The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About150917P z:\council packets\2015\r150917\150917a.docx Last Printed: 9/10/2015 3:07 PM Page 1 of 4 NOTICE OF THE EXECUTIVE AND REGULAR SESSIONS OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL TIME: 5:30 P.M. – EXECUTIVE SESSION (Executive Session will be held in the Fountain Conference Room - 2nd floor) 6:30 P.M. – REGULAR SESSION WHEN: THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 WHERE: FOUNTAIN HILLS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 16705 E. AVENUE OF THE FOUNTAINS, FOUNTAIN HILLS, AZ Councilmembers of the Town of Fountain Hills will attend either in person or by telephone conference call; a quorum of the Town’s various Commission, Committee or Board members may be in attendance at the Council meeting. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to A.R.S. § 1-602.A.9, subject to certain specified statutory exceptions, parents have a right to consent before the State or any of its political subdivisions make a video or audio recording of a minor child. Meetings of the Town Council are audio and/or video recorded and, as a result, proceedings in which children are present may be subject to such recording. Parents, in order to exercise their rights may either file written consent with the Town Clerk to such recording, or take personal action to ensure that their child or children are not present when a recording may be made. If a child is present at the time a recording is made, the Town will assume that the rights afforded parents pursuant to A.R.S. § 1-602.A.9 have been waived. PROCEDURE FOR ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL Anyone wishing to speak before the Council must fill out a speaker’s card and submit it to the Town Clerk prior to Council discussion of that Agenda item. Speaker Cards are located in the Council Chamber Lobby and near the Clerk’s position on the dais. Speakers will be called in the order in which the speaker cards were received either by the Clerk or the Mayor. At that time, speakers should stand and approach the podium. Speakers are asked to state their name and whether or not they reside in Fountain Hills (do not provide a home address) prior to commenting and to direct their comments to the Presiding Officer and not to individual Councilmembers. Speakers’ statements should not be repetitive. If a speaker chooses not to speak when called, the speaker will be deemed to have waived his or her opportunity to speak on the matter. Speakers may not (i) reserve a portion of their time for a later time or (ii) transfer any portion of their time to another speaker. If there is a Public Hearing, please submit the speaker card to speak to that issue during the Public Hearing. Individual speakers will be allowed three contiguous minutes to address the Council. Time limits may be waived by (i) discretion of the Town Manager upon request by the speaker not less than 24 hours prior to a Meeting, (ii) consensus of the Council at Meeting or (iii) the Mayor either prior to or during a Meeting. Please be respectful when making your comments. If you do not comply with these rules, you will be asked to leave. Mayor Linda M. Kavanagh Vice Mayor Dennis Brown Councilmember Henry Leger Councilmember Nick DePorter Councilmember Alan Magazine Councilmember Cassie Hansen Councilmember Cecil A. Yates z:\council packets\2015\r150917\150917a.docx Last Printed: 9/10/2015 3:07 PM Page 2 of 4 EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA  CALL TO ORDER – Mayor Linda M. Kavanagh 1. ROLL CALL AND VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pursuant to: (i) A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3), Discussion or consultation for legal advice with the attorney or attorneys of the public body (specifically, imposition of various fees). 2. ADJOURNMENT. REGULAR SESSION AGENDA  CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Linda M. Kavanagh  INVOCATION – Dr. Cathy Northrup, Community Church of the Verdes  ROLL CALL – Mayor Linda M. Kavanagh  MAYOR’S REPORT i) The Mayor will read a PROCLAMATION declaring September 17 – 23, 2015, as Constitution Week in the Town of Fountain Hills.  SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES/PRESENTATIONS i) Mayor Kavanagh may review RECENT EVENTS attended relating to Economic Development. i) Councilmember DePorter to provide an update regarding the August 28th, 2016, Greater Phoenix Economic Council (GPEC) Ambassador Event - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND GPEC 101. ii) Fiscal Year 2014-15 ECONOMIC UPDATE by Economic Development Specialist Scott Cooper. ii) Update by Jackie Miles, President of the FOUNTAIN HILLS’ SISTER CITIES ASSOCIATION, regarding recent activities. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431-01(H), public comment is permitted (not required) on matters not listed on the agenda. Any such comment (i) must be within the jurisdiction of the Council and (ii) is subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. The Council will not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during “Call to the Public” unless the matters are properly noticed for discussion and legal action. At the conclusion of the call to the public, individual Councilmembers may (i) respond to criticism, (ii) ask staff to review a matter or (iii) ask that the matter be placed on a future Council agenda. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS All items listed on the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine, non-controversial matters and will be enacted by one motion and one roll call vote of the Council. All motions and subsequent approvals of consent items will include all recommended staff stipulations unless otherwise stated. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or member of the public so requests. If a Councilmember or member of the public wishes to discuss an item on the consent agenda, he/she may request so prior to the motion to accept the Consent Agenda or with notification to the Town Manager or Mayor prior to the date of the meeting for which the item was scheduled. The items will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Agenda. z:\council packets\2015\r150917\150917a.docx Last Printed: 9/10/2015 3:07 PM Page 3 of 4 1. CONSIDERATION of approving the TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES from September 3, 2015. 2. CONSIDERATION of approving a SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION for the American Legion Post #58 (Robert Putnam) to be held in conjunction with the annual Fountain Hills Art Festival held November 13- 15, 2015, from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Liquor sales will be restricted to 16837 E Parkview Ave., Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 3. CONSIDERATION of approving a SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION for the River of Time Museum (Jean Linzer) to be held at the Fountain Hills Community Center on February 20, 2016, from 6:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. 4. CONSIDERATION of RESOLUTION 2015-48, approving an intergovernmental agreement with the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation relating to Proposition 202 funding. 5. CONSIDERATION of approving a BUDGET TRANSFER, in the aggregate amount of $150,000, from two departments (Development Services and Community Services) to three departments (Mayor and Council, Administration, and the Municipal Court) to cover budget shortfalls from Fiscal Year 2014/15. 6. CONSIDERATION of approving a BUDGET TRANSFER, in the amount of $6,658.55, from the Special Revenue Fund to the Tourism Fund. 7. CONSIDERATION of RESOLUTION 2015-47, approving the revised Town of Fountain Hills 2015-16 Pay Plan. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 8. CONSIDERATION of appointing three (3) Planning and Zoning Commissioners for two (2) year terms beginning on October 1, 2015 until September 30, 2017. 9. DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF regarding creating a potential Sister Cities Commission. 10. CONSIDERATION of a CONTRACT with American Metering Services, Inc. d/b/a/ AMS Billing Services to implement the environmental fee, which was adopted by the Council on November 20, 2014. 11. DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF relating to LEAGUE RESOLUTIONS adopted by the 2015 Resolution Committee at their August 18, 2015 business meeting, which was held during the annual League of Arizona Cities and Towns Annual Conference, for possible support by the Fountain Hills Town Council. 12. COUNCIL DISCUSSION/DIRECTION to the Town Manager. Item(s) listed below are related only to the propriety of (i) placing such item(s) on a future agenda for action or (ii) directing staff to conduct further research and report back to the Council: i.) None. z:\council packets\2015\r150917\150917a.docx Last Printed: 9/10/2015 3:07 PM Page 4 of 4 13. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL REQUESTS and REPORT ON RECENT ACTIVITIES by the Mayor, Individual Councilmembers, and the Town Manager. 14. ADJOURNMENT. DATED this 10th day of September, 2015. Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk The Town of Fountain Hills endeavors to make all public meetings accessible to persons with disabilities. Please call 480-816- 5100 (voice) or 1-800-367-8939 (TDD) 48 hours prior to the meeting to request a reasonable accommodation to participate in this meeting or to obtain agenda information in large print format. Supporting documentation and staff reports furnished the Council with this agenda are available for review in the Clerk’s office. z:\council packets\2015\r150917\150917a.docx Last Printed: 9/10/2015 3:07 PM Page 1 of 4 NOTICE OF THE EXECUTIVE AND REGULAR SESSIONS OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL TIME: 5:30 P.M. – EXECUTIVE SESSION (Executive Session will be held in the Fountain Conference Room - 2nd floor) 6:30 P.M. – REGULAR SESSION WHEN: THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 WHERE: FOUNTAIN HILLS COUNCIL CHAMBERS 16705 E. AVENUE OF THE FOUNTAINS, FOUNTAIN HILLS, AZ Councilmembers of the Town of Fountain Hills will attend either in person or by telephone conference call; a quorum of the Town’s various Commission, Committee or Board members may be in attendance at the Council meeting. Notice is hereby given that pursuant to A.R.S. § 1-602.A.9, subject to certain specified statutory exceptions, parents have a right to consent before the State or any of its political subdivisions make a video or audio recording of a minor child. Meetings of the Town Council are audio and/or video recorded and, as a result, proceedings in which children are present may be subject to such recording. Parents, in order to exercise their rights may either file written consent with the Town Clerk to such recording, or take personal action to ensure that their child or children are not present when a recording may be made. If a child is present at the time a recording is made, the Town will assume that the rights afforded parents pursuant to A.R.S. § 1-602.A.9 have been waived. PROCEDURE FOR ADDRESSING THE COUNCIL Anyone wishing to speak before the Council must fill out a speaker’s card and submit it to the Town Clerk prior to Council discussion of that Agenda item. Speaker Cards are located in the Council Chamber Lobby and near the Clerk’s position on the dais. Speakers will be called in the order in which the speaker cards were received either by the Clerk or the Mayor. At that time, speakers should stand and approach the podium. Speakers are asked to state their name and whether or not they reside in Fountain Hills (do not provide a home address) prior to commenting and to direct their comments to the Presiding Officer and not to individual Councilmembers. Speakers’ statements should not be repetitive. If a speaker chooses not to speak when called, the speaker will be deemed to have waived his or her opportunity to speak on the matter. Speakers may not (i) reserve a portion of their time for a later time or (ii) transfer any portion of their time to another speaker. If there is a Public Hearing, please submit the speaker card to speak to that issue during the Public Hearing. Individual speakers will be allowed three contiguous minutes to address the Council. Time limits may be waived by (i) discretion of the Town Manager upon request by the speaker not less than 24 hours prior to a Meeting, (ii) consensus of the Council at Meeting or (iii) the Mayor either prior to or during a Meeting. Please be respectful when making your comments. If you do not comply with these rules, you will be asked to leave. Mayor Linda M. Kavanagh Vice Mayor Dennis Brown Councilmember Henry Leger Councilmember Nick DePorter Councilmember Alan Magazine Councilmember Cassie Hansen Councilmember Cecil A. Yates z:\council packets\2015\r150917\150917a.docx Last Printed: 9/10/2015 3:07 PM Page 2 of 4 EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA  CALL TO ORDER – Mayor Linda M. Kavanagh 1. ROLL CALL AND VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION: Pursuant to: (i) A.R.S. § 38-431.03(A)(3), Discussion or consultation for legal advice with the attorney or attorneys of the public body (specifically, imposition of various fees). 2. ADJOURNMENT. REGULAR SESSION AGENDA  CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE – Mayor Linda M. Kavanagh  INVOCATION – Dr. Cathy Northrup, Community Church of the Verdes  ROLL CALL – Mayor Linda M. Kavanagh  MAYOR’S REPORT i) The Mayor will read a PROCLAMATION declaring September 17 – 23, 2015, as Constitution Week in the Town of Fountain Hills.  SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES/PRESENTATIONS i) Mayor Kavanagh may review RECENT EVENTS attended relating to Economic Development. i) Councilmember DePorter to provide an update regarding the August 28th, 2016, Greater Phoenix Economic Council (GPEC) Ambassador Event - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND GPEC 101. ii) Fiscal Year 2014-15 ECONOMIC UPDATE by Economic Development Specialist Scott Cooper. ii) Update by Jackie Miles, President of the FOUNTAIN HILLS’ SISTER CITIES ASSOCIATION, regarding recent activities. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431-01(H), public comment is permitted (not required) on matters not listed on the agenda. Any such comment (i) must be within the jurisdiction of the Council and (ii) is subject to reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions. The Council will not discuss or take legal action on matters raised during “Call to the Public” unless the matters are properly noticed for discussion and legal action. At the conclusion of the call to the public, individual Councilmembers may (i) respond to criticism, (ii) ask staff to review a matter or (iii) ask that the matter be placed on a future Council agenda. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS All items listed on the Consent Agenda are considered to be routine, non-controversial matters and will be enacted by one motion and one roll call vote of the Council. All motions and subsequent approvals of consent items will include all recommended staff stipulations unless otherwise stated. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a Councilmember or member of the public so requests. If a Councilmember or member of the public wishes to discuss an item on the consent agenda, he/she may request so prior to the motion to accept the Consent Agenda or with notification to the Town Manager or Mayor prior to the date of the meeting for which the item was scheduled. The items will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the Agenda. z:\council packets\2015\r150917\150917a.docx Last Printed: 9/10/2015 3:07 PM Page 3 of 4 1. CONSIDERATION of approving the TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES from September 3, 2015. 2. CONSIDERATION of approving a SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION for the American Legion Post #58 (Robert Putnam) to be held in conjunction with the annual Fountain Hills Art Festival held November 13- 15, 2015, from 10:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Liquor sales will be restricted to 16837 E Parkview Ave., Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 3. CONSIDERATION of approving a SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION for the River of Time Museum (Jean Linzer) to be held at the Fountain Hills Community Center on February 20, 2016, from 6:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. 4. CONSIDERATION of RESOLUTION 2015-48, approving an intergovernmental agreement with the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation relating to Proposition 202 funding. 5. CONSIDERATION of approving a BUDGET TRANSFER, in the aggregate amount of $150,000, from two departments (Development Services and Community Services) to three departments (Mayor and Council, Administration, and the Municipal Court) to cover budget shortfalls from Fiscal Year 2014/15. 6. CONSIDERATION of approving a BUDGET TRANSFER, in the amount of $6,658.55, from the Special Revenue Fund to the Tourism Fund. 7. CONSIDERATION of RESOLUTION 2015-47, approving the revised Town of Fountain Hills 2015-16 Pay Plan. REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS 8. CONSIDERATION of appointing three (3) Planning and Zoning Commissioners for two (2) year terms beginning on October 1, 2015 until September 30, 2017. 9. DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF regarding creating a potential Sister Cities Commission. 10. CONSIDERATION of a CONTRACT with American Metering Services, Inc. d/b/a/ AMS Billing Services to implement the environmental fee, which was adopted by the Council on November 20, 2014. 11. DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF relating to LEAGUE RESOLUTIONS adopted by the 2015 Resolution Committee at their August 18, 2015 business meeting, which was held during the annual League of Arizona Cities and Towns Annual Conference, for possible support by the Fountain Hills Town Council. 12. COUNCIL DISCUSSION/DIRECTION to the Town Manager. Item(s) listed below are related only to the propriety of (i) placing such item(s) on a future agenda for action or (ii) directing staff to conduct further research and report back to the Council: i.) None. z:\council packets\2015\r150917\150917a.docx Last Printed: 9/10/2015 3:07 PM Page 4 of 4 13. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL REQUESTS and REPORT ON RECENT ACTIVITIES by the Mayor, Individual Councilmembers, and the Town Manager. 14. ADJOURNMENT. DATED this 10th day of September, 2015. Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk The Town of Fountain Hills endeavors to make all public meetings accessible to persons with disabilities. Please call 480-816- 5100 (voice) or 1-800-367-8939 (TDD) 48 hours prior to the meeting to request a reasonable accommodation to participate in this meeting or to obtain agenda information in large print format. Supporting documentation and staff reports furnished the Council with this agenda are available for review in the Clerk’s office. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT UPDATE Statewide Industry Report Arizona Commerce Authority Jobs Created – 18,314 Companies Supported by ACA Resources Applications - 446 Awards – 69 Capital Invested - $1.51B Attraction - $625.6M Expansion – $336.8M Regional Industry Report Greater Phoenix Economic Council Jobs Created – 6,281 Company Locates – 32 Capital Investment - $900M Lead Generation - Partners Total Direct Partner Generated Leads – 118 GPEC – 91 ACA – 27 Qualified Leads/Responses – 21 Active - 5 Business Attraction – Early Results Generated Active Leads Project Avatar Project Memory Project Auto Project Brew Project Stay Project Urgency Project Repeat Project Honor Project Treat Business Attraction Recent Projects Tractor Supply Company 10 new jobs (5 full time and 5 part time) $1.6M capital investment Kewpie Egg World Trading Company 2 new jobs Mayo Clinic IT/Administration 40+ employees with an economic impact of over $2M in annual payroll $400,000 capital investment Southwest Kidney Institute 6-9 new jobs $500,000 capital investment Opportunities Business Retention & Expansion Prevco Subsea Expansion Machine Shop Expansion Engineers Broker’s Alliance Workforce Development Job Growth Physical Expansion Opportunities Entrepreneurial Development JumpStartBiz Four local projects JanitorSite.com QuickFind Numbers Interim Public Management Wired Up Marketing Digital Postcard Marketing Updated FountainHillsED.org website Marketing Economic Development Networks Movoto.com NerdWallet Opportunities OVER 70 NEW JOBS OVER $2.5M CAPITAL INVESTMENT Totals Thank You vibrant economy • smart growth • quality of life • SCENIC BEAUTYARIZONA On the leading edge of the Phoenix Metropolitan area just 25 minutes from Sky Harbor International Airport, Fountain Hills is one of Arizona’s most livable communities. The Town offers multiple development opportunities along with easy access to major roadways as part of a strategic plan to insure a sustainable future for our community.The Town’s vision for the future, the Fountain Hills Economic Development Plan, is an ambitious plan for thoughtful, balanced, and sustainable development that focuses on:• Attracting companies that best match our labor force and build upon existing regional clusters• Strong relationships with our existing businesses• Building and encouraging entrepreneurial development• Organized and developer-driven infrastructure• Thoughtful management of environmental realitiesWe invite you to be a part of our plan and join this dynamic community of 23,000; home to an abundant and educated workforce, outdoor recreation, diverse population, award-winning schools, critically acclaimed theatre, and one of the world’s tallest fountains.Where metropolitan amenities and small-town livability actively connect so people can build partnerships for the good of the community and each other.For more information on Business Development opportunities in Fountain Hills, Arizona, please call the Town of Fountain Hills Economic Development Office at 480-816-5104 or visit our website at www.fountainhillsed.org16705 E. Ave of the FountainsFountain Hills, AZ 85268OPPORTUNITYVISIONFOUNTAIN HILLS, AZ Town of Fountain Hills PROCLAMATION Constitution Week 2015 WHEREAS,September 17,2015 marks the 228th anniversary of the drafting of the Constitution of the United States of America by the Constitutional Convention;and WHEREAS,it is fitting and proper to officially recognize this magnificent document and the anniversary of its creation;and WHEREAS,it is fitting and proper to officially recognize the patriotic celebrations which will commemorate the occasion; NOW,THEREFORE,I,Linda M.Kavanagh,Mayor of the Town of Fountain Hills,Arizona,do hereby proclaim September 17 through 23,2015 to be CONSTITUTION WEEK in Fountain Hills and hereby ask our citizens to reaffirm the ideals the Framers of the Constitution had in 1787. 7HiDATEDThis17m day of September,2015. YJUn^M^ inda M.Kavanagh,Mayor ATTEST: %J^JM Bevelyn J.Bender/Town Clerk^fr^XQ TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FORM Meeting Date:9/17/2015 Meeting Type:Regular Session Agenda Type:Consent Submitting Department:Administration Staff Contact Information:Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk;480-816-5115;bbender@fh.az.gov Council Goal: Strategic Values:Civic Responsibility C3 Solicitfeedback indecision-making REQUEST TO COUNCIL (Agenda Language):CONSIDERATION of approving the TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES from September 3,2015. Applicant:NA Applicant Contact Information: Property Location: Related Ordinance,Policy or Guiding Principle:A.R.S.§38-431.01 Staff Summary (background):The intent of approving previous meeting minutes is to ensure an accurate account of the discussion and action that took place at that meeting for archival purposes.Approved minutes are placed on the Town's website in compliance with state law. Risk Analysis (options or alternatives with implications): Fiscal Impact (initial and ongoing costs;budget status): Budget Reference (page number): Funding Source:NA If Multiple Funds utilized,list here: Budgeted;if No,attach Budget Adjustment Form:NA Recommendation(s)by Board(s)or Commission(s): Staff Recommendation(s):Approve List Attachment(s):None SUGGESTED MOTION (for Council use):Move to approve the consent agenda as listed Prepared by:Approved: 1..Vv^vAjU^ Bevelyn Bender,Town Clerk 9/8/2015 Grady E.Miller,To/fi Mtonager 9/8/2015 Page 1 of 1 redact redact redact redact redact redact redact redact redact redact redact redact TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FORM Meeting Date:9/17/2015 Meeting Type:Regular Session Agenda Type:Consent Submitting Department:Administration Staff Contact Information:Grady E. Miller,Town Manager,480-816-5107;gmiller@fh.az.gov Council Goal: Strategic Values:Not Applicable (NA)Not Applicable (NA) REQUEST TO COUNCIL (Agenda Language):CONSIDERATION of RESOLUTION 2015-48,approving an intergovernmental agreement with the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation relating to Proposition 202 funding. Applicant:NA Applicant Contact Information:NA Property Location:NA Related Ordinance,Policy or Guiding Principle:Section 12 of the Gaming Compact 2002 and A.R.S.§5- 601.02;Fountain Hills Resolution 2004-34 Staff Summary (background): Proposition 202 [Gaming Compact with the State of Arizona]was a ballot measure passed by the Arizona voters in the 2002 state general election and codified in A.R.S.§5-601.02.This legislation allows for distribution of funds to be solicited by cities,towns,and counties for their programs from Arizona Indian Tribes for government services that benefit the general public,which include public safety,mitigation of impacts of gaming,and the promotion of commerce and economic development. The Compact permits the Nation to allocate 12%of the fees it pays to the State to cities,towns,and counties in the State of Arizona. Many non-profits also request this funding as "pass through dollars" from cities,towns, and counties to support programs within their communities.Because the legislation required that the funds be solicited by a municipality or county,the Town Council approved Resolution 2004-34 on July 1,2004,which adopted the Town's policy and procedures relating to the Proposition 202 application process for the procurement of funds on behalf of various entities (i.e.as a pass through for funds).A copy of the policy has been provided for reference. The Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation has awarded a total of $50,000.00 for FY2015 to the Fountain Hills Unified School District. Risk Analysis (options or alternatives with implications):NA Fiscal Impact (initial and ongoing costs;budget status):NA Budget Reference (page number):NA Funding Source:NA IfMultiple Funds utilized,listhere: NA Page 1 of 2 2461246.1 RESOLUTION 2015-48 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, APPROVING AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE FORT MCDOWELL YAVAPAI NATION RELATING TO PROPOSITION 202 FUNDING. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS as follows: SECTION 1. The Intergovernmental Agreement between the Town of Fountain Hills and the Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation relating to Proposition 202 funding for promotion of tourism and other public programs (the “Agreement”) is hereby approved in substantially the form and substance attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2. The Mayor, the Town Manager, the Town Clerk and the Town Attorney are hereby authorized and directed to cause the execution of the Agreement and to take all steps necessary to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills, Arizona, September 17, 2015. FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO: Linda M. Kavanagh, Mayor Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk REVIEWED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Grady E. Miller, Town Manager Andrew J. McGuire, Town Attorney 2461246.1 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2015-48 [Intergovernmental Agreement] See following pages. Intergovernmental Agreement Between The Town ofFountain Hills and The Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation To Provide Funds for Government Services that Benefit the General Public In the Town ofFountain Hills And Surrounding Communities Pursuant To A Tribal Revenue Sharing Agreement Authorized By Section 12 Payment ofRegulatory Costs;Tribal Contributions Fort McDowell Yavapai Nation and State ofArizona Gaming Compact 2002, And A.R.S.