTE IS GOING FURTHER THAN I SHOULD PAY BECAUSE I LIVE CLOSER TO THE, SO THERE'S ALL KINDS OF SCENARIOS AND SITUATIONS, UH, THAT PEOPLE WOULD FEEL THERE'S INEQUITY. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE RATE STUDY, I THINK WE SHOULD PICK OUT NOT EVERYTHING 'CAUSE THERE'S TOO MANY THINGS, BUT, BUT A FEW OF THESE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS AND ASK AND INVESTIGATE WHETHER OR NOT OTHER JURISDICTIONS HAVE DIFFERENT RATES DEPENDING ON THEIR SITUATION. SO IF THEY HAVE A PRIVATE SYSTEM THAT FLOWS IN BECAUSE THEY'RE PAYING TO MAINTAIN THAT SYSTEM, YOU KNOW, SHOULD THEIR RATE BE DIFFERENT. AND, AND I'M NOT GONNA SAY MY SITUATION 'CAUSE IT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL, BUT, BUT I BROUGHT IT UP JUST BECAUSE THERE ARE ANY NUMBER OF DIFFERENT SCENARIOS THAT EXIST WITHIN THE CITY. BUT, UH, WHEN WE LOOK AT FAIR AND EQUITABLE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT REALLY MEANS. WE'VE CHOSEN RIGHT NOW TO HAVE TWO RATES, ONE FOR LOW FLOW, ONE FOR REGULAR FLOW. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DETERMINED IS FAIR AND EQUITABLE. I BET THERE ARE OTHER WAYS IN WHICH TO APPROACH THIS. AND I KNOW IN THE FORMER STUDY, I WASN'T ON COUNCIL AT THE TIME, BUT I REMEMBER HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH MY COLLEAGUE AT THE END OF THE TABLE. IT WAS SO COMPLICATED AND THERE WERE SO MANY DIFFERENT POTENTIALS THAT, THAT THAT COUNCIL ALMOST LIKE FROZE. RIGHT. WE DON'T KNOW WHICH WAY TO GO. SO I, I, I, I CAN UNDERSTAND SIMPLICITY HELPS A LOT IN THAT, BUT I THINK THAT MAYBE IT'S TOO SIMPLE AND THAT WE COULD LOOK AT, AT, AT, YOU KNOW, RATE SETTING BASED ON, ON DIFFERENT THINGS THAN WE CURRENTLY HAVE, WHICH IS ONLY FLOW OF YOUR TOILET OPPOSED TO ANY NUMBER OF OTHER THINGS. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY ARE. I THINK ONE IS, IS THE THUNDER MOUNTAIN RANCH SITUATION. ONE MIGHT BE THIS GENTLEMAN'S SITUATION. I KNOW ANOTHER PRIVATE OR CONDOMINIUM BASED OFFICE STRUCTURE. THEY HAVE TOILETS THAT EVERYBODY USES. SO THERE IS, I MEAN, PEOPLE ARE BENEFITING THE CUSTOMERS WHO USE THAT FACILITY, THE EMPLOYEES WHO WORK THERE, EVEN THOUGH THEY OR THE OWNERS OF CONDOMINIUMS GO TO THE BATHROOM. SO THEY, THEY ARE GETTING SOME BENEFIT OUT OF IT, EVEN IF THEY DON'T HAVE WATER IN THEIR PARTICULAR UNIT. BUT THERE ARE, THERE ARE DIFFERENT SITUATIONS. AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US, YOU KNOW, LOOK BROADLY ACROSS SOME CATEGORIES THAT OTHER COMMUNITIES MAY HAVE ESTABLISHED DIFFERENT RATE STRUCTURES FOR. OKAY. THANK YOU. UH, IT WAS ME. OH, YES. I'M SORRY, . YES. YOU KNOW, CAN I, I MEAN, THIS IS ALL NICE AND I'M GLAD THAT YOU'VE GIVEN DIRECTION ABOUT THE RATE STUDY. I WONDER IF WE CAN JUST GET BACK TO THE RATE INCREASE THAT WE HAVE A LOT MORE ON THE AGENDA. YEAH. AND I DON'T KNOW THAT, I MEAN, I, I HAVE A LOT I COULD SAY ABOUT THIS, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO BECAUSE, OKAY. SO CAN WE GET BACK TO JUST 'CAUSE WE AREN'T, I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA, [03:25:01] I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF PUTTING OFF VOTING ON THIS UNTIL ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE RESOLVED. SO IF WE COULD DO THAT, I'D BE MOST GRATEFUL. OKAY. UM, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? FIRST COMMENTS? OKAY. AND WE'LL GO OVER TO, TO COMMENTS. UH, WELL, KURT, DID YOU WANNA ADDRESS ANY OF THE, THE HISTORY? I THINK IT'S BEEN SAID. THANK YOU. JUST WANNA BE SURE. OKAY. SO, UH, COMMENTS THEN LOOKING AT ME. OKAY. THANKS MAYOR. I'LL START WITH JESSICA NEXT. DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. OKAY. UM, OKAY. SO VICE MAYOR, YOU JUST MADE THE FIRST ARGUMENT I'VE EVER HEARD FOR WHY SOMEBODY SHOULD WANNA LIVE NEXT TO A SEWER PLANT. , REALIZE THAT I WASN'T EXPECTING THAT. THANK YOU FOR THAT. UM, WITHOUT BELABORING, UH, TO, TO FRUSTRATE COUNCILOR WILLIAMSON ANY FURTHER. YES. I THINK SOME OF THESE UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES NEED TO FIND THEIR WAY INTO THE RATE STUDY AND BE COMMENTED ON, UH, AND TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AS FAR AS THE RATE INCREASE. UM, YES, WE, WE NEED TO DO THIS. I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT WE HAVE OVERLOOKED IT FOR TOO MANY YEARS. UM, THIS 3.6% I'M CONCERNED DOESN'T EVEN COME CLOSE TO CLOSING THE GAP. AND I THINK WE NEED TO BE COMMUNICATING TO THE COMMUNITY, UH, YOU KNOW, AS SOON AS WE KNOW MORE ABOUT REALLY WHAT IT'S GONNA TAKE, UH, TO CLOSE THAT GAP BECAUSE IT'S, I SEEM TO RECALL SHERRY SAYING THIS 3.6 ISN'T REALLY MUCH MORE THAN A DROP IN THE BUCKET COMPARED TO THE GAP THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. SO, UH, I THINK EVERYBODY NEEDS TO BE READY FOR THAT FACT, THAT THERE'S CERTAINLY GONNA BE MORE INCREASE COMING. UM, AND WE CAN'T JUST KICK THAT CAN DOWN THE CURB. I MEAN, IT IS A REQUIREMENT FOR IT TO BE SELF-FUNDING. THANK YOU, MAYOR. THANK YOU COUNCILOR. JOHN, A QUICK QUESTION BEFORE I COMMENT. GO RIGHT AHEAD. SO THE RATE STUDY, DOES IT HAVE A BEGINNING? DO WE HAVE AN END DATE? WHAT, WHAT ARE WE LOOKING AT HERE IS LIKE TWO YEARS BEFORE WE KNOW WHAT THE ANSWERS ARE TO ALL THOSE QUESTIONS WE JUST ASKED ABOUT PRIVATE SYSTEMS AND CONDOS. IS IT SIX MONTHS? DO WE, DO WE HAVE ANY IDEA? I, I DON'T KNOW WHO TO LOOK AT HERE, SO I'M GONNA STARE APPARENTLY AT THE CITY MANAGER. THANK YOU. COUNSELOR DUNN. MAYOR, UM, ANNETTE STICKER, CITY MANAGER. UH, WE DO HAVE MONEY IN THE BUDGET, I BELIEVE, TO HIRE THE CONSULTANTS TO CONDUCT THE RATE STUDY IN THIS FISCAL YEAR. UM, IT'LL BE ONE OF THE TOP FIRST TASKS OF THE NEW FINANCE DIRECTOR WE HOPE TO BRING ON BOARD SHORTLY. UM, SO THAT IS WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THAT. WE NEED TO GET THE STAFFING IN PLACE IN FINANCE TO OVERSEE THE PROJECT. OF COURSE, ROXANNE AND HER GROUP WILL BE DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN IT TO INFORM IT. SO HOPEFULLY BY THE END OF THE PHYSICAL CALENDAR YEAR, WE SHOULD HAVE SOMETHING GOING, PERHAPS GOING, OH, YOU SAID IN HAVEN IT STARTED? YES. YEAH, THE CALENDAR YEAR. NOT, NOT TO HAVE THE PROJECT, NOT THE FISCAL YEAR, JUST FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE CONFUSED. SO BY, BY JANUARY OF OF 25, WE SHOULD HAVE THIS STUDY GOING. THAT'S WHAT I WAS ASKING. IT SHOULD DEFINITELY BE GOING, I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT WOULD TAKE. I MEAN, WE HAVE TO GO OUT WITH AN RFP AND SURE. PUT SOMEBODY IN THE SCOPE OF WORK AND ALL THAT. BUT WE ABSOLUTELY WILL HAVE THAT STARTED SURE. BEFORE THE END. SO SOONER RATHER THAN LATER IN AND WAS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET AT, TO UNDERSTAND, TO BE ABLE TO SAY THE FOLLOWING. UM, OBVIOUSLY WE HAVE DISCREPANCIES. I'M COMFORTED BY THE FACT THAT WE'RE GONNA TRY AND FIND OUT WHAT THE ISSUES ARE SO THAT WE CAN MODIFY THE RATES AS APPROPRIATE GOING FORWARD. I THINK THE RATE INCREASE THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO TO WHAT COUNCILLOR FOLTZ JUST SAID IS, IS NECESSARY BUT NOT SUFFICIENT AS WE GO FORWARD. THAT GAP BETWEEN WHAT INDIVIDUALS PAY, BASED ON WHAT WE LEARN IN THE RIGHT STUDY MAY INCREASE, BUT THE INCREASE THAT WE DO NOW, I'M NOT SURE IS GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE IN THE LONGER RUN. SINCE THE LONGER RUN I'M HOPING WILL ONLY BE A SHORT RUN. UM, I'M OKAY WITH THE IDEA THAT WE NEED TO PUT THIS RATE INCREASE IN PLACE. NOW. I UNDERSTAND THE ANGST AND THE PAIN THAT PEOPLE ARE FEELING, AND HOPEFULLY WE'LL GET THAT FIXED AS QUICKLY AS WE CAN. BUT I THINK THERE'S, UNFORTUNATELY FOR ALL OF US, AND I LIVE HERE AND PAY THIS TOO, UM, THE, THIS RATE IS GONNA CONTINUE TO GO UP, UH, NO MATTER WHAT WE DO. SO I'M IN FAVOR OF US GOING FORWARD AND PUTTING THIS, UH, IN PLACE. AND I REALLY WOULD HOPE THAT, UM, THAT WE'VE, WE'VE MADE IT CLEAR, I'VE MADE IT CLEAR THAT IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO GET THIS RATE STUDY UP AND UP AND RUNNING AND TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE SCENARIOS THAT WE'VE HEARD TODAY. THANK YOU VICE MAYOR. [03:30:01] I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS THAN THE ONES I JUST MADE. COUNCILOR WILLIAMSON, I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS INCREASE. UM, IT HASN'T, PEOPLE HAVEN'T, I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HAS YET ACCEPTED THE AMOUNT OF HOW MUCH IT COSTS TO PROCESS WASTE AND THE INCREASES THAT ALL OF US HAVE SEEN IN OTHER PARTS OF OUR, OF OUR LIVES. I KNOW THAT IN PUBLIC WORKS IS SEEN IS THE SAME FOR HER. UM, AND THIS, THE RATES ARE GOING TO GO UP AND THIS IS JUST THE FIRST. AND I DON'T THINK PEOPLE SHOULD, SHOULD BE UNDER ANY ILLUSION THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO END UP PAYING PROBABLY SOME AMOUNT MORE THAN THEY THINK IS REASONABLE. BUT I WILL TELL YOU ONE THING THAT WAS VERY CLEAR AT THE LAST TIME WE DID A RATE STUDY, AND IT WASN'T THAT COUNCIL FROZE. IT WAS THAT THE RATE STUDY WAS ABOUT CHANGING THE ASSESSMENT TO A WATER-BASED VERSUS A, UM, UH, A FLAT FEE FOR EVERYBODY UNDER THE, SOME SOMEBODY IS GOING NO MATTER WHAT, WHAT SYSTEM WE END UP WITH AND WHAT OUR RATE IS, SOMEONE IS GOING TO BE DISADVANTAGED, IS GOING TO FEEL DISADVANTAGED. THAT IS WHAT OUR EXPERT SAID THE LAST TIME WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THE RATE BA THE, UM, WATER BASED VERSUS, UM, A A ONE A FLAT FEE. UM, AND WHAT WE FOUND OUT WAS THAT AT A WATER BASED ONE, A FEW PEOPLE, OR MOST, A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD SAVE LIKE A DOLLAR 50 A MONTH AND SOME PORTION, SOME NON INSIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE POPULATIONS, UM, WATER BILL WOULD HUGELY INCREASE. AND SO I THINK AT THE TIME, COUNCIL WAS UNWILLING TO, TO MOVE FORWARD WITH UNDER THAT SCENARIO. BUT THE GUYS DID SAY THE PEOPLE OR THE CONSULTANTS DID SAY THERE IS NO SYSTEM THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE SOME INEQUITIES. AND THAT IS JUST THE WAY IT IS. THE BASIC INEQUITY IS ALWAYS GOING TO BE, IF THESE PEOPLE WANTED THEIR OWN, THEIR OWN SEWER SYSTEM THAT WAS A LESSER QUALITY THAN OURS, AND NOW THEY DON'T GET THE SERVICE, I HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT BECAUSE SOMEONE'S GOING TO HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT. EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE SYSTEM IS GONNA HAVE TO PAY FOR THAT. SO WHILE I AGREE THAT THE RATE STUDY SHOULD LOOK AT IT, I THINK WE SHOULD BE FAIRLY REALISTIC ABOUT WHAT IS CONSIDERED AN INEQUITY AND WHETHER OR NOT PERFECTION CAN BE ACHIEVED IN WASTEWATER RATES. THANK YOU. COUNCILOR FURMAN. THANK YOU, MAYOR. I JUST SCRATCHED MY HEAD AND WONDER PARKING RATE CA CALCULATIONS WERE COMPLEX. DEVELOPER IMPACT FEES ARE EVEN MORE COMPLEX AND WASTEWATER IS GONNA BE EVEN A NEXT LEVEL ABOVE THAT. UM, IT WILL BE, UH, DIFFICULT AND INTERESTING CONVERSATION. I LOOK FORWARD TO IT HAPPENING SOMETIME 3.6%. NOW TO PUT A BANDAID ON A OLD STYLE SYSTEM IS NOT ENOUGH, BUT IT'S GOTTA BE WHAT WE WORK WITH TODAY. UM, AND WE WILL TRY TO AND ADDRESS THESE INEQUITIES. WE'RE A SMALL CITY. I CAN'T IMAGINE US REALLY IMPLEMENTING GIS MAPS AND WATER FLOW AND INSPECTORS TO COUNT TOILETS AND ALL THE REST. BUT I MEAN, LOTS OF THINGS COULD HAPPEN IN A WAY, IN A STUDY. SO THANK YOU MAYOR. THANK YOU. COUNCIL KINSELLA. OKAY, UH, I THINK EVERYTHING I HAVE, UH, HAS ALREADY BEEN ADDRESSED, SO I'M GONNA LOOK FOR A, UH, MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION I MOVE. OKAY. YEAH, I I LOVE WASTEWATER. I MOVE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024 DASH 1818, CREATING A PUBLIC RECORD ENTITLED EXHIBIT A, PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SEDONA CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE, FINANCE WASTEWATER RATES. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? OKAY. UH, ANY COMMENTS? DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NO. OKAY. UH, SECOND ONE, I MOVE TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 2024 DASH THREE THREE ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THAT DOCUMENT KNOWN AS EXHIBIT A, PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE SEDONA CONSOLIDATED FEE SCHEDULE FINANCE WASTEWATER RATES REFLECTING A 3.6% WASTEWATER RATE [03:35:01] INCREASE EFFECTIVE OCTOBER, 2024, PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES OR CODE PROVISIONS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH. I HAVE A SECOND. SECOND. ANY COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. A AYE. ANY OPPOSED? YOU UNANIMOUS ALSO. OKAY. [8.b. AB 3071 Public hearing #1/discussion on the Land Use Assumptions and Infrastructure Improvement Plan (IIP) developed by consultant Tischler/Bise, Inc. as required by A.R.S. § 9-463.05 for the City of Sedona to adopt updated Development Impact Fees.] MOVING ON. UH, ANNETTE, DO YOU HAVE THAT, UH, CONSULTANT HERE? I DO. THANK YOU, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. UM, ANNETTE S**C, AGAIN, CITY MANAGER. UM, THE NEXT ITEM IS THE REVIEW OF THE DRAFT LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR A DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEE UPDATE. AND WITH US TONIGHT GETTING SET UP IS MR. BEN GRIFFIN WITH TISCHLER BUYS, WHO SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER FROM, UH, PAST FEE UPDATES FOR DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. HE'S WORKED WITH THE CITY BEFORE. UM, HE PREPARED ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE IN YOUR PACKET. YOU ALSO RECEIVED HIS, UH, POWERPOINT SLIDES IN ADVANCE IN THE PACKET. UM, WHILE THEY'RE GETTING SET UP, I WILL JUST REMIND YOU THAT THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES IS TO CHARGE NEW DEVELOPMENT FOR THE COST OF NEW GROWTH IMPACTS TO OUR SERVICES. UM, SPECIFICALLY WE HAVE FEES RELATED TO TRANSPORTATION, POLICE, AND PARK SYSTEMS. UM, THE STATE HAS, UH, SPECIFIC STATE STATUTES THAT GOVERN HOW THIS IS CALCULATED AND THAT WE NEED TO REVIEW THESE EVERY FIVE YEARS. SO, UH, THAT TIME HAS COME TO DO A REVIEW. THERE IS QUITE A LENGTHY PROCESS INVOLVED IN ADOPTING, UM, THESE FEES. AND I HAVE INCLUDED IN YOUR, UH, PACKET, THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE OF, UM, STEPS TO BE TAKEN, UM, IF THE COUNCIL'S GOING TO IMPLEMENT A NEW OR AN UPDATED FEE. UM, THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF DAYS TO PROCESS THIS IS 225 DAYS. SO THE FIRST TIME SOMETHING COULD BE EFFECTIVE, UM, WITH THE NEW RATE WOULD BE MARCH 31ST, 2025. SO, UH, FOR THE PUBLIC, UM, EDUCATION OR WHOEVER'S WATCHING TONIGHT, UM, THESE FEES ARE NOT BEING ADOPTED TONIGHT. THIS IS A REVIEW OF THE METHODOLOGY AND THE COSTS THAT GO INTO DETERMINING THE FEES SO THAT YOU CAN ASK, UH, BEN, ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE ABOUT HOW THAT'S CALCULATED, THE ASSUMPTIONS, AND IF ANYTHING NEEDS TO CHANGE, UM, AND THEN WE WOULD BRING BACK, UM, A REVISION OR THE SAME DOCUMENT TO THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING FOR THE NEXT PART OF THE PROCESS. SO, ANNETTE, BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD, CAN I GET A GUIDE FROM YOU? I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG THIS PRESENTATION WILL BE, BUT I KNOW YOU HAVE CITY STAFF HERE WAITING, YOU KNOW, OVER LATE. I DON'T KNOW IF WE'RE GONNA GET TO THAT IN KEEPING WITH OUR 10 O'CLOCK, UH, CUTOFF. WELL, I BELIEVE THAT, UM, WE ASSUMED APPROXIMATELY A HALF HOUR-ISH OKAY. FOR THE PRESENTATION. AND THEN, UM, THE REST IS UP TO YOU ALL . OKAY. I JUST DON'T WANNA KEEP HOW LONG YOU WANNA SPEND ON IT. I DON'T WANNA KEEP EXTRA STAFF HERE. IF WE DON'T GET TO IT BY 10 O'CLOCK, I WOULD FEEL REALLY BAD AND HAVE TO BRING HIM BACK FIRST THING TOMORROW AFTERNOON. YOU NEED SHIFT PLEASE, BECAUSE YOU'RE STAYING OVERNIGHT, RIGHT? YES, BUT 8:00 AM YEAH, WE, YEAH. SO WE, WE HAVE A CUTOFF AND WE, WE HAVE A A LOT TODAY. SO IF YOU COULD GO AHEAD. I DON'T WANNA HOLD YOU UP. OKAY. YEAH. AND YOU KNOW, I, SORRY, I'LL START OVER. UH, BEN GRIFFIN , UH, I'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS STUDY, WORKED ON THE PREVIOUS STUDY. UM, SO ANNETTE DID FORWARD ME SOME QUESTIONS, UH, FROM SOME OF YOU. UH, I RESPONDED TO THOSE. SO, UH, THAT SHOULD HELP, YOU KNOW, LIMIT SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WE'LL HAVE HERE. UM, I'LL MOVE THROUGH THIS QUICKLY. UM, SO I WANNA START WITH SOME DEVELOPMENT FEW BASICS. SO ANY OF YOU WHO WERE NOT INVOLVED LAST TIME, OR, YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN FIVE YEARS, UH, AND YOU JUST DON'T REMEMBER, YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING ABOUT IMPACT FEES. UM, WE'LL JUST QUICKLY GO THROUGH THAT. AND THEN WHAT'S MOST IMPORTANT FOR TONIGHT, UH, IT'S GONNA BE THE DISCUSSION OF LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN. UH, SO DEVELOPMENT FEES ARE ONE TIME PAYMENTS FROM FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, UH, TO PAY FOR THEIR PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF CAPITAL COSTS. UH, SO WE CAN'T USE THESE FOR OPERATIONS MAINTENANCE REPLACEMENT. THIS NEEDS TO BE GROWTH RELATED CAPITAL. IF IT'S GONNA BE ELIGIBLE FOR, UH, DEVELOPMENT FEES. IT'S NOT A TAX, BUT IT'S A FEE THAT, UH, REQUIRES YOU TO PROVIDE THE FEE PAYER, UH, WITH A BENEFIT. UM, AND SO IMPACT FEES HAVE THREE REQUIREMENTS. [03:40:01] FIRST, UM, THERE HAS TO BE NEED. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT SYSTEM LEVEL IMPROVEMENTS, UH, NOT PROJECT LEVEL. UH, SO, YOU KNOW, WE WOULDN'T INCLUDE, UM, YOU KNOW, TURN LANES INTO A NEW DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THAT'S A, A PROJECT LEVEL, UH, IMPROVEMENT THAT ONLY, YOU KNOW, UH, PROVIDES A BENEFIT TO THAT SINGLE DEVELOPMENT. WE'RE LOOKING FOR THINGS THAT PROVIDE A DEVELOPMENT, UH, TO, UH, SORRY, PROVIDE IMPROVEMENTS, UH, THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVE THIS SYSTEM WIDE OR, UH, YOU KNOW, CITYWIDE BENEFIT. UM, WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT BENEFIT, WE, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT IT TWO WAYS. UH, SO THERE IS THAT SHORT RANGE EXPENDITURE, SO WE WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE SPENDING THAT MONEY WITHIN 10 YEARS. UM, LEGALLY YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SPEND THAT WITHIN 10 YEARS OF THE DATE OF COLLECTION. AND THE OTHER PART IS A, YOU KNOW, A GEOGRAPHIC SERVICE AREA. UM, SEDONA IS SMALL ENOUGH THAT, YOU KNOW, A CITYWIDE SERVICE AREA, UM, DOES SERVE YOU WELL. UM, AND THEN FINALLY, YOU KNOW, THE FEES MAY BE PROPORTIONATE TO DEMAND. UH, SO YOU'LL, YOU'LL NOTICE WHEN WE START SHOWING THE FEE SCHEDULES, UH, THAT WE HAVE, UH, A LOT OF LINES ON THERE. AND THAT'S TO MAKE SURE THAT DIFFERENT LAND USES, UH, DIFFERENT INTENSITIES OF LAND USES ARE CHARGED A PROPORTIONATE AMOUNT, UH, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE DEMAND THAT THEY PROVIDE FOR THOSE CAPITAL INFRASTRUCTURES. UH, SO IN ARIZONA WE NEED THREE COMPONENTS OF A FEE STUDY. THE FIRST IS A, THE, THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS DOCUMENT. ESSENTIALLY THAT'S THE, YOU KNOW, EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND THEN WHAT WE THINK WILL HAPPEN OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS. UM, THE NEXT IS GONNA BE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN OR THE IIP, UH, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY YOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE. UH, THE, THE COST RELATED TO INFRASTRUCTURE. UM, THOSE TWO COMPONENTS, THEY'RE ADOPTED FIRST, AND THEN THE DEVELOPMENT FEES ARE ACTUALLY ADOPTED AT A SEPARATE, UH, ADOPTION. UM, YOU'LL HEAR ME TALK ABOUT LEVEL OF SERVICE. THE, THE BIG THING WITH IMPACT FEES IS THAT YOU CAN'T CHARGE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT FOR A HIGHER LEVEL OF SERVICE THAN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT RECEIVES UNLESS YOU'VE IDENTIFIED SOME SORT OF OUTSIDE REVENUE SOURCE, UM, TO RAISE THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE. UH, BECAUSE YOU ALWAYS WANNA MAKE SURE THAT YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, CHARGING EVERYONE THE SAME. YOU'RE NOT OVERCHARGING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. UH, AND THEN ALSO, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE KEY THINGS IN ARIZONA WOULD BE THAT, YOU KNOW, PARKSHIRE LIMITED TO 30 ACRES UNLESS THERE IS A DIRECT BENEFIT TO DEVELOPMENT. UH, AND THEN FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, WE CAN'T INCLUDE REGIONAL TRAINED FACILITIES. UM, THERE ARE THREE METHODOLOGIES. UH, COST RECOVERY BASICALLY LOOKS TO THE PAST AND SAYS, HEY, WE'VE OVERSIZED THIS. THERE'S EXCESS CAPACITY. WHAT IS FUTURE DEVELOPMENT'S? PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THAT, UH, INCREMENTAL EXPANSION LOOKS TO THE PRESENT AND SAYS, THIS IS WHAT WE PROVIDE TODAY, OUR EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE. UH, AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT IT WOULD COST US TO REPLICATE THAT. UH, AND THEN PLAN-BASED LOOKS TO THE FUTURE AND SAYS, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO GET TO A CERTAIN LEVEL OF SERVICE. UH, HOW DO WE, YOU KNOW, DIVVY UP THE, THE COST BETWEEN EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND FUTURE DEVELOPMENT? UH, AND THEN WE HAVE TO LOOK AT CREDITS. UH, SO THE FIRST ONE, THE SITE SPECIFIC CREDIT, UH, THAT'S HANDLED AFTER ADOPTION. SO IF A DEVELOPER COMES IN AND CONSTRUCTS SOMETHING THAT IS IN THE IMPACT FEE STUDY, THEY WOULD JUST RECEIVE A, A CREDIT AGAINST THEIR IMPACT FEES FOR PROVIDING THAT. UH, SO AN EASY EXAMPLE WOULD BE, UH, YOU KNOW, WE, WE HAVE PARK LAND AS A COMPONENT. SO IF A DEVELOPER DEDICATED, YOU KNOW, A A FEW ACRES OF PARK LAND FOR A PUBLIC PARK, THEN THEY WOULD RECEIVE A, A CREDIT AGAINST THEIR IMPACT FEES, UM, FOR DEBT SERVICE AND DEDICATED REVENUES. THOSE ARE HANDLED IN THE IMPACT FEE STUDY. UH, BASICALLY REDUCING THE FEES. SO YOU AREN'T CHARGING FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, UH, TWICE. SO ONCE THE IMPACT FEE AND ONCE THROUGH THAT, UH, FUTURE REVENUE SOURCE. ALRIGHT, SO TONIGHT IS THE, THE FIRST PUBLIC HEARING ON THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS IN THE IIP UH, STATE STATUTE SAYS, YOU KNOW, NOT LESS THAN 30 DAYS, BUT NO MORE THAN 60 DAYS FROM TODAY. UM, YOU NEED TO, UM, APPROVE OR DISPROVE THE LAND ASSUMPTIONS OR IIP UM, ONCE YOU'VE ADOPTED THAT, THEN WE START THE SECOND HALF, WHICH IS TECHNICALLY FORMALITY BECAUSE THE, THE FEES WON'T CHANGE AT THAT POINT. YOU WILL HAVE SEEN THEM. UM, AND SO SEPTEMBER 25TH, UM, WE WOULD ADVERTISE THE DEVELOPMENT FEES. SO YOU'D HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING IN NOVEMBER, UH, COULD ADOPT THOSE FEES IN JANUARY. UH, AND THEN THOSE FEES WOULD GO INTO EFFECT MARCH 31ST, UH, OR AT A LATER DATE OF YOUR CHOOSING, RIGHT? SO WE'LL GET INTO THE LAND ASSUMPTIONS. UH, FOR THE, THE RESIDENTIAL DEMAND FACTORS, WE USE OCCUPANCY BECAUSE, UH, THAT'S THE BEST DEMAND INDICATOR FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. UH, MOST CITIES IN ARIZONA, UH, JUST USE, YOU KNOW, A SINGLE FAMILY MULTIFAMILY, MAYBE, YOU KNOW, UH, AN [03:45:01] RV CLASSIFICATION. UM, BUT IN SEDONA, UH, USE, UH, SIZE OF UNIT, UH, YOU KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CAME UP IN THE LAST UPDATE. AND IT'S A WAY TO MAKE THE SMALLER UNITS MORE AFFORDABLE. UH, SO, YOU KNOW, IF WE JUST USE AN AVERAGE OF, YOU KNOW, A MULTIFAMILY UNIT, UM, AND IT'S, YOU KNOW, AT THE TOP 1.84 PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD, WELL, YOU CAN SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, A REALLY SMALL UNIT IS AVERAGING ONE PERSON PER HOUSEHOLD. SO BY USING SIZE THRESHOLDS INSTEAD OF UNIT TYPE, IT DOES MAKE THOSE SMALLER UNITS MORE AFFORDABLE. AND, UH, THE LARGER UNITS THAT HAVE MORE OCCUPANTS, IT MAKES THOSE MORE EXPENSIVE BECAUSE THEY HAVE HIGHER DEMAND FOR SERVICES. SO, ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY? YEAH, MAYOR PETE, THANK, THANK YOU, MAYOR. SO, BOY, I, I ALMOST WISH I HAD TIME TO REALLY THINK ABOUT AND, AND UNDERSTAND THIS A LITTLE BIT MORE. AND I KNOW THAT WE'RE ALL FEELING SOME PRESSURE FOR AMOUNT OF TIME, BUT I'M THINKING ABOUT THE IMPACT OF SHORT TERM RENTALS IN OUR COMMUNITY VERSUS SORT OF THE STANDARD STATEWIDE ASSUMPTIONS OF OCCUPANCY FOR SINGLE