Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2010.1012.TCOM.Minutesz:\council packets\2010\r12-16-10\101202m.docx Page 1 of 8 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE AND REGULAR SESSION OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL DECEMBER 2, 2010 EXECUTIVE SESSION AGENDA CALL TO ORDER Mayor Schlum called the Executive Session to order at 5:31 p.m. in the Fountain Conference room at Town Hall. AGENDA ITEM #1 – ROLL CALL AND VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION: PURSUANT TO §38- 431.03(A)(3), DISCUSSION OR CONSULTATION FOR LEGAL ADVICE WITH THE ATTORNEY OR ATTORNEYS OF THE PUBLIC BODY (SPECIFICALLY, RELATING TO PROPOSITION 203). ROLL CALL: Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Mayor Schlum, Councilmember Contino, Councilmember Leger, Vice Mayor Brown, Councilmember Hansen, Councilmember Dickey and Councilmember Elkie. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire, Deputy Town Manager/Finance Director Julie Ghetti, Senior Planner Bob Rodgers, Development Services Director Paul Mood, and Town Clerk Bev Bender were also present. Vice Mayor Brown MOVED to go into Executive Session and Councilmember Dickey SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0). The Executive Session convened at 5:31 p.m. AGENDA ITEM #2 – ADJOURN TO THE REGULAR SESSION Without objection, Mayor Schlum adjourned the Executive Session at 6:14 p.m. REGULAR SESSION AGENDA * CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Mayor Schlum called the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m. in the Fountain Hills Town Hall Council Chambers. * INVOCATION – Pastor Steve Bergeson, Shepherd of the Hills Lutheran Church * ROLL CALL Present for roll call were the following members of the City Council: Mayor Schlum, Councilmember Contino, Councilmember Leger, Vice Mayor Brown, Councilmember Elkie, Councilmember Hansen and Councilmember Dickey. Deputy Town Manager/Finance Director Julie Ghetti, Town Attorney Andrew McGuire and Town Clerk Bev Bender were also present. * MAYOR’S REPORT None. * SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES/PRESENTATIONS (i) The Mayor will read a proclamation proclaiming the week of December 12 - 18 "Meet Your Neighbor Week" in the Town of Fountain Hills. Mayor Schlum read a proclamation into the record proclaiming the week of December 12-18 "Meet Your Neighbor Week" in the Town of Fountain Hills. The Mayor said that meeting your neighbors could promote fellowship and goodwill during the upcoming holiday season and throughout the year and added that good neighbors looked out for one another and expressed concern in a variety of ways, which leads to an element of security and protection in z:\council packets\2010\r12-16-10\101202m.docx Page 2 of 8 neighborhoods. Mayor Schlum stated that knowing neighbors increased everyone's ability to share their time and resources and provides a strengthened sense of pride in your home and neighborhood. He noted that meeting your neighbors could be accomplished in a myriad of ways, such as simply introducing yourself when you see a neighbor outside or by planning an informal neighborhood gathering. The Mayor further stated that meeting your neighbors would nurture and enhance the wholesome sense of community that was so highly valued in the Town. Mayor Schlum said it was his privilege to proclaim "Meet Your Neighbor Week" in Fountain Hills and encouraged all Town residents to make a special effort to meet their neighbors and experience the many rewards that come from making neighborhoods even stronger in the community. CALL TO THE PUBLIC Town Clerk Bev Bender advised that one citizen wished to address the Council. Harris Deitch addressed the Council and expressed concerns about the garbage/trash problem that seemed to be infuriating most people. He said that right now the Town was proposing to have one trash hauler and everyone else wanted seven. He suggested that they all compromise on the issue and have two haulers, Allied and one other, and said that there should be a 3-year rate guarantee. He stated that this compromise might quell the concerns of the angry masses. Mayor Schlum thanked Mr. Deitch for his comments. CONSENT AGENDA AGENDA ITEM #1 – CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE TOWN COUNCIL MEETING MINUTES FROM OCTOBER 28 AND NOVEMBER 4, 2010. AGENDA ITEM #2 – CONSIDERATION OF A APPROVING A CHANGE ORDER TO THE CONTRACT WITH VISUS ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $16,700.00 FOR ADDITIONAL WORK ON PROJECT NO S6007 - DEL CAMBRE SIDEWALK PROJECT. AGENDA ITEM #3 – CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING A LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY SHERYL CRAIG MORGAN, OWNER OF COWBOY SPIRITS, LLC, DBA SADDLE BRONC GRILL LOCATED AT 11056 N. SAGUARO BOULEVARD, FOUNTAIN HILLS, AZ. THIS IS FOR A SERIES 12 LICENSE (RESTAURANT). AGENDA ITEM #4 - CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE CONTRACT FOR SERVICES BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS AND THE AREA AGENCY ON AGING RELATED TO HOME DELIVERED MEALS. Councilmember Leger MOVED to approve the Consent Agenda as listed and Councilmember Dickey SECONDED the motion. A roll call vote was taken as follows: Councilmember Dickey Aye Mayor Schlum Aye Councilmember Leger Aye Councilmember Hansen Aye Councilmember Contino Aye Vice Mayor Brown Aye Councilmember Elkie Aye The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0). z:\council packets\2010\r12-16-10\101202m.docx Page 3 of 8 REGULAR AGENDA AGENDA ITEM #5 CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2010-21, AN AMENDMENT TO THE INVESTMENT POLICY UPDATING INVESTMENT OPTIONS OTHER THAN LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOL - GOVERNMENT (LPIP-GOV). Deputy Town Manager/Finance Director Julie Ghetti addressed the Council and said that the Resolution before the Council this evening authorized an amendment to the Town's existing investment policy. She stated that the policy that the Town currently has was adopted in March 2003 and was certified by the Municipal Treasurer's Association of the United States and Canada. At the direction of a previous Council several years ago, the policy was informally amended to restrict investments only to those in the LGIP - the Local Government Investment Pool and Government Securities, which was where the Town's idle funds had been since that time. The LGIP-GOV invests only in those securities backed by the faith and credit of the government. However, this pool was much like a money market in that the funds are liquid and available within 24 hours, which meant that the interest rate on the return of that investment was very low (currently, it has been less than one tenth of one percent). Ms. Ghetti advised that the goal with the proposed policy was to allow for a more diversified portfolio through additional investment options but remaining with full credit backing. The policy has been reviewed by the Town's Financial Advisor Team, Wedbush Securities, who will not be participating in any investment solicitations, and the Town's Legal Team (Bond Counsel), Gust Rosenfeld. She reported that there was currently approximately $20 million in funds that were restricted and not programmed to be spent, such as the fund balance, capital projects money, development fees, etc. If approved, it was the intention of staff to solicit vendors, both local and non-local, who will be selected to manage a portion of the Town's portfolio. She stated that when staff was ready to go out to bid they would come back to the Council for their authorization to put out a bid. In addition, they also have the option of "piggybacking" on another municipality's Request for Proposals (RFP) that has researched and gone out for competitive bids. Staff also intended to have this amended policy recertified by the Municipal Treasurer's Association of the United States and Canada. Ms. Ghetti indicated her willingness to respond to questions from the Council. Mayor Schlum thanked Ms. Ghetti for her presentation. Ms. Bender advised that there were no citizens wishing to address the Council. Councilmember Leger MOVED to approve Resolution No. 2010-21 and Councilmember Dickey SECONDED the motion. Councilmember Dickey said it was her understanding that even if they paid an advisor, which they currently did not do, the Town would likely see a larger return. Ms. Ghetti replied that the goal of the investment was to currently invest their money and get a return back and she was sure there were fees included that the Town did not see. She said that this would work the same way, they would invest the money and get earnings back and she was sure there would be fees built into that. She added that the goal was if they can invest in a longer term of keeping it more liquid, they would get a better return. Councilmember Dickey commented that some of the brokers/financial consultants operate on performance based measures and said that she would hope that they would keep that in mind when looking at the RFP and the responses received. She asked if there would be a change in the amount invested and Ms. Ghetti stated that the goal would be to invest some of the money that was in the pool but not all of it -- they would want to keep a good portion in it