§5-601.02 Fort McDowell,Arizona TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FORM Meeting Date:9/17/2015 Meeting Type:Regular Session Agenda Type:Consent Submitting Department:Administration Staff Contact Information:Craig Rudolphy,Finance Director,480-816-5162,crudolphy@fh.az.gov Strategic Planning Goal:Not Applicable (NA)Operational Priority:Not Applicable (NA) REQUEST TO COUNCIL (Agenda Language):CONSIDERATION of APPROVING a BUDGET TRANSFER in the aggregate amount of $150,000 from two Departments (Development Services and Community Services) to three Departments (Mayor & Council,Administration and Municipal Court) to cover budget shortfalls for Fiscal Year 14-15. Applicant: Applicant Contact Information: Property Location: Related Ordinance,Policy or Guiding Principle: Staff Summary (background):The Town's Financial Policy requires all budget transfers between and among Departments to be approved by Town Council. This request for a budget transfer will transfer budget authority from Departments that were under budget to those Departments which were over budget in FY14-15.The overall budget of the General Fund as approved by Council inthe amount of $13,903,466 was not exceeded. Despite these variances,the Town of Fountain Hills ended FY14-15 with a surplus of approximately $650,000 (unaudited). The Mayor &Council was over budget due to $5,000 in unanticipated legal fees.Administration was over budget due to additional funding of the debt service requirements for the Community Center.And the Municipal Court was over budget due to an error in the budgeting of the salary for the Presiding Judge. Risk Analysis (options or alternatives with implications): Without this budget transfer,the Town will show unfavorable budget variances in the audited financial statements of the Town. Fiscal Impact (initial and ongoing costs;budget status):None. Budget Reference (page number):pp 91,112 Funding Source:General Fund If Multiple Funds utilized,list here: Budgeted;if No,attach Budget Adjustment Form:Yes Recommendation(s)by Board(s)or Commission(s): Staff Recommendation(s):Approve List Attachment(s):Budget Transfer form Page 1 of 2 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS 09/15/2015 09:59 BBogdan CLERK:BBogdan TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS BUDGET AMENDMENT JOURNAL ENTRY PROOF YEAR PER JNL SRC ACCOUNT EFF DATE JNL DESC REF 1 REF 2 2016 3 17 BUA TOURAD-4401 09/08/2015 G5201 AOT GRANT BUA SRAD-4401 09/08/2015 G5201 AOT GRANT BUA SRAD-7010 09/08/2015 G5201 AOT GRANT BUA TOURAD-6410 09/08/2015 G5201 AOT GRANT APPROVED: MAYOR REF 3 ACCOUNT DESC LINE DESC GRANTS INCREASE TO MATCH G5201 GRANTS TRANSFER TO MATCH G5201 CONTINGENCY TRANSFER TO MATCH G5201 ADVERTISING/SIGNAGE INCREASE TO MATCH G5201 JOURNAL 2016/03/17 TOTAL DATE: T OB DEBIT 6,658.55 6,658.55 .00 P 2 |bgamdent CREDIT 6,658.55 6,658 .55 .00 2460533.1 RESOLUTION 2015-47 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, APPROVING THE REVISED TOWN 2015-16 PAY PLAN. WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills (the “Town Council”) approved Resolution No. 2015-15 on June 4, 2015, approving the Town of Fountain Hills 2015-16 Pay Plan (the “Pay Plan”); and WHEREAS, the Town Council desires to revise the Pay Plan to correct a scrivener’s error on the Non-Exempt Positons (the “Revised Pay Plan”). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS as follows: SECTION 1. The recitals above are hereby incorporated as if fully set forth herein. SECTION 2. The Town Council hereby approves the Revised Pay Plan in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 3. The Revised Pay Plan shall be effective as of July 1, 2015, and shall remain in effect for the 2015-16 Fiscal Year. SECTION 4. The Mayor, the Town Manager, the Town Clerk and the Town Attorney are hereby authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to carry out the purpose and intent of this Resolution. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills, September 17, 2015. FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO: Linda M. Kavanagh, Mayor Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk REVIEWED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Grady E. Miller, Town Manager Andrew J. McGuire, Town Attorney 2460533.1 EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION 2015-47 [Revised Pay Plan] See following pages. EXHIBIT A - 2015-16 PAY PLAN Adjusted by 2.5 Percent Position Title GIS Technician/CAD Operator 23.06 32.80 22.50 32.00 Traffic Signal Technician II 22.50 32.00 21.95 31.22 Civil Engineer Inspector 20.03 28.48 19.54 27.79 Code Enforcement Officer 18.80 26.73 18.34 26.08 Executive Assistant 18.80 26.73 18.34 26.08 Fleet Mechanic/Open Space-Landscape Specialist 18.34 26.08 17.89 25.44 Park Operations Lead 18.34 26.08 17.89 25.44 Facilities Maintenance Technician 16.97 24.14 16.56 23.55 Building Permit Technician 16.53 23.51 16.13 22.94 Senior Court Clerk 16.08 22.87 15.69 22.31 Street Maintenance Technician 16.08 22.87 15.69 22.31 Court Clerk 15.38 21.86 15.00 21.33 Financial Services Technician 15.38 21.86 15.00 21.33 Accounting Clerk 14.87 21.15 14.51 20.63 Customer Service Representative II 14.87 21.15 14.51 20.63 Senior Services Activities Coordinator 14.56 20.70 14.20 20.19 Lead Park Attendant 14.56 20.69 14.20 20.19 Customer Service Representative I 13.25 18.85 12.93 18.39 Home Delivered Meals Coordinator 12.97 18.44 12.65 17.99 Groundskeeper 12.97 18.44 12.65 17.99 Operations Support Worker 12.97 18.44 12.65 17.99 Custodian 11.98 17.04 11.69 16.62 Park Attendant 11.98 17.04 11.69 16.62 Senior Services Assistant 11.98 17.04 11.69 16.62 Non-Exempt Positions Previous RangeMinimumMaximum 8/25/2015 GEM EXHIBIT A - 2015-16 PAY PLAN Adjusted by 2.5 Percent Position Title Finance Director 85,406 121,456 83,323 118,494 Development Services Director 84,095 119,592 82,044 116,675 Town Engineer 80,842 114,965 78,870 112,161 Administrative Services Director 75,654 107,588 73,809 104,964 Community Services Director 75,361 107,171 73,523 104,557 Court Administrator 67,511 96,007 65,864 93,665 Town Clerk 62,062 88,258 60,548 86,105 Economic Development Specialist 60,336 85,804 58,864 83,711 Chief Building Offical/Plans Examiner 59,720 84,927 58,263 82,856 Street Superintendent 58,468 83,147 57,042 81,119 Senior Planner 58,227 82,805 56,807 80,785 Recreation Supervisor 54,229 77,119 52,906 75,238 Parks Supervisor 52,384 74,495 51,106 72,678 Information Technology Administrator 51,774 73,628 50,511 71,832 Facilities/Environmental Supervisor 50,936 72,437 49,694 70,670 Events and Operations Supervisor - Comm. Ctr.47,486 67,530 46,328 65,883 Executive Assistant to the Town Manager/Council 47,150 67,052 46,000 65,417 Senior Services Supervisor 45,225 64,315 44,122 62,746 Accountant 43,525 61,897 42,463 60,387 Recreation Program Coordinator 41,114 58,468 40,111 57,042 Tourism Coordinator 41,114 58,468 40,111 57,042 Volunteer Coordinator 41,114 58,468 32,635 46,410 Community Center Operations Coordinator 38,214 54,344 37,282 53,019 Exempt Positions Previous Range Minimum Maximum 8/25/2015 GEM TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FORM Meeting Date:9/17/2015 Meeting Type:Regular Session Agenda Type:Regular Submitting Department:Development Services Staff Contact Information:Robert Rodgers,Senior Planner:480-816-5138;rrodgers@fh.az.gov Strategic Planning Goal: CR4 Communications plan for civic involvement Operational Priority:Not Applicable (NA) REQUEST TO COUNCIL (Agenda Language):CONSIDERATION of appointing Three (3)Planning and Zoning Commissioners for two (2) terms beginning on October 1,2015 until September 30,2017. Applicant: Applicant Contact Information: Property Location: Related Ordinance,Policy or Guiding Principle:Council Rules of Procedure Staff Summary (background):On September 3, 2015,the Town Council Executive Subcommittee interviewed three (3)applicants requesting consideration to be appointed to serve on the Town of Fountain Hills Planning and Zoning Commission. The Appointed three (3)applicants will serve a term beginning October 1, 2015 until September 30,2017. Risk Analysis (options or alternatives with implications): Fiscal Impact (initial and ongoing costs;budget status): Budget Reference (page number): Funding Source:NA If Multiple Funds utilized,list here: Budgeted;if No,attach Budget Adjustment Form:NA Recommendation(s)by Board(s)or Commission(s):S Staff Recommendation(s):Subcommittee recommendations will be provided separately. List Attachment(s): SUGGESTED MOTION (for council use):Move to appoint ,,and to serve on the Town of Fountian Hills Planning and Zoning Commission for two year terms beginning October 1, 2015 until September 30,2017. Page 1 of 2 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FORM Meeting Date:9/17/2015 Meeting Type:Regular Session Agenda Type:Regular Submitting Department:Administration Staff Contact Information: Grady E,Miller,Town Manager Strategic Planning Goal:Not Applicable (NA)Operational Priority:Not Applicable (NA) REQUEST TO COUNCIL (Agenda Language):DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF regarding creating a potential Sister Cities Commission. Applicant:N/A Applicant Contact Information:N/A Property Location:N/A Related Ordinance,Policy or Guiding Principle:N/A Staff Summary (background):Recently,there has been a discussion with the Fountain Hills Sister City Association about the possibility ofthe Town of Fountain Hills forminga Sister Cities Commission. This is a commonpracticeofcitiesthroughoutthe countryto ensure the continuity and viability ofitssister city relationships. Since partnership agreements are signed bythe leaders of cities and towns and their sister cities, itis important that the Town of Fountain Hills maintain this commitmentforthe longterm.Currently,this is delegated bythe Town to the Fountain Hills Sister City Association.While the Fountain Hills Sister City Association has done an outstanding job of fundraising and overseeing the town's sister cities program,a sister city commission will help institutionalize this responsibility within the Townorganization and provide continuity in the event that the association were no longer able to do so. The proposed charge ofthe sister cities commission wouldbe to advise the Town Council on the sister city program,assist in organizing and hosting visiting sister city delegations,recommend the possible addition of a sister city,assist the Mayor and Council in ensuring cultural protocols are followed,and consider activities and events that promote and highlight the special relationship between the town and its sister cities. If the Town Council were to establish a commission,the Fountain Hills Sister Cities Association would continue to play an important role with the town's Sister Cities Program.The Association would continue to fundraise to help support the student exchanges and other sister cityactivities,assist the town inorganizing and hosting delegations,organize special events,and other sister city related programs and projects. It is envisioned that the membership of a proposed Sister City Commission would consist of a seven member advisory board that would include the president and a board member from the Fountain Hills Sister City Page 1 of 2 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL AGENDA ACTION FORM Meeting Date:9/17/2015 Meeting Type:Regular Session Agenda Type:Regular Submitting Department:Administration Staff Contact Information:Craig Rudolphy,Finance Director,480-816-5162,crudolphy@fh.az.gov Strategic Planning Goal:Not Applicable (NA)Operational Priority:Environmental Fee REQUEST TO COUNCIL (Agenda Language):CONSIDERATION ofa CONTRACT with American Metering Services, Inc.d/b/a AMS Billing Services,to implement the environmental fee adopted by Council on November 20, 2014. Applicant: Applicant Contact Information: Property Location: Related Ordinance,Policy or Guiding Principle: Staff Summary (background):At the November 20,2014,Council meeting,Council approved a $3.00 per month fee per parcel to offset the costs of an Environmental Program for the Town of Fountain Hills. A Request for Proposals (RFP)was prepared and released on May 27,2015.Only one response to the RFP was received.The response was reviewed by staff and found to meet the reqiurements of the RFP.The process will result in mailing one bill annually to each parcel owner in the Town,tentatively scheduled for January 2016. Risk Analysis (options or alternatives with implications):Many items included in the new Environmental Fund FY15-16 budget totaling $639,241 would not be able to be completed.The General Fund budget would need to diverted from existing programs to fund those programs in the Environmental Fund that are mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ)and the Arizona Department of Water Resources (ADWR). Fiscal Impact (initial and ongoing costs;budget status):$540,000 Budget Reference (page number):96;269-272 Funding Source:Multiple Funds ifMultiple Funds utilized,listhere:General Fund;Environmental Fund Budgeted;if No,attach Budget Adjustment Form:na Recommendation(s)by Board(s)or Commission(s): Staff Recommendation(s):Approve List Attachment(s):Professional Services Agreement;list of mandatory and recommended items Page 1 of 2 Contract No. 2016-108 2436189.1 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS AND AMERICAN METERING SERVICES, INC. D/B/A AMS BILLING SERVICES THIS PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT (this “Agreement”) is entered into as of September 17, 2015, between the Town of Fountain Hills, an Arizona municipal corporation (the “Town”), and American Metering Services, Inc., a Florida corporation, d/b/a AMS Billing Services (the “Consultant”). RECITALS A. The Town issued a Request for Proposals, Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Processing (the “RFP”), a copy of which is on file in the Town Clerk’s Office and incorporated herein by reference, seeking proposals from vendors to provide bill creation, printing, mailing, account monitoring and collection services (the “Services”). B. The Consultant responded to the RFP by submitting a proposal (the “Proposal”), attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference, and the Town desires to enter into an Agreement with the Consultant for the Services. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals, which are incorporated herein by reference, the following mutual covenants and conditions, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Town and the Consultant hereby agree as follows: 1. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective as of the date first set forth above and shall remain in full force and effect until August 5, 2016 (the “Initial Term”), unless terminated as otherwise provided in this Agreement. After the expiration of the Initial Term, this Agreement may be renewed for up to four successive one-year terms (each, a “Renewal Term”) if (i) it is deemed in the best interests of the Town, subject to availability and appropriation of funds for renewal in each subsequent year, (ii) at least 30 days prior to the end of the then-current term of the Agreement, the Consultant requests, in writing, to extend the Agreement for an additional one-year term and (iii) the Town approves the additional one-year term in writing (including any price adjustments approved as part of this Agreement), as evidenced by the Town Manager’s signature thereon, which approval may be withheld by the Town for any reason. The Consultant’s failure to seek a renewal of this Agreement shall cause the Agreement to terminate at the end of the then-current term of this Agreement; provided, however, that the Town may, at its discretion and with the agreement of the Consultant, elect to waive this requirement and renew this Agreement. The Initial Term and any Renewal Term(s) are collectively referred to herein as the “Term.” Upon renewal, the terms and conditions of this Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 2436189.1 2 2. Scope of Work. Consultant shall provide the Services as set forth in the Scope of Work, attached hereto as Exhibit B and incorporated herein by reference. 3. Compensation. The Town shall pay Consultant for the Initial Term and for each subsequent Renewal Term, if any, an annual aggregate amount not to exceed $85,000.00 for the Services at the rates set forth in the Fee Proposal, attached hereto as Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference. The maximum aggregate amount for this Agreement, including all Renewal Terms, shall not exceed $425,000.00. 4. Payments. The Town shall pay the Consultant monthly, based upon work performed and completed to date, and upon submission and approval of invoices. All invoices shall document and itemize all work completed to date. Each invoice statement shall include a record of time expended and work performed in sufficient detail to justify payment. The contract number must be referenced on all invoices. 5. Documents. All documents, including any intellectual property rights thereto, prepared and submitted to the Town pursuant to this Agreement shall be the property of the Town. 6. Consultant Personnel. Consultant shall provide adequate, experienced personnel, capable of and devoted to the successful performance of the Services under this Agreement. Consultant agrees to assign specific individuals to key positions. Consultant agrees that, upon commencement of the Services to be performed under this Agreement, key personnel shall not be removed or replaced without prior written notice to the Town. If key personnel are not available to perform the Services for a continuous period exceeding 30 calendar days, or are expected to devote substantially less effort to the Services than initially anticipated, Consultant shall immediately notify the Town of same and shall, subject to the concurrence of the Town, replace such personnel with personnel possessing substantially equal ability and qualifications. 7. Inspection; Acceptance. All work shall be subject to inspection and acceptance by the Town at reasonable times during Consultant’s performance. The Consultant shall provide and maintain a self-inspection system that is acceptable to the Town. 8. Licenses; Materials. Consultant shall maintain in current status all federal, state and local licenses and permits required for the operation of the business conducted by the Consultant. The Town has no obligation to provide Consultant, its employees or subcontractors any business registrations or licenses required to perform the specific services set forth in this Agreement. The Town has no obligation to provide tools, equipment or material to Consultant. 9. Performance Warranty. Consultant warrants that the Services rendered will conform to the requirements of this Agreement and to the highest professional standards in the field. 10. Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, the Consultant shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Town and each council member, officer, employee or agent thereof (the Town and any such person being herein called an “Indemnified Party”), for, from and against any and all losses, claims, damages, liabilities, costs and expenses (including, 2436189.1 3 but not limited to, reasonable attorneys’ fees, court costs and the costs of appellate proceedings) to which any such Indemnified Party may become subject, under any theory of liability whatsoever (“Claims”), insofar as such Claims (or actions in respect thereof) relate to, arise out of, or are caused by or based upon the negligent acts, intentional misconduct, errors, mistakes or omissions, in connection with the work or services of the Consultant, its officers, employees, agents, or any tier of subcontractor in the performance of this Agreement. The amount and type of insurance coverage requirements set forth below will in no way be construed as limiting the scope of the indemnity in this Section. 11. Insurance. 11.1 General. A. Insurer Qualifications. Without limiting any obligations or liabilities of Consultant, Consultant shall purchase and maintain, at its own expense, hereinafter stipulated minimum insurance with insurance companies authorized to do business in the State of Arizona pursuant to ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 20-206, as amended, with an AM Best, Inc. rating of A- or above with policies and forms satisfactory to the Town. Failure to maintain insurance as specified herein may result in termination of this Agreement at the Town’s option. B. No Representation of Coverage Adequacy. By requiring insurance herein, the Town does not represent that coverage and limits will be adequate to protect Consultant. The Town reserves the right to review any and all of the insurance policies and/or endorsements cited in this Agreement but has no obligation to do so. Failure to demand such evidence of full compliance with the insurance requirements set forth in this Agreement or failure to identify any insurance deficiency shall not relieve Consultant from, nor be construed or deemed a waiver of, its obligation to maintain the required insurance at all times during the performance of this Agreement. C. Additional Insured. All insurance coverage and self-insured retention or deductible portions, except Workers’ Compensation insurance and Professional Liability insurance, if applicable, shall name, to the fullest extent permitted by law for claims arising out of the performance of this Agreement, the Town, its agents, representatives, officers, directors, officials and employees as Additional Insured as specified under the respective coverage sections of this Agreement. D. Coverage Term. All insurance required herein shall be maintained in full force and effect until all work or services required to be performed under the terms of this Agreement are satisfactorily performed, completed and formally accepted by the Town, unless specified otherwise in this Agreement. E. Primary Insurance. Consultant’s insurance shall be primary insurance with respect to performance of this Agreement and in the protection of the Town as an Additional Insured. 2436189.1 4 F. Claims Made. In the event any insurance policies required by this Agreement are written on a “claims made” basis, coverage shall extend, either by keeping coverage in force or purchasing an extended reporting option, for three years past completion and acceptance of the services. Such continuing coverage shall be evidenced by submission of annual Certificates of Insurance citing applicable coverage is in force and contains the provisions as required herein for the three-year period. G. Waiver. All policies, except for Professional Liability, including Workers’ Compensation insurance, shall contain a waiver of rights of recovery (subrogation) against the Town, its agents, representatives, officials, officers and employees for any claims arising out of the work or services of Consultant. Consultant shall arrange to have such subrogation waivers incorporated into each policy via formal written endorsement thereto. H. Policy Deductibles and/or Self-Insured Retentions. The policies set forth in these requirements may provide coverage that contains deductibles or self- insured retention amounts. Such deductibles or self-insured retention shall not be applicable with respect to the policy limits provided to the Town. Consultant shall be solely responsible for any such deductible or self-insured retention amount. I. Use of Subcontractors. If any work under this Agreement is subcontracted in any way, Consultant shall execute written agreements with its subcontractors containing the indemnification provisions set forth in this Section and insurance requirements set forth herein protecting the Town and Consultant. Consultant shall be responsible for executing any agreements with its subcontractors and obtaining certificates of insurance verifying the insurance requirements. J. Evidence of Insurance. Prior to commencing any work or services under this Agreement, Consultant will provide the Town with suitable evidence of insurance in the form of certificates of insurance and a copy of the declaration page(s) of the insurance policies as required by this Agreement, issued by Consultant’s insurance insurer(s) as evidence that policies are placed with acceptable insurers as specified herein and provide the required coverages, conditions and limits of coverage specified in this Agreement and that such coverage and provisions are in full force and effect. Confidential information such as the policy premium may be redacted from the declaration page(s) of each insurance policy, provided that such redactions do not alter any of the information required by this Agreement. The Town shall reasonably rely upon the certificates of insurance and declaration page(s) of the insurance policies as evidence of coverage but such acceptance and reliance shall not waive or alter in any way the insurance requirements or obligations of this Agreement. If any of the policies required by this Agreement expire during the life of this Agreement, it shall be Consultant’s responsibility to forward renewal certificates and declaration page(s) to the Town 30 days prior to the expiration date. All certificates of insurance and declarations required by this Agreement shall be identified by referencing the RFP number and title or this Agreement. A $25.00 administrative fee shall be assessed for all certificates or declarations received without the appropriate RFP number and title or a reference to this Agreement, as applicable. Additionally, certificates of insurance and declaration page(s) of the 2436189.1 5 insurance policies submitted without referencing the appropriate RFP number and title or a reference to this Agreement, as applicable, will be subject to rejection and may be returned or discarded. Certificates of insurance and declaration page(s) shall specifically include the following provisions: (1) The Town, its agents, representatives, officers, directors, officials and employees are Additional Insureds as follows: (a) Commercial General Liability – Under Insurance Services Office, Inc., (“ISO”) Form CG 20 10 03 97 or equivalent. (b) Auto Liability – Under ISO Form CA 20 48 or equivalent. (c) Excess Liability – Follow Form to underlying insurance. (2) Consultant’s insurance shall be primary insurance as respects performance of the Agreement. (3) All policies, except for Professional Liability, including Workers’ Compensation, waive rights of recovery (subrogation) against Town, its agents, representatives, officers, officials and employees for any claims arising out of work or services performed by Consultant under this Agreement. (4) ACORD certificate of insurance form 25 (2014/01) is preferred. If ACORD certificate of insurance form 25 (2001/08) is used, the phrases in the cancellation provision “endeavor to” and “but failure to mail such notice shall impose no obligation or liability of any kind upon the company, its agents or representatives” shall be deleted. Certificate forms other than ACORD form shall have similar restrictive language deleted. 11.2 Required Insurance Coverage. A. Commercial General Liability. Consultant shall maintain “occurrence” form Commercial General Liability insurance with an unimpaired limit of not less than $1,000,000 for each occurrence, $2,000,000 Products and Completed Operations Annual Aggregate and a $2,000,000 General Aggregate Limit. The policy shall cover liability arising from premises, operations, independent contractors, products-completed operations, personal injury and advertising injury. Coverage under the policy will be at least as broad as ISO policy form CG 00 010 93 or equivalent thereof, including but not limited to, separation of insured’s clause. To the fullest extent allowed by law, for claims arising out of the performance of this Agreement, the Town, its agents, representatives, officers, officials and employees shall be cited as an Additional Insured under ISO, Commercial General Liability Additional Insured Endorsement form CG 20 10 03 97, or equivalent, which shall read “Who is an Insured (Section II) is amended to include as an insured the person or organization shown in the Schedule, but only with 2436189.1 6 respect to liability arising out of “your work” for that insured by or for you.” If any Excess insurance is utilized to fulfill the requirements of this subsection, such Excess insurance shall be “follow form” equal or broader in coverage scope than underlying insurance. B. Vehicle Liability. Consultant shall maintain Business Automobile Liability insurance with a limit of $1,000,000 each occurrence on Consultant’s owned, hired and non-owned vehicles assigned to or used in the performance of the Consultant’s work or services under this Agreement. Coverage will be at least as broad as ISO coverage code “1” “any auto” policy form CA 00 01 12 93 or equivalent thereof. To the fullest extent allowed by law, for claims arising out of the performance of this Agreement, the Town, its agents, representatives, officers, directors, officials and employees shall be cited as an Additional Insured under ISO Business Auto policy Designated Insured Endorsement form CA 20 48 or equivalent. If any Excess insurance is utilized to fulfill the requirements of this subsection, such Excess insurance shall be “follow form” equal or broader in coverage scope than underlying insurance. C. Professional Liability. If this Agreement is the subject of any professional services or work, or if the Consultant engages in any professional services or work adjunct or residual to performing the work under this Agreement, the Consultant shall maintain Professional Liability insurance covering negligent errors and omissions arising out of the Services performed by the Consultant, or anyone employed by the Consultant, or anyone for whose negligent acts, mistakes, errors and omissions the Consultant is legally liable, with an unimpaired liability insurance limit of $2,000,000 each claim and $2,000,000 annual aggregate. D. Workers’ Compensation Insurance. Consultant shall maintain Workers’ Compensation insurance to cover obligations imposed by federal and state statutes having jurisdiction over Consultant’s employees engaged in the performance of work or services under this Agreement and shall also maintain Employers Liability Insurance of not less than $500,000 for each accident, $500,000 disease for each employee and $1,000,000 disease policy limit. 11.3 Cancellation and Expiration Notice. Insurance required herein shall not expire, be canceled, or be materially changed without 30 days’ prior written notice to the Town. 12. Termination; Cancellation. 