AND MULTIFAMILY. I I LOOK AT THE HOUSES THAT ARE AROUND ME, AND INSTEAD OF A RETIRED SECOND HOMEOWNER, WHICH IS THE PRO THE, THE MAJORITY OF, UH, UH, OR A, A GOOD PROPORTION OF THE HOMES IN SEDONA, IT'S SHORT TERM RENTALS. AND I SEE MORE PEOPLE IN A THAT HOME THAN IT USED TO HOLD WHEN IT WAS OWNED BY THE PART-TIME OCCUPANT. NOW, IN THE SHORT TERM RENTALS, I JUST SEE MORE PEOPLE, AND I THINK THERE'S MORE DEMANDS IN OUR PARKS AND OUR STREETS BECAUSE OF THAT. SO I'M JUST, AND I HAVEN'T UNDERSTOOD HOW WE DO OR DON'T THINK ABOUT SHORT TERM RENTALS ON OUR DEMANDS. YEAH, IT'S A GOOD QUESTION. IT'S WHEN WE STRUGGLED WITH, YOU KNOW, WHEN WE STARTED IN, YOU KNOW, IN 2017 FOR YOUR CURRENT FEES. UM, AND SO WE NEED DATA TO SUPPORT ANY CHANGE IN AN OCCUPANCY FACTOR. UM, AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT, WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THE, YOU KNOW, THIS IS AN IMPACT FEE FOR THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THAT UNIT. AND SO WHILE IT MAY BE A SHORT TERM RENTAL NOW, UM, YOU KNOW, A FEW YEARS FROM NOW, IT COULD BE SOLD AND, YOU KNOW, A FAMILY WITH KIDS COULD MOVE IN AND THEN, YOU KNOW, A FEW YEARS AFTER THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, EMPTY NESTERS. SO, YOU KNOW, WITH IMPACT FEES, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S REALLY AVERAGES. UM, AND WITHOUT ANY DATA TO SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, THAT, THAT HIGHER OCCUPANCY FACTOR OR HIGHER DEMAND UNIT, UM, YOU'D PROBABLY BE CHALLENGED PRETTY QUICKLY. UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WITHOUT THE DATA TO SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, IT'S A NEW TREND STATEWIDE, AND I GET THAT THERE ISN'T DATA, I DON'T KNOW WHEN WE DECIDE TO START DEVELOPING THE DATA SO THAT SOME FUTURE PLAN WE CAN DO THIS, BUT IT'S ALMOST LIKE NOW IS THE TIME. THIS IS A REAL ISSUE. I'M LESS OPTIMISTIC THAN YOU. THAT FUTURE USES OF OUR SHORT TERM RENTALS WILL CHANGE ONE DAY. , UM, ONE CLARIFICATION COUNSELOR OR POINT IS THAT, UM, THESE FEES ARE PAID AT THE TIME THAT THE BUILDING PERMIT IS PULLED TO CONSTRUCT THE PROPERTY. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD KNOW THAT THE PERSON IS BUILDING A SHORT TERM RENTAL AND WE WOULD CHARGE THEM A DIFFERENT FEE. UM, ONE THOUGHT THAT BEN AND I TALKED ABOUT OVER LUNCH WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE WE REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE A PERMIT, UM, A SHORT TERM RENTAL LICENSE, THAT, UM, MAYBE THERE'S SOME TIE IN THERE IF WE COULD JUSTIFY AND HAVE THE DATA TO SU SUPPORT SOME DIFFERENTIATION ON THE FEE, BUT TRYING TO IMPLEMENT IT AND HOW WE, AT WHAT POINT WE WOULD COLLECT IT IS ALSO AT A . YEAH, THOSE ARE REALLY WISE COMMENTS, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT I ALSO BELIEVE THAT PEOPLE IN OUR BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOOK AT THE PROJECTS COMING IN. AND I THINK THAT WITH SOME GOOD DEGREE OF CONFIDENCE, THEY KNOW WHETHER THE HOUSE BEING BUILT IS GONNA BE A SHORT TERM RENTAL. THEY, THEY'RE, THEY'RE KIND OF DESIGNED A LITTLE DIFFERENT, MAYBE MORE BEDROOMS THAN HAS BEEN THE STANDARD IN THE PAST AND BED, YOU KNOW, BATHROOMS ADJACENT TO BEDROOMS. AND I, I THINK THAT I, AND I DON'T WANNA PUT ANYONE ON THE SPOT TO SAY YES OR NO, THAT THAT'S THE CASE, BUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK I'VE HEARD CONVERSATIONS THAT THIS LOOKS TO BE A SHORT TERM RENTAL. I THINK STEVE, STEVE, UH, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. STEVE MERTIS, DIRECTOR OF, UH, FOR THE RECORD, UH, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, UM, COUNCILOR HERMAN. YOU'RE RIGHT, WE DO HAVE PERMITS THAT COME IN [03:50:01] AND WE HAVE A PRETTY GOOD IDEA OF WHETHER IT IS OR NOT. BUT I WOULD SAY THAT'S ON THE MUCH LESSER LEVEL, MUCH SMALLER PERCENTAGE OF NEW HOMES THAT COME IN THAT WE CAN, YOU KNOW, WITH, WITH SOME DEGREE OF CERTAINTY SAY, YES, THIS DEFINITELY WILL BE A SHORT TERM RENTAL. SOMETIMES THE APPLICATION ACTUALLY SAYS SHORT TERM RENTAL, BUT FOR, UM, FOR THE MAJORITY OF THOSE PERMITS, UH, WE REALLY CAN'T MAKE THAT DECISION WITH, WITH ENOUGH SURETY. OKAY. I'D BE INTERESTED TO SEE IF ANY, MY OTHER COLLEAGUES HAVE KIND OF QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS ABOUT SHORT-TERM RENTALS. THE OTHER OBSERVATION THAT I'D LIKE TO ASK ABOUT WHEN I DID MY ANALYSIS OF THE DATA, UH, AND I LOOK AT THE CURRENT FEE STRUCTURE AND THE PROPOSED FEE STRUCTURE FOR THE DIFFERENT SIZE, AND JUST, I'LL START WITH JUST THE HOUSING ELEMENT OF IT, AND THEN I DO A CALCULATION OF THE CHANGE AND LOOK AT DOLLAR PER SQUARE FOOT, THE CHANGE IN THE RATE STRUCTURE, DOLLAR PER SQUARE FOOT, WE'RE INCREASING ON THE SMALLEST HOMES THE MOST PERCENTAGE WISE, YES. AND THE BIGGEST HOMES GET THE LEAST INCREASE, BUT WE'RE CHARGING THEM A PER PERSON COST. SO WE'RE TREATING EVERYONE, EVERY PERSON THE SAME. AND WHAT WHAT TENDS TO HAPPEN IS, YOU KNOW, THE 1, 2, 3 BEDROOM, YOU SEE A VERY LINEAR INCREASE, BUT THEN ONCE YOU TO FOUR OR FIVE, SIX BEDROOM, THE, THE SAMPLE SIZE WITH CENSUS DATA ISN'T AS GREAT. AND WHAT YOU START TO SEE IS, YOU KNOW, SORT OF A, A DROP IN OCCUPANCY RATES BECAUSE THEY'RE REALLY JUST EXTRA BEDROOMS. THEY'RE, IT'S NOT MEANT TO BE OCCUPIED ALL THE TIME. UH, AND SO YOU, YOU START TO SEE A, A LEVELING OFF, WHICH IS WHY, YOU KNOW, AT THE UPPER END OF THESE, YOU START SEEING SMALL INCREASES. AND IT'S BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, AS YOU INCREASE IN SIZE, YOU'RE NOT REALLY INCREASING, UH, IN OCCUPANCY AT THE SAME RATE. AND I UNDERSTAND THAT, AND I THINK IT'S REALLY BACK TO THE SAME CONCERN THAT WE'VE GOT THIS NEW THING, RELATIVELY NEW THING IN OUR STATE, CERTAINLY IN OUR COMMUNITY CALLED SHORT TERM RENTALS, AND WE DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND THE IMPACTS, AND WE'RE GONNA SET A RATE STUDY HERE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS WITHOUT REALLY THINKING ABOUT THE IMPACT IT IS. AND I JUST WISH I DON'T, I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER. I DON'T HAVE A HANDLE OR SOME DATA THAT I CAN POINT TO EITHER, BUT I KNOW THE IMPACT IS DIFFERENT THAN THE STANDARD OLD TIME VERSIONS OF OCCUPANCY BASED ON SIZE AND BEDROOMS. I, I JUST THINK IT'S DIFFERENT. UH, AND I COULD BE WRONG. I WISH, JUST WISH THERE WAS A WAY FOR US TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION OR START TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION IN A DIFFERENT WAY. UH, THANK YOU, MAYOR. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. UH, BEN, CONTINUE. ALRIGHT, SO ANOTHER PART OF THE LAND ASSUMPTIONS IS WE HAVE TO PROJECT OUT WHAT WE THINK IS GONNA HAPPEN OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS. UH, AND SO, YOU KNOW, IN DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF, YOU KNOW, LANDSCAPE L SCARCITY IS AN ISSUE HERE. UH, AND IT'S VERY LIKELY THAT IT WILL CHANGE THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU RECEIVE BECAUSE AS YOU APPROACH BUILD OUT, UM, YOU KNOW, YOU EITHER HAVE TO STOP BUILDING OR YOU HAVE TO ADD DENSITY. AND SO, YOU KNOW, THE DISCUSSION WAS, YOU KNOW, IF WE LOOK AT RESIDENTIAL PERMITS SINCE 2020, YOU'RE AVERAGING ABOUT 35 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS A YEAR AND AVERAGING ABOUT 33 MULTIFAMILY UNITS A YEAR. AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, WITH DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF, UM, YOU KNOW, WE, WE DECIDED TO SORT OF CHANGE THAT TO, UM, TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THAT LAND IS SCARCE. AND SO THERE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, A A, A SHIFT, UH, OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS WHERE YOU'RE, YOU KNOW, EACH YEAR YOU'RE GETTING FEWER SINGLE FAMILY UNITS, UH, AND SEEING MORE MULTIFAMILY UNITS, UH, SORT OF JUST A SWAP OF THAT. UM, AND SO, UH, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO SHOW, YOU KNOW, UH, OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS, WE THINK WE'LL HAVE X NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS. UH, AND SO THIS IS, YOU KNOW, HOW WE'RE, WE'RE GETTING TO THAT IS SAYING, A, WE THINK THERE'S GONNA BE A DIFFERENCE, UH, COMPARED TO RECENT TRENDS. AND, YOU KNOW, LAND SCARCITY IS THE ISSUE. UH, AND SO THIS IS HOW MANY UNITS WE THINK ARE LIKELY. HOLD ON FOR BEN ON THAT. COUNCILOR FOLTZ. THANK YOU MAYOR. WHAT ABOUT, UH, GENTRIFICATION AND TEAR DOWNS? SO HOW DOES THAT [03:55:01] PLAY INTO THIS? DOES A TEAR DOWN STILL INCUR AN IMPACT FEE? YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING? I, I DO. UM, AND ONE BENEFIT OF ASSESSING FEES BY SIZE OF UNIT IS THAT, UM, YOU HAVE THESE DIFFERENT SIZE THRESHOLDS. MM-HMM. . SO IF SOMEONE TEARS DOWN A 2000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE AND PUTS IN A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE, UM, YOU ARE JUSTIFIED IN CHARGING THEM THE DIFFERENCE. SO THAT ADDITIONAL 2000 SQUARE FEET, UH, IS ADDITIONAL DEMAND. SO YOU COULD ACTUALLY ASSESS, YOU KNOW, A PARTIAL FEE. MM-HMM. , UH, A TEAR DOWN. I WONDER IF I KNOW ANYBODY WHO'S DONE THAT. DO WE? DO WE? YEAH. DO WE, ANYBODY WHO, WHO HAS DONE THAT? I DON'T KNOW. . ALRIGHT. MOVING ALONG. I CAN'T KEEP UP WITH ALL THE FEES. BRIAN, ANYTHING ELSE? NO, THANK YOU. I KNEW YOU WERE GONNA ASK THAT QUESTION THOUGH. I KNEW IT, IT ACTUALLY WAS NOT A, A PERSONALLY FOCUSED THING. IT REALLY WAS LIKE THINKING ABOUT GOOD QUESTION AREAS THAT I THINK WILL GENTRIFY YES. I THOUGHT THEY WERE GONNA GOING TO 20 YEARS AGO AND THEY STILL HAVEN'T. BUT THAT'S BECAUSE WE'RE NOT FULLY BUILT OUT. RIGHT? BUT AT SOME POINT PEOPLE ARE GONNA START SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT, I'LL BUY THAT PLACE THAT'S SADLY IN POOR CONDITION FOR FIVE, 600,000. I'M GONNA TEAR IT DOWN AND I'M GONNA BUILD A LITTLE MCMANSION IN SEDONA. ALRIGHT. OKAY, GO AHEAD BEN. ALRIGHT, SO NEXT SET. FOR NON-RESIDENTIAL TRENDS, WE LOOKED AT, UH, YOUR RECENT PERMIT HISTORY. UH, AGAIN, DISCUSSION WITH STAFF, UH, MADE SOME, SOME CHANGES. SO THE ASSUMPTION HERE IS THAT, UH, YOUR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS, UM, WILL BE ABOUT 20% HIGHER THAN WHAT YOU'VE SEEN OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS. UH, AND SO WE'RE JUST CARRYING THAT FORWARD ON A ANNUAL BASIS. UH, SO BASICALLY SAYING, HEY, YOU'RE GONNA SEE ABOUT 2000 SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL YEAR, YOU KNOW, ABOUT 13,000 COMMERCIAL. UM, BUT USING THAT TO PROJECT, YOU KNOW, FUTURE NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. AND SO ALL OF THAT, UH, INCLUDING THE OCCUPANCY FACTORS, ALL OF THAT, HANG ON. UM, FUTURE PERMITS, LODGING, WE'RE GONNA BLOW PAST THOSE NUMBERS WITH WHAT'S YEAH. JUST APPROVED. YEAH. SO WE'RE, WE'RE DEFINITELY LIGHT ON LODGING, UH, ESTIMATE OF, OF ROOMS OVER THE NEXT NINE YEARS. SO ONE BENEFIT, AND WE'LL GET TO THIS WHEN WE START TALKING ABOUT THE IIP IS WE'RE USING AN INCREMENTAL METHODOLOGY FOR A LOT OF FEES. I THINK ALMOST ALL BUT ONE, DID YOU TALK INTO THE ? YEAH. I'M SORRY, BEN. HAVING A HARD TIME. WE'RE HAVING A HARD TIME. UM, SO ONE BENEFIT TO AN INCREMENTAL METHODOLOGY, WHICH ALMOST ALL OF YOUR FEES USE, IS THAT YOU COULD GROW BY A HUNDRED THOUSAND PEOPLE OR YOU COULD GROW BY A THOUSAND PEOPLE OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS. IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FEE AMOUNT, IT JUST CHANGES THE REVENUE COLLECTIONS, WHICH THEN INFLUENCE HOW MUCH YOU ACTUALLY BUILD. SO IF YOU GROW FASTER, YOU BUILD MORE BECAUSE YOU HAVE MORE REVENUE. IF YOU GROW SLOWER, YOU BUILD LESS BECAUSE YOU HAVE LESS REVENUE. BUT IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE FEE CALCULATION. HUH? SO REALLY WITH AN IMPACT FEE, THE, THE BASE YEAR ASSUMPTIONS, THOSE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT. ALRIGHT? AND SO THIS IS ESSENTIALLY YOUR LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS. UM, SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS, HEY, IF YOU GROW BY, YOU KNOW, 350 SINGLE FAMILY UNITS OVER THE NEXT 10 YEARS, 800 MULTIFAMILY UNITS, THEN THAT HAS AN ASSOCIATED POPULATION OF ABOUT 2200 PEOPLE. UM, THAT'S GONNA BE YOUR PEAK POPULATION TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE, THOSE SEASONAL RESIDENTS. UH, AND THEN WHERE YOU SEE THE PARK POPULATION THAT'S ACTUALLY, UH, WITH PARKS, WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE LODGING, UM, RESIDENTS OR LODGING VISITORS, UH, AND INCLUDING THEM IN THE PARK POPULATION. UM, BECAUSE WITH YOUR LODGING OR, UH, YOU KNOW, HOTEL MOTEL TYPE DEVELOPMENT, UM, IT'S REALLY THE VISITORS THAT ARE DRIVING THE DEMAND FOR ADDITIONAL, UH, PARK INFRASTRUCTURE AND NOT THE EMPLOYEES. UH, SO WE MAKE IT, YOU KNOW, A SWITCH WITH THE PARK FEES TO USE A PARK POPULATION. UM, WHEREAS YOUR OTHER FEES, UH, WE INCLUDE LODGING ON THE NON-RESIDENTIAL SIDE, UH, 'CAUSE THAT HAS THE HIGHER DEMAND INDICATOR. ALRIGHT, SO ANY QUESTIONS ON THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS? OKAY, I HAVE A QUESTION. ISN'T SOME OF THIS BASED ON, ON COST? 