12.1 For Town’s Convenience. This Agreement is for the convenience of the Town and, as such, may be terminated without cause after receipt by Consultant of written notice by the Town. Upon termination for convenience, Consultant shall be paid for all undisputed services performed to the termination date. 12.2 For Cause. If either party fails to perform any obligation pursuant to this Agreement and such party fails to cure its nonperformance within 30 days after notice of nonperformance is given by the non-defaulting party, such party will be in default. In the event of such default, the non-defaulting party may terminate this Agreement immediately for cause 2436189.1 7 and will have all remedies that are available to it at law or in equity including, without limitation, the remedy of specific performance. If the nature of the defaulting party’s nonperformance is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within 30 days, then the defaulting party will have such additional periods of time as may be reasonably necessary under the circumstances, provided the defaulting party immediately (A) provides written notice to the non-defaulting party and (B) commences to cure its nonperformance and thereafter diligently continues to completion the cure of its nonperformance. In no event shall any such cure period exceed 90 days. In the event of such termination for cause, payment shall be made by the Town to the Consultant for the undisputed portion of its fee due as of the termination date. 12.3 Due to Work Stoppage. This Agreement may be terminated by the Town upon 30 days’ written notice to Consultant in the event that the Services are permanently abandoned. In the event of such termination due to work stoppage, payment shall be made by the Town to the Consultant for the undisputed portion of its fee due as of the termination date. 12.4 Conflict of Interest. This Agreement is subject to the provisions of ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 38-511. The Town may cancel this Agreement without penalty or further obligations by the Town or any of its departments or agencies if any person significantly involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating this Agreement on behalf of the Town or any of its departments or agencies is, at any time while the Agreement or any extension of the Agreement is in effect, an employee of any other party to the Agreement in any capacity or a consultant to any other party of the Agreement with respect to the subject matter of the Agreement. 12.5 Gratuities. The Town may, by written notice to the Consultant, cancel this Agreement if it is found by the Town that gratuities, in the form of economic opportunity, future employment, entertainment, gifts or otherwise, were offered or given by the Consultant or any agent or representative of the Consultant to any officer, agent or employee of the Town for the purpose of securing this Agreement. In the event this Agreement is canceled by the Town pursuant to this provision, the Town shall be entitled, in addition to any other rights and remedies, to recover and withhold from the Consultant an amount equal to 150% of the gratuity. 12.6 Agreement Subject to Appropriation. The Town is obligated only to pay its obligations set forth in the Agreement as may lawfully be made from funds appropriated and budgeted for that purpose during the Town’s then current fiscal year. The Town’s obligations under this Agreement are current expenses subject to the “budget law” and the unfettered legislative discretion of the Town concerning budgeted purposes and appropriation of funds. Should the Town elect not to appropriate and budget funds to pay its Agreement obligations, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated at the end of the then-current fiscal year term for which such funds were appropriated and budgeted for such purpose and the Town shall be relieved of any subsequent obligation under this Agreement. The parties agree that the Town has no obligation or duty of good faith to budget or appropriate the payment of the Town’s obligations set forth in this Agreement in any budget in any fiscal year other than the fiscal year in which the Agreement is executed and delivered. The Town shall be the sole judge and authority in determining the availability of funds for its obligations under this Agreement. The Town shall keep Consultant informed as to the availability of funds for this Agreement. The obligation of the Town to make any payment pursuant to this Agreement is not a general obligation or 2436189.1 8 indebtedness of the Town. Consultant hereby waives any and all rights to bring any claim against the Town from or relating in any way to the Town’s termination of this Agreement pursuant to this section. 13. Miscellaneous. 13.1 Independent Contractor. It is clearly understood that each party will act in its individual capacity and not as an agent, employee, partner, joint venturer, or associate of the other. An employee or agent of one party shall not be deemed or construed to be the employee or agent of the other for any purpose whatsoever. The Consultant acknowledges and agrees that the Services provided under this Agreement are being provided as an independent contractor, not as an employee or agent of the Town. Consultant, its employees and subcontractors are not entitled to workers’ compensation benefits from the Town. The Town does not have the authority to supervise or control the actual work of Consultant, its employees or subcontractors. The Consultant, and not the Town, shall determine the time of its performance of the services provided under this Agreement so long as Consultant meets the requirements of its agreed Scope of Work as set forth in Section 2 above. Consultant is neither prohibited from entering into other contracts nor prohibited from practicing its profession elsewhere. Town and Consultant do not intend to nor will they combine business operations under this Agreement. 13.2 Applicable Law; Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Arizona and suit pertaining to this Agreement may be brought only in courts in the Maricopa County, Arizona. 13.3 Laws and Regulations. Consultant shall keep fully informed and shall at all times during the performance of its duties under this Agreement ensure that it and any person for whom the Consultant is responsible abides by, and remains in compliance with, all rules, regulations, ordinances, statutes or laws affecting the Services, including, but not limited to, the following: (A) existing and future Town and County ordinances and regulations, (B) existing and future State and Federal laws and (C) existing and future Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards. 13.4 Amendments. This Agreement may be modified only by a written amendment signed by persons duly authorized to enter into contracts on behalf of the Town and the Consultant. 13.5 Provisions Required by Law. Each and every provision of law and any clause required by law to be in the Agreement will be read and enforced as though it were included herein and, if through mistake or otherwise any such provision is not inserted, or is not correctly inserted, then upon the application of either party, the Agreement will promptly be physically amended to make such insertion or correction. 13.6 Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are severable to the extent that any provision or application held to be invalid by a Court of competent jurisdiction shall not affect any other provision or application of the Agreement which may remain in effect without the invalid provision or application. 2436189.1 9 13.7 Relationship of the Parties. It is clearly understood that each party will act in its individual capacity and not as an agent, employee, partner, joint venturer, or associate of the other. An employee or agent of one party shall not be deemed or construed to be the employee or agent of the other for any purpose whatsoever. The Consultant is advised that taxes or Social Security payments will not be withheld from any Town payments issued hereunder and Consultant agrees to be fully and solely responsible for the payment of such taxes or any other tax applicable to this Agreement. 13.8 Entire Agreement; Interpretation; Parol Evidence. This Agreement represents the entire agreement of the parties with respect to its subject matter, and all previous agreements, whether oral or written, entered into prior to this Agreement are hereby revoked and superseded by this Agreement. No representations, warranties, inducements or oral agreements have been made by any of the parties except as expressly set forth herein, or in any other contemporaneous written agreement executed for the purposes of carrying out the provisions of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted according to its plain meaning, and no presumption shall be deemed to apply in favor of, or against the party drafting the Agreement. The parties acknowledge and agree that each has had the opportunity to seek and utilize legal counsel in the drafting of, review of, and entry into this Agreement. 13.9 Assignment; Delegation. No right or interest in this Agreement shall be assigned or delegated by Consultant without prior, written permission of the Town signed by the Town Manager and no delegation of any duty of Consultant shall be made without prior, written permission of the Town signed by the Town Manager. Any attempted assignment or delegation by Consultant in violation of this provision shall be a breach of this Agreement by Consultant. 13.10 Subcontracts. No subcontract shall be entered into by the Consultant with any other party to furnish any of the material or services specified herein without the prior written approval of the Town. The Consultant is responsible for performance under this Agreement whether or not subcontractors are used. Failure to pay subcontractors in a timely manner pursuant to any subcontract shall be a material breach of this Agreement by Consultant. 13.11 Rights and Remedies. No provision in this Agreement shall be construed, expressly or by implication, as waiver by the Town of any existing or future right and/or remedy available by law in the event of any claim of default or breach of this Agreement. The failure of the Town to insist upon the strict performance of any term or condition of this Agreement or to exercise or delay the exercise of any right or remedy provided in this Agreement, or by law, or the Town’s acceptance of and payment for services, shall not release the Consultant from any responsibilities or obligations imposed by this Agreement or by law, and shall not be deemed a waiver of any right of the Town to insist upon the strict performance of this Agreement. 13.12 Attorneys’ Fees. In the event either party brings any action for any relief, declaratory or otherwise, arising out of this Agreement or on account of any breach or default hereof, the prevailing party shall be entitled to receive from the other party reasonable attorneys’ fees and reasonable costs and expenses, determined by the court sitting without a jury, which shall be deemed to have accrued on the commencement of such action and shall be enforced whether or not such action is prosecuted through judgment. 2436189.1 10 13.13 Liens. All materials or services shall be free of all liens and, if the Town requests, a formal release of all liens shall be delivered to the Town. 13.14 Offset. A. Offset for Damages. In addition to all other remedies at law or equity, the Town may offset from any money due to the Consultant any amounts Consultant owes to the Town for damages resulting from breach or deficiencies in performance or breach of any obligation under this Agreement. B. Offset for Delinquent Fees or Taxes. The Town may offset from any money due to the Consultant any amounts Consultant owes to the Town for delinquent fees, transaction privilege taxes and property taxes, including any interest or penalties. 13.15 Notices and Requests. Any notice or other communication required or permitted to be given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been duly given if (A) delivered to the party at the address set forth below, (B) deposited in the U.S. Mail, registered or certified, return receipt requested, to the address set forth below or (C) given to a recognized and reputable overnight delivery service, to the address set forth below: If to the Town: Town of Fountain Hills 16705 East Avenue of the Fountains Fountain Hills, Arizona 85268 Attn: Grady E. Miller, Town Manager With copy to: GUST ROSENFELD P.L.C. One East Washington Street, Suite 1600 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2553 Attn: Andrew J. McGuire, Esq. If to Consultant: American Metering Services, Inc. d/b/a AMS Billing Services 6915 15th Street East, Suite 204 Sarasota, Florida 34243 Attn: Frank J. Miller, President or at such other address, and to the attention of such other person or officer, as any party may designate in writing by notice duly given pursuant to this subsection. Notices shall be deemed received (A) when delivered to the party, (B) three business days after being placed in the U.S. Mail, properly addressed, with sufficient postage or (C) the following business day after being given to a recognized overnight delivery service, with the person giving the notice paying all required charges and instructing the delivery service to deliver on the following business day. If a copy of a notice is also given to a party’s counsel or other recipient, the provisions above governing the date on which a notice is deemed to have been received by a party shall mean and refer to the date on which the party, and not its counsel or other recipient to which a copy of the notice may be sent, is deemed to have received the notice. 2436189.1 11 13.16 Confidentiality of Records. The Consultant shall establish and maintain procedures and controls that are acceptable to the Town for the purpose of ensuring that information contained in its records or obtained from the Town or from others in carrying out its obligations under this Agreement shall not be used or disclosed by it, its agents, officers, or employees, except as required to perform Consultant’s duties under this Agreement. Persons requesting such information should be referred to the Town. Consultant also agrees that any information pertaining to individual persons shall not be divulged other than to employees or officers of Consultant as needed for the performance of duties under this Agreement. 13.17 Records and Audit Rights. To ensure that the Consultant and its subcontractors are complying with the warranty under subsection 13.18 below, Consultant’s and its subcontractors’ books, records, correspondence, accounting procedures and practices, and any other supporting evidence relating to this Agreement, including the papers of any Consultant and its subcontractors’ employees who perform any work or services pursuant to this Agreement (all of the foregoing hereinafter referred to as “Records”), shall be open to inspection and subject to audit and/or reproduction during normal working hours by the Town, to the extent necessary to adequately permit (A) evaluation and verification of any invoices, payments or claims based on Consultant’s and its subcontractors’ actual costs (including direct and indirect costs and overhead allocations) incurred, or units expended directly in the performance of work under this Agreement and (B) evaluation of the Consultant’s and its subcontractors’ compliance with the Arizona employer sanctions laws referenced in subsection 13.18 below. To the extent necessary for the Town to audit Records as set forth in this subsection, Consultant and its subcontractors hereby waive any rights to keep such Records confidential. For the purpose of evaluating or verifying such actual or claimed costs or units expended, the Town shall have access to said Records, even if located at its subcontractors’ facilities, from the effective date of this Agreement for the duration of the work and until three years after the date of final payment by the Town to Consultant pursuant to this Agreement. Consultant and its subcontractors shall provide the Town with adequate and appropriate workspace so that the Town can conduct audits in compliance with the provisions of this subsection. The Town shall give Consultant or its subcontractors reasonable advance notice of intended audits. Consultant shall require its subcontractors to comply with the provisions of this subsection by insertion of the requirements hereof in any subcontract pursuant to this Agreement. 13.18 E-verify Requirements. To the extent applicable under ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 41-4401, the Consultant and its subcontractors warrant compliance with all federal immigration laws and regulations that relate to their employees and their compliance with the E- verify requirements under ARIZ. REV. STAT. § 23-214(A). Consultant’s or its subcontractor’s failure to comply with such warranty shall be deemed a material breach of this Agreement and may result in the termination of this Agreement by the Town. 13.19 Conflicting Terms. In the event of any inconsistency, conflict or ambiguity among the terms of this Agreement, the Scope of Work, the Fee Proposal, the RFP and the Consultant’s Proposal, the documents shall govern in the order listed herein. 2436189.1 12 13.20 Non-Exclusive Contract. This Agreement is entered into with the understanding and agreement that it is for the sole convenience of the Town. The Town reserves the right to obtain like goods and services from another source when necessary. 13.21 Cooperative Purchasing. Specific eligible political subdivisions and nonprofit educational or public health institutions (“Eligible Procurement Unit(s)”) are permitted to utilize procurement agreements developed by the Town, at their discretion and with the agreement of the awarded Consultant. Consultant may, at its sole discretion, accept orders from Eligible Procurement Unit(s) for the purchase of the Materials and/or Services at the prices and under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, in such quantities and configurations as may be agreed upon between the parties. All cooperative procurements under this Agreement shall be transacted solely between the requesting Eligible Procurement Unit and Consultant. Payment for such purchases will be the sole responsibility of the Eligible Procurement Unit. The exercise of any rights, responsibilities or remedies by the Eligible Procurement Unit shall be the exclusive obligation of such unit. The Town assumes no responsibility for payment, performance or any liability or obligation associated with any cooperative procurement under this Agreement. The Town shall not be responsible for any disputes arising out of transactions made by others. [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGES 2436189.1 13 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first set forth above. “Town” TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, an Arizona municipal corporation Grady E. Miller, Town Manager ATTEST: Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk (ACKNOWLEDGMENT) STATE OF ARIZONA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF MARICOPA ) On ___________________, 2015, before me personally appeared Grady E. Miller, the Town Manager of the TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, an Arizona municipal corporation, whose identity was proven to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person who he claims to be, and acknowledged that he signed the above document, on behalf of the Town of Fountain Hills. Notary Public (Affix notary seal here) [SIGNATURES CONTINUE ON FOLLOWING PAGE 2436189.1 EXHIBIT A TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS AND AMERICAN METERING SERVICES, INC. D/B/A AMS BILLING SERVICES [Consultant’s Proposal] See following pages. 6915 15th Street East Ste 204 - Sarasota, FL 34243 941-358-1253 | www.amsbilling.com June 28, 2015 Town Finance Director 16705 East Avenue of the Fountains Fountain Hills, Arizona 85268 AMS Billing Services, Inc. officially submits the request to be awarded the contract for the Fountain Hills “Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process” for the year beginning January 1, 2016. We understand the contract requires providing bill creation, printing, mailing, and account monitoring and collection services for the 15,000 + properties of Fountain Hills, Arizona. About AMS Billing AMS Billing has been in operation since 1998 and is located in Sarasota, Florida. We are a leader in Property Utility Management, specializing in automated Utility Billing Solutions, Sub metering, Water Conservation, and Specialty Billing Services. AMS offers adept services that boost our client’s bottom line by reducing expenses related to billing and payment collection services. Unlike other utility and specialty billing companies, there is no outsourcing with the services offered by AMS. AMS takes care of every single element in-house and is therefore able to streamline its service resulting in process time to be shorter and quality to be higher. AMS provides timely and accurate billing services and utility management along with customer-centric features like online reports, timely audits on rates and tariffs, resident auto-pay, call center for payment processing and billing inquiries, guaranteed maintenance, etc. AMS takes pride in our excellent understanding of state regulations which works to prevents blunders and resulting fines for using unlawful billing practices. We are excited at the opportunity to provide our services to Fountain Hills and are confident we have the experience, personnel, systems, and processes to successfully perform the “Environmental Billing and Collection Process’ for you. Please review the attachments representing our formal proposal and contact us at your convenience with any questions. . We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Frank J. Miller, President / CEO 6915 15th St. Suite 204 Sarasota, Florida 35243 941-358-1253 06June28 2015-Fountain Hills Proposal – Cover Letter 1 F:FountainHills2016 – table of contents TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Proposal TABLE OF CONTENTS June 28, 2015 General Information • AMS Billing – Corporate Identification and principal address • Fountain Hills Business License Application • Disaster Recovery Program • AMS – Business Description and years in business • Terminated client contracts in last five years for performance • Litigation and or arbitration claims in the last five years • Company Holidays 2015 - 2016 • Vendor Information Form Experience and Qualifications • AMS experience in providing services to entities similar to Fountain Hills • List of five organizations with services comparable to or exceeding needs of Fountain Hills Key Personnel Identified as Support Staff for The Fountain Hills Contract • Employees • Roles and responsibilities Project Approach • Approach to fulfilling contract duties – Implementation & Operation Calendar • Contract Fulfillment o Security Measures to protect Fountain Hills data o Quality Control procedures o Procedures to ensure billing is successfully completed o Process to remove a bill from processing o Procedures for correcting issues that arise o Ongoing support provided throughout the contract • Alternative approaches to accomplish Fountain Hills objectives • Project schedule, Implementation Plan and Training – see Implementation & Operation Calendar Pricing • Included in separate sealed envelope per proposal guidelines F:FountainHills2016 – General Information TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Proposal General Information June 28, 2015 General Information • AMS Billing – Corporate Identification and principal address: AMS Billing Services, Inc. Ph 941-358-1253 6915 15 th st. E. Suite 204 Email: Info@amsbilling.com Sarasota, Florida 34243 • Fountain Hills Business License Application – see attached at GI-1 • Disaster Recovery Program – AMS utilizes a Cloud / Web based billing software with along with backup secure servers at an offsite location. • AMS – Business Description and years in business AMS Billing has been in operation since 1998 and is located in Sarasota, Florida. We are a leader in Property Utility Management, specializing in automated Utility Billing Solutions, Sub metering, Water Conservation, and Specialty Billing Services. AMS offers adept services that boost our client’s bottom line by reducing expenses related to billing and payment collection services. • Terminated client contracts in last five years for performance – None • Litigation and or arbitration claims in the last five years – None • Company Holidays 2015 – 2016 – See GI-2 • Vendor Information Form – see GI-3 • Organizational Chart – see GI-4 • Certificate of Insurance – see GI-5 GI F:FountainHills2016 – experience & qualifications TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Proposal Experience & Qualifications June 28, 2015 • AMS experience in providing services to entities similar to Fountain Hills AMS has been in business since 1998 providing billing and payment center services to many businesses including Home Owners Associations, Multi-Family Housing, and Commerical Business Centers. Billing and payment center services include processing personal checks, credit card payments, pay by phone, auto payments, bank processed bill pays, cash payments, and web based payments. We are also in the process of establishing paperless billing which will be available in the fall of 2015. Billing and payment processing is performed monthly, quarterly, semi-annually, and annually depending on the needs of our clients. • List of five organizations with services comparable to or exceeding needs of Fountain Hills Larry Loyed Davida Hurst CFO & Treasurer at Aderhold Properties, Inc. Inscap Executive Assistant Atlanta, Georgia Sarasota, Florida 404-526-9800 x232 941-960-7000 x206 lloyed@aderholdproperties.net dhurst@inscap.com Jamie Biller, CPM Jeff Warrington Property Supervisor at the Gallina Companies Warrington Enterprises, Inc. Sarasota, Florida Sarasota, Florida 941-496-4161 941-921-4441 jbiller@gallinaco.com jeff@warringtonenterprises.com Baruch Cohen Isram Realty & Management Hallandale, Florida 954-455-2822 baruch@isramrealty.com EQ TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Proposal Key Personnel June 28, 2015 Key Personnel Identified as Support Staff for The Fountain Hills Contract • Mr. Chris Jeffries, Director of Operations 10 years’ experience with AMS, MBA, Ret. Lieutenant 10+ years Navy Oversees all billing and payment processes, approves changes to billing reports and report changes. Manages maintenance programs for clients and client requests, manages contracts with mailing and printing vendors. Ms. Alex Sombra, Billing Manager 5+ years’ experience with AMS, AA, BBA expected 2016 Manages billing reps, controls and monitors billing rep portfolio’s including her own portfolio of clients, reviews and approves reports, reconciles billing records to output, manages employee payroll time reporting, back-up to Operations Director Mr. Matt Ortner, IT Director, New Business Technology Development 8 years experience with AMS, 25 years professional experience Developes all technology processing, maintains existing systems, creates specialty reporting based on client needs, manages IT support staff of 8 and sets staff priorities. Mr. John Thomas, CFO 3+ years with AMS, 32 years Accounting & Finance experience Oversees all financial and accounting processes and accounting staff, manages monthly/annual corporate reporting and analysis, corporate taxes, contract analysis, financial planning KP F:FountainHills2016 – pa TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Proposal Project Approach June 28, 2015 Project Approach • Approach to fulfilling contract duties – See PA-1 Attached • Contract Fulfillment o Security Measures to protect Fountain Hills data – AMS maintains a secure website, does not keep any payer credit card information, does not allow company records to be removed from premises without proper management approval, and the offices are secured with 24 security monitoring. o Quality Control procedures – AMS has in place a pre-programmed monthly review including a monthly physical audit of records and programs. o Procedures to ensure billing is successfully completed – AMS processes customer billings with reports forwarded to clients allowing for a 48 hour review. Input received from the client with changes is then included in the billing to customers. o Process to remove a bill from processing – Information is verified with the client and town records and documented before removal. o Procedures for correcting issues that arise – AMS is proactive in this approach and works with clients and their customers to satisfy all concerned. Any changes are reviewed with all parties to ensure issues are resolved and agreed upon. o Ongoing support provided throughout the contract – AMS assigns client with a personal rep so the client and their customers deal with one person throughout contract period. • Alternative approaches to accomplish Fountain Hills objectives – See PA - 1 PA F:FountainHills2016 – pa-2 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Proposal Project Approach June 28, 2015 Project Approach • Alternative approaches to accomplish Fountain Hills objectives The Fountain Hills objective of implementing and annual “$36.00 Environmental Fee” to property owners effective January 1, 2016, can best be accomplished by a one-time billing each January for the calendar year as opposed to a $3.00 monthly bill. Each month AMS will rebill property owners for which no payment has been received and include a “late fee” in the new billing as directed by Fountain Hills management. The rebills will be marked as past due and encourage the property owners to remit payment. This process will continue until all billed Environmental Fees have been collected. AMS will provide reports to Fountain Hills of payments received, outstanding balances by name monthly, and will remit payments received to Fountain Hills within two weeks of payments being received. We also suggest the town take advantage of our “web based portal payment system”. This option allows payers the opportunity to pay the bill online, with the funds going directly to the clients bank account. In this case it would be the designated bank account of Fountain Hills. This would make the payment funds available to the town in two to three business days. Payments by physical checks would still be remitted to Fountain Hills in the required two weeks. We feel the more advance notice and explanation of the Environmental Fee to be billed January 2016 we can do, will assist us in the collection of these fees. We suggest mailing an information package and introductory letter to the property owners in the fall of 2015 (November / December). The information package will also include email addresses and phone numbers to call for further explanation if needed. While it is not stated in the Proposal information on how the selected vendor will be paid for these services, we recommend that AMS bill Fountain Hills monthly based on the number of bills that are billed in that period. In each succeeding month as the non-payers are re-billed, AMS will then bill the town for the number of bills mailed. This should provide a decline in monthly cost to the town for services rendered. This process will continue until all fees are collected. PA - 1 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Project Schedule & Implementation Plan Calendar June 28, 2015 • June 30, 2015 – Environmental Fee Proposal Submission • August 6, 2015 – Town Council Award Date • August 31, 2015 – Agreement Start Date • September 4, 2015 – Implementation Calendar Forwarded by AMS to Fountain Hills • September 11, 2015 – AMS request to Environmental Fee language to be included on billings to property owners • September 25, 2015 – Sample of monthly billing invoice including introductory letter forwarded to Fountain Hills for review and feedback. • October 2, 2015 – AMS to obtain access to Maricopa County Assessor’s Office Records • October 2 – 9, 2015 – AMS creates billing data base and receivable report sample for Town of Fountain Hills Review. • October 16, 2015 – AMS to provide training material and access to billing data base to Fountain Hills employees. • October 17, 2015 – AMS initiates information requests to establish Gateway payment account for Fountain Hills. • October 17 – 30 – Questions and Feedback from Fountain Hills addressed and resolved. • November 13 – AMS updates property owner data base and resends sample of billing invoice and introductory letter to Fountain Hills for final approval. • November 20, 2015 – AMS prints and mails to property owners, letter of introduction and explanation of Environmental Fee to be billed January 1, 2016. PS&I F:FountainHills2016 – ps&i TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Project Schedule & Implementation Plan Calendar June 28, 2015 • November 21, 2015 – January 1, 2016 – AMS & Fountain Hills responds to property owners questions regarding the Environmental Fee to be billed. • January 1, 2016 – AMS updates property owner’s data base and mails Environmental Billing. • January – December 2016 – Monthly billing and payment cycle is established along with late notices. Payments received remitted to Fountain Hills as stated in contract along with receivable balances. PS&I 1 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Implementation and Operation Calendar June 28, 2015 • June 30, 2015 – Environmental Fee Proposal Submission • August 6, 2015 – Town Council Award Date • August 31, 2015 – Agreement Start Date • September 4, 2015 – Implementation Calendar Forwarded by AMS to Fountain Hills • September 11, 2015 – AMS request to Environmental Fee language to be included on billings to property owners • September 25, 2015 – Sample of monthly billing invoice including introductory letter forwarded to Fountain Hills for review and feedback. • October 2, 2015 – AMS to obtain access to Maricopa County Assessor’s Office Records • October 2 – 9, 2015 – AMS creates billing data base and receivable report sample for Town of Fountain Hills Review. • October 16, 2015 – AMS to provide training material and access to billing data base to Fountain Hills employees. • October 17, 2015 – AMS initiates information requests to establish Gateway payment account for Fountain Hills. • October 17 – 30 – Questions and Feedback from Fountain Hills addressed and resolved. • November 13 – AMS updates property owner data base and resends sample of billing invoice and introductory letter to Fountain Hills for final approval. • November 20, 2015 – AMS prints and mails to property owners, letter of introduction and explanation of Environmental Fee to be billed January 1, 2016. • November 21, 2015 – January 1, 2016 – AMS & Fountain Hills responds to property owners questions regarding the Environmental Fee to be billed. 2 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Implementation and Operation Calendar June 28, 2015 • January 1, 2016 – AMS updates property owner’s data base and mails Environmental Billing. • January – December 2016 – Monthly billing and payment cycle is established along with late notices. Payments received remitted to Fountain Hills as stated in contract along with receivable balances. F:FountainHills2016 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Proposal Optional Services June 28, 2015 AMS provides multiple billing and payment processing services including water utility billing, security monitoring billing, trash removal, and sewer billing services. We are a national billing company with clients from Maryland to California to Washington State and Texas. No to client is too small or too big for us and if there is a billing need and payment center need we can work with anyone to get the job done. We are continually improving and adding to our services and payment methods and have partnered with 7Eleven, Family Dollar and PayNearMe to give our clients customers the ability to pay their bills at over 17,000 locations nationwide. We are currently implementing paperless billing which will provide the ability to even pay directly from your phone. Our web portal payment option even eliminates the delay of receiving your funds as this payment option deposits payments directly into the clients bank account in two to three business days. Why wait 30 days to receive your payments when this option is available. OS AMS Billing Services INC. 6915 15th Street East, Suite 204 – Sarasota, FL 34243 941-358-1253 I www.amsbilling.com I info@amsbilling.com References: Larry Loyed Chief Financial Officer & Treasurer at Aderhold Properties, Inc. Atlanta, GA 404-526-9800 x232 lloyed@aderholdproperties.net Davida Hurst Executive Assistant Sarasota, FL 941-960-7000 X206 dhurst@inscap.com Jamie Biller, CPM Property Supervisor at The Gallina Companies Sarasota, FL 941-496-4161 jbiller@gallinacos.com Jeff Warrington Warrington Enterprises, Inc. Sarasota, FL 941-921-4441 jeff@warringtonenterprises.com Baruch Cohen Isram Realty & Management Hallandale, FL 954-455-2822 baruch@isramrealty.com 2436189.1 EXHIBIT B TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS AND AMERICAN METERING SERVICES, INC. D/B/A AMS BILLING SERVICES [Scope of Work] See following pages. 2436189.1 SCOPE OF WORK Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Processing 1. Introduction. The Town Council approved the implementation of an environmental fee for each parcel of land with the corporate limits of the Town at a rate of $3 per month. The Town currently contains approximately 15,000 parcels, and property owners of each parcel will be billed $36.00 annually. Due to the number of winter residents, bills will be issued in January. The Town is seeking an outside source to (i) utilize information from the Maricopa County Assessor’s property records to establish a database of all parcels and property owners, (ii) create, print, mail and email bills, (iii) accept payments and monitor customer accounts, (iv) create, print, mail and email late notices and (v) provide collection services for unpaid fees. Bill messages may be included and may be changed periodically based on Town requirements. It is unknown how many late notices will be required, but the percentage is likely to be higher in the first year than in later years. The vendor should be able to use its experience and industry knowledge to estimate those figures. 2. Requirements. 2.1 Vendor shall prepare a database consisting of all Fountain Hills parcel numbers, property owner names and addresses obtained from the Maricopa County Assessor’s Office records. 2.2 Vendor shall provide all paper, forms and envelopes for all bills, correspondence and reports. Return envelopes must be provided to customers for payment, except for customers who opt for e-billing services. 2.3 Vendor must be able to produce the Town’s bill with a remittance stub in a format acceptable to the Town. 2.4 Vendor must have the ability to print bill messages, logos and other information as needed. 2.5 Vendor must provide an interface capable of the following and provide the Town with specific operating details: A. Allow the Town to include/exclude inserts and messages based on Town requirements. B. Allow the Town to update requirements for bill messages and bill inserts on an as-needed basis. C. Allow the Town to create ad hoc messaging to be printed on the bills, including the ability to upload images to the message area. D. Storage of messages for reuse. 2436189.1 2.6 Sample bills shall be sent to the Town electronically for review and approval before they are printed and mailed. 2.7 Bills must be printed and mailed via presorted first class (or emailed) within one business day of receipt of approval. 2.8 The vendor must have the capability to suppress printing certain bills and envelopes, based on Town requirements. Suppression could be on a one-time or ongoing basis. 2.9 Vendor shall email billing status reports to the Town weekly for the first two months after the billing is complete. Thereafter, billing status reports may be reduced to monthly. 2.10 Vendor shall collect all payments from the customer. Various methods of payment (e.g., check, e-check, online, etc.) must be allowed. 2.11 Funds shall be remitted to the Town within two weeks of collection via ACH or wire transfers. 2.12 Vendor shall monitor customer accounts. 2.13 Vendor shall email aged accounts receivable reports to the Town monthly. 2.14 Vendor shall send out late notices monthly. 2.15 Vendor shall provide collection services for past due accounts. 2.16 Vendor must allow site visits by Town personnel. 2.17 Vendor shall provide the following customer support: A. Contact name and information. B. Unlimited telephone customer support Monday through Friday, from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. for both the Town and the parcel owners. C. Procedure to obtain assistance after-hours. 2.18 Vendor shall allow access to billing system by Town personnel. 3. Optional Services. Other services, including, but not limited to the below list items, will be considered if offered by vendors. All optional items and their cost should be listed on the Price Sheet, under the heading “Optional Services”. 3.1 Electronic billing. 2436189.1 3.2 Combined billing for entities that own multiple parcels. 3.3 Ability to provide similar services to other Town departments. 2436189.1 EXHIBIT C TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS AND AMERICAN METERING SERVICES, INC. D/B/A AMS BILLING SERVICES [Fee Proposal] See following page. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA Environmental Fee Billing and Collection Process Proposal Pricing June 28, 2015 AMS provides billing services to clients and contracts with them on a per bill basis plus one time set-up fees and invoice billing specialization of $250.00. This allows the clients to only pay for the service work incurred. Our billing and payment processing services include: • Collecting and updating client data billing list • Reviewing billing reports for accuracy • Interacting with the client gaining approval for each month billing • Processing and printing monthly bills • Bill insertion along with return envelopes in bill mailing • Applying postage and delivering bills to post office • Processing checks received, auto payments, checks by phone and credit card payments. • Remitting funds received to clients along with AMS billing for services. • Providing personalized phone support for client contacts and billed customers • Providing monthly reporting on accounts receivable outstanding to clients • Maintains billing data base to allow clients to add inserts to billings as needed. AMS can provide the above listed services for $1.50 per monthly bill plus postage. The current postage rate is $0.49 which would bring the total cost per monthly bill to $1.99. As the billing and payment process moves from month to month the amount of billing required will decrease by the number of payments received. Working with Fountain Hills management and getting as much information to the property owners who will be billed in advance of the billing, we feel the rebilling required can be minimized, which will keep our service costs to a minimum. Ideally we anticipate totals bills and rebills to not exceed 30,000 to 35,000 bills which would project the total cost to Fountain Hills to be from $60,000 to $70,000. If you approve we encourage doing a mailing in November to explain the Environmental Fee Bill they will receive in January, and to introduce AMS so we can provide them all the options they will have to pay this fee. This information will also be included in the monthly billings as they take place. If you approve of the fall notification it’s cost to you will be $0.99 per notification ($0.49 for postage and $0.50 for all other costs). Total projected Environmental Fee and Payment Processing costs for 2016 - $75,000 - $85,000. P League of Arizona Cities and Towns Summary Chart Final and Adopted 2016 Resolutions Number Resolution 1 Create renewable energy and conservation financing districts for commercial properties. 2 Allow cities and towns to invest in infrastructure and other improvements in a designated area. Pay for investments via the increased property tax revenue generated new development. 3 Conduct thorough reform of the PSPRS System as provided by the League’s PSPRS Task Force. 4 Allow cities and towns to place reasonable balances on public record requests that are overbroad or abusive and on the frequency on requests. 5 Develop and pass legislation to make the requirements for annexation a more simple and flexible process. 6 Provide relief from the proportional width and length requirements of current annexation statute. 7 Explore methods to finance the operation and maintenance of retention and detention basins, including authorizing retention and detention basin improvement districts. 8 Partner with cities and towns for the operation and maintenance of Arizona State Parks under long term leases. 9 Restore the Arizona Housing Trust Fund. 10 Restore the Arizona State Park Heritage Funds. 11 Expand state licensure requirements and local enforcement authority for sober living homes. 12 Urge the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to improve its communication with municipalities when studying changes to potential flight paths. Urge Congress to amend key portions of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 that would help achieve the aforementioned request. 13 Urges the Legislature to stop future sweeps of Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) allocated to Arizona cities and towns, and to restore HURF funding to FY2008 levels. 14 Support the inclusion of funding to accelerate design and construction of State Route 189 in ADOT’s Five-Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program. 5 Chair’s Report of the Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Policy Committee Mayor Kenny Evans, Payson, Chair Resolutions Committee Meeting, League Annual Conference Tuesday, August 18, 2015 On June 10 and June 30, the Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Policy Committee (BFED) convened to discuss six policy issues submitted by cities and towns for consideration in by the newly established policy committee process. Below is a summary of each of the policy issues considered by BFED: 1. Request and encourage the Arizona State Legislature to establish a mechanism enabling local government to establish renewable energy and conservation financing districts for commercial properties. – Flagstaff 2. Change ARS 32-144, Professions & Occupations, registration requirement where a commercial tenant improvement project of less than $10,000 would not require an Arizona Registrant to design and stamp the project. – Flagstaff 3. Equalize the tax credit treatment (maximum allowable credits and collection deadlines) of contributions made to qualified charitable organizations, private schools, and public schools. – Eagar 4. Seek legislation to allow cities and towns to invest in infrastructure and other improvements in a designated area, and pay for the investments via the increased property tax revenue generated by the new development. – Surprise 5. Seek a study by the League staff to examine the structure of the state shared sales tax distribution formula and make recommendations on possible improvements.– Scottsdale 6. Seek legislation to provide for additional revenue generation authority to address the changing landscape of the Arizona economy, and address the shift in growth that directly impacts the current statewide revenue models. – Prescott Below is a summary of the committee discussion and the recommendation: The City of Flagstaff presented policy issue number 1. This proposal is seeking legislation to form an opt-in financing mechanism for renewable energy and conservation districts. Flagstaff noted that this issue is being discussed as an economic development tool among a number of cities and Tucson has led recent efforts to meet with business community representatives, finance experts, and other stakeholders. The committee also noted that the legislature has been resistant to creating additional special districts, but if the resolution is broad enough, the League can continue to work on finding the appropriate legislative “mechanism.” Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a resolution with the understanding that it remain broad as the details continue to be developed (now resolution BFED 1 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Flagstaff also presented policy issue number 2. The motivation for this proposal is to make it easier to complete work on commercial improvements that meet certain conditions. Flagstaff noted that they had worked on similar legislation in the past that created an exemption for residential improvements that met specified conditions. The committee raised a number of questions about how the legislation would ensure public safety and satisfy design professional concerns. Committee members voted to work on this issue with League staff and other interested parties. The Town of Eagar presented policy issue number 3. The town noted that equalizing tax credit treatment among the beneficiaries is an important issue for rural Arizona and many White Mountain communities approved resolutions reflecting that. There is currently a deadline disparity and allowable credit disparity between public school tax credits and private school tax credits. The committee acknowledged that a strong public school system is an important community resource and considered it an economic development tool. The committee also remarked that this issue would be more 6 appropriate for public school associations to advocate for and that the League should maintain its core focus of advocating on behalf of direct municipal interests. The Committee voted to work on this issue with League staff and other interested parties. The City of Surprise presented policy issue number 4. They are seeking a new economic development tool that would be available to cities and towns to help facilitate projects while nearly eliminating taxpayer risk. The tool is designed to be a financing mechanism that reimburses eligible projects costs using the incremental gains attributed to project activity. Oversight over the mechanism will be thorough and collaborative with affected property taxing jurisdictions. There are some outstanding questions that have yet to be answered, but stakeholders continue to be consulted in an effort to resolve them to ensure that the legislation has broad support and passes legal hurdles. Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution BFED 2 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Scottsdale presented policy issue number 5. The stated purpose of the issue is to explore the state shared sales tax revenue system to determine if there are inequities that can be resolved. Committee members noted that the data necessary to accurately determine how much each city contributes to the shared system may not be currently available among all cities and towns. Without that data, it is difficult to measure the statewide impact. After significant deliberation, the committee amended the original proposal and recommended that League staff further study the issue. The City of Prescott provided background on policy issue number 6 informing the committee that this issue is appropriate for ongoing study of the policy committee and League staff. The town remarked that revenue sources are increasingly restricted and the changing economy requires municipalities to study alternative methods of raising revenue. Committee members voted to work on this issue with League staff and other interested parties. The table below summarizes the BFED Committee’s actions: Policy Issue Disposition by Committee 1 Resolution BFED 1 2 Continued committee work 3 Continued committee work 4 Resolution BFED 2 5 Continued committee work 6 Continued committee work Kenny Evans Mayor of Payson Chair, Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Policy Committee 7 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: BFED 1 Establish a statutory mechanism enabling local government to create renewable energy and conservation financing districts for commercial properties. Submitted by: City of Flagstaff A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution A renewable energy and conservation financing district authorizes local governments to facilitate the financing for related improvements for commercial property owners. Participation in the program should be voluntary, so property owners can opt-in to use the mechanism to finance their own energy efficiency improvements, renewable energy installation, and water conservation improvements. Such programs can deliver benefits beyond energy independence, including new economic development opportunities, increase property value, provide protection from increasing energy costs, and enhance community awareness. Numerous communities across the nation already have energy efficiency, water conservation, and renewable energy financing programs. At least 30 states have passed enabling legislation allowing local government to establish similar financing districts. They also define energy efficiency, water conservation, and renewable energy as a public benefit, and grant local government the authority to issue bonds. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy State law (A.R.S. 9-461.05) requires local governments over a certain size to adopt energy efficiency elements in their general plan. This resolution supports municipalities that choose to promote energy efficiency, renewable energy and water conservation practices within their communities. Many Arizona communities are working to improve the efficiency of existing building stock in the residential and commercial sectors to promote sustainability and help protect community members from rising energy costs. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns With enabling legislation, local governments could voluntarily elect to establish an energy efficiency, renewable energy and water conservation financing program and participation in the program would be completely voluntary for interested property owners. There would be no fiscal impact on the city or town. D. Fiscal Impact to the State There are no fiscal impacts to the State. Energy district authority would allow for opt-in energy efficiency and renewable energy financing programs at the fiscal responsibility of the property owner. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Flagstaff Name: Jerene Watson, Deputy City Manager Phone: 928-213-2073 Email: jerenewatson@flagstaffaz.gov League Staff: Ryan Peters 8 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: BFED 2 Seek legislation to allow cities and towns to invest in infrastructure and other improvements in a designated area, and pay for the investments via the increased property tax revenue generated by the new development. Submitted by: City of Surprise A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Economic Development Reimbursement Authority (EDRA) is a mechanism that allows cities and towns to stimulate new development that may not otherwise take place by reimbursing developers for eligible costs within the authority’s boundaries. The reimbursements are funded with the incremental difference between property tax collections before the project and after the project. This new tool can attract business and jobs to a community and can also be used to assist in business expansion for existing enterprise. It is also a carefully crafted tool to ensure taxpayers and taxing jurisdictions are protected from private risk. Reimbursement is only authorized if certain conditions are met and an oversight committee made up of city, county, and school district representatives approves the costs. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Promoting economic development and job creation is important to every city in the state of Arizona. Economic Development Reimbursement Authority would give municipalities another option for supporting these projects. For those proposals or projects that are pending financing, this legislation could serve as a catalyst for economic development. For municipalities that choose not to use this tool, this legislation would have no impact. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns The legislation calls for EDRAs to capture NEW property tax revenue that is generated as a result of a project being built and to use only that revenue for reimbursement of approved development related needs. Once the EDRA expires all of the property tax revenue will be distributed as usual. An EDRA cannot be formed without the agreement and support of the county and school districts. Municipal taxpayers located outside the district would also be held harmless. D. Fiscal Impact to the State No state funds would be involved in the funding of an EDRA because the legislation pertains only to property tax. However, the state would receive increased income tax collections from the new employees that work within the district in addition to increased corporate income tax receipts from the companies that move into the district. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Surprise Name: Nicole Lance, Deputy City Manager Phone: (623) 222-1030 Email: nicole.lance@surpriseaz.gov League Staff: Ryan Peters 9 Chair’s Report of the General Administration, Human Resources and Elections Policy Committee Mayor Lana Mook, El Mirage, Chair Resolutions Committee Meeting, League Annual Conference Tuesday, August 18, 2015 On Friday, June 5, the General Administration, Human Resources and Elections Policy Committee (GAHRE) met at the League of Arizona Cities and Towns Office to discuss fourteen policy issues that had been submitted by cities and towns for consideration in the new policy committee format established by the League Executive Committee in 2014. Those fourteen policy issues and the sponsoring cities are summarized below: 1. Conduct thorough reform of the PSPRS System based on the principles provided by the PSPRS Task Force in the Yardstick document adopted by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns Executive Committee. – League Staff 2. Revise state law regarding the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS) to balance contribution rates between employers and employees at a reasonably affordable rate for both. – Yuma 3. Public Safety Pension Reform: Adopt further improvements to Arizona’s public safety retirement system that will promote affordability for taxpayers while providing for the benefit promised to workers. These improvements should include a plan to effectively deal with the problem of unfunded liability, bringing a balance within a reasonable period of time while ensuring that Arizona remains competitive in its ability to recruit and retain talented public safety employees. – Flagstaff 4. All Arizona Cities and Towns would benefit from accurate actuarial, long term rate forecasting, new authority for pension funding options, and pension reform for PSPRS. – Prescott 5. Amend Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 39-121.01 to allow cities and towns to place reasonable balances on public record requests that are overbroad or abusive and on the frequency on requests. – Yuma 6. Allow publication of ordinances by summary rather than in full, with a statement of where the full text of the ordinance is available; coupled with requirements to publish the ordinances in full on the municipal website and to provide copies free of charge for 30 days. - Jerome 7. Affirmatively reject, oppose and renounce legislative proposals that are unfunded, diminish local authority, address matters of purely local concern, or that conflict with the organic law of Arizona’s charter cities. – Yuma 8. Strengthen efforts of cities and towns to retain local control. Rights of municipalities to self-determine local legislation that reflects the desires of our community residents has been diminished notably in recent years.- Flagstaff 9. Develop legislation regarding annexation, resulting in a more simplified and flexible process with less excessive signature requirements.