'CAUSE YOU'RE, IF WE, IF WE BUILD MORE, WE GROW MORE THAN WE PROJECT, WE HAVE EXPENSES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT GROWTH, HOW ARE THEY CALCULATED WITHIN THESE FEES? UH, SO YOU'LL SEE THAT ON THE NEXT SLIDES. UM, SO, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE TO HAVE THE LAND USE ASSUMPTIONS, WHICH IS ONE COMPONENT IN ARIZONA. AND THEN WE HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PLAN. SO THAT'S THE [04:00:01] ACTUAL LEVEL OF SERVICE CALCULATION AND THEN THE ASSOCIATED COST WITH THAT. SO WE'LL START WITH PARKS. UH, THIS WILL CONTINUE WITH A CITYWIDE SERVICE AREA. UM, WE'RE LOOKING AT THREE COMPONENTS. SO THE LAND AND AMENITIES COMPONENTS, YOUR CURRENT FEES HAVE THAT, UM, WE'RE CARRYING THOSE FORWARD. UM, THIS DOES INCLUDE A NEW SHARED USE PATH COMPONENT. UH, SO THIS, THIS WOULD BE JUST SHARED USE PATHS WITHIN PARKS. UM, WE'RE USING AN INCREMENTAL METHODOLOGY FOR THE AMENITIES AND THE SHARED YOUTH PATHS. UM, WE'RE USING A PLAN BASE FOR PARK LAND. UM, AND THAT'S BECAUSE YOUR CURRENT LEVEL SERVICE SUPPORTS, UH, YOU KNOW, THE NEED FOR ABOUT 19 OR 20 ADDITIONAL ACRES. UM, BUT AGAIN, BECAUSE LAND IS SCARCE, UM, IT, IT'S NOT LIKELY THAT YOU WOULD ACQUIRE THAT. AND QUITE FRANKLY, THE THE FEE WOULD BE VERY HIGH IF, IF WE, IF WE DID THAT. UH, AND SO IN DISCUSSIONS WITH STAFF, UM, WE REDUCED THAT TO INSTEAD OF SAYING YOU NEED 19 OR 20 ACRES OVER 10 YEARS TO SAY, IT'S LIKELY THAT YOU WOULD ACQUIRE, YOU KNOW, ABOUT FIVE ACRES. UM, AND SO THAT BROUGHT THE FEE DOWN. UH, AND SO YOU CAN SEE AT THE BOTTOM THE 10 YEAR DEMAND, UH, BASED ON THESE ASSUMPTIONS WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, FIVE ACRES OF LAND AT TWO AND A HALF MILLION DOLLARS. UH, YOU'D NEED ABOUT NINE PARK AMENITIES TO MAINTAIN YOUR EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE. UH, AND BASED ON, YOU KNOW, WHAT IT WOULD COST TO REPLICATE WHAT YOU HAVE TODAY, IT'S ABOUT $2.1 MILLION IN FEE REVENUE OVER THAT 10 YEAR TIMEFRAME. UH, AND THEN FOR SHARED USE PATHS YOU NEED ABOUT, YOU KNOW, 0.17 MILES. UM, SO THAT WOULD GENERATE ABOUT $91,000 IN FEE REVENUE FOR SHARED USE PATHS WITHIN THE PARKS. UM, WE CAN GO QUICK ONE QUESTION, BEN, ON THE SHARED USE PATH, IS THAT FOR THE INSTALLATION OR MAINTENANCE AS WELL? MAINTAIN IT? IT'S JUST GONNA BE FOR THE, UH, THE, THE CONSTRUCTION OF THAT CAN'T USE IMPACT FEES FOR MAINTENANCE. ALRIGHT. BUT ONCE WE'RE BUILT OUT WITH OUR SHARED USE PATHS, WE'RE GONNA BE BUILT OUT, RIGHT? SO I'M JUST, YOU KNOW, AT WHAT POINT ARE WE NOT GONNA BE, UH, INCLUDING THAT IN, IN THE, UH, STRUCTURE? UH, SO IF, YOU KNOW, IN FIVE YEARS WHEN YOU UPDATE AGAIN, IF YOU SAY, HEY LOOK, WE'RE WE'RE BASICALLY FINISHED BUILDING THE SHARED USE PASS, WE COULD JUST PULL THAT COMPONENT OUT OR YOU KNOW, IF YOU THINK, HEY, WE'RE, WE'RE ACTUALLY REALLY CLOSE NOW, UM, WE COULD REMOVE THIS COMPONENT NOW. NO, BUT IT'S JUST A WAY OF SHOWING, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT YOU, YOU COULD INCLUDE I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW. , OKAY. NO, WE'RE NOT BUILT OUT YET, BUT I'M WONDERING IF THERE'S BEEN CLOSE, NOT EVEN, NO, NOT EVEN CLOSE. EVEN CLOSE. IT'S RIGHT. I GET THAT WE'RE LIKE FIVE MILES INTO ABOUT 40 OH, OKAY. FACTS, WHICH IS WHY I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S 0.17 MILES, RIGHT? SO IT'S, IT'S BASED ON YOUR EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE WITHIN EXISTING PARKS. SO BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE MANY IN EXISTING PARKS TODAY, WE CAN ONLY SUPPORT 0.17 BASED ON 10 YEARS OF GROWTH. SO IS THERE ANY OTHER, I MEAN, FOR THE SHARED USE PATH, IS THERE TOURISM MONEY? IS THAT, COULD IT BE USED FOR THAT INSTEAD OF, BECAUSE I MEAN WE ARE ALWAYS GETTING CRITICIZED FOR BUILDING COSTS AND, AND WHAT HAVE YOU. I DON'T WANT TO GO TOO SIDETRACKED WITH I UNDERSTAND. WE'RE, AND I'M NOT GONNA GO ANY DEEPER. WE'RE, WE'RE PURSUING ADOT FUNDING RIGHT NOW FOR SOME PROJECTS AND WE'RE LOOKING AT STATE, UM, STATE PARKS FUNDING AS WELL. SO THERE ARE, THERE ARE OTHER FUNDING SOURCES OUT THERE AND THERE'S, OH GOSH, SOME OF THE FLAP FUNDING THERE, THERE'S SEVERAL SOURCES THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW FOR FUNDING. OKAY. I'LL, I'LL TALK TO YOU ABOUT THIS OFFLINE. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UM, SO I WON'T GO THROUGH ALL OF THESE, UM, BECAUSE THIS IS ALL IN THE REPORT, UH, AND THE SUMMARY WAS IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDE. BUT ESSENTIALLY THE, THE CALCULATION, YOU KNOW, IS JUST SAYING, HEY, IF, IF WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, 144 ACRES TODAY, WE KNOW WE CAN SUPPORT, YOU KNOW, 19 TO 20 ACRES, BUT WE REALLY ONLY WANT FIVE, THERE'S A DOWNWARD ADJUSTMENT. UM, AND SO WE'RE BASICALLY SAYING, HEY, OUR ADJUSTED LEVEL SERVICE IS ABOUT 37 AND A HALF ACRES. THAT'S HOW WE GET TO FIVE. UM, AND THEN, YOU KNOW, WE JUST DIVIDE THE ACREAGE BY EXISTING, UH, DEVELOPMENT TO COME UP WITH YOUR, YOU KNOW, LEVEL OF SERVICE AND THEN ASSUMING $500,000 PER ACRE, THAT'S HOW WE'RE COMING UP WITH A, A COST PER PERSON OR A A COST PER JOB. UH, AND YOU'LL, YOU'LL SEE THIS THROUGHOUT THE REPORT, THERE'S ALWAYS A, A COST PER PERSON, A COST PER JOB, A COST PER, YOU KNOW, VMT, UH, AND WE JUST APPLY THOSE TO THOSE DEMAND FACTORS THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT EARLIER TO COME UP WITH THE ACTUAL, UH, FEE. SO FOR [04:05:01] THE PART FEES, UM, UH, LIKE I SAID, YOU KNOW, YOU TAKE THE SUM OF ALL THESE COSTS PER PERSON COST PER, UH, JOB, YOU MULTIPLY IT BY THE DEMAND INDICATORS TO COME UP WITH, UH, THE PROPOSED FEES. SO ON THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE, UH, YOU KNOW, IT'S ASSESSED PER UNIT. ON THE NON-RESIDENTIAL SIDE, IT'S ASSESSED PER SQUARE FOOT, UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LODGING, WHICH IS ASSESSED PER ROOM. UH, BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE, THERE IS AN INCREASE, UM, AND YOU KNOW, THE, THE, THE PARK LAND COMPONENT, UM, IT'S INCREASED SINCE THE PREVIOUS STUDY AND YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S ADDING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, $900, YOU KNOW, PER PERSON TO THE FEE. UM, SO YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS, UH, A NEED TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO ANY OF THESE FEES. UM, AND THIS WAS, YOU KNOW, A, A QUESTION THAT, YOU KNOW, ONE OF YOU SENT TO ANNETTE. UM, THERE ARE WAYS TO MAKE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE FEES. SO YOU CAN ADOPT A PERCENTAGE OF A FEE, UM, OR YOU CAN REMOVE COMPONENTS. UM, BUT YOU KNOW, IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU DECIDE YOU WANT TO DO, UM, IF WE REMOVE A COMPONENT, WE NEED TO KNOW BEFORE THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING. UH, 'CAUSE WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE, THE DOCUMENT IS UPDATED IF YOU'RE JUST ADOPTING A PERCENTAGE OF THE FEE THAT'S HANDLED IN THE, UH, THE DEVELOPMENT FEE ADOPTION, WHICH DOESN'T HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED IN, UH, THIS, THIS FIRST ROUND. ALRIGHT, SO ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE PARKS AND REC FEES? SO THE, THE MORE PARKS WE BUILT, THE HIGHER THE IMPACT FEES ARE GONNA BE FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I HEARD. MM-HMM? NOT NECESSARILY. UH, SO IT'S BASED ON THE EXISTING, IF WE BUILD MORE PARKS, I MEAN, I THOUGHT THAT'S WHAT YOU SAID, BUT YOU'RE GONNA, SO IF, IF YOU GROW FASTER THAN WE, THAN WE'RE PROJECTING, THEN YOU'LL GENERATE MORE FEE REVENUE THAN YOU'RE PROJECT THAN WE'RE PROJECTING AND THEN YOU WOULD JUST BUILD MORE. BUT IF YOU DON'T GROW AS QUICKLY, THEN IT'S NOT, WE'RE WE'RE NOT USING NEVERMIND. I, I, I WITHDRAW MY QUESTION. I, THIS IS REALLY VERY ARCANE . I, I HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS, BUT I'LL SAVE IT FOR ANOTHER TIME. WE'LL TALK . I THINK PERHAPS BEN, WHAT COUNSELOR WILLIAMSON MIGHT BE ASKING ABOUT IS IF THERE'S AN ASSUMPTION WE'RE GONNA ACQUIRE FIVE MORE ACRES OF PARKLAND AND THAT HAS A COST THAT FEEDS INTO THIS. AND IF THE COUNSELORS SAY NO, WE'RE NOT GONNA ACQUIRE FIVE ACRES OF NEW PARKLAND IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. AND YOU TOOK THAT ASSUMPTION OUT, IT WOULD CHANGE THE FEE, RIGHT? THAT IS CORRECT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I THINK THAT WAS WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO ASK. AND ESSENTIALLY, AND I PLAYED AROUND WITH IT BEFORE I GOT HERE. IF YOU PULLED OUT THE LAND COMPONENT COMPLETELY, THEN YOUR, YOU KNOW, YOUR SMALLEST UNIT SIZE DROPS BY $918. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT BASICALLY A, A, AN INCREASE OF, YOU KNOW, A HUNDRED, 200 BUCKS AND THEN THAT SORT OF FOLLOWS THROUGH WITH THE, UM, THE, THE RESIDENTIAL FEES. YOU'RE SEEING A VERY SLIGHT INCREASE IF YOU REMOVE THE, THE PARK LAND COMPONENT. I'LL ACCEPT THAT. THANK YOU. OKAY, CONTINUE BEN. ALRIGHT, SO UP NEXT, UH, WE HAVE THE POLICE, IAP SO CITYWIDE SERVICE AREA, LIKE YOU CURRENTLY HAVE, UH, ALL THESE COMPONENTS ARE IN YOUR CURRENT FEES. THEY'RE ALL INCREMENTAL. UH, SO THERE'S NO CHANGE IN METHODOLOGY OR COMPONENTS. UH, SO ANY, UH, COST INCREASES OR FEE INCREASES ARE REALLY RELATED TO, YOU KNOW, INCREASED CONSTRUCTION COSTS, INCREASED VEHICLE COSTS, BECAUSE YOUR, UH, YOUR, YOU KNOW, LEVEL OF SERVICES VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS IN THE PREVIOUS STUDY. SO IT'S, THIS IS REALLY JUST DRIVEN BY, YOU KNOW, INCREASES TO CONSTRUCTION COSTS AND VEHICLE COSTS. UH, AND SO, YOU KNOW, BASED ON MAINTAINING YOUR EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE, UH, YOU NEED ABOUT 2,800 SQUARE FEET OF POLICE FACILITIES. THIS DOESN'T LOCK YOU INTO BUILDING ANY SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENT. YOU COULD EXPAND AN EXISTING FACILITY, YOU COULD BUILD A NEW ONE. UM, BUT THAT INCREMENTAL METHODOLOGY ALLOWS YOU THAT FLEXIBILITY TO, UM, EXPAND WHERE NEEDED. UH, YOU'D NEED ABOUT SEVEN ADDITIONAL VEHICLES IF YOU MAINTAIN YOUR LEVEL OF SERVICE AND EIGHT UNITS OF EQUIPMENT. UH, AND SO THIS IS WHERE YOU SEE THE LARGEST INCREASE IN THE FEES. UH, AND IT'S REALLY DRIVEN BY, UH, THE, THE POLICE FACILITIES COST INCREASES. UM, LAST TIME WE USED, UH, MAYBE $250 A SQUARE FOOT, AND THIS TIME I THINK WE'RE USING ABOUT SEVEN 50, UM, JUST TO REFLECT THE, THE, THE COST [04:10:01] INCREASES. AND SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S DRIVING THIS FEE. SO DID STAFF DETERMINED THE AMOUNT OF THE 10 YEAR FACILITIES INCREASE? IS THAT HOW IT WORKED? WE, WE WORKED WITH OKAY THEN. YEAH. AND WHY, HOW DID YOU DETERMINE THAT PARTICULAR FACILITIES? NEVER. I MEAN, YOU KNOW, I'M GONNA BACK OFF HERE. I'M GONNA TAKE THAT AWAY. KEEP GOING. PETE. UH, YOU JUST MADE A STATEMENT, MR. GRIFFIN ABOUT POLICE WAS THE BIGGEST CHANGE, BUT I THINK IT'S THE SMALLEST CHANGE. IF I LOOK AT THE CHANGES IN ANY SQUARE FOOT CATEGORY, IT'S THE LOW, IT'S THE LOWEST INCREMENTAL DOLLARS. IS IT? I WAS THINKING IT'S A 200 AND SOMETHING PERCENT INCREASE, WHEREAS I THINK THE OTHERS WERE IN THE ONE HUNDREDS ON A PERCENTAGE WISE. BUT ON A DOLLAR BASIS, YOU KNOW, A 1700 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE INCREASES $1,100, 1174 WHERE PARKS AND REC IS 1446 AND STREETS ARE 3,500 BUCKS. WELL THEN I WILL, UH, CHANGE WHAT I SAID TO A PERCENTAGE INCREASE. YEAH. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. RIGHT. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS WITH POLICE FEES? NO, GO AHEAD. ALRIGHT, SO FINALLY, UH, THE, THE STREET IIP AGAINST CITYWIDE SERVICE AREA, UM, YOUR CURRENT FEES HAVE A STREET IMPROVEMENTS COMPONENT. THESE WILL ALSO HAVE THAT USING ANY CRIMINAL METHODOLOGY TO MAINTAIN THE LEVEL OF SERVICE. UM, WE DO HAVE A NEW SHARED USE PATH COMPONENT WITH THIS. SO THIS WILL BE SHARED USE PATHS WITHIN THE STREET RIGHT OF WAY. SO THE WAY THAT ARIZONA'S ENABLING LEGISLATION IS WRITTEN IS, UH, YOU KNOW, STREET FACILITIES, UM, TO BE ELIGIBLE, THEY NEED TO BE WITHIN A RIGHT OF WAY. SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, SHARED USE PATHS HERE, IT'S ANY EXISTING PATH WITHIN A RIGHT OF WAY. UH, AND SO YOU WOULD MAINTAIN THAT LEVEL OF SERVICE BY BUILDING ADDITIONAL SHARED USE PATHS WITHIN, UH, YOU KNOW, FUTURE RIGHTS OF WAY. UH, AND THEN WE HAVE AN INTERSECTION COMPONENT, WHICH YOUR CURRENT FEES DID HAVE A PLAN-BASED INTERSECTION COMPONENT. IT COVERED, YOU KNOW, LESS THAN 10% OF THE COST. UM, THIS ONE WE'VE SHIFTED TO AN INCREMENTAL METHODOLOGY. UM, REALLY WHAT'S DRIVING THE FEE INCREASE HERE IS THE, THE, THE COST PER LANE MILE OF THOSE STREET IMPROVEMENTS. LAST TIME WE USED, UH, THINK ABOUT 1.4 MILLION, NOW WE'RE USING 3 MILLION PER LANE MILE. UM, THE SHARED USE PASS AND THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, THEY'RE NOT REALLY, YOU KNOW, DRIVING MUCH OF THIS FEE INCREASE. IT'S REALLY, UM, YOU KNOW, JUST THE, YOU KNOW, STAGGERING COST INCREASE RELATED TO, YOU KNOW, BUILDING, UH, STREET IMPROVEMENTS. AND SO TO MAINTAIN YOUR EXISTING LEVELS OF SERVICE, YOU'D NEED TO, UH, CONSTRUCT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THREE AND A QUARTER LANE MILES OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS, ABOUT A MILE OF SHARED ABUSE PATHS. AND, UH, YOU COULD FUND ABOUT A THIRD OF AN INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT. AND SO AS YOU CAN SEE, UH, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE, YOU KNOW, PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL INCREASES AS WELL. UH, BUT AGAIN, IT, IT'S REALLY JUST THOSE STREET IMPROVEMENT COSTS THAT ARE, UH, DRIVING UP, UH, THE, THE PROPOSED FEES. ALRIGHT, SO THEN THERE'S JUST A, A COMPARISON TO THE, UH, PROPOSED FEES AND THE CURRENT FEES. SIR, ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO ANY OF THIS? MAYOR PETE, THANK YOU MAYOR. AS YOU CAN TELL, THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE STRUGGLED WITH THE DEVELOPER IMPACT FEES IN ARIZONA HERE, SITTING ON THIS DAIS, STRUGGLING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS. SO I'M GETTING THE SENSE THAT, AND PERHAPS I'M RIGHT OR WRONG, BUT YOU CAN TELL ME THAT. IS THERE A STANDARD METHODOLOGY, JUST THE INPUTS AND THE OUTPUTS FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL CITY OR DIFFERENT? WE EACH HAVE DIFFERENT CURRENT LEVELS OF SERVICE GROWTH RATES, PROJECTED SERVICES, BUT THE METHODOLOGY IS ALL PRETTY STANDARD. I MEAN, THERE ARE GENERALLY THREE METHODOLOGIES. UH, AND YOU KNOW, AFTER THE RECESSION, A LOT OF ARIZONA COMMUNITIES SHIFTED FROM A PLAN-BASED APPROACH, WHICH SAID, THESE ARE THE VERY SPECIFIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE WANT TO, USING AN INCREMENTAL THAT SAID, THIS IS OUR EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE AND THIS IS WHAT IT COSTS, UH, BECAUSE IT INSULATES THE CITY FROM CHANGES IN THE DEVELOPMENT CYCLE. SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU WERE TO HAVE ANOTHER RECESSION AND WE HAD A, A PLAN BASED APPROACH THAT SAID, HEY, WE'RE GONNA BUILD, BUILD $10 MILLION WORTH [04:15:01] OF STREET IMPROVEMENTS, AND THEN YOU ONLY COLLECT 2 MILLION FEE REVENUE, WELL, YOU'VE ALREADY COLLECTED THE FEE REVENUE. SO YOU EITHER HAVE TO REFUND THAT OR YOU HAVE TO MAKE UP THAT, YOU KNOW, $8 MILLION DIFFERENCE OUT OF THE, THE GENERAL FUND OR SOME OTHER REVENUE SOURCE. OH. SO THAT'S WHY A LOT OF COMMUNITIES HAVE SHIFTED TO THE INCREMENTAL METHODOLOGY. SO, YOU KNOW, IF YOU GROW SLOWER, YOU JUST BUILD LESS BECAUSE YOU'RE ALWAYS MAINTAINING A LEVEL OF SERVICE. AND WHERE ARE, WHICH ONE OF THOSE APPROACHES? ALMOST EVERY SINGLE ONE OF YOUR FEES? THIS, THIS TIME IS THE INCREMENTAL METHODOLOGY. AND WHAT'S THE THIRD METHODOLOGY? UH, COST RECOVERY. THAT WORKS REALLY WELL WITH UTILITIES. WITH WHAT? UTILITIES WHERE YOU'VE OVERSIZED CAPACITY AND YOU BUY INTO IT. AND WHAT DOES THE REST OF THE VERDE VALLEY DO? UM, I'M NOT SURE WHO ELSE HAS FEES. I, I THINK THE, THE CLOSEST CITY WITH FEES WE FLAGSTAFF AND THEY DON'T COLLECT FOR ALL COMPONENTS. UH, AND THEN I THINK KINGMAN WOULD BE OTHER CLOSEST. BUT IT REALLY, IT JUST DEPENDS ON, YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, EVERY COMMUNITY'S DIFFERENT. SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, WHAT ARE, YOU KNOW, WHAT KIND OF GROWTH ARE YOU GONNA HAVE? AND THEN WHAT ARE YOUR ACTUAL INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDS? SO WHEN YOU SAY OTHER CITIES DON'T HAVE FEES, DOES COTTONWOOD HAVE DEVELOPER IMPACT FEES? I DON'T THINK SO. YEAH, I DON'T THINK SO. WE DON'T THINK SO. WHAT DID THEY DO THEN? GOOD FOLLOW UP QUESTION. WHAT DID THEY DO LIKE OF THE ALL THE VERDE VALLEY COMMUNITIES? I'D LIKE TO KNOW BECAUSE I MEAN, SO MAYOR COUNCIL, ANNETTE, GO AHEAD AGAIN. UM, SO ONE WAY TO THINK OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES IS THAT WE, THIS IS A WAY TO CREATE LIKE A STANDARD CHARGE TO ALL NEW DEVELOPMENT. THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO NEGOTIATE AN EXACTION FOR THESE, UM, SPECIFIC PROJECTS, THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO THESE PROJECTS EACH TIME THE APPLICATION COMES IN. SO IF YOU HAVE THIS, THEN YOU JUST DEFAULT TO THESE, UM, STANDARDIZED FEES. WHAT THOSE OTHER COMMUNITIES ARE PROBABLY DOING IS THAT AS THOSE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS ARE COMING IN, THEY'RE NEGOTIATING WITH THOSE DEVELOPERS ON, UM, HOW MUCH THE CITY'S GOING TO REQUIRE THAT PERSON TO PAY OR THAT PROJECT TO PAY TOWARDS THEIR, UM, PUBLIC SYSTEMS. SO IF WE HAVE THE FEES, WE CAN'T ALSO DO AN EXACTION DURING THE P AND Z PROCESS. BUT ANNETTE, I THINK IT WOULD, DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO THEY'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO THIS EFFORT BECAUSE THEY'RE ABLE TO, OR THEY DESIRE TO MAYBE AS A POLICY CHOICE TO NEGOTIATE ON EVERY SINGLE ONE. IT WOULD BE NICE TO KNOW WHAT OUR NEIGHBORS ARE DOING. I THINK, I MEAN, WE DO THAT A A LOT AND I DON'T WANT TO, OUR HOUSING COSTS TO BE SO MUCH HIGHER THAN ANY OTHER CITY IN THE VERDE VALLEY OR TOWN IN THE VERDE VALLEY. WE'RE, YOU KNOW, AS IT IS NOW, WE HAVE COMPLAINTS FROM BUILDERS THAT RATHER REALISTIC OR IMAGINED, UH, THE FEES ARE HIGH. SO, SO THE OTHER, UM, CHOICE YOU HAVE THAT I BELIEVE BEN ANSWERED IN THE EMAIL THAT I FORWARDED TO YOU IS THAT THIS IS SETTING THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE UNDER THE LAW, BUT THE COUNCIL BY POLICY CAN SAY WE'RE ONLY GOING TO IMPOSE X PERCENT OF IT, 50% OF IT, OR IF IT'S FOR EXAMPLE, A UM, WORKFORCE HOUSING PROJECT THAT WE ARE PARTICIPATING IN, YOU COULD BY POLICY HAVE SOME KIND OF A WAIVER POLICY OR WHATEVER, BUT THAT COST ENDS UP HAVING TO GET BORN, YOU KNOW, ON THE OTHER SIDE. BUT THERE ARE SOME THINGS YOU CAN DO ONCE YOU KNOW WHAT YOUR, YOUR MAXIMUM IS, THEN YOU HAVE THAT FRAMEWORK TO DECIDE WE'RE ONLY GONNA IMPOSE A PORTION OF IT OR WE'LL GO AHEAD AND IMPOSE ALL OF IT. I BELIEVE IN THE PAST THE COUNCIL'S ALWAYS ADOPTED THE FULL RATE, IS THAT CORRECT? I BELIEVE SO. WE MAY HAVE PULLED OUT COMPONENTS BUT ULTIMATELY ADOPTED THE FULL PROPOSED FEE. WELL, ARE YOU DONE? NO, THE VICE MAYOR WAS, UH, NO, JUST LAST SORT OF ELEMENT OF THAT QUESTION. JUST SO I CAN UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE OF THIS THING. WHAT IS THE TOTAL AMOUNT TO DEVELOP IMPACT FEES THAT WE'VE COLLECTED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS? AND THEN WHAT IS THE NUMBER AND THEN PROJECTION? WHAT'S THE NUMBER? ARE WE TALKING ABOUT A MILLION BUCKS A YEAR OR A 10 MILLION OR WHAT? WE CAN COME BACK AROUND WHEN SHE GOES. OKAY. THAT'S GREAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MAYOR. ALRIGHT, VICE MAYOR, YOU'VE BEEN WAITING. NO, REALLY, I'M TRYING TO RECONCILE [04:20:02] THE COSTS FOR DEVELOPMENT, THE REAL COSTS. MM-HMM. WITH THE FACT THAT OUR FEES ARE ALREADY HIGH. I THINK THEY'RE, AND I'D LIKE TO KNOW HOW THEY COMPARE WITH OTHER COMMUNITIES BECAUSE IT'S BEEN SUGGESTED TO US THAT WE'RE WAY HIGHER THAN OUR NEIGHBORS. AND SO IF YOU LOOK AT A 700 FOOT UNIT, OR SEVEN, I CAN'T EVEN, I DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THIS MEANS. IS IT 700 FEET OR IS IT 700 UNITS? 700 SQUARE FEET. FEET. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT TO CHARGE $7,100 FOR THIS TINY LITTLE UNIT JUST SEEMS, AND IT'S DOUBLE, MORE THAN DOUBLE WHAT WE WERE CHARGING. THE INCREASE IS AT THE TOTAL. THAT'S THE TOTAL. OKAY. $7,381 JUST SEEMS OUTRAGEOUS TO ME. UH, AND IT WAS $3,273. I MEAN, HAS OUR COSTS GONE UP DOUBLED? YEAH. SO, MM-HMM. , YES. AND THIS IS, YOU KNOW, A DISCUSSION THAT WE'RE HAVING WITH ESSENTIALLY EVERY COUNCIL IN EVERY STATE WE'RE WORKING WITH, BUT SPECIFICALLY, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WORKING WITH A LOT OF CITIES IN THE VALLEY RIGHT NOW, AND, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE'RE HAVING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S MOST IMPORTANT TO EACH COMMUNITY. UM, BECAUSE THE COSTS HAVE INCREASED SO QUICKLY THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU EITHER HAVE DEVELOPMENT, PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE, OR YOU AS A CITY DECIDE TO SUBSIDIZE DEVELOPMENT. BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE, WHEN I LOOK AT THESE ASSUMPTIONS FOR 10 YEARS, THEY SEEM REALLY LOW TO ME THAT THE SHARED USE PATHS SEEM LOW. IT DOESN'T TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WE'RE GONNA BUILD A NEW POLICE STATION IN 10 YEAR, YOU KNOW, I MEAN, IT'S, IT'S 2,800 SQUARE FEET OF POLICE SEEMS REALLY LOW TO ME. JUST I COULD PICK ANY NUMBER OF THINGS IN HERE THAT SEEM UNDERSTATED, AND YET THE FEES ARE GOING UP. THEY'RE MORE THAN DOUBLE. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND. SO, I'D LIKE TO GO BACK TO SOMETHING THAT, UH, COUNCILOR FOLTZ SAID IF HE KNOWS ANYBODY, UM, THAT HAS PAID IMPACT FEES IN THE PAST YEAR. AND I MEAN, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, I'VE HEARD IT COULD BE QUITE HIGH. SO WHAT, WHAT WOULD A TEAR DOWN BE, IF YOU DON'T MIND SHARING SOME ANECDOTAL INFORMATION? I DO MIND, BUT, OKAY. AND DON'T WORRY ABOUT IT. I MEAN, WE, WE'VE GOT EXAMPLES WE CAN LOOK AT RIGHT HERE. SO, OKAY. IT'S SUBSTANTIAL. THAT'S GOOD. THAT'S FINE. I CAN GO WITH SUBSTANTIAL. AND THAT COULD BE TURNING BUILDERS OFF. WELL, PEOPLE WHO WANNA COME HERE AND THEY BUY A VACANT LOT. WELL, I THINK TO HIS COMMENT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, OKAY, WELL A COUNCIL CAN DECIDE TO SUBSIDIZE MM-HMM. , WELL, I DON'T THINK WE WANNA SUBSIDIZE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. RIGHT, RIGHT. BUT MULTIFAMILY, RIGHT. AND THE DIGA IS AN AVENUE FOR RELIEF ON THE DIFF HERE. RIGHT. SO THERE, THERE IS A WAY, AT LEAST IN A TARGETED CATEGORY, A DEVELOPMENT TYPE, UM, WHERE WE CAN BRING SOME RELIEF. BUT I AGREE WITH THE VICE MAYOR THAT THESE PROPOSED FEES ARE BREATHTAKING. MM-HMM. . AND WE'VE ALL RECEIVED CONSIDERABLE, UH, CONCERNED FEEDBACK VIA EMAIL. AND IT'S LIKE, IT'S NOT LIKE WE'RE WANTING THIS. RIGHT. I, TO YOUR POINT, AGAIN, VICE MAYOR, LIKE, IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE THIS IS HELPING BUILD A WHOLE LOT OF ADDITIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE. THIS DOESN'T FEEL RICH PER SE. RIGHT. AND NOT THAT THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR, BUT IT'S JUST, DANG, THIS IS EXPENSIVE. JESSICA, COULD WE BE SHORT? I'LL, WHAT'S THAT? I WILL MAKE AN EFFORT. THANK YOU. I THINK THAT THEY ARE LOW, HOLLY, AND I THINK IF THEY WEREN'T LOW, THE FEES WOULD BE FOUR TIMES AS MUCH. SO I THINK THAT THERE IS JUST, THIS IS LIKE THE TRAFFIC STUDIES. THIS IS ALL, YOU JUST PLUG NUMBERS IN AND THERE'S A, AN ALGORITHM AND IT POPS OUT THE OTHER END. WE COULD CHANGE ALL THE ASSUMPTIONS AND WE GET LOWER NUMBERS. SO, BUT THE, THE POINT IS, AND I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT 'CAUSE I REALLY, THE DETAILS OF THIS, MY MIND IS NOT ABLE TO WRAP AROUND. COULD YOU PUT YOUR MIC CLOSER? THE COST TO US, THANK YOU FOR CREATING THESE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS HAS TRIPLED, DOUBLED, OR TRIPLED. SO THE [04:25:01] QUESTION IS, DO WE WANNA ABSORB THE COSTS OF THESE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS OR DO WE WANT TO PASS A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF THE CO OF THE ACTUAL INCREASES ON TO PEOPLE WHO DEVELOP IN OUR COMMUNITY? THAT'S REALLY THE ISSUE. SO, YOU KNOW, I, THIS IS INTERESTING BECAUSE THERE ISN'T ANY REQUIREMENT THAT D FEES BE APPLIED UNIFORMLY THAT ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES ARE TREATED THE SAME. YOU CAN NEGOTIATE INDIVIDUAL, ONE INDIVIDUAL DIFF FEES WITH LIKE, I COULD CHARGE YOU $700,000 AND I COULD CHARGE YOU $200,000. OR DO THEY HAVE, DOES IT HAVE TO BE A, A, AN EQUITY? BUT WHY WOULDN'T I CLAIM BIAS? NO, NO. I'M ASKING THE QUESTION, DOES THERE HAVE TO BE AN EQUITY OR CAN YOU NEGO? BUT YOU SAID YOU COULD NEGOTIATE. I WAS AT THE, I WAS TALKING ABOUT WHEN A NEW DEVELOPMENT COMES IN, LIKE A SUBDIVISION OR WHATEVER, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. MM-HMM. , UM, AT THE TIME YOU'RE DOING YOUR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. OKAY. YOU'RE DOING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS. OKAY. YEAH. YEAH. UM, AND THEN RENEE JUST LOOKED UP FOR US THAT THE AMOUNT OF, UM, DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES THE CITY COLLECTED IN THE LAST FISCAL YEAR WAS $615,000 6 1 5, CORRECT? NOT MUCH. NOT AT ALL. NO. BUT YOU DON'T KNOW HOW MANY UNITS WERE BUILT? YEAH, WE DO. WE HAVE THEM IN HERE. OKAY. I CAN'T BRING IT UP. NOT COMING. FINE. IT'S IN YOUR PACKET, MAYOR. YES, GO AHEAD. SO, SO JUST LIKE, IN PRACTICAL TERMS, ANDY, HOW MUCH, HOW FAR WOULD $615,000 GET US IN SHARED USE PATH LENGTH AS A PRACTICAL, FOR INSTANCE, IF IT WAS CONCRETE, IT'D BE HALF A MILE. OH, . SO WHY ARE WE SPENDING SO MUCH TIME ON THIS ? BUT WITH THESE NUMBERS THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, IT'S TWO AND A HALF TIMES PROJECTED PERHAPS OVER THE NEXT YEARS NOW. SO INSTEAD OF 600,000, IT'S 101.2 MILLION MILLION, 1.5 MILLION SOMETHING. WAIT, THE, THE 615,000 THAT WAS FOR FISCAL YEAR 23, CORRECT? BECAUSE THAT WAS WHAT WE HAD TO CLOSE. OKAY. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE ABOUT 24. YEAH. THE, SO IS THAT THE, AS OF JUNE 30TH, JUNE 30TH, 23 OR JUNE 30TH? 24TH. 23. OKAY. THANK YOU. MM-HMM? . OKAY. YEAH. THANK YOU. UM, CONTINUE. WAS THERE ANYTHING LEFT? THAT WAS THE, THE FINAL SLIDE. OKAY. WELL, LET ME, ONE MORE QUESTION. ARE PARKS AND REC, POLICE AND STREETS THE THREE CATEGORIES YOU CAN USE? OR ARE THERE OTHERS? THERE ARE OTHERS. UM, YOU USED TO HAVE A STORM WATER FEE. UM, IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HANDLE WATER WASTEWATER THROUGH CAPACITY FEES. UM, THE OTHERS THAT ARE ELIGIBLE WOULD BE, UH, FIRE AND LIBRARY. I THINK THAT WOULD COVER ALL OF THEM. MM-HMM. THAT'S SEPARATE FOR US. OKAY. BUT THE FIRST ONE YOU SAID WAS WHAT AGAIN? STORM WATER. STORM WATER. STORM WATER. WE DO THAT DIFFERENT. SO WHY, HOW DO WE DO THAT? DON'T WE DO A ISN'T WASTEWATER SYSTEM WASTE? NO. WASTEWATER STORM WATER ARE TWO SEPARATE THINGS. ISN'T STORM WATER DONE THROUGH THE COUNTIES? NO. WELL, WE, WE DO GET SOME TAX FUNDING FROM THE, THE FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICTS, BUT WE ENDED UP NOT DOING STORMWATER IN THIS ROUND BECAUSE THERE WAS SUCH A, A LACK OF CAPITAL EXPECTED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS FOR THE FUTURE IN THE STORMWATER C UH, CATEGORY. IS THAT STILL THE CASE? YEAH. OKAY. UH, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO TO THE PUBLIC? OKAY. WE'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR, UM, SEAN SMITH. ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO SUBMIT A CARD? PLEASE DO SO AT THIS TIME. GUY SEAN. THANK YOU. MY NAME IS SEAN SMITH. I LIVE IN SEDONA. UM, I'M GONNA TALK TO MY CAP TODAY AND TALK ABOUT SHARED USE PASS. I THINK I HEARD THE NUMBER WAS PRETTY LOW IN TERMS OF THE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. SO IF WE HAVE THE CAPACITY OF THE LEVEL OF SERVICE TO JACK THAT AND RAPIDLY INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF SIDEWALKS THAT WE DO, I LIKE TO ENJOY THEM, YOU KNOW, BEFORE I DIE. SO, UH, I THINK A LOT OF US WOULD. AND SO YOU CAN ARGUE THAT WE'RE PLAYING CATCH UP WITH SIDEWALKS AND THAT WE HAVE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO [04:30:01] MAKE A, A CHANGE HERE THAT WOULDN'T, YOU KNOW, BREAK THE BANK KIND OF 'CAUSE THE OTHER BIGGER COMPONENTS OF THE, THE FEES HERE ARE NOT SIDEWALKS. SO, UM, YOU KNOW, EQUITY FOR SQUARE FOOT, RIGHT? WE WANT MULTI-FAMILY. WE WANT, YOU KNOW, DON'T DING THE SMALL HOUSE. THE BIGGER YOUR HOUSE YOU DO, THE MORE IMPACT YOU FEE. THAT'S, THAT'S FAIR. IF IT SEEMS TO ME, UM, AND PHIL, THE MCMANSIONS, THAT YOU HAVE TO DO THE BUILD OUT BEFORE THE INCENTIVES COME TO START DOING THAT. AND BY THE TIME YOU GET TO MCMANSIONS, IT'S LIKE, I DON'T REALLY CARE HOW MUCH IMPACT FEES YOU PAY WHEN YOU'RE JACKING UP THIS, YOU KNOW, BIG HOUSE. AND THAT'S, THAT'S A MUCH SMALLER PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL BUILD OUT. UM, SO, UH, USE THE DIGGA TO HELP MOLD THE FAMILY AGAIN, LIKE, UH, COUNSELOR FOLD SAID, AND, UH, YEAH, LET'S, SO THE, THE, I TALKED TO PUBLIC WORKS AND, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ALL THESE MILES AND MILES OF SIDEWALKS THAT WE WANT TO DO. AND I ASKED, OKAY, WELL WHY CAN'T WE FRONT LOAD SOME OF THAT IN THE PLANNING? AND THE ANSWER WAS, WELL, STAFF IS AT CAPACITY AND OTHER CAPACITY LIMITS IN THE CITY, YOU KNOW, LIMIT HOW MUCH WE CAN DO ONE TIME. BUT IF WE JACK THE FEES HERE, WE CAN PAY FOR OUTSOURCING. WE PAY, WE CAN PAY FOR A CAPACITY INCREASE IN THE CITY IN GENERAL TO ALLOW MORE SIDEWALK PROJECTS TO HAPPEN EARLIER. AND, UH, WE, WE GET TO CATCH UP. SO I, I ADVOCATE DOING THAT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SEAN. I WILL CLOSE THE, UH, PUBLIC, UH, MEETING, PUBLIC HEARING. UM, SO ANY COMMENTS? YES. OKAY. THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION IN HERE. UM, BUT I STILL, THERE'S OTHER INFORMATION THAT I WOULD WANT, WHICH WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT BEFORE, IS I WANNA KNOW WHAT OUR NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES ARE DOING HERE IN THE VERDE VALLEY, BECAUSE WE HAVE GOTTEN THAT, THOSE CRITICISMS OF BEING, OF OUT PRICING DEVELOPMENT, UM, COMPARATIVELY, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TRUE OR NOT. SO EVEN THOUGH ANECDOTALLY WE'VE HEARD THAT WE THINK THAT THERE MAY NOT BE FEES I, I NEED TO KNOW FOR SURE. SO I, I, I WANT, I'D LIKE TO, YOU KNOW, IF MY COLLEAGUES AGREE DIRECT STAFF TO GET THAT INFORMATION FOR US ABOUT THE NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES, ALSO THE COUNTY, THE UNINCORPORATED AREA, AND HOW THAT FACTORS IN FOR YAFFA, PA, AND COCONINO. UM, SO I, I, I THAT I NEED, UM, I JUST WANT CLARIFICATION AS WELL. THESE, BECAUSE WE HAVE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES, IF WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE THEM, IT WOULD BE BY A PERCENTAGE. AND AS YOU'RE, THERE WAS SOME INFORMATION THAT WENT BACK AND FORTH THAT SAID IT COULD BE ANY PERCENTAGE OF YOU ARE GIVING US THE MAXIMUM IT HAS TO BE DONE THAT WAY. IT, IT CAN'T BE DONE. IT HAS TO BE A PERCENTAGE OF WHAT WE HAVE. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S, WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT IT THAT WAY VERSUS COMING UP WITH A ALMOST LIKE A ZERO BASED CALCULATION THAT WOULD BE LOOKING AT A DIFFERENT STRUCTURE AND DOING SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE SQUARE FOOTAGE BASED. BECAUSE AGAIN, WHEN I DID MY INITIAL REVIEW OF THIS, I WAS ASTOUNDED TO SEE THAT WE DON'T HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT INCENTIVIZES THE DEVELOPMENT OF SMALLER UNITS. AND THIS SEEMS TO BE ACTUALLY DISCOURAGING THAT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT IT'S, IT'S, IT'S BACKLOADED ON, ON THE, ON THE SMALLER SQUARE FOOT PROPERTIES. SO I'M, I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THAT. I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF THERE'S ANOTHER METHODOLOGY THAT COULD BE USED OTHER THAN THIS PERCENTAGES BASED ON WHETHER IT'S 1% OF WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM IS, OR 0% OR A HUNDRED PERCENT, CAN WE ADOPT A DIFFERENT STRUCTURE? SO THOSE ARE THE TWO ITEMS THAT I NEED RESEARCHED IN ORDER TO HAVE FURTHER CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS AT THIS POINT. AND I MAY HAVE OTHER COMMENTS, BUT I'LL LEAVE IT THERE FOR THE MOMENT. PETE. YEAH, MAYOR, THANK YOU. A COMMENT, IT'S REALLY AN ESCAPED QUESTION, MR. GRIFFIN. I'D LIKE TO ASK WHETHER THE METHODOLOGY ALLOWS FOR THE VISITOR HEAVY COMPONENT OF OUR COMMUNITY. SO DO THE BASE NUMBERS THAT YOU USE, UH, IS IT CHANGED ANYHOW BECAUSE WE'RE SUCH A LOW RESIDENT POPULATION COMPARED TO THE TOTAL USE IN OUR COMMUNITY? HOW'S THAT FACTORED IN THE ANALYSIS? GREAT QUESTION. SO, YOU KNOW, INSTEAD OF USING, YOU KNOW, PERSONS PER HOUSING UNIT, UM, WE USE PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD BECAUSE WE'RE LOOKING AT THE OCCUPIED UNITS. SO THE THOUGHT THERE IS WE REALLY WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE, YOU KNOW, CONVERT THAT HOUSING UNIT TO POPULATION THAT WE'RE, WE'RE LOOKING AT, YOU KNOW, THE OCCUPIED UNITS, UH, BECAUSE YOU HAVE SUCH A HIGH PERCENTAGE [04:35:01] OF YOUR HOUSING UNITS USED FOR SEASONAL OR RECREATIONAL USE. UH, AND SO IF WE USED, YOU KNOW, FOR HOUSING UNIT, LIKE WE DO IN A LOT OF COMMUNITIES, UM, YOU KNOW, YOUR DEMAND FACTORS WOULD BE MUCH LOWER. UH, SO THAT'S PART OF THE WAY THAT WE ARE, YOU KNOW, MAKING THAT ADJUSTMENT IS WE'RE SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GONNA INCLUDE, UM, THE, THE ACTUAL OCCUPANCY RATES, UM, AND THEN WE ADD BACK IN THOSE SEASONAL RECREATIONAL UNITS ON TOP OF IT. AND THEN, AS YOU SAW FOR THE, THE PARKS FEES, UM, WE TREAT THE LODGING UNITS AS, UM, ESSENTIALLY A RESIDENTIAL UNIT, UH, BECAUSE, UH, AGAIN, IT'S THE, THE VISITORS, UH, IN THOSE LODGING UNITS THAT ARE REALLY DRIVING DEMAND FOR PARKS AND NOT THE EMPLOYEES RELATED TO, UH, THO THOSE USES. UH, SO, YOU KNOW, ALL THOSE COMPOUND TO, YOU KNOW, REALLY TRY AND GET AT THE, OUR, OUR BEST ESTIMATE OF, YOU KNOW, YOUR YOUR ACTUAL PEAK POPULATION. UH, AS WE CONTINUE TO WRAP OUR HANDS AROUND OUR TOURISM, UH, WORK THAT WE'RE DOING IN STAFFING UP OUR OWN, UM, DEPARTMENT, LOOKING AT THIS, I THINK WE'RE UNDERSTANDING TO A GREATER, GREATER DEGREE THE IMPACT OF DAY USE. PEOPLE WHO AREN'T COUNTED IN THE POPULATION ARE IN THE, IN THE STAYING A NIGHT. AND, AND THAT'S A TOUGH ONE. YOU KNOW, IT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE USUALLY HEAR THIS WITH STREET FEES BECAUSE IT'S, WELL, HEY, WE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE ALL THIS, ALL THIS TRAFFIC, WELL, IT'S, YOU KNOW, PASS THROUGH OR IT'S FROM DEVELOPMENT OUTSIDE OF YOUR CITY. MM-HMM. . AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN ONLY CHARGE FEES ON DEVELOPMENT WITHIN YOUR CITY. SO IF THEY DON'T LIVE HERE, THEY'RE NOT STAYING HERE, THEY'RE NOT WORKING HERE, THERE'S REALLY NO WAY TO ASSESS A FEE. SO THERE IS NO ADJUSTMENT IN THE NUMBERS 'CAUSE OF OUR SITUATION. OH, THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MAYOR. I DON'T HAVE ANY. OKAY. UM, BRIAN, YOU HAD SOMETHING. THANK YOU, MAYOR, UM, COUNCILOR KINSELLA, YOUR DESIRE TO SEE HOW WE BENCHMARK RELATIVE TO OTHER COMMUNITIES IN THE VERDE VALLEY. I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. UH, PART OF GETTING THAT DATA THOUGH, WE NEED TO KNOW WHEN THOSE COMPARABLE FEES WENT INTO EFFECT. MM-HMM. , RIGHT? BECAUSE I'M JUST SITTING HERE LOOKING AT A, A COUPLE OF THE RESIDENTIAL FEE, UH, INCREASES, YOU KNOW, AT THE BOTTOM END IT'S 125% INCREASE IN THE MIDDLE, IT'S 138%. SO WHEN THOSE COMPARATIVE FEES WENT INTO EFFECT, WILL DEFINITELY HAVE A, UH, IMPACT ON HOW WE SHOULD PERCEIVE WHAT THIS REPRESENTS. THE OTHER IS, I, I, I DON'T THINK I'M INTERESTED IN, IN TRYING TO EXPLORE ANY OTHER MODEL FOR HOW TO GO ABOUT CALCULATING THIS. UM, THERE WAS TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, BUT ULTIMATELY IT COMES DOWN TO THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE IN THE RESIDENTIAL THAT'S, AND, AND IT'S NOT REGRESSIVE IN THAT REGARD WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT ON A PER PERSON BASIS. SO, OKAY. THANK YOU. CAST THAT DONE. VICE MAYOR. OKAY. UM, I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THE NUMBERS ARE IN THE VERDE VALLEY. I FEEL THAT'S, I CAN'T MAKE A DECISION UNTIL I HAVE THAT AS A COMPARISON. AND IF WE DO 50%, 75%, 10, WHATEVER IT IS OF THAT, OKAY. IF THAT'S AN OPTION. BUT I DON'T WANNA BE SO MUCH HIGHER THAT I ALREADY THINK WE ARE TO THE OTHER COMMUNITIES IN THE VERDE VALLEY AS FAR AS A DIFFERENT MODEL. I THINK THE DIFFERENT MODEL WOULD BE WE JUST REDUCE THE PERCENTAGE IF, IF THE COUNCIL'S SO INCLINED. BUT I CAN'T EVEN, YOU KNOW, FIGURE ANYTHING OUT UNTIL I KNOW WHAT THE COMP, THE COMP ARE. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU WOULD GO ABOUT DOING THAT, ANNETTE, IF YOU WOULD DO IT TO, WELL, MAYOR, WE CAN GATHER THAT INFORMATION BETWEEN NOW AND THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING THAT'S ALREADY ON YOUR CALENDAR FOR THIS PROCESS. AND IF I UNDERSTOOD BEN CORRECTLY, UM, WHAT WE HAVE ON YOUR CALENDAR RIGHT NOW IS THE NEXT PUBLIC HEARING IS 30 DAYS FROM NOW, THE LAW SAYS THAT YOU HAVE TO MAKE A DECISION ON THIS WITHIN 60 DAYS. SO WE COULD DO THAT NEXT PUBLIC HEARING, WORK SOME MORE ON ALL THIS NEW INFORMATION AND THEN SCHEDULE ANOTHER WITHIN THAT, UH, BEFORE THE 60 DAY CLOCK EXPIRES FOR YOU TO ACTUALLY MAKE THE DECISION. OKAY. IF THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU, WE CAN GATHER SOME MORE OF THIS INFORMATION. UM, I DID ALSO WANNA CLARIFY THAT I, MY UNDERSTANDING, AND YOU KNOW, I'M NEW TO THIS IN ARIZONA, BUT I DEALT WITH THESE IN OREGON AND IDAHO AS WELL. UM, IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE STATE LAW KIND OF DICTATES WHAT YOUR CHOICES ARE AND HOW YOU CALCULATE THIS. CORRECT? LIKE YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW CERTAIN RULES, SO TO SPEAK, ON HOW YOU PREPARE THESE. UM, IS THAT NOT RIGHT? I, THERE'S IT, IT'S MORE T DICTATE DICTATE BY NATIONAL CASE LAW. OH, OKAY. [04:40:01] BY CASE LAW? YES. OKAY. AND THAT'S WHAT, YEAH, BECAUSE THEY'VE BEEN LITIGATED. THAT'S WHAT I UNDERSTOOD. ALSO. IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT STATE STATUTE. SO WHAT I AM WONDERING IF COUNSELOR ELLA'S QUESTION, MAYBE I MISUNDERSTOOD IT THE FIRST TIME, IS IF WE HAVE THIS CHART, ARE THEY ABLE TO SAY, OKAY, FOR, UM, ANY OF THE CATEGORIES THAT ARE 1200 SQUARE FEET OR LESS, RIGHT? THEY WOULD CHARGE 50% OF THE FEE, BUT FOR THOSE THAT ARE X SQUARE FEET AND LARGER, IT'D BE A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE FEE. OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE THE WHOLE CATEGORY? RESIDENTIAL WOULD ALL GET THE 50% APPLIED OR WHATEVER? WELL, IT WOULD ACTUALLY NEED TO BE, UH, A PERCENTAGE TO ALL FEES OF THAT TYPE. SO WHAT YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IS TREAT DIFFERENT LAND USES IN A WAY THAT WOULD, IT'S NOT THAT THE LAND USES THOUGH, FOR ME IT'S THE SIZE. BUT IS THAT, WAS THAT YOUR QUESTION? IF YOU COULD APPLY A PERCENTAGE TO CERTAIN LINE ITEMS ON THIS SIDE? YEAH, I WANNA, I WANNA KNOW IF WE, IF IF YOU, IF WE, LET'S JUST SAY WE WERE GOING TO DO AN INCREASE. COULD WE DO A 10% INCREASE FOR THE UNITS, UH, OF THE, WHAT IS IT, 700 OR LESS AND THEN A 12% FOR THE NEXT CATEGORY AND A 13 FOR THE NEXT, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT WOULD ESCALATE IT THAT INCENTIVIZES SMALLER STRUCTURES THAT HAVE LESS IMPACT ON THE LAND. SO I GUESS THAT'S A LEGAL QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO YOU WOULD, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CHANGE WITHIN THE, THE RESIDENTIAL BASICALLY SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GONNA CHARGE CERTAIN UNITS THIS PERCENTAGE, CERTAIN UNITS, THAT PERCENTAGE. IT'S A, UM, IT'S A DUAL PROTECTION ISSUE. SO YOU'RE BASICALLY PROVIDING A BENEFIT TO ONE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT CLASS OVER ANOTHER. SO THEN THAT BRINGS ME BACK TO, DO WE HAVE TO STICK WITH THIS MODEL? BECAUSE THIS MODEL IS SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT BASED ON INCENTIVIZING SMALLER DEVELOPMENTS, UH, ESPECIALLY IN THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT. UM, SO WELL IT, IT DOES INCENTIVIZE SMALLER DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IF WE JUST SAID, HEY, WE'RE GONNA HAVE SINGLE FAMILY VERSUS MULTIFAMILY, THEN WE WOULD SAY ALL MULTIFAMILY UNITS AVERAGE, UH, ONE POINT I THINK FIVE PERSONS PER HOUSEHOLD COMPARED TO, YOU KNOW, NOW WE CAN HAVE A A 700 SQUARE FOOT, YOU KNOW, MINIMUM THRESHOLD, WHICH ASSUMES ONE PERSON SO THAT THAT HAS A, YOU KNOW, A LOWER FEE THAN IF WE JUST DID BY UNIT TYPE. OKAY. OKAY. THAT ANSWERS HOW THIS MODEL WORKS. BUT AGAIN, MY QUESTION IS, DO WE HAVE TO USE THIS MODEL? WE DON'T. OKAY. WE CAN COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT OKAY. BUT THERE ARE, BUT AREN'T THERE, I MEAN, WE CAN'T, I MEAN, I GUESS I WOULD CAUTION AGAINST JUST DESIGNING YOUR OWN MODEL ON THE FLY OFF THE D WHEN WE HAVE, I MEAN, IT HAS TO BE DEFENSIBLE IN COURT. YEAH. UM, WHICH IS WHY WE HIRE THESE FOLKS THAT DO THIS EVERY DAY FOR CITIES ACROSS THE COUNTRY TO BUILD DEFENSIBLE MODELS WITH THE DATA TO, UH, JUSTIFY THE, THE FEES. SO I GUESS, I DON'T KNOW WHAT, UM, I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE O OTHER MODEL OPTIONS ARE THAT ARE AVAILABLE. YOU DESCRIBED COST RECOVERY, YOU DESCRIBED INCREMENTAL APPROACH AND THEN THE PLAN-BASED APPROACH. IS THAT THE CHOICE FOR METHODOLOGIES? Y YES. THOSE ARE GONNA BE YOUR, YOUR THREE OPTIONS. AND WOULD THE RESULTS BE DIFFERENT IF WE APPLIED ANY OF THOSE OTHER ONES? UH, POTENTIALLY. UM, I MEAN, IF, IF YOU WENT PLAN-BASED AND YOU WANTED A DIFFERENT LEVEL OF SERVICE THAN WHAT YOU CURRENTLY PROVIDE, SO A, A HIGHER LEVEL OF SERVICE, THEN YOUR FEES WOULD LIKELY INCREASE AND THERE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, A, A COST TO COVER EXISTING DEVELOPMENT SHARE TO INCREASE THE LEVEL OF SERVICE. OKAY. WELL I GUESS I STILL HAVE THE FLOOR. UM, I'M NOT INTERESTED IN ANOTHER MODEL. THIS MODEL IS INSANE ENOUGH AS IT IS. AND I, I REALLY JUST THINK IT'S JUST PLUGGING THINGS IN TO FORMULA, INTO ALGORITHMS THAT THEN SHOOT OUT THESE FEES. AND SO I DON'T, I'M NOT INTERESTED IN EXPLORING WHAT OTHER MODELS WOULD BE. I, I DON'T SEE FOR, FOR JUST INSTEAD, I THINK THERE HAS TO BE OTHER WAYS TO INCENTIVIZE, UM, SMALLER UNITS. NOW, IS THERE, IS IT POSSIBLE, AND I GUESS IT IS POSSIBLE 'CAUSE THE DIGA PERMITS IT FOR US TO WAIVE [04:45:01] DIFF FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING, RIGHT? OR DOES IT HAVE TO BE APPLIED? DON'T WE PAY? YEAH, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, WE CAN'T WAIVE ANY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. WE HAVE TO, THEY PAY THEM. YEAH. BUT WE COULD PAY. AND SO I THINK THAT'S CAN PAY EM ON BEHALF OF THE DEVELOPER IN THAT CASE. YEAH. SO THEY CAN'T BE WAIVED. BUT I THINK, I MEAN, I THINK THAT'S A WAY THAT WE HAVE THAT WE CAN DO IT. AND I THINK WE SHOULD, WE SHOULD LOOK AT WAYS WE CAN DO IT. NOW, I THINK THIS IS A, THIS IS, THIS IS WRITTEN IN STONE, YOU KNOW, I THINK WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AS THIS IS THE WAY IT'S DONE AND WHAT DO WE WANNA DO WITH THE WAY IT'S, HOW DO WE WANNA APPLY IT? THANK YOU MAYOR. I, I SUSPECT THAT IF WE TRIED TO SHIFT TO ONE OF THE OTHER MODELS, WE STILL COULDN'T VARY WITHIN A CATEGORY TYPE. THAT'S CORRECT. YEAH. SO I'M NOT SURE WE COULD GET THERE. UH, ONE, UH, COMMENT I WANTED TO MAKE TO CITY MANAGER WHEN WE LOOK AT THE, UM, OTHER VERDE VALLEY CITIES IS WE PROBABLY SHOULD ALSO ASK WHEN THEY'RE DUE TO CHANGE THEIRS. . YEAH. WE CAN SURVEY THEM. UM, I GUESS ONE FINAL COMMENT IS, UM, THE APPROACH I'VE SEEN IN OTHER PLACES I'VE WORKED IS THE, UH, MODEL IS ADOPTED WITH THE FEE STRUCTURE. THIS IS WHAT THE, UM, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT HERE, IT'S D OTHER PLACES, IT'S SYSTEM IMPACT CHARGES, WHATEVER. AND THEN OUTSIDE OF THIS, THE COUNCIL WOULD HAVE A SEPARATE POLICY AROUND FOR THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS. THE CITY IS WILLING TO PAY IT, AS KURT SAID, ON BEHALF OF THE DEVELOPER IN ORDER TO KEEP THE INTEGRITY OF THE MODEL AND THE FUNDING IN TACT AND NOT, YOU KNOW, SHORTCHANGE THAT, UM, ABILITY OF THE CITY TO COMPLETE THE PROJECTS THAT ARE REQUIRED BECAUSE OF THE NEW GROWTH. UM, SO YOU COULD USE OTHER DISCRETIONARY DOLLARS TO PAY ON BEHALF TO SUBSIDIZE, SO TO SPEAK, THIS COST FOR THE DEVELOPER IF IT'S ACHIEVING SOME POLICY OBJECTIVE FOR YOU. UM, OKAY. BUT IT'S OUTSIDE OF TWEAKING THE MODEL. YOU DON'T TWEAK THE MODEL TO CREATE THE INCENTIVE, I GUESS IS HOW I'VE SEEN IT. ALRIGHT. UH, JUST, OH YES, MELISSA, I'M SORRY. THAT'S OKAY. IT'S JUST A, SO JUST A LITTLE COMMENT. WHEN I'VE BEEN LISTENING TO EVERYBODY TALKING ABOUT HOW WE SHOULD CANVAS THE REST OF THE VERDE VALLEY AND SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING IS THEY DON'T GET THE IMPACTS THAT WE GET ON DAY TRIPPERS. THEY DON'T GET THE IMPACTS THAT WE GET ON VISITORS. THEY DON'T QUITE HAVE THE IMPACTS THAT WE HAVE ON OUR SERVICES. UM, THERE ARE, BECAUSE WE'RE NOT ABLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN STR AND A HOUSE WHEN WE, WHEN IT'S BEING BUILT BECAUSE WE HAVE OTHER WAYS WE'RE NOT ABLE TO DISTINGUISH ABOUT THE IMPACTS OF THESE PEOPLE COMING IN, UM, AND USING OUR FACILITIES, CALLING OUR POLICE, UM, ALL THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. I JUST WANT TO SORT OF LAY A LITTLE CAVEAT IN PEOPLE'S MINDS THAT THOSE THINGS IMPACT OUR COSTS. UM, AND WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO RECOVER THOSE COSTS IN, IN SOME WAY. AND OTHER CITIES MAY NOT HAVE THOSE KINDS OF COSTS NOR PROVIDE THE SAME LEVEL OF SERVICE AROUND PERCENTAGE OF PAVED ROADS THAT ARE MAINTAINED THE WAY OURS ARE MAINTAINED OR THE LEVEL OF POLICE RESPONSE OR WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE. SO JUST SORT OF TO KEEP IN PEOPLE'S MINDS WHEN WE START TO GET THIS STUFF BACK IN, WE'RE KIND OF DIFFERENT THAN MANY OF THE, UM, NEIGHBORING COMMUNITIES. AND, AND I THINK I UNDERSTAND THAT AND I AGREE WITH THAT, BUT OUR RESIDENTS KEEP SAYING, OH, WE ARE NEGATIVELY IMPACTED BY THOSE TOURISTS THAT COME HERE AND NOW THEY WOULD BE PAYING MORE TO BUILD A HOUSE HERE. WHILE THOSE TOURISTS DON'T AND THEY CAN'T, I MEAN, THERE'S NO WAY FOR US TO, YOU KNOW, ALL THAT, ALL THOSE IMPACTS, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S ON THE SHOULDERS OF THE RESIDENTS HERE. WELL THAT'S, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU DIFFERENTIATE. I'M JUST WELL, THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE PROBLEM IS YOU CANNOT DIFFERENTIATE AND IT'S FOR NEW BUILDINGS. SO THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ALREADY RESIDENTS HERE AREN'T PAYING THOSE FEES UNLESS THEY TEAR THEIR HOME DOWN AND BUILD A MCMANSION. I THINK THAT WAS THE TERM THAT WAS USED. AND IN WHICH CASE THEY ARE GONNA USE MORE FACILITIES OR THEY ARE INCREASING IT. SO I, I JUST, I JUST FEEL LIKE, LET'S BE CAREFUL NOT TO COMPARE OURSELVES NECESSARILY TO SOME OF OUR NEIGHBORS. THAT'S ALL. I I GET IT. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT. UH, THIS IS FOR INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. THERE'S NO VOTE. SO, UM, AND THAT YOU, DID YOU HAVE ANY FINAL COMMENT? UH, NO. UH, I THINK WE'VE HEARD, [04:50:01] UM, YOUR FEEDBACK AND I THINK WHAT I'LL DO IS WORK WITH JOANNE TO, UM, TENTATIVELY SCHEDULE A THIRD DISCUSSION ON THIS WITHIN THAT 60 DAY WINDOW. UM, ASSUMING THAT WHEN YOU HAVE THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING, YOU MAY NOT HAVE A FINAL DECISION, BUT GOOD. OKAY. IT COULD GOOD. AND THAT WILL SHIFT EVERYTHING LATER. CORRECT? IT'LL ADJUST THE WHOLE SCHEDULE BECAUSE EACH ONE HAS A TIMELINE THAT BUILDS ON THE NEXT, BUT THE ELECTION THE, WE'RE DOING, UH, JUST NOW, THAT'LL BE FAST. OKAY. OKAY. UM, SO LET'S, THANK YOU BEN. BEN, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO, UH, ITEM D NOW. I UNDERSTAND THEY, THEY CAN KEEP IT DOWN TO LESS THAN THREE HOURS, CARRIE. OKAY. UH, ITEM [8.d. AB 3081 Public hearing/possible action regarding proposed revisions to the Sedona Land Development Code. The proposed revisions include revisions to the Urban Agriculture Section (LDC Section 3.4.D(2)) to comply with recently adopted state legislation and a change to purpose statements of the M1 and M2 districts (LDC Sections 2.11.A & 2.12.A) to accurately reflect the permitted uses. Case Number: PZ24-00007 (LDC) Applicant: City of Sedona. ] D, AB 30 81 PUBLIC HEARING POSSIBLE ACTION. UH, REGARDING PROPOSED VISIONS TO THE SEDONA LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THE PROPOSED REVISIONS INCLUDE REVISIONS TO THE URBAN AGRICULTURE SECTION LDC, SECTION 3.4, UH, POINT D TWO TO COMPLY WITH RECENTLY ADOPTED STATE LEGISLATION AND THE CHANGE SHE PROPOSED, UH, TO, UH, PROPOSED STATEMENTS OF THE M1 AND M TWO DISTRICT LDC SECTIONS 2.1 A AND TWO POINT 12 A TO, UH, ACCURATELY REFLECT THE PERMITTED USES. YOU DONE, I, I WAS GONNA SAY I THINK THE MAYOR JUST GAVE MY PRESENTATION. . YEP. UM, THESE ARE FAIRLY SIMPLE, HOPEFULLY CHANGES TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO UPDATE OUR URBAN AGRICULTURE CHICKEN SECTION TO MATCH STATE LAW AND THEN TO UPDATE SOME PURPOSE STATEMENTS IN THE, IN A COUPLE MIXED USE ZONES TO REFLECT SOME OF THE USE CHANGES THAT WERE MADE LAST YEAR. AND DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION, BUT I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. AND THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING PETE QUESTION. YEAH. THANK YOU MAYOR. TWO, JUST TWO QUESTIONS REALLY. THEY WERE QUESTIONS THAT I HEARD IN THE PNZ SESSION AND I DON'T KNOW THAT I HEARD AN ANSWER THERE. OKAY. MAYBE IT'S 'CAUSE I MISSED IT, BUT I KNOW THAT ONE OF THE COMMISSIONERS ASK ABOUT WAS THERE A CHANGE TO ROOSTERS? DO WE DO REGULATE ROOSTERS IN OUR CODES? NO ROOSTERS, NO ROOSTERS. NO ROOSTERS. AND THERE WAS NO CHANGE IN THE STATE LAW REGARDING THAT. THE STATE LAW SAYS WE CAN STILL SAY NO ROOSTERS, SO WE ARE STILL SAYING NO ROOSTERS. GREAT. AND THEN THE SECOND QUESTION WAS REALLY ABOUT, YOU KNOW, POTENTIAL INNOVATIVE THINGS THAT MIGHT COME AND MAKE OUR CITY COOLER, WHICH MIGHT LOOK LIKE A RESTAURANT WITH SOME LODGING ABOVE THAT MIGHT BE WANT TO BE CLOSE TO A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD OR IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. HOW WOULD WE HANDLE THAT IF A DEVELOPER WALKED INTO YOU TODAY TO SAY, HEY, I'VE GOT THIS GREAT THING, I WANNA HAVE A RESTAURANT WITH SOME LODGING ABOVE AND PUT IT CLOSER TO A NEIGHBORHOOD. SO WE PROBABLY, WELL, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO THAT WITHOUT A ZONE CHANGE. IF THEY WERE GONNA CALL IT LODGING, THEY COULD DO A RESTAURANT WITH A COUPLE APARTMENTS ABOVE IT. UM, AND IF THEY FALL UNDER THE STATE STATUTES FOR NUMBER OF UNITS ON A PROPERTY, THEY WOULD HAVE A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBILITY IN HOW THEY RENT THOSE. IF THEY WANTED TO DO A RESTAURANT WITH TWO APARTMENTS AND THAT'S THE ONLY, YEAH. NOT APARTMENTS, BUT IT'S ACTUALLY A SHORT TERM WHATEVER LODGING FOR GUESTS THAT MIGHT DO IT. YEAH. SHORT TERM RENTAL REALLY, OR LODGING. THEY COULD BUILD A COUPLE STUDIO APARTMENTS IS THEY WOULD NEED TO HAVE A ZONE CHANGE. THEY COULD COME TO US AND ASK FOR A ZONE CHANGE. SO IF THEY WERE GOING TO STAY IN THEIR M TWO DESIGN, WE ACTUALLY DON'T HAVE ANY PROPERTIES THAT ARE CURRENTLY ZONED M1, WHICH IS ONE OF THE DISTRICTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT. RIGHT. UM, SO IF THERE WAS A PROPERTY THAT WAS ZONED M TWO, THEY COULD BUILD A RESTAURANT WITH A COUPLE APARTMENTS ABOVE IT. UM, APARTMENTS ARE PERMITTED USES IT WOULD NEED TO HAVE A FULL DWELLING FACILITIES, A KITCHEN, BATHROOM, ALL OF THAT. UM, OR IF THEY WANTED TO DO A TRUE LODGING PROJECT, IT WOULD NEED TO BE A ZONE CHANGE. THANK YOU. THANK MAYOR. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? A MOTION? NO, THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. PUBLIC HEARING. AH, DO WE HAVE ANY CARDS? WE DO NOT MAYOR, BUT WE STILL NEED TO OPEN AND THEN CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. OKAY. WE CAN OPEN A PUBLIC HEARING. I KNOW THAT. AND THANK YOU. AND CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING, SEAN, NO CARD. RIGHT. WE ALREADY CLOSED IT. OKAY. UM, SO NOW DO I HAVE A MOTION? SURE. OKAY, I'LL MAKE A MOTION. OKAY. I MOVE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION, EXCUSE ME. 2024 DASH 1919 ESTABLISHING AS A PUBLIC RECORD EXHIBIT A AUGUST 13TH, 2024 PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONS. [04:55:04] OKAY, SECOND. SECOND. OKAY. UH, ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. FIRST READING, SORRY MAYOR AND COUNCIL, THAT'S AN OVERSIGHT. WE DON'T DO FIRST READINGS ANYMORE AND THIS IS THE SECOND OH, UH, PUBLIC MEETING ON THIS ORDINANCE. SO YOU'RE READY TO MAKE A MOTION. I'M JUST GOING BY THE SCRIPT. I MOVE TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2024 DASH FOUR FOUR CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVAL CRITERIA IN SECTION 8.6 POINT C FOUR OF THE LDC AMENDING THE LDC ADOPTING BY REFERENCE THAT DOCUMENT KNOWN AS EXHIBIT A, AUGUST 13TH, 2024, PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REVISIONS PROVIDING FOR A SAVINGS CLAUSE AND REPEALING ALL ORDINANCES OR PORTS OF ORDINANCES OR CODE PROVISIONS IN CONFLICT HEREWITH. OKAY. SECOND, SECOND. COUNCIL DUN ON THE SECOND. UH, ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NO, NONE. OKAY, THANK YOU. UH, WE'RE DOWN TO ONE TWO ACTUALLY. LET'S TRY TO DO, CAN WE DO THE, UM, ITEM F APPROVING THE CANVAS? JOE, THAT COULD BE QUICK, RIGHT? UH, HOPE SO. OKAY. OKAY. ITEM F [8.f. AB 3097 Discussion/possible action regarding a Resolution approving the canvass of the City's Primary Election held on July 30, 2024.] UH, 30 AND, UH, 97. DISCUSSION, UH, POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING A RESOLUTION APPROVING THE CANVAS FOR THE CITY'S PRIMARY ELECTION HELD ON JULY 30TH, MADAM CLERK? SURE. ALRIGHT. UM, THE PRIMARY ELECTION WAS HELD, UH, JULY 30TH, 2024. UM, AND THEN THE RESULTS, THE FINAL RESULTS, THE NUMBER OF BALLOTS CAST FOR YAVAPAI COUNTY WAS 2,236 AND 948 COCONINO COUNTY FOR A TOTAL OF 31 84. UH, THE RESULTS FOR THE MAYOR WERE AS FOLLOWS, UH, SCOTT JALO WITH 1,712 VOTES AND JOHN MARTINEZ WITH 1,448. AND THE WRITE-IN VOTES, UM, WERE FOUR. AND THE NON-QUALIFIED ON THAT MEANS THAT THEY ARE NOT, THEY WERE NOT, UM, QUALIFIED CAN, UH, MM-HMM. WRITING CANDIDATES, UH, COUNSELOR THE RESULTS FOR COUNSELORS FOR A FOUR YEAR TERM. UM, KATHY KINSELLA RECEIVED 1,929 CATHERINE TODD RECEIVED 1,393 VOTES. DEREK PAFF RECEIVED 2046 VOTES. HOLLY PLU RECEIVED 2,133 VOTES, AND THE WRITE-IN VOTES, UH, WERE A TOTAL OF SIX. UH, THE PROPOSITION 4 81 FOR THE 25 YEAR FRANCHISE AGREEMENT, UH, GRANTED TO THE ARIZONA WATER COMPANY WAS SUCCESSFUL, UH, WITH A 2,597 VOTES YES VOTES. AND A TOTAL OF 2,579. YES. SORRY. 2,579. IT IS CLOSE TO 10 O'CLOCK, SORRY. UM, AND A TOTAL OF 399 NO VOTES. SO WITH THAT SAID, UM, THE CANDIDATES, THE FOUR CANDIDATES, MAYOR AND THREE COUNSELORS, UM, THAT DID RECEIVE AN ADEQUATE NUMBER OF VOTES, UM, ARE SCOTT JALO AS MAYOR. UM, THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED VOTES IS 1,582. UM, AND HE EXCEEDED THAT. AND THEN FOR COUNSELORS, THE RE AMOUNT OF VOTES REQUIRED WAS 1,252. UM, KATHY KINSELLA, DEREK PAFF AND HOLLY FLUG RECEIVED THAT ALSO AS STATED IN THE AGENDA BILL THAT, UM, CATHERINE TODD DID RECEIVE, UM, THE NUMBER OF VOTES THAT, THE ADEQUATE NUMBER OF VOTES, BUT SHE DID NOT RECEIVE THE MAJORITY, UM, NUMBER OF VOTES. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? ANY COMMENTS? OKAY, I'LL SIGN THIS TOMORROW. WE DO, WE HAVE TO, WE DON'T HAVE TO, WE HAVE TO MAKE A MOTION. MOTION. IS THERE A MOTION? I'M NOT SEEING A MOTION ON THIS. MAKE, MAKE THE MOTION BECAUSE I DON GONNA MAKE, HAVE ANY I MOVE TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NUMBER 2024. 2020 20. YES. 20. OKAY. I APPROVE. RESOLUTION NUMBER 20 24 20 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR [05:00:01] AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEDONA, ARIZONA, DECLARING AND ADOPTING THE RESULTS OF THE PRIMARY ELECTION HELD ON JUNE 30TH, 2023. JULY 30TH, JULY 30TH, 2024. THANK YOU. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NONE. OKAY. UH, AND MAY I PLEASE ASK WHO SECONDED THAT? BRIAN. BRIAN? YES. THANK YOU. OKAY. THE BIGGEST ITEM [8.g. AB 3066 Discussion/possible action regarding future meeting/agenda items. ] OF THE NIGHT. ITEM G AB 30 66. DISCUSSION, POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING FUTURE MEETING AGENDA ITEMS. ARE THERE ANY YES. OKAY. KATHY? YES. UM, SO I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE WHAT I SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER. UH, I KNOW WHEN WE'RE GONNA HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THE FUTURE OF THE ACT GRADE CROSSING AT 1 79. NOW THAT THE, UM, UNDERPASS WILL IS OPERATIONAL, I WANNA MAKE SURE WE HAVE A SPECIFIC DISCUSSION OF THAT TOPIC. SO, UH, COUNSELOR GONZAL, DO YOU MEAN SEPARATE FROM THE SIM UPDATE THAT'S HAPPENING? LIKE A STANDALONE? I DON'T WANT IT TO BE LOST IN THE, THE SIM USUALLY IS VERY EXTENSIVE AND COVERS A LOT, AND IT DEPENDS ON WHAT WE'RE DOING IN THERE. I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT THIS ITEM IS VERY SPECIFICALLY DISCUSSED. SO IF THAT SHOULD BE DONE WITHIN THE SIM OR SEPARATELY, UH, I NEED YOUR FEEDBACK TO UNDERSTAND IF WE WILL GIVE ENOUGH TIME. AND THAT'S UP TO THE COUNCIL IF YOU WANT IT TO BE A STANDALONE ON A DIFFERENT NIGHT OR SOMETHING COMPARED TO, UH, MAKING SURE THAT SPECIFICALLY CALLED OUT IN THE SIM UPDATE WE ALREADY HAVE SCHEDULED. YEAH. UH, I GUESS BECAUSE I WANT TO KNOW WHAT EXACTLY WHAT, UM, STATE DOT'S POSITION IS GOING TO BE ON IT AT THAT POINT WHEN WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION TALKING ABOUT THE CLOSURE OF THE, OF THE , THE CLOSURE OF THE CRA CROSSING ON 1 79. OKAY. SO IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO, UH, I DON'T KNOW BRIAN. YES, I MEAN, MY QUESTION IS, IS IT NOT ADEQUATE THOUGH THAT WE'RE JUST GIVING DIRECTION TO STAFF THAT IT WILL BE DISTINCTLY THAT'S FINE. YOU KNOW, CALLED OUT AS AN ITEM DURING THAT REVIEW IN OCTOBER DURING THE SAME REVIEW? YEAH. IS IS THAT ADEQUATE AS FAR AS IS PROVIDING DIRECTION? YEAH, IT'S FINE FOR ME. THAT'S FINE. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I WAS CLEAR THAT IT WASN'T A SEPARATE THING ON A EVENING MEETING. I JUST, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S GONNA GONNA BE EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION ON THAT SO WE HAVE ALL THE BACKUP INFORMATION SO IT JUST DOESN'T GET LOST IN A, IN A LAUNDRY LIST OF THE ITEMS WE'RE DISCUSSING. UH, WE'RE GONNA, I THINK WE'RE GONNA WANNA DISCUSS THAT PRETTY, UM, DEEPLY. GOT IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. AND WE ALSO HAVE THIS, UH, DISCUSSION OF THE FUTURE MEETING SCHEDULED ON TOMORROW'S AGENDA. SO IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE DISCUSSING TOPICS TOMORROW AS WELL, THAT'S FINE TOO. RIGHT. OKAY. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO DO IT TONIGHT. [10. ADJOURNMENT] DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. WELL, WE CONVENE TOMORROW. THREE O'CLOCK . WOW. WE DID IT CLOSE. ANYWAY. HARD STOP, SIR. * This transcript was created by voice-to-text technology. The transcript has not been edited for errors or omissions, it is for reference only and is not the official minutes of the meeting.