– Oro Valley 10. Develop a resolution that would simplify the annexation process when both the municipality and the property owner desire annexation. The proposed legislation would provide relief from the proportional width and length requirements if the minimum adjoining boundary of the property meets the minimum 300 foot requirement, there is a single property owner, and both the city or town and the property owner desire annexation, thus allowing the annexation of the entire parcel in one process. – Queen Creek 11. Develop and pass legislation that allows greater flexibility in annexing county islands. - Yuma 10 12. Amend A.R.S. § 48-574 to authorize retention and detention basin improvement districts to levy and expend money to operate, maintain, repair and improve retention and detention basins within a municipality. – Yuma 13. Set the super majority requirement as simply being "greater than 2/3." In the case of Phoenix and any other nine-member council, this would not change anything: 6 of 9 would still be required for 2/3, and 7 of 9 would still be required for a super majority. However, seven-member councils would get a more reasonable set of expectations: a 5 of 7 vote, which is 71% of the council, is at the midpoint between 2/3 and 3/4, so it would serve equally well, on average, for both requirements. - Sedona 14. Set the requirement(s) to achieve a valid legal protest relating to re-zoning as 20% of the area within the re-zoned area or 20% of the area of lots of property owners within 150 feet of the property to be re-zoned whether adjacent (sharing a border) or non-adjacent (e.g., across the street). – Sedona Below is a summary of the committee discussion and the recommendation: Discussion on Policy Issues 1-4 related to reform of the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS) was informative with a presentation from Scott McCarty on the “Yardstick” document developed by the League’s Pension Task Force. The Yardstick is a statement of those elements that are critical to a healthy, sustainable retirement program. Committee members determined that Issues 2-4 were included within the elements identified by the Yardstick document. Committee members voted to move Policy Issues 1-4 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 1 on Resolutions Listing). The City of Yuma provided background on Policy Issue 5 and informed the members of the Committee that they had consensus legislation that they had drafted last year with the newspaper Industry and an industry representative at the meeting confirmed that they were in support of the legislation that was considered in last year’s session. Committee members voted to move Policy Issue 5 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 2 on Resolutions Listing). The Town of Jerome provided background on Policy Issue 6 and informed the members of the Committee that they believed that similar legislation in other states had saved money and time for the municipal clerks tasked with the publication of ordinances and other documents in local papers. Committee members discussed that this was a sensitive issue with elected officials and it was suggested that perhaps a non-legislative solution could be found; at the very least, the newspaper association agreed to meet with League Staff and city/town staff to work on the issue. The Committee voted to work on Policy Issue 6 with League staff and other interested parties. Discussion on Policy Issues 7-8 related to ongoing efforts of the League to protect local control and charter authority. Specific discussion was had concerning how to strengthen the League’s ability to fight legislation that diminishes city and town authority to determine its own destiny. Committee members determined that Issues 7-8 were included within the continuing “Guiding Principles” provided each year in the League’s Policy Statement. Committee members voted to move Policy Issues 7-8 forward as a Guiding Principles in the League’s Policy Statement. Discussion on Policy Issues 9 & 11 related to simplification of the annexation process as it relates to the signature requirements and eliminating counties islands. Input from the Town of Oro Valley and the City of Yuma stressed that having signature requirements based on both assessed valuation as well as the total number of property owners seemed to be too onerous. Committee members voted to move Policy Issues 9 & 11 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 3 on Resolutions Listing). The Town of Queen Creek provided background on Policy Issue 10 informing the Committee that length and width requirements in annexation statutes had sometimes caused problems in a very specific situation. If one property owner and the city or town desired for a parcel to be annexed, if the parcel did not meet length and width requirements, it was necessary to do multiple, piecemeal annexations to complete the annexation of the entire parcel. Committee members voted to move Policy Issue 10 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 4 on Resolutions Listing). The City of Yuma provided background on Policy Issue 12 and informed the members of the Committee that this policy issue is the same as an approved resolution from last year’s resolution committee. Committee members voted to move Policy Issue 12 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 5 on Resolutions Listing). Discussion on Policy Issues 13-14 related to simplification of the rezoning process as it related to supermajority vote and legal protest requirements. The Committee felt that because these issues are complicated and controversial that the Committee needed to have a more in-depth discussion and more work on these two policy issues. The Committee voted 11 to work on Policy Issues 13-14 with League staff, the City of Sedona and other interested parties. The table below summarizes the GAHRE Committee’s actions: Policy Issue Disposition by Committee Policy Issues 1-4 Resolution GAHRE 1 Policy Issue 5 Resolution GAHRE 2 Policy Issue 6 Continued Committee Work Policy Issues 7-8 Guiding Principles Policy Issues 9 & 11 Resolution GAHRE 3 Policy Issue 10 Resolution GAHRE 4 Policy Issue 12 Resolution GAHRE 5 Policy Issues 13-14 Continued Committee Work Lana Mook Mayor of El Mirage Chair, General Administration, Human Resources and Elections Policy Committee 12 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 1 Conduct thorough reform of the PSPRS System based on the principles provided by the PSPRS Task Force in the Yardstick document adopted by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns Executive Committee. This also includes specific aid for cities and towns to deal with unfunded liability of the system. Submitted by: League Staff A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution The League of Arizona Cities and Towns formed the Pension Task Force in the fall of last year to explore the reasons for the ever-increasing employer costs and unfunded liability related to the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS). The committee has undertaken nearly a year-long process of educating themselves on the various aspects of the system in order to determine what constitutes a healthy retirement system. After consultation with stakeholders as well as subject matter experts, both national and local, the Task Force has developed a tool called “The Yardstick”. The Yardstick provides a tool to evaluate proposals related to PSPRS reform by providing criteria that are vital to a healthy system. This resolution would give League staff the flexibility to work with the stakeholders in PSPRS Reform to make reasonable and effective changes to PSPRS based on the principles adopted in the Yardstick as well as explore other ideas that will aid cities and towns to reduce their unfunded liability in the system. Examples include providing an exemption to the state expenditure limit related to the unfunded liability of PSPRS for individual cities and towns as well as authority for cities and towns to finance unfunded liability. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy This resolution would lead to solutions and reforms that would save cities and towns significant revenue going forward. Public safety costs make up a significant portion of the budget for all cities and towns. Finding a way to curb those costs while providing a healthy, sustainable system for public safety personnel would be significant. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns This resolution would have a significant positive impact on the budgets of all cities and towns. D. Fiscal Impact to the State Because the Department of Public Safety participates in the PSPRS, they would benefit from the reforms being developed. E. Contact Information League Staff: Tom Belshe 13 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 2 Urges the Legislature to amend A.R.S. § 39-121.01 to allow cities and towns to place reasonable balances on public record requests that are overbroad or abusive and on the frequency on requests. Submitted by: City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution This Resolution seeks amendments to public records access laws that will allow cities and towns to facilitate and maintain timely and complete citizen’s access to public records while discouraging frequent, overbroad, or abusive requests.1 Municipalities receive and process thousands of requests for public records each year. Most of these requests are reasonable, coming from the media and persons who may or may not make other requests but who seek specific and limited information. However, there are times when filling these requests is delayed because of frequent, extensive, or excessive numbers of requests of other persons. Requests from these few individuals require a significant and disproportionate amount of staff time to locate, review, redact, and prepare voluminous amounts of documents or materials from multiple departments for inspection and/or copying. In some cases the requesting party doesn’t review the records after having been notified they are available for inspection. This creates unnecessary work for employees, delays other important work (including filling public records requests from other persons), and drains the public coffers. Some requests by these individuals are overbroad, such as requests for “All documents, e-mail, memoranda, etc. pertaining to the city action ……..” These documents can cover many years, require production of hundreds or thousands of documents, and involve research and review by several City departments. Again, after spending many hours locating, assembling, redacting, and copying these records, some are never inspected by the requestor. This resolution requests amendment of Title 39 to give municipalities the ability, in limited instances, to place reasonable restrictions on the number or frequency of requests made by a single individual and to limit certain requests such as those with a broad scope or that cover an extensive time period, and where the individual is unwilling to narrow the request. Such restrictions will allow cities to both comply with the spirit and intent of public records laws while discouraging the frequent, numerous, overbroad, or abusive requests. These limited restrictions will discourage abusive requests while maintaining public records access for all citizens. Those individuals making frequent, numerous or overbroad requests may be limited in the number of requests accepted within a specified time and have new requests held until all previous requests have been inspected. Additional requests beyond these numbers would still be filled, however the taxpayer would not have to continue bear costs of over-burdensome requests. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Transparency is an essential component of a responsive, representative government. Cities endeavor at all times to be open, accessible and responsive to their citizens. Making records available for inspection by the public and the media is important to maintaining transparency and trust in government. Most citizens and the media are conscientious and purposeful in their requests. However, requests by a few individuals that are overbroad or abusive and require disproportionate amounts of city-wide staff time do not further the goal of transparency and will hurt citizen access to, and the availability of, public records. Last year, legislation was crafted that included the cities and towns and newspaper associations that recognized the importance of government transparency, 1 Nothing in this Resolution is intended to limit media access to public records. 14 while recognizing those requests that were abusive and overreaching. We hope to pursue that same legislation this year. Here are some bullet points of the specifics in last year’s language: • Establishes, as a defense to any action related to a request for access to public records, that the request is unduly burdensome or harassing. • Specifies that a request for public records may be unduly burdensome if either of the following apply: o the request does not identify the requested records with reasonable particularity; or o the request cannot be narrowed or reduced to a manageable degree after the officer or public body explains in writing both why the request is not manageable and provides the person seeking the records a reasonable opportunity to narrow or reduce the request to a manageable degree. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Cities will still respond to public records requests in the spirit of transparency and openness in government. Allowing cities some relief from abusive public records requests or to identify potentially abusive practices will free staff to perform other governmental functions. D. Fiscal Impact to the State There will be no fiscal impact to the State. However an amendment could include public records requests of the State, which will result in savings. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Yuma Name: Steve Moore: City Attorney Phone: 928 373-5057 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Tom Belshe 15 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 3 Develop and pass legislation to make the requirements for annexation a more simple and flexible process. Submitted by: Town of Oro Valley; City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution The annexation process is cumbersome and needs examination. This resolution proposes to advocate for reasonable solutions to the annexation dilemma. Excessive signature requirements are a deterrent to annexation. Cities and towns are required to obtain signatures from utility companies, and other entities, that do not own real property in the proposed annexation area. Cities and towns are also required to meet an assessed valuation threshold; but when the city or town does not levy a property tax, the value of the property is irrelevant. Over time, cities created county islands by annexing around the areas that did not meet the statutory signature requirements for annexation. This has resulted in pockets of non-incorporated areas dotted throughout cities. These county islands do not receive the same level of public services, such as improved infrastructure, water and sewer services, sanitation, and public safety and emergency services, as the property as close as next door. An unintended consequence is that when an emergency arises in an unincorporated area that is wholly within or adjoining a city’s boundaries, there is often confusion over which agency should respond. For example, when emergency assistance calls from an unincorporated area are received by a city, there may be delays in responding while the call is routed to the county. Or, both jurisdictions may respond to a public safety event when the boundaries are not readily known, and in the worst case neither may respond. The irony is that unincorporated areas contribute to a city’s economy, but cannot participate in decisions affecting their community, and, at the same time, create burdens on cities that adjoin or surround them, and on the counties they look to for services. This resolution seeks to alleviate this situation and will benefit all property owners within a city’s annexation area and county islands. The League, interested members, and other stakeholders should convene to discuss these problematic areas and design legislation that will enhance the annexation process without undue burden to any one party. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Statutes regarding municipal annexation have become more complicated over time. Simplifying the annexation process to allow cities and towns to provide important urban services within their boundaries is good policy. Annexation also fosters civic engagement in the democratic process and a sense of shared responsibility for our communities. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Residents living in unincorporated areas are affected by decisions made by cities and towns, yet they have no voice in the governing process. Reducing the unincorporated population is a key strategy for cities and counties to maintain fiscal stability. Annexation allows cities and towns a way to expand their retail sales tax base, providing greater fiscal stability. This increased governance capacity ensures that cities and towns are able to provide adequate services to all Arizona citizens. If legislation moves forward that allows greater flexibility in annexing county islands, it would be up to cities and towns themselves to determine when and if they annex these areas. Those communities that choose to move forward will need to extend their services to newly annexed areas. Those costs would be different for each community. But nothing in the legislation should require a city or town to annex county islands if they feel they cannot provide services. 16 D. Fiscal Impact to the State There is no fiscal impact to the state when it comes to which local government provides local services. Minor adjustments in state-shared revenues would be made based on population changes, but it would be a reshuffling of the total allocation, not an increase in state revenues to local government. Eliminating barriers to annexation would also encourage economic development, which would ultimately result in increased revenue to the state. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: Town of Oro Valley, City of Yuma Name: Chris Cornelison: Intergovernmental Relations Director Phone: 520 229-4723 Email: ccornelison@orovalleyaz.gov Name: Steve Moore: City Attorney Phone: 928 373-5057 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Tom Belshe 17 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 4 Provide relief from the proportional width and length requirements of current annexation statute if the minimum adjoining boundary of the property meets the minimum 300 foot requirement, there is a single property owner, and both the city or town and the property owner desire annexation, thus allowing the annexation of the entire parcel in one process. Submitted by: Town of Queen Creek A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution The purpose of this resolution is to enact a change in state statute to simplify what can be an unnecessarily cumbersome annexation process. This legislative change would reduce the cost and time associated with the multi-step process that is currently required for certain annexations. Under the current annexation statute it is possible to have a scenario where a large single property owner may wish to annex into a municipality, and the municipality wishes to annex the property, however due to the overall shape of the parcel the annexation is required to take place in several steps over a significant period of time due to the proportional width and length requirements. The proposed resolution would provide relief from the proportional width and length requirements if the property meets the minimum adjoining boundary requirement of 300 feet, there is a single property owner, and both the municipality and the property owner desire annexation, thus allowing the annexation of the entire parcel in one process. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Annexation offers cities and towns the opportunity to expand their retail sales tax base, providing greater fiscal stability and promotes economic development. Annexation also improves cities’ and towns’ ability to plan for future growth and level of service needs for their community. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns This change would have a positive fiscal impact on cities and towns. It would lower the cost of annexation and increase municipal sales tax revenues in many cases. D. Fiscal Impact to the State: There would be no direct cost to the state to make this change. E. Contact Information: Sponsoring City or Town: Town of Queen Creek Name: Tracy Corman: Assistant to the Town Manager Phone: 480-358-3740 Email: tracy.corman@queencreek.org League Staff: Tom Belshe 18 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 5 Explore methods to finance the operation and maintenance of retention and detention basins including amending A.R.S. § 48-574 to authorize retention and detention basin improvement districts to levy and expend money to operate, maintain, repair and improve retention and detention basins within a municipality. Submitted by: City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Maintenance and operation of retention and detention basins has become an increasingly difficult and expensive proposition for cities and towns. This resolution would allow League staff to work on legislation that would help secure a funding mechanism in state law for such basins. A.R.S. § 48-574 currently authorizes improvement districts for the operation, maintenance, repair and improvement of pedestrian malls, off-street parking facilities and parkways. The proposed statutory change makes retention and detention basins eligible for operation and maintenance cost payment through an improvement district. Under current state law, improvement districts are not specifically authorized to maintain retention and detention basins. As a result, off-site retention, which benefits only a small, localized area, is often subsidized by landowners outside of the area receiving the benefit (and who may already bear the burden of on-site retention on their parcel). Alternatively, under current law, a municipality could require the formation of a homeowner’s or neighborhood association to maintain basins. Permitting a developer the flexibility to form an improvement district would allocate such costs directly to and in proportion to the benefit without the requirement of a homeowner’s or neighborhood association. The proposed legislation would allow operation, maintenance, improvement and repair costs for retention and detention basins to be included in the tax levy as part of a property owner’s tax bill in accordance with assessed value or assessment of each lot within the improvement district in proportion to the benefit to each lot. The district would not have the authority to issue improvement bonds or to engage in any activity other than operation, maintenance, repair and improvement of the retention and/or detention basin. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Improvement districts are prevalent across the state. A uniform process that allows cities and towns to more fairly distribute the perpetual maintenance costs of retention and detention basins will provide long-term cumulative savings to municipalities, provide developers with an alternative to homeowner’s or neighborhood associations, and facilitate ease of payment for homeowners. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Cities and towns that approve retention and detention basin improvement districts would realize savings that could be spent for other improvements or services. D. Fiscal Impact to the State There is no fiscal impact to the state. 19 E. Contact Information: Sponsoring City or Town: City of Yuma Name: Steve Moore: City Attorney Phone: 928 373-5057 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Tom Belshe 20 Chair’s Report of the Neighborhoods, Sustainability and Quality of Life Policy Committee Councilman Gilbert Lopez, Coolidge, Chair Resolutions Committee Meeting, League Annual Conference Tuesday, August 18, 2015 On Wednesday, June 24, and Monday, July 6 the Neighborhoods, Sustainability and Quality of Life (NSQL) Policy Committee met at the League of Arizona Cities and Towns to discuss five policy issues submitted by cities and towns for. Below is a summary of each of the policy issues considered by NSQL along with the sponsoring municipalities: 1. Make provisions to allow towns, in certain circumstances, to bill property owners rather than tenants for utilities. - Jerome 2. Partner with cities and towns for the operation and maintenance of Arizona State Parks under long term leases, for a nominal amount, and to participate financially by providing for a dedicated funding mechanism to share a portion of the costs. – Yuma 3. Restore the Arizona Housing Trust Fund. – Flagstaff 4. Recommend the authorization of expenditures and full appropriations to restore the Arizona State Park Heritage Funds. Sahuarita 5. Expand the State Licensure Requirements and Local Enforcement Authority for Sober Living Housing - Prescott Below is a summary of the committee discussion and the recommendations: The Town of Jerome presented policy issue number 1. They proposed that there be revisions to statute to allow cities/towns, within certain circumstances, to bill property owners rather than tenants for utilities. After a historical review of the statute and other discussion it was concluded that this issue could be solved non- legislatively within the League. Stephanie Karlin, Vice Mayor of Avondale, volunteered to send information to Jerome as Avondale has already addressed the issue. Therefore, this submission will not become a resolution. The City of Yuma presented policy issue number 2. Yuma would like to see a partnership between cities and towns and the state for the operation and maintenance of state parks under long term leases (e.g., 25 years) instead of having a short term lease (perhaps three years). The long term lease would justify the investments made to maintain the parks associated with Yuma and other municipalities that have parks in their areas. This would be enabling legislation, not a mandatory requirement. Committee members moved this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution NSQL 1 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Flagstaff presented policy issue number 3. They proposed that the state should restore the Arizona Housing Trust Fund. Currently the fund is capped at $2.5 million. At its height it was $55 million, and $350 million was then leveraged through the Arizona Housing Alliance. Committee members moved this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution NSQL 2 on the resolutions summary chart). The Town of Sahuarita presented policy issue number 4. They seek to restore the Heritage Fund. There was discussion about the need to keep this issue in front of the legislature even if there will be a ballot initiative on the matter in 2016. Committee members moved this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution NSQL 3 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Prescott presented policy issue number 5. They seek to expand the state’s requirements and 21 local authority for sober living housing in order to have proper licensure, code enforcement, and tracking systems. There are other cities that have similar problems with these facilities. Problems include neighbor complaints, safety concerns due to overcrowding and potential fire hazards, and neighborhood deterioration. However, attention must simultaneously be paid to certain HUD regulations. The city has been working with experts and stakeholders across the state to help address this issue. There will be an ad hoc legislative committee as well, with the goal of finding a balanced regulatory scheme for resolving this issue. Committee members moved this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution NSQL 4 on the resolutions summary chart). The table below summarizes the NSQL Committee’s actions: Policy Issue Disposition by Committee 1 To be resolved non-legislatively. 2 Resolution NSQL 1 3 Resolution NSQL 2 4 Resolution NSQL 3 5 Resolution NSQL 4 Gilbert Lopez Councilman, Coolidge Chair, Neighborhoods, Sustainability and Quality of Life Policy Committee 22 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: NSQL 1 Partner with cities and towns for the operation and maintenance of Arizona State Parks under long term leases, for a nominal amount, and participate financially by providing for a dedicated funding mechanism to share a portion of the costs. Submitted by: City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Local governments and non-profit groups in Arizona have already entered into short term agreements to operate and maintain the parks in or near their jurisdictions. These agreements have proven to be successful. However, the state has been reluctant to enter into leases for longer than three years. In order to make the current partnerships between the state and local governments more viable over time and to encourage partnerships with both public and private non-profit organizations, longer term leases and a continuing, dedicated, and reliable funding stream from the state, local governments and non-profits will be needed. Longer term leases and a dedicated funding stream will assure that Arizona’s State Parks (ASP) remain open to the public as a recreational, environmental, and cultural benefit that supports and generates tourism, and provides important revenue to not only local, but also to the regional and statewide, economies. In addition, the availability of the State Parks system will continue to provide a high quality of life for Arizona residents and serve as an attraction to visitors and new residents. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy State parks are essential to the rural economies and people of Arizona. In addition, Arizona’s natural environment, including access to the environment through availability of state parks across the state draws millions of tourists to Arizona, benefiting every entity that relies on tourism as part of its economy. ASP is reliant on partnerships with local governments to make its state parks viable. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Increased tourism from state park activity means increased visitors to neighboring towns and cities. In 2007 this meant over $20 million in state and local taxes. (Source available upon request.) D. Fiscal Impact to the State Calculated at the state level for FY07, the total economic impact of Arizona State Parks (direct, indirect and induced) on the state was $266,436,582. (Source available upon request.) E. Contact Information: Sponsoring City or Town: City of Yuma Name: Steven W. Moore, City Attorney Phone: (928) 373-5050 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Dale Wiebusch 23 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: NSQL 2 Restore the Arizona Housing Trust Fund. Submitted by: City of Flagstaff A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Created in 1988 to provide a flexible funding source to assist in meeting the needs of low-income households in Arizona, the Housing Trust Fund receives money from the sale of unclaimed property, such as stocks or savings accounts abandoned by the owner, often due to a death without a will. The Housing Trust Fund was initially funded by 35% of unclaimed property proceeds, and then increased over time to 55% to better address rural housing needs. Prior to the Great Recession, the Housing Trust Fund received over $30 million annually. Due to state budgetary constraints, in 2010 the Housing Trust Fund was capped at $2.5 million. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Cities and towns, as well as non-profits, are eligible to apply to receive an allocation of the Housing Trust Fund to further housing objectives within their communities. Restoration of funding to the Trust Fund will enable a greater number of grant applications to be funded and other funding to be leveraged. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Funding from the Housing Trust Fund has the potential to bring much needed funding to communities to address housing needs, either through the city, town or a non-profit application for use to further local housing objectives. D. Fiscal Impact to the State When the Housing Trust Fund was capped at $2.5 million in 2010, the funding from the sale of unclaimed property was reallocated to other areas. Restoration of funding to the Trust Fund will potentially pull funding away from the areas to which it was reallocated. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Flagstaff Name: Jerene Watson, Asst. City Manager Phone: (928) -213-2073 Email: jerenewatson@flagstaffaz.gov League Staff: Dale Wiebusch 24 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: NSQL 3 Recommendation for the authorization of expenditure and full appropriations through the reenactment of repealed ARS 41-501, 503 and 504 to restore the Arizona State Park Heritage Funds. Submitted by: Town of Sahuarita A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution For years the Heritage Fund was swept into the General Fund, and in 2011 was eliminated entirely. This resolution seeks to restore the Fund so that State Parks and local governments could once again avail themselves of these funds. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Approval of this resolution and resulting policy changes would provide a vehicle for funding to continue municipalities’ and the states’ ability to provide and enhance the conservation of our state’s natural, cultural, and historic resources. It would shift the responsibility for these programs back to the state and reinforce the voter approved initiative that originally placed the burden on the state. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Reenactment of Arizona Heritage Fund appropriations would have a significant positive impact on recreational opportunities, environmental education for the K-12 curriculum and enrichment for educators, grants and research, and response to and help with ameliorating human-wildlife conflicts in urban areas. It also positively impacts the viability of State Parks as the sweep of funds has left them without funds for capital improvements or for any structural emergency. The loss of Heritage Funds has a direct impact on cities and towns due to the economic impact of State Parks. D. Fiscal Impact to the State The restoration of Arizona Heritage Fund dollars to pre-2009 levels would require $10 million that currently is used by the state for other purposes. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: Town of Sahuarita Name: Teri Bankhead, Asst. to the Town Manager Phone: 520-344-7110 Email: tbankhead@sahuaritaaz.gov League Staff: Dale Wiebusch 25 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: NSQL 4 Proposing the expansion of state licensure requirements and local enforcement authority for sober living housing. Submitted by: City of Prescott A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Sober living homes have proliferated in recent years and they have little to no oversight. As they do not provide therapy per se, they are not regulated by the Arizona Department of Health. This resolution seeks to allow for increased state and local licensing and regulation authority. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Sober living housing is a type of group housing that offers an alcohol and drug-free living environment for individuals recovering from alcohol or substance use disorders. Most sober living homes are considered “group homes for disabled persons” and therefore entitled to some level of protection under the Fair Housing Act of 1968, as amended. As one of the conditions of occupancy, residents agree not to use alcohol or prohibited substances. With the growth of these group homes, neighbors and other stakeholders have expressed concerns to municipalities, legislators, and the AZ Department of Health about the presence of these homes particularly in residentially zoned areas. Concerns also have been expressed regarding the need to protect the residents of some of these homes from unscrupulous providers. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Due to the unregulated nature of these facilities, there are often issues related to complaints of deterioration of neighborhood aesthetics and potential decrease in property values. In addition, if some type of licensing was available the city could receive revenue from these fees. D. Fiscal Impact to the State Minimal costs to the state are expected for increased regulation and oversight, which could be offset through the establishment of a licensing fee. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Prescott Name: Alison Zelms, Deputy City Manager Phone: 928-777-1220 Email: alison.zelms@prescott-az.gov League Staff: Dale Wiebusch 26 Chair’s Report of the Transportation, Infrastructure, and Public Works Policy Committee Mayor Jonathan Rothschild, Tucson, Chair Resolutions Committee Meeting, League Annual Conference Tuesday, August 18, 2015 On June 12 and July 8, the Transportation, Infrastructure, and Public Works Policy Committee (TIPW) met to discuss policy issues submitted by cities and towns for consideration in by the newly established policy committee process. Below is a summary of each of the policy issues considered by TIPW: 1. Urge the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to improve its communication with municipalities when studying changes to potential flight paths that would have a significant adverse aircraft noise impact on residential communities and urge Congress to amend key portions of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 that would help achieve the aforementioned request. – Phoenix 2. Stop future sweeps of Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) allocated to Arizona cities and towns, and to restore HURF funding to FY2008 levels.-Yuma 3. Support the inclusion of funding to accelerate design and construction of State Route 189 in ADOT’s Five-Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program. - Tucson Below is a summary of the committee discussion and the recommendation: The City of Phoenix presented policy issue one. They are seeking greater collaboration between local communities and the Federal Aviation Administration when flight route changes are proposed. The goal of the collaboration is to avoid disruptions in the affected communities. In order to achieve this, portions of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 need to be amended to require more timely notices of proposed changes. Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a federal resolution (now TIPW 1 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Yuma presented policy issue two. Statute provides a method of distributing HURF funds for the purpose of construction, improvements and maintenance of streets and roadways. The State has swept portions of these revenues each year since FY2008, mainly to support Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS). These sweeps directly contribute to delayed maintenance on streets which has caused many streets to now need total replacement, at a much greater cost. Poor condition of transportation infrastructure is a detriment to attracting new commerce and industry. Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution TIPW 2 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Tucson presented policy issue three. Municipalities across Arizona are in need of transportation infrastructure projects. The expansion of SR-189 is an investment in Arizona’s transportation infrastructure that facilitates trade, keeping Arizona competitive as an import and export hub. Nogales and Santa Cruz County cannot accelerate the construction without the help of partners throughout the state, nor will they be the sole beneficiaries of the completed project, as an unrestricted flow of goods between Arizona and Mexico benefits businesses throughout the state. Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution TIPW 3 on the resolutions summary chart). 27 The table below summarizes the TIPW Committee’s actions: Policy Issue Disposition by Committee 1 Resolution TIPW 1 2 Resolution TIPW 2 3 Resolution TIPW 3 Jonathan Rothschild Mayor of Tucson Chair, Transportation, Infrastructure, and Public Works Policy Committee 28 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: TIPW 1 Urge the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to improve its communication with municipalities when studying changes to potential flight paths that would have a significant adverse aircraft noise impact on residential communities and urge Congress to amend key portions of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 that would help achieve the aforementioned request. Submitted by: City of Phoenix A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution On September 18, 2014, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) implemented changes in flight paths to and from Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport as part of its effort to streamline departures and arrivals using Next Generation Air Transportation (NextGen) satellite-based navigation. Congress approved the program in 2003, and since then, the technology has been implemented in some of the busiest airports around the country. Phoenix was the tenth city on the FAA's list. The FAA is now beginning a new Metroplex process, looking at the Phoenix regional airspace. The goal of the Phoenix Metroplex Project is to improve the efficiency of aircraft arrival and departure procedures to and from various airports, including but not limited to: Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX), Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport (IWA), Scottsdale Airport (SDL), Deer Valley Airport (DVT), Falcon Field Airport (FFZ), Glendale Municipal Airport (GEU), Phoenix Goodyear Airport (GYR), and Tucson International Airport (TUS). The Project may involve changes in aircraft flight paths and altitudes in certain areas. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Requiring collaboration between the FAA and affected cities, wherever flight path changes are being considered, will help achieve the intended goals of efficiency while mitigating impacts on the local communities. Municipalities know their constituencies well and better positioned to report on how flight path changes affects neighborhoods. Without municipal input, the federal agencies may miss some key data that would be adverse to the quality of life for many residents. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns FAA’s rearrangement of flight routes since implementation upended decades of land-use compatibility planning that directed billions of dollars of private investment while the city invested hundreds of millions of dollars of noise mitigation efforts all based on the previous stable flight tracks. D. Fiscal Impact to the State There is no fiscal impact to the state. 29 E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Phoenix Name: Thomas Remes, Government Relations Director Phone: (602) 262-4413 Email: thomas.remes@phoenix.gov League Staff: Ryan Peters 30 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: TIPW 2 Urges the Legislature to stop future sweeps of Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) allocated to Arizona cities and towns, and to restore HURF funding to FY2008 levels. Submitted by: City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution HURF funds come from a number of sources including use fuel taxes, motor carrier fees, vehicle license taxes and motor vehicle registration fees. Statutes provide a method of distributing these funds among the state, counties, and cities for the purpose of construction, improvements and maintenance of streets and roadways within their jurisdictions. The State has swept portions of these revenues each year since FY2008, mainly to support Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS). These sweeps affect every municipality and county in the state. As a result of these sweeps, more than 38% of Yuma’s major roadways are in poor or below average condition. Delayed maintenance on streets has caused many streets to now need total replacement, at a much greater cost. The poor condition of transportation infrastructure is a detriment to attracting new commerce and industry. In addition to the direct impact on cities’ streets and roadways, this slowdown and halt of street construction and maintenance has cost jobs. The Arizona chapter of the Associated General Contractors estimated in 2011 that an estimated 42,000 jobs have been lost due to the lack of highway construction. This loss has had a negative impact on the economic viability of the State. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy The longer the attention to street maintenance is neglected, the more costly it becomes to bring streets up to even average condition. Many Arizona counties, cities, and towns experience a significant rise in population during the winter months. The declining street infrastructure negatively affects the states’ tourism industry and makes other warm states more attractive to these visitors. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns The sweeps have touched every county, city and town in Arizona. There are no replacement revenues for cities to tap. As maintenance is delayed, the cost rises. Restoring full HURF funding to local jurisdictions will allow much needed street replacement, repair, and maintenance. D. Fiscal Impact to the State Reinstating the statutory distribution of HURF monies, including the funds to be allocated to DPS pursuant to statutes, may require the State find other sources for revenue for DPS. 31 E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Yuma Name: Steven Moore, City Attorney Phone: (928) 373-5050 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Ryan Peters 32 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: TIPW 3 Supports the inclusion of funding to accelerate design and construction of State Route 189 in ADOT’s Five- Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program. Submitted by: City of Tucson A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution State Route 189 provides a critical international commerce connection from the Mariposa Land Port of Entry (LPOE) to Interstate 19, serving as a bypass route for commercial truck traffic to and from Mexico. Municipalities, county governments, and regional planning agencies throughout Arizona have advocated for the expansion of SR-189 to relieve congestion and protect this key trade corridor. ADOT has also recognized the importance of SR-189, having recently funded engineering and design work in the current five-year program. However, construction funding is not anticipated until 2021, a delay that will only benefit our competitors— Texas, New Mexico, and California. The Mariposa LPOE is one of the ten busiest cargo ports along the U.S.-Mexico border, processing more than 85% of the commercial vehicles and approximately 89% of the trade value crossing the Arizona-Sonora border. The recent expansion of the Mariposa LPOE has further congested the state’s most significant bottleneck in the flow of cross-border commerce, severely impacting Arizona’s ability to compete in international trade. Arizona is in danger of losing significant portions of this trade, a key economic engine for the state, to Texas and other border states. To support trade and relieve the current congestion, it is necessary to accelerate the improvements to SR-189 in ADOT’s Five-Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Municipalities across Arizona are in need of transportation infrastructure projects. The expansion of SR-189 is an investment in Arizona’s transportation infrastructure that facilitates trade, keeping Arizona competitive as an import and export hub. Nogales and Santa Cruz County cannot accelerate the construction without the help of partners throughout the state, nor will they be the sole beneficiaries of the completed project, as an unrestricted flow of goods between Arizona and Mexico benefits businesses throughout the state. D. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Arizona cities and towns share a mutual interest in growing and strengthening our economy. Mexico is a growing world market, as well as Arizona’s most important trading partner. A robust relationship with Mexico provides many opportunities for Arizona businesses, and helps grow our economy. If we neglect to make this needed investment, our Mexican trading partners will look to Texas and other border states for business-friendly transportation infrastructure that facilitates trade. D. Fiscal Impact to the State Mexico is the largest bilateral trading partner with Arizona, accounting for an estimated $30 million in two-way trade each day. Trade between the U.S. and Mexico is expected to increase dramatically over the next decade, and Arizona is well-positioned to become a global leader in international commerce by virtue of our proximity 33 to what is projected to become the world’s 5th largest economy by 2050. We must ensure that international commerce can efficiently and safely travel between Arizona and Mexico at the Mariposa Land Port of Entry, one of the busiest land ports in the United States. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Tucson Name: Ryan Anderson, Policy Advisor to Mayor Rothschild. Phone: (520) 548-9755 Email: ryan.anderson@tucsonaz.gov League Staff: Ryan Peters 1 July 10, 2015 Dear Mayor: It is my privilege to appoint you to the 2015 Resolutions Committee of the League of Arizona Cities and Towns. Former League President Doug Von Gausig, Mayor of Clarkdale and a member of the League’s Executive Committee, has agreed to serve as Chairman. The Committee is responsible for recommending items for inclusion in the League’s legislative program based upon a review of the Resolutions submitted by Arizona's cities and towns. The adopted Resolutions are outlined in the annual Municipal Policy Statement which serves as the principal guide for the League's legislative program for the upcoming session. The Chairs of the five newly formed League Policy Committees will present the Resolutions discussed in their respective committees to the Resolutions Committee at the Annual Conference. Included in this packet you will find the: • Resolutions Committee Calendar • Resolutions Committee Procedures • Policy Committee Reports and Resolutions The Resolutions Committee will meet on Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 1:30 p.m. as the first item of business at the League Annual Conference at the Starr Pass Resort in Tucson. Lunch will be provided before the meeting. The actions of the full Resolutions Committee will be formally adopted at the League’s Annual Business Meeting on Thursday August 20, 2015 at 4:00 p.m. Please officially accept your appointment or designate a council representative to serve your city/town on the 2015 Resolutions Committee, by clicking here www.leagueaz.org/resolutions. We look forward to having all 91 cities and towns participate on the Resolutions Committee. If you have any questions or comments regarding the Resolutions Committee, your appointment or the resolution submittal process, please do not hesitate to contact the League office. Sincerely, Mayor Mark Mitchell, Tempe League President Enclosures cc (via email): Managers, Clerks without Managers, Intergovs 2 2015 Resolutions Committee Calendar April: Mayor Von Gausig appointed as 2015 Resolutions Chairman. May-June Policy Committees meet. July 10: League to send out resolutions packets to membership. August 18: Resolutions Committee meeting at the Annual Conference in Tucson. August 20: Resolutions ratified at the Annual Business Meeting. 3 LEAGUE OF ARIZONA CITIES AND TOWNS RESOLUTIONS COMMITTEE PROCEDURES 1. Resolutions Committee Appointment The President shall appoint the Chairman and members of the Resolutions Committee. Only one elected official from each city or town shall be appointed to the Committee. 2. Duties The Resolutions Committee shall adopt statements of policy amending the annual Municipal Policy Statement, special resolutions and such other resolutions of courtesy, commendation or appreciation as the Committee deems appropriate. 3. Submission of Resolutions A. All resolutions, including resolutions of courtesy, commendation or appreciation, may be considered by the Committee provided such resolutions are submitted to the Chairman of the Committee or to the League office for consideration by the Policy Committees. The new resolutions process allows cities and towns to submit policy ideas to the League at any time during the year without the requirement of a co-sponsoring city or town. If approved by a policy committee, League staff will draft the resolution for presentation to the full Resolutions Committee. Sponsoring cities and towns, or other interested stakeholders may be consulted to provide more information on the idea and also may be invited to speak to the issue at one of the policy committee meetings. Submissions received after May 15 may not be processed in time for the Annual Conference. B Except in the case of emergency as determined by the chair of the committee, no resolutions submitted after the deadline specified in subsection A of this section or that have not been vetted by the Policy Committees may be considered. 4. Resolutions Committee Process A. The President shall assign submissions to the relevant Policy Committee. The Policy Committees will review submissions and develop pertinent resolutions for consideration by the Resolutions Committee. Only resolutions advanced by the Policy Committees shall be discussed at the Annual Conference Resolutions Committee. B. Resolutions shall be amended according to the process established by the Chairman of the Committee. C. The completed resolutions will go to the full Resolutions Committee at the Annual Conference for consideration. The chairs of each policy committee will be responsible for presenting the resolutions and their committee activities to the full Resolutions Committee. Notice shall be given to each member at least four weeks in advance of the meeting. 5. Final Report After the Resolutions Committee meeting, the Chairman of the Committee or a designee shall report to the entire league membership at the Annual Business Meeting those resolutions adopted by the Committee. Resolutions adopted by the Committee shall be formally adopted by the membership at the Annual Business Meeting and become the basis for the annual Municipal Policy. 4 The following policy committee reports and resolutions are arranged in alphabetical order. The recommended resolutions are categorized by their respective committee initials and numbered according to the order in which they were approved. Budget, Finance and Economic Development – BFED General Administration, Human Resources and Elections – GAHRE Neighborhoods, Sustainability and Quality of Life – NSQL Public Safety, Military Affairs and the Courts – PSMAC* Transportation, Infrastructure and Public Works – TIPW * No items were submitted to this committee. 5 Chair’s Report of the Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Policy Committee Mayor Kenny Evans, Payson, Chair Resolutions Committee Meeting, League Annual Conference Tuesday, August 18, 2015 On June 10 and June 30, the Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Policy Committee (BFED) convened to discuss six policy issues submitted by cities and towns for consideration in by the newly established policy committee process. Below is a summary of each of the policy issues considered by BFED: 1. Request and encourage the Arizona State Legislature to establish a mechanism enabling local government to establish renewable energy and conservation financing districts for commercial properties. – Flagstaff 2. Change ARS 32-144, Professions & Occupations, registration requirement where a commercial tenant improvement project of less than $10,000 would not require an Arizona Registrant to design and stamp the project. – Flagstaff 3. Equalize the tax credit treatment (maximum allowable credits and collection deadlines) of contributions made to qualified charitable organizations, private schools, and public schools. – Eagar 4. Seek legislation to allow cities and towns to invest in infrastructure and other improvements in a designated area, and pay for the investments via the increased property tax revenue generated by the new development. – Surprise 5. Seek a study by the League staff to examine the structure of the state shared sales tax distribution formula and make recommendations on possible improvements.– Scottsdale 6. Seek legislation to provide for additional revenue generation authority to address the changing landscape of the Arizona economy, and address the shift in growth that directly impacts the current statewide revenue models. – Prescott Below is a summary of the committee discussion and the recommendation: The City of Flagstaff presented policy issue number 1. This proposal is seeking legislation to form an opt-in financing mechanism for renewable energy and conservation districts. Flagstaff noted that this issue is being discussed as an economic development tool among a number of cities and Tucson has led recent efforts to meet with business community representatives, finance experts, and other stakeholders. The committee also noted that the legislature has been resistant to creating additional special districts, but if the resolution is broad enough, the League can continue to work on finding the appropriate legislative “mechanism.” Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a resolution with the understanding that it remain broad as the details continue to be developed (now resolution BFED 1 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Flagstaff also presented policy issue number 2. The motivation for this proposal is to make it easier to complete work on commercial improvements that meet certain conditions. Flagstaff noted that they had worked on similar legislation in the past that created an exemption for residential improvements that met specified conditions. The committee raised a number of questions about how the legislation would ensure public safety and satisfy design professional concerns. Committee members voted to work on this issue with League staff and other interested parties. The Town of Eagar presented policy issue number 3. The town noted that equalizing tax credit treatment among the beneficiaries is an important issue for rural Arizona and many White Mountain communities approved resolutions reflecting that. There is currently a deadline disparity and allowable credit disparity between public school tax credits and private school tax credits. The committee acknowledged that a strong public school system is an important community resource and considered it an economic development tool. The committee also remarked that this issue would be more 6 appropriate for public school associations to advocate for and that the League should maintain its core focus of advocating on behalf of direct municipal interests. The Committee voted to work on this issue with League staff and other interested parties. The City of Surprise presented policy issue number 4. They are seeking a new economic development tool that would be available to cities and towns to help facilitate projects while nearly eliminating taxpayer risk. The tool is designed to be a financing mechanism that reimburses eligible projects costs using the incremental gains attributed to project activity. Oversight over the mechanism will be thorough and collaborative with affected property taxing jurisdictions. There are some outstanding questions that have yet to be answered, but stakeholders continue to be consulted in an effort to resolve them to ensure that the legislation has broad support and passes legal hurdles. Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution BFED 2 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Scottsdale presented policy issue number 5. The stated purpose of the issue is to explore the state shared sales tax revenue system to determine if there are inequities that can be resolved. Committee members noted that the data necessary to accurately determine how much each city contributes to the shared system may not be currently available among all cities and towns. Without that data, it is difficult to measure the statewide impact. After significant deliberation, the committee amended the original proposal and recommended that League staff further study the issue. The City of Prescott provided background on policy issue number 6 informing the committee that this issue is appropriate for ongoing study of the policy committee and League staff. The town remarked that revenue sources are increasingly restricted and the changing economy requires municipalities to study alternative methods of raising revenue. Committee members voted to work on this issue with League staff and other interested parties. The table below summarizes the BFED Committee’s actions: Policy Issue Disposition by Committee 1 Resolution BFED 1 2 Continued committee work 3 Continued committee work 4 Resolution BFED 2 5 Continued committee work 6 Continued committee work Kenny Evans Mayor of Payson Chair, Budget, Finance, and Economic Development Policy Committee 7 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: BFED 1 Establish a statutory mechanism enabling local government to create renewable energy and conservation financing districts for commercial properties. Submitted by: City of Flagstaff A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution A renewable energy and conservation financing district authorizes local governments to facilitate the financing for related improvements for commercial property owners. Participation in the program should be voluntary, so property owners can opt-in to use the mechanism to finance their own energy efficiency improvements, renewable energy installation, and water conservation improvements. Such programs can deliver benefits beyond energy independence, including new economic development opportunities, increase property value, provide protection from increasing energy costs, and enhance community awareness. Numerous communities across the nation already have energy efficiency, water conservation, and renewable energy financing programs. At least 30 states have passed enabling legislation allowing local government to establish similar financing districts. They also define energy efficiency, water conservation, and renewable energy as a public benefit, and grant local government the authority to issue bonds. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy State law (A.R.S. 9-461.05) requires local governments over a certain size to adopt energy efficiency elements in their general plan. This resolution supports municipalities that choose to promote energy efficiency, renewable energy and water conservation practices within their communities. Many Arizona communities are working to improve the efficiency of existing building stock in the residential and commercial sectors to promote sustainability and help protect community members from rising energy costs. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns With enabling legislation, local governments could voluntarily elect to establish an energy efficiency, renewable energy and water conservation financing program and participation in the program would be completely voluntary for interested property owners. There would be no fiscal impact on the city or town. D. Fiscal Impact to the State There are no fiscal impacts to the State. Energy district authority would allow for opt-in energy efficiency and renewable energy financing programs at the fiscal responsibility of the property owner. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Flagstaff Name: Jerene Watson, Deputy City Manager Phone: 928-213-2073 Email: jerenewatson@flagstaffaz.gov League Staff: Ryan Peters 8 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: BFED 2 Seek legislation to allow cities and towns to invest in infrastructure and other improvements in a designated area, and pay for the investments via the increased property tax revenue generated by the new development. Submitted by: City of Surprise A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Economic Development Reimbursement Authority (EDRA) is a mechanism that allows cities and towns to stimulate new development that may not otherwise take place by reimbursing developers for eligible costs within the authority’s boundaries. The reimbursements are funded with the incremental difference between property tax collections before the project and after the project. This new tool can attract business and jobs to a community and can also be used to assist in business expansion for existing enterprise. It is also a carefully crafted tool to ensure taxpayers and taxing jurisdictions are protected from private risk. Reimbursement is only authorized if certain conditions are met and an oversight committee made up of city, county, and school district representatives approves the costs. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Promoting economic development and job creation is important to every city in the state of Arizona. Economic Development Reimbursement Authority would give municipalities another option for supporting these projects. For those proposals or projects that are pending financing, this legislation could serve as a catalyst for economic development. For municipalities that choose not to use this tool, this legislation would have no impact. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns The legislation calls for EDRAs to capture NEW property tax revenue that is generated as a result of a project being built and to use only that revenue for reimbursement of approved development related needs. Once the EDRA expires all of the property tax revenue will be distributed as usual. An EDRA cannot be formed without the agreement and support of the county and school districts. Municipal taxpayers located outside the district would also be held harmless. D. Fiscal Impact to the State No state funds would be involved in the funding of an EDRA because the legislation pertains only to property tax. However, the state would receive increased income tax collections from the new employees that work within the district in addition to increased corporate income tax receipts from the companies that move into the district. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Surprise Name: Nicole Lance, Deputy City Manager Phone: (623) 222-1030 Email: nicole.lance@surpriseaz.gov League Staff: Ryan Peters 9 Chair’s Report of the General Administration, Human Resources and Elections Policy Committee Mayor Lana Mook, El Mirage, Chair Resolutions Committee Meeting, League Annual Conference Tuesday, August 18, 2015 On Friday, June 5, the General Administration, Human Resources and Elections Policy Committee (GAHRE) met at the League of Arizona Cities and Towns Office to discuss fourteen policy issues that had been submitted by cities and towns for consideration in the new policy committee format established by the League Executive Committee in 2014. Those fourteen policy issues and the sponsoring cities are summarized below: 1. Conduct thorough reform of the PSPRS System based on the principles provided by the PSPRS Task Force in the Yardstick document adopted by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns Executive Committee. – League Staff 2. Revise state law regarding the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS) to balance contribution rates between employers and employees at a reasonably affordable rate for both. – Yuma 3. Public Safety Pension Reform: Adopt further improvements to Arizona’s public safety retirement system that will promote affordability for taxpayers while providing for the benefit promised to workers. These improvements should include a plan to effectively deal with the problem of unfunded liability, bringing a balance within a reasonable period of time while ensuring that Arizona remains competitive in its ability to recruit and retain talented public safety employees. – Flagstaff 4. All Arizona Cities and Towns would benefit from accurate actuarial, long term rate forecasting, new authority for pension funding options, and pension reform for PSPRS. – Prescott 5. Amend Arizona Revised Statutes (A.R.S.) § 39-121.01 to allow cities and towns to place reasonable balances on public record requests that are overbroad or abusive and on the frequency on requests. – Yuma 6. Allow publication of ordinances by summary rather than in full, with a statement of where the full text of the ordinance is available; coupled with requirements to publish the ordinances in full on the municipal website and to provide copies free of charge for 30 days. - Jerome 7. Affirmatively reject, oppose and renounce legislative proposals that are unfunded, diminish local authority, address matters of purely local concern, or that conflict with the organic law of Arizona’s charter cities. – Yuma 8. Strengthen efforts of cities and towns to retain local control. Rights of municipalities to self-determine local legislation that reflects the desires of our community residents has been diminished notably in recent years.- Flagstaff 9. Develop legislation regarding annexation, resulting in a more simplified and flexible process with less excessive signature requirements.– Oro Valley 10. Develop a resolution that would simplify the annexation process when both the municipality and the property owner desire annexation. The proposed legislation would provide relief from the proportional width and length requirements if the minimum adjoining boundary of the property meets the minimum 300 foot requirement, there is a single property owner, and both the city or town and the property owner desire annexation, thus allowing the annexation of the entire parcel in one process. – Queen Creek 11. Develop and pass legislation that allows greater flexibility in annexing county islands. - Yuma 10 12. Amend A.R.S. § 48-574 to authorize retention and detention basin improvement districts to levy and expend money to operate, maintain, repair and improve retention and detention basins within a municipality. – Yuma 13. Set the super majority requirement as simply being "greater than 2/3." In the case of Phoenix and any other nine-member council, this would not change anything: 6 of 9 would still be required for 2/3, and 7 of 9 would still be required for a super majority. However, seven-member councils would get a more reasonable set of expectations: a 5 of 7 vote, which is 71% of the council, is at the midpoint between 2/3 and 3/4, so it would serve equally well, on average, for both requirements. - Sedona 14. Set the requirement(s) to achieve a valid legal protest relating to re-zoning as 20% of the area within the re-zoned area or 20% of the area of lots of property owners within 150 feet of the property to be re-zoned whether adjacent (sharing a border) or non-adjacent (e.g., across the street). – Sedona Below is a summary of the committee discussion and the recommendation: Discussion on Policy Issues 1-4 related to reform of the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS) was informative with a presentation from Scott McCarty on the “Yardstick” document developed by the League’s Pension Task Force. The Yardstick is a statement of those elements that are critical to a healthy, sustainable retirement program. Committee members determined that Issues 2-4 were included within the elements identified by the Yardstick document. Committee members voted to move Policy Issues 1-4 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 1 on Resolutions Listing). The City of Yuma provided background on Policy Issue 5 and informed the members of the Committee that they had consensus legislation that they had drafted last year with the newspaper Industry and an industry representative at the meeting confirmed that they were in support of the legislation that was considered in last year’s session. Committee members voted to move Policy Issue 5 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 2 on Resolutions Listing). The Town of Jerome provided background on Policy Issue 6 and informed the members of the Committee that they believed that similar legislation in other states had saved money and time for the municipal clerks tasked with the publication of ordinances and other documents in local papers. Committee members discussed that this was a sensitive issue with elected officials and it was suggested that perhaps a non-legislative solution could be found; at the very least, the newspaper association agreed to meet with League Staff and city/town staff to work on the issue. The Committee voted to work on Policy Issue 6 with League staff and other interested parties. Discussion on Policy Issues 7-8 related to ongoing efforts of the League to protect local control and charter authority. Specific discussion was had concerning how to strengthen the League’s ability to fight legislation that diminishes city and town authority to determine its own destiny. Committee members determined that Issues 7-8 were included within the continuing “Guiding Principles” provided each year in the League’s Policy Statement. Committee members voted to move Policy Issues 7-8 forward as a Guiding Principles in the League’s Policy Statement. Discussion on Policy Issues 9 & 11 related to simplification of the annexation process as it relates to the signature requirements and eliminating counties islands. Input from the Town of Oro Valley and the City of Yuma stressed that having signature requirements based on both assessed valuation as well as the total number of property owners seemed to be too onerous. Committee members voted to move Policy Issues 9 & 11 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 3 on Resolutions Listing). The Town of Queen Creek provided background on Policy Issue 10 informing the Committee that length and width requirements in annexation statutes had sometimes caused problems in a very specific situation. If one property owner and the city or town desired for a parcel to be annexed, if the parcel did not meet length and width requirements, it was necessary to do multiple, piecemeal annexations to complete the annexation of the entire parcel. Committee members voted to move Policy Issue 10 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 4 on Resolutions Listing). The City of Yuma provided background on Policy Issue 12 and informed the members of the Committee that this policy issue is the same as an approved resolution from last year’s resolution committee. Committee members voted to move Policy Issue 12 forward as a Resolution (see Resolution GAHRE 5 on Resolutions Listing). Discussion on Policy Issues 13-14 related to simplification of the rezoning process as it related to supermajority vote and legal protest requirements. The Committee felt that because these issues are complicated and controversial that the Committee needed to have a more in-depth discussion and more work on these two policy issues. The Committee voted 11 to work on Policy Issues 13-14 with League staff, the City of Sedona and other interested parties. The table below summarizes the GAHRE Committee’s actions: Policy Issue Disposition by Committee Policy Issues 1-4 Resolution GAHRE 1 Policy Issue 5 Resolution GAHRE 2 Policy Issue 6 Continued Committee Work Policy Issues 7-8 Guiding Principles Policy Issues 9 & 11 Resolution GAHRE 3 Policy Issue 10 Resolution GAHRE 4 Policy Issue 12 Resolution GAHRE 5 Policy Issues 13-14 Continued Committee Work Lana Mook Mayor of El Mirage Chair, General Administration, Human Resources and Elections Policy Committee 12 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 1 Conduct thorough reform of the PSPRS System based on the principles provided by the PSPRS Task Force in the Yardstick document adopted by the League of Arizona Cities and Towns Executive Committee. This also includes specific aid for cities and towns to deal with unfunded liability of the system. Submitted by: League Staff A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution The League of Arizona Cities and Towns formed the Pension Task Force in the fall of last year to explore the reasons for the ever-increasing employer costs and unfunded liability related to the Public Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS). The committee has undertaken nearly a year-long process of educating themselves on the various aspects of the system in order to determine what constitutes a healthy retirement system. After consultation with stakeholders as well as subject matter experts, both national and local, the Task Force has developed a tool called “The Yardstick”. The Yardstick provides a tool to evaluate proposals related to PSPRS reform by providing criteria that are vital to a healthy system. This resolution would give League staff the flexibility to work with the stakeholders in PSPRS Reform to make reasonable and effective changes to PSPRS based on the principles adopted in the Yardstick as well as explore other ideas that will aid cities and towns to reduce their unfunded liability in the system. Examples include providing an exemption to the state expenditure limit related to the unfunded liability of PSPRS for individual cities and towns as well as authority for cities and towns to finance unfunded liability. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy This resolution would lead to solutions and reforms that would save cities and towns significant revenue going forward. Public safety costs make up a significant portion of the budget for all cities and towns. Finding a way to curb those costs while providing a healthy, sustainable system for public safety personnel would be significant. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns This resolution would have a significant positive impact on the budgets of all cities and towns. D. Fiscal Impact to the State Because the Department of Public Safety participates in the PSPRS, they would benefit from the reforms being developed. E. Contact Information League Staff: Tom Belshe 13 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 2 Urges the Legislature to amend A.R.S. § 39-121.01 to allow cities and towns to place reasonable balances on public record requests that are overbroad or abusive and on the frequency on requests. Submitted by: City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution This Resolution seeks amendments to public records access laws that will allow cities and towns to facilitate and maintain timely and complete citizen’s access to public records while discouraging frequent, overbroad, or abusive requests.1 Municipalities receive and process thousands of requests for public records each year. Most of these requests are reasonable, coming from the media and persons who may or may not make other requests but who seek specific and limited information. However, there are times when filling these requests is delayed because of frequent, extensive, or excessive numbers of requests of other persons. Requests from these few individuals require a significant and disproportionate amount of staff time to locate, review, redact, and prepare voluminous amounts of documents or materials from multiple departments for inspection and/or copying. In some cases the requesting party doesn’t review the records after having been notified they are available for inspection. This creates unnecessary work for employees, delays other important work (including filling public records requests from other persons), and drains the public coffers. Some requests by these individuals are overbroad, such as requests for “All documents, e-mail, memoranda, etc. pertaining to the city action ……..” These documents can cover many years, require production of hundreds or thousands of documents, and involve research and review by several City departments. Again, after spending many hours locating, assembling, redacting, and copying these records, some are never inspected by the requestor. This resolution requests amendment of Title 39 to give municipalities the ability, in limited instances, to place reasonable restrictions on the number or frequency of requests made by a single individual and to limit certain requests such as those with a broad scope or that cover an extensive time period, and where the individual is unwilling to narrow the request. Such restrictions will allow cities to both comply with the spirit and intent of public records laws while discouraging the frequent, numerous, overbroad, or abusive requests. These limited restrictions will discourage abusive requests while maintaining public records access for all citizens. Those individuals making frequent, numerous or overbroad requests may be limited in the number of requests accepted within a specified time and have new requests held until all previous requests have been inspected. Additional requests beyond these numbers would still be filled, however the taxpayer would not have to continue bear costs of over-burdensome requests. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Transparency is an essential component of a responsive, representative government. Cities endeavor at all times to be open, accessible and responsive to their citizens. Making records available for inspection by the public and the media is important to maintaining transparency and trust in government. Most citizens and the media are conscientious and purposeful in their requests. However, requests by a few individuals that are overbroad or abusive and require disproportionate amounts of city-wide staff time do not further the goal of transparency and will hurt citizen access to, and the availability of, public records. Last year, legislation was crafted that included the cities and towns and newspaper associations that recognized the importance of government transparency, 1 Nothing in this Resolution is intended to limit media access to public records. 14 while recognizing those requests that were abusive and overreaching. We hope to pursue that same legislation this year. Here are some bullet points of the specifics in last year’s language: • Establishes, as a defense to any action related to a request for access to public records, that the request is unduly burdensome or harassing. • Specifies that a request for public records may be unduly burdensome if either of the following apply: o the request does not identify the requested records with reasonable particularity; or o the request cannot be narrowed or reduced to a manageable degree after the officer or public body explains in writing both why the request is not manageable and provides the person seeking the records a reasonable opportunity to narrow or reduce the request to a manageable degree. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Cities will still respond to public records requests in the spirit of transparency and openness in government. Allowing cities some relief from abusive public records requests or to identify potentially abusive practices will free staff to perform other governmental functions. D. Fiscal Impact to the State There will be no fiscal impact to the State. However an amendment could include public records requests of the State, which will result in savings. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Yuma Name: Steve Moore: City Attorney Phone: 928 373-5057 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Tom Belshe 15 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 3 Develop and pass legislation to make the requirements for annexation a more simple and flexible process. Submitted by: Town of Oro Valley; City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution The annexation process is cumbersome and needs examination. This resolution proposes to advocate for reasonable solutions to the annexation dilemma. Excessive signature requirements are a deterrent to annexation. Cities and towns are required to obtain signatures from utility companies, and other entities, that do not own real property in the proposed annexation area. Cities and towns are also required to meet an assessed valuation threshold; but when the city or town does not levy a property tax, the value of the property is irrelevant. Over time, cities created county islands by annexing around the areas that did not meet the statutory signature requirements for annexation. This has resulted in pockets of non-incorporated areas dotted throughout cities. These county islands do not receive the same level of public services, such as improved infrastructure, water and sewer services, sanitation, and public safety and emergency services, as the property as close as next door. An unintended consequence is that when an emergency arises in an unincorporated area that is wholly within or adjoining a city’s boundaries, there is often confusion over which agency should respond. For example, when emergency assistance calls from an unincorporated area are received by a city, there may be delays in responding while the call is routed to the county. Or, both jurisdictions may respond to a public safety event when the boundaries are not readily known, and in the worst case neither may respond. The irony is that unincorporated areas contribute to a city’s economy, but cannot participate in decisions affecting their community, and, at the same time, create burdens on cities that adjoin or surround them, and on the counties they look to for services. This resolution seeks to alleviate this situation and will benefit all property owners within a city’s annexation area and county islands. The League, interested members, and other stakeholders should convene to discuss these problematic areas and design legislation that will enhance the annexation process without undue burden to any one party. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Statutes regarding municipal annexation have become more complicated over time. Simplifying the annexation process to allow cities and towns to provide important urban services within their boundaries is good policy. Annexation also fosters civic engagement in the democratic process and a sense of shared responsibility for our communities. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Residents living in unincorporated areas are affected by decisions made by cities and towns, yet they have no voice in the governing process. Reducing the unincorporated population is a key strategy for cities and counties to maintain fiscal stability. Annexation allows cities and towns a way to expand their retail sales tax base, providing greater fiscal stability. This increased governance capacity ensures that cities and towns are able to provide adequate services to all Arizona citizens. If legislation moves forward that allows greater flexibility in annexing county islands, it would be up to cities and towns themselves to determine when and if they annex these areas. Those communities that choose to move forward will need to extend their services to newly annexed areas. Those costs would be different for each community. But nothing in the legislation should require a city or town to annex county islands if they feel they cannot provide services. 16 D. Fiscal Impact to the State There is no fiscal impact to the state when it comes to which local government provides local services. Minor adjustments in state-shared revenues would be made based on population changes, but it would be a reshuffling of the total allocation, not an increase in state revenues to local government. Eliminating barriers to annexation would also encourage economic development, which would ultimately result in increased revenue to the state. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: Town of Oro Valley, City of Yuma Name: Chris Cornelison: Intergovernmental Relations Director Phone: 520 229-4723 Email: ccornelison@orovalleyaz.gov Name: Steve Moore: City Attorney Phone: 928 373-5057 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Tom Belshe 17 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 4 Provide relief from the proportional width and length requirements of current annexation statute if the minimum adjoining boundary of the property meets the minimum 300 foot requirement, there is a single property owner, and both the city or town and the property owner desire annexation, thus allowing the annexation of the entire parcel in one process. Submitted by: Town of Queen Creek A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution The purpose of this resolution is to enact a change in state statute to simplify what can be an unnecessarily cumbersome annexation process. This legislative change would reduce the cost and time associated with the multi-step process that is currently required for certain annexations. Under the current annexation statute it is possible to have a scenario where a large single property owner may wish to annex into a municipality, and the municipality wishes to annex the property, however due to the overall shape of the parcel the annexation is required to take place in several steps over a significant period of time due to the proportional width and length requirements. The proposed resolution would provide relief from the proportional width and length requirements if the property meets the minimum adjoining boundary requirement of 300 feet, there is a single property owner, and both the municipality and the property owner desire annexation, thus allowing the annexation of the entire parcel in one process. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Annexation offers cities and towns the opportunity to expand their retail sales tax base, providing greater fiscal stability and promotes economic development. Annexation also improves cities’ and towns’ ability to plan for future growth and level of service needs for their community. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns This change would have a positive fiscal impact on cities and towns. It would lower the cost of annexation and increase municipal sales tax revenues in many cases. D. Fiscal Impact to the State: There would be no direct cost to the state to make this change. E. Contact Information: Sponsoring City or Town: Town of Queen Creek Name: Tracy Corman: Assistant to the Town Manager Phone: 480-358-3740 Email: tracy.corman@queencreek.org League Staff: Tom Belshe 18 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: GAHRE 5 Explore methods to finance the operation and maintenance of retention and detention basins including amending A.R.S. § 48-574 to authorize retention and detention basin improvement districts to levy and expend money to operate, maintain, repair and improve retention and detention basins within a municipality. Submitted by: City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Maintenance and operation of retention and detention basins has become an increasingly difficult and expensive proposition for cities and towns. This resolution would allow League staff to work on legislation that would help secure a funding mechanism in state law for such basins. A.R.S. § 48-574 currently authorizes improvement districts for the operation, maintenance, repair and improvement of pedestrian malls, off-street parking facilities and parkways. The proposed statutory change makes retention and detention basins eligible for operation and maintenance cost payment through an improvement district. Under current state law, improvement districts are not specifically authorized to maintain retention and detention basins. As a result, off-site retention, which benefits only a small, localized area, is often subsidized by landowners outside of the area receiving the benefit (and who may already bear the burden of on-site retention on their parcel). Alternatively, under current law, a municipality could require the formation of a homeowner’s or neighborhood association to maintain basins. Permitting a developer the flexibility to form an improvement district would allocate such costs directly to and in proportion to the benefit without the requirement of a homeowner’s or neighborhood association. The proposed legislation would allow operation, maintenance, improvement and repair costs for retention and detention basins to be included in the tax levy as part of a property owner’s tax bill in accordance with assessed value or assessment of each lot within the improvement district in proportion to the benefit to each lot. The district would not have the authority to issue improvement bonds or to engage in any activity other than operation, maintenance, repair and improvement of the retention and/or detention basin. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Improvement districts are prevalent across the state. A uniform process that allows cities and towns to more fairly distribute the perpetual maintenance costs of retention and detention basins will provide long-term cumulative savings to municipalities, provide developers with an alternative to homeowner’s or neighborhood associations, and facilitate ease of payment for homeowners. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Cities and towns that approve retention and detention basin improvement districts would realize savings that could be spent for other improvements or services. D. Fiscal Impact to the State There is no fiscal impact to the state. 19 E. Contact Information: Sponsoring City or Town: City of Yuma Name: Steve Moore: City Attorney Phone: 928 373-5057 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Tom Belshe 20 Chair’s Report of the Neighborhoods, Sustainability and Quality of Life Policy Committee Councilman Gilbert Lopez, Coolidge, Chair Resolutions Committee Meeting, League Annual Conference Tuesday, August 18, 2015 On Wednesday, June 24, and Monday, July 6 the Neighborhoods, Sustainability and Quality of Life (NSQL) Policy Committee met at the League of Arizona Cities and Towns to discuss five policy issues submitted by cities and towns for. Below is a summary of each of the policy issues considered by NSQL along with the sponsoring municipalities: 1. Make provisions to allow towns, in certain circumstances, to bill property owners rather than tenants for utilities. - Jerome 2. Partner with cities and towns for the operation and maintenance of Arizona State Parks under long term leases, for a nominal amount, and to participate financially by providing for a dedicated funding mechanism to share a portion of the costs. – Yuma 3. Restore the Arizona Housing Trust Fund. – Flagstaff 4. Recommend the authorization of expenditures and full appropriations to restore the Arizona State Park Heritage Funds. Sahuarita 5. Expand the State Licensure Requirements and Local Enforcement Authority for Sober Living Housing - Prescott Below is a summary of the committee discussion and the recommendations: The Town of Jerome presented policy issue number 1. They proposed that there be revisions to statute to allow cities/towns, within certain circumstances, to bill property owners rather than tenants for utilities. After a historical review of the statute and other discussion it was concluded that this issue could be solved non- legislatively within the League. Stephanie Karlin, Vice Mayor of Avondale, volunteered to send information to Jerome as Avondale has already addressed the issue. Therefore, this submission will not become a resolution. The City of Yuma presented policy issue number 2. Yuma would like to see a partnership between cities and towns and the state for the operation and maintenance of state parks under long term leases (e.g., 25 years) instead of having a short term lease (perhaps three years). The long term lease would justify the investments made to maintain the parks associated with Yuma and other municipalities that have parks in their areas. This would be enabling legislation, not a mandatory requirement. Committee members moved this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution NSQL 1 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Flagstaff presented policy issue number 3. They proposed that the state should restore the Arizona Housing Trust Fund. Currently the fund is capped at $2.5 million. At its height it was $55 million, and $350 million was then leveraged through the Arizona Housing Alliance. Committee members moved this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution NSQL 2 on the resolutions summary chart). The Town of Sahuarita presented policy issue number 4. They seek to restore the Heritage Fund. There was discussion about the need to keep this issue in front of the legislature even if there will be a ballot initiative on the matter in 2016. Committee members moved this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution NSQL 3 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Prescott presented policy issue number 5. They seek to expand the state’s requirements and 21 local authority for sober living housing in order to have proper licensure, code enforcement, and tracking systems. There are other cities that have similar problems with these facilities. Problems include neighbor complaints, safety concerns due to overcrowding and potential fire hazards, and neighborhood deterioration. However, attention must simultaneously be paid to certain HUD regulations. The city has been working with experts and stakeholders across the state to help address this issue. There will be an ad hoc legislative committee as well, with the goal of finding a balanced regulatory scheme for resolving this issue. Committee members moved this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution NSQL 4 on the resolutions summary chart). The table below summarizes the NSQL Committee’s actions: Policy Issue Disposition by Committee 1 To be resolved non-legislatively. 2 Resolution NSQL 1 3 Resolution NSQL 2 4 Resolution NSQL 3 5 Resolution NSQL 4 Gilbert Lopez Councilman, Coolidge Chair, Neighborhoods, Sustainability and Quality of Life Policy Committee 22 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: NSQL 1 Partner with cities and towns for the operation and maintenance of Arizona State Parks under long term leases, for a nominal amount, and participate financially by providing for a dedicated funding mechanism to share a portion of the costs. Submitted by: City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Local governments and non-profit groups in Arizona have already entered into short term agreements to operate and maintain the parks in or near their jurisdictions. These agreements have proven to be successful. However, the state has been reluctant to enter into leases for longer than three years. In order to make the current partnerships between the state and local governments more viable over time and to encourage partnerships with both public and private non-profit organizations, longer term leases and a continuing, dedicated, and reliable funding stream from the state, local governments and non-profits will be needed. Longer term leases and a dedicated funding stream will assure that Arizona’s State Parks (ASP) remain open to the public as a recreational, environmental, and cultural benefit that supports and generates tourism, and provides important revenue to not only local, but also to the regional and statewide, economies. In addition, the availability of the State Parks system will continue to provide a high quality of life for Arizona residents and serve as an attraction to visitors and new residents. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy State parks are essential to the rural economies and people of Arizona. In addition, Arizona’s natural environment, including access to the environment through availability of state parks across the state draws millions of tourists to Arizona, benefiting every entity that relies on tourism as part of its economy. ASP is reliant on partnerships with local governments to make its state parks viable. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Increased tourism from state park activity means increased visitors to neighboring towns and cities. In 2007 this meant over $20 million in state and local taxes. (Source available upon request.) D. Fiscal Impact to the State Calculated at the state level for FY07, the total economic impact of Arizona State Parks (direct, indirect and induced) on the state was $266,436,582. (Source available upon request.) E. Contact Information: Sponsoring City or Town: City of Yuma Name: Steven W. Moore, City Attorney Phone: (928) 373-5050 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Dale Wiebusch 23 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: NSQL 2 Restore the Arizona Housing Trust Fund. Submitted by: City of Flagstaff A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Created in 1988 to provide a flexible funding source to assist in meeting the needs of low-income households in Arizona, the Housing Trust Fund receives money from the sale of unclaimed property, such as stocks or savings accounts abandoned by the owner, often due to a death without a will. The Housing Trust Fund was initially funded by 35% of unclaimed property proceeds, and then increased over time to 55% to better address rural housing needs. Prior to the Great Recession, the Housing Trust Fund received over $30 million annually. Due to state budgetary constraints, in 2010 the Housing Trust Fund was capped at $2.5 million. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Cities and towns, as well as non-profits, are eligible to apply to receive an allocation of the Housing Trust Fund to further housing objectives within their communities. Restoration of funding to the Trust Fund will enable a greater number of grant applications to be funded and other funding to be leveraged. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Funding from the Housing Trust Fund has the potential to bring much needed funding to communities to address housing needs, either through the city, town or a non-profit application for use to further local housing objectives. D. Fiscal Impact to the State When the Housing Trust Fund was capped at $2.5 million in 2010, the funding from the sale of unclaimed property was reallocated to other areas. Restoration of funding to the Trust Fund will potentially pull funding away from the areas to which it was reallocated. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Flagstaff Name: Jerene Watson, Asst. City Manager Phone: (928) -213-2073 Email: jerenewatson@flagstaffaz.gov League Staff: Dale Wiebusch 24 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: NSQL 3 Recommendation for the authorization of expenditure and full appropriations through the reenactment of repealed ARS 41-501, 503 and 504 to restore the Arizona State Park Heritage Funds. Submitted by: Town of Sahuarita A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution For years the Heritage Fund was swept into the General Fund, and in 2011 was eliminated entirely. This resolution seeks to restore the Fund so that State Parks and local governments could once again avail themselves of these funds. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Approval of this resolution and resulting policy changes would provide a vehicle for funding to continue municipalities’ and the states’ ability to provide and enhance the conservation of our state’s natural, cultural, and historic resources. It would shift the responsibility for these programs back to the state and reinforce the voter approved initiative that originally placed the burden on the state. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Reenactment of Arizona Heritage Fund appropriations would have a significant positive impact on recreational opportunities, environmental education for the K-12 curriculum and enrichment for educators, grants and research, and response to and help with ameliorating human-wildlife conflicts in urban areas. It also positively impacts the viability of State Parks as the sweep of funds has left them without funds for capital improvements or for any structural emergency. The loss of Heritage Funds has a direct impact on cities and towns due to the economic impact of State Parks. D. Fiscal Impact to the State The restoration of Arizona Heritage Fund dollars to pre-2009 levels would require $10 million that currently is used by the state for other purposes. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: Town of Sahuarita Name: Teri Bankhead, Asst. to the Town Manager Phone: 520-344-7110 Email: tbankhead@sahuaritaaz.gov League Staff: Dale Wiebusch 25 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: NSQL 4 Proposing the expansion of state licensure requirements and local enforcement authority for sober living housing. Submitted by: City of Prescott A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution Sober living homes have proliferated in recent years and they have little to no oversight. As they do not provide therapy per se, they are not regulated by the Arizona Department of Health. This resolution seeks to allow for increased state and local licensing and regulation authority. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Sober living housing is a type of group housing that offers an alcohol and drug-free living environment for individuals recovering from alcohol or substance use disorders. Most sober living homes are considered “group homes for disabled persons” and therefore entitled to some level of protection under the Fair Housing Act of 1968, as amended. As one of the conditions of occupancy, residents agree not to use alcohol or prohibited substances. With the growth of these group homes, neighbors and other stakeholders have expressed concerns to municipalities, legislators, and the AZ Department of Health about the presence of these homes particularly in residentially zoned areas. Concerns also have been expressed regarding the need to protect the residents of some of these homes from unscrupulous providers. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Due to the unregulated nature of these facilities, there are often issues related to complaints of deterioration of neighborhood aesthetics and potential decrease in property values. In addition, if some type of licensing was available the city could receive revenue from these fees. D. Fiscal Impact to the State Minimal costs to the state are expected for increased regulation and oversight, which could be offset through the establishment of a licensing fee. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Prescott Name: Alison Zelms, Deputy City Manager Phone: 928-777-1220 Email: alison.zelms@prescott-az.gov League Staff: Dale Wiebusch 26 Chair’s Report of the Transportation, Infrastructure, and Public Works Policy Committee Mayor Jonathan Rothschild, Tucson, Chair Resolutions Committee Meeting, League Annual Conference Tuesday, August 18, 2015 On June 12 and July 8, the Transportation, Infrastructure, and Public Works Policy Committee (TIPW) met to discuss policy issues submitted by cities and towns for consideration in by the newly established policy committee process. Below is a summary of each of the policy issues considered by TIPW: 1. Urge the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to improve its communication with municipalities when studying changes to potential flight paths that would have a significant adverse aircraft noise impact on residential communities and urge Congress to amend key portions of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 that would help achieve the aforementioned request. – Phoenix 2. Stop future sweeps of Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) allocated to Arizona cities and towns, and to restore HURF funding to FY2008 levels.-Yuma 3. Support the inclusion of funding to accelerate design and construction of State Route 189 in ADOT’s Five-Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program. - Tucson Below is a summary of the committee discussion and the recommendation: The City of Phoenix presented policy issue one. They are seeking greater collaboration between local communities and the Federal Aviation Administration when flight route changes are proposed. The goal of the collaboration is to avoid disruptions in the affected communities. In order to achieve this, portions of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 need to be amended to require more timely notices of proposed changes. Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a federal resolution (now TIPW 1 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Yuma presented policy issue two. Statute provides a method of distributing HURF funds for the purpose of construction, improvements and maintenance of streets and roadways. The State has swept portions of these revenues each year since FY2008, mainly to support Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS). These sweeps directly contribute to delayed maintenance on streets which has caused many streets to now need total replacement, at a much greater cost. Poor condition of transportation infrastructure is a detriment to attracting new commerce and industry. Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution TIPW 2 on the resolutions summary chart). The City of Tucson presented policy issue three. Municipalities across Arizona are in need of transportation infrastructure projects. The expansion of SR-189 is an investment in Arizona’s transportation infrastructure that facilitates trade, keeping Arizona competitive as an import and export hub. Nogales and Santa Cruz County cannot accelerate the construction without the help of partners throughout the state, nor will they be the sole beneficiaries of the completed project, as an unrestricted flow of goods between Arizona and Mexico benefits businesses throughout the state. Committee members voted to move this issue forward as a resolution (now resolution TIPW 3 on the resolutions summary chart). 27 The table below summarizes the TIPW Committee’s actions: Policy Issue Disposition by Committee 1 Resolution TIPW 1 2 Resolution TIPW 2 3 Resolution TIPW 3 Jonathan Rothschild Mayor of Tucson Chair, Transportation, Infrastructure, and Public Works Policy Committee 28 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: TIPW 1 Urge the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to improve its communication with municipalities when studying changes to potential flight paths that would have a significant adverse aircraft noise impact on residential communities and urge Congress to amend key portions of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 that would help achieve the aforementioned request. Submitted by: City of Phoenix A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution On September 18, 2014, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) implemented changes in flight paths to and from Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport as part of its effort to streamline departures and arrivals using Next Generation Air Transportation (NextGen) satellite-based navigation. Congress approved the program in 2003, and since then, the technology has been implemented in some of the busiest airports around the country. Phoenix was the tenth city on the FAA's list. The FAA is now beginning a new Metroplex process, looking at the Phoenix regional airspace. The goal of the Phoenix Metroplex Project is to improve the efficiency of aircraft arrival and departure procedures to and from various airports, including but not limited to: Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport (PHX), Phoenix-Mesa Gateway Airport (IWA), Scottsdale Airport (SDL), Deer Valley Airport (DVT), Falcon Field Airport (FFZ), Glendale Municipal Airport (GEU), Phoenix Goodyear Airport (GYR), and Tucson International Airport (TUS). The Project may involve changes in aircraft flight paths and altitudes in certain areas. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Requiring collaboration between the FAA and affected cities, wherever flight path changes are being considered, will help achieve the intended goals of efficiency while mitigating impacts on the local communities. Municipalities know their constituencies well and better positioned to report on how flight path changes affects neighborhoods. Without municipal input, the federal agencies may miss some key data that would be adverse to the quality of life for many residents. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns FAA’s rearrangement of flight routes since implementation upended decades of land-use compatibility planning that directed billions of dollars of private investment while the city invested hundreds of millions of dollars of noise mitigation efforts all based on the previous stable flight tracks. D. Fiscal Impact to the State There is no fiscal impact to the state. 29 E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Phoenix Name: Thomas Remes, Government Relations Director Phone: (602) 262-4413 Email: thomas.remes@phoenix.gov League Staff: Ryan Peters 30 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: TIPW 2 Urges the Legislature to stop future sweeps of Highway User Revenue Funds (HURF) allocated to Arizona cities and towns, and to restore HURF funding to FY2008 levels. Submitted by: City of Yuma A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution HURF funds come from a number of sources including use fuel taxes, motor carrier fees, vehicle license taxes and motor vehicle registration fees. Statutes provide a method of distributing these funds among the state, counties, and cities for the purpose of construction, improvements and maintenance of streets and roadways within their jurisdictions. The State has swept portions of these revenues each year since FY2008, mainly to support Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS). These sweeps affect every municipality and county in the state. As a result of these sweeps, more than 38% of Yuma’s major roadways are in poor or below average condition. Delayed maintenance on streets has caused many streets to now need total replacement, at a much greater cost. The poor condition of transportation infrastructure is a detriment to attracting new commerce and industry. In addition to the direct impact on cities’ streets and roadways, this slowdown and halt of street construction and maintenance has cost jobs. The Arizona chapter of the Associated General Contractors estimated in 2011 that an estimated 42,000 jobs have been lost due to the lack of highway construction. This loss has had a negative impact on the economic viability of the State. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy The longer the attention to street maintenance is neglected, the more costly it becomes to bring streets up to even average condition. Many Arizona counties, cities, and towns experience a significant rise in population during the winter months. The declining street infrastructure negatively affects the states’ tourism industry and makes other warm states more attractive to these visitors. C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns The sweeps have touched every county, city and town in Arizona. There are no replacement revenues for cities to tap. As maintenance is delayed, the cost rises. Restoring full HURF funding to local jurisdictions will allow much needed street replacement, repair, and maintenance. D. Fiscal Impact to the State Reinstating the statutory distribution of HURF monies, including the funds to be allocated to DPS pursuant to statutes, may require the State find other sources for revenue for DPS. 31 E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Yuma Name: Steven Moore, City Attorney Phone: (928) 373-5050 Email: steve.moore@yumaaz,gov League Staff: Ryan Peters 32 League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution Resolution: TIPW 3 Supports the inclusion of funding to accelerate design and construction of State Route 189 in ADOT’s Five- Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program. Submitted by: City of Tucson A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution State Route 189 provides a critical international commerce connection from the Mariposa Land Port of Entry (LPOE) to Interstate 19, serving as a bypass route for commercial truck traffic to and from Mexico. Municipalities, county governments, and regional planning agencies throughout Arizona have advocated for the expansion of SR-189 to relieve congestion and protect this key trade corridor. ADOT has also recognized the importance of SR-189, having recently funded engineering and design work in the current five-year program. However, construction funding is not anticipated until 2021, a delay that will only benefit our competitors— Texas, New Mexico, and California. The Mariposa LPOE is one of the ten busiest cargo ports along the U.S.-Mexico border, processing more than 85% of the commercial vehicles and approximately 89% of the trade value crossing the Arizona-Sonora border. The recent expansion of the Mariposa LPOE has further congested the state’s most significant bottleneck in the flow of cross-border commerce, severely impacting Arizona’s ability to compete in international trade. Arizona is in danger of losing significant portions of this trade, a key economic engine for the state, to Texas and other border states. To support trade and relieve the current congestion, it is necessary to accelerate the improvements to SR-189 in ADOT’s Five-Year Transportation Facilities Construction Program. B. Relevance to Municipal Policy Municipalities across Arizona are in need of transportation infrastructure projects. The expansion of SR-189 is an investment in Arizona’s transportation infrastructure that facilitates trade, keeping Arizona competitive as an import and export hub. Nogales and Santa Cruz County cannot accelerate the construction without the help of partners throughout the state, nor will they be the sole beneficiaries of the completed project, as an unrestricted flow of goods between Arizona and Mexico benefits businesses throughout the state. D. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns Arizona cities and towns share a mutual interest in growing and strengthening our economy. Mexico is a growing world market, as well as Arizona’s most important trading partner. A robust relationship with Mexico provides many opportunities for Arizona businesses, and helps grow our economy. If we neglect to make this needed investment, our Mexican trading partners will look to Texas and other border states for business-friendly transportation infrastructure that facilitates trade. D. Fiscal Impact to the State Mexico is the largest bilateral trading partner with Arizona, accounting for an estimated $30 million in two-way trade each day. Trade between the U.S. and Mexico is expected to increase dramatically over the next decade, and Arizona is well-positioned to become a global leader in international commerce by virtue of our proximity 33 to what is projected to become the world’s 5th largest economy by 2050. We must ensure that international commerce can efficiently and safely travel between Arizona and Mexico at the Mariposa Land Port of Entry, one of the busiest land ports in the United States. E. Contact Information Sponsoring City or Town: City of Tucson Name: Ryan Anderson, Policy Advisor to Mayor Rothschild. Phone: (520) 548-9755 Email: ryan.anderson@tucsonaz.gov League Staff: Ryan Peters