because it was liquid (in the event that the Town needed it). She added that they would start out very cautiously and put out a few million dollars but again the goal was to diversify it and have a portfolio that was spread out a little more. Councilmember Dickey referred to Page 4 of 28 and noted that it said, "The Town's Finance Director or designee would establish written procedures for the operation of the investment program" and asked if that was something that Ms. Ghetti would have to do. Ms. Ghetti responded yes and said that the first thing she would do would be to have the policy certified by the Municipal Treasurer's Association and then once certified they would get into the written procedures, which she would develop. z:\council packets\2010\r12-16-10\101202m.docx Page 4 of 8 Councilmember Dickey said she had one more thing, and she was not sure there was an answer to this, but when she looked at the criteria and parameters of how they would do some of the investments, she did not see anything similar to what the State did, which was they do not invest in certain companies based on their locations, etc. and she wondered if that would be something that they might look into. She asked if they were going to have parameters like that. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire replied that staff could certainly look into that and if they find that there was some amended language that conformed to what the State did, then staff would bring that back to the Council. Mayor Schlum asked how quickly this would kick in after everything else was in alignment and Ms. Ghetti stated that it depended on how long it would take to get the certification and write up the procedures. She added that she would expect that sometime in the spring they would be able to put out an RFP and again, come to the Council first for approval. Mayor Schlum asked if all the funds and reserves would be available under this new policy for that new type of investment and she said yes, as they are now. The Mayor said that diversification was an element of the strategy going forward if it was to go forward. Ms. Ghetti said yes and explained that again they would be depending on the experts in the field to diversify it. She added that she believed they had expressed that in the policy -- no single investment in one large investment. Mayor Schlum noted that municipalities in the past have made investments that have gone bankrupt and asked whether this would put the Town at risk of doing something like that. He questioned how the Council would know what degree of risk they were investing in and who would advise them on that. Ms. Ghetti responded that the policy limits restrict investments to those that were only backed by the true faith and credit of the government. She said that there would be no risky investments. The issue with the cities that had lost a lot of money was the State Treasurer's Office (the LGIP) that had made an investment that turned out to be fraudulent so dealing with government securities only, which was all this policy allowed, would prevent that. The goal of the policy was preservation of principal, not return. They hoped to get a little bit better than less than one-tenth of one percent but they should be able to invest that longer than just keeping it very liquid. There were no further questions from the Council and the Mayor called for a motion. The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0). AGENDA ITEM #6 - DISCUSSION OF STAFF'S LONG-RANGE SIDEWALK PLAN AND SIDEWALK PROJECTS ANTICIPATED TO BE CONSTRUCTED DURING THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. Town Engineer Randy Harrel addressed the Council and stated that the Council had asked for a presentation on the Long- Range Sidewalk Plan for the next five years and staff will do so this evening. He noted that back in 2007 staff had presented the Council with such a Plan and staff was currently using that as a working document. The Plan showed proposed future sidewalk locations in the vicinity of schools, commercial areas and along arterial areas to complete gaps in the sidewalk system and the promote connectivity and safety. (Copy of the presentation available in the office of the Town Clerk.) Mr. Harrel stated that in the Town's Capital Project's Plan (CIP) they had two categories of sidewalks listed, one was the annual sidewalk program and one was specifically allocated to the Downtown area. The main criteria for inclusion of a sidewalk into the Town’s Five-Year Capital Improvement Plan was connectivity to schools and or parks, connectivity to the Downtown commercial area, and completing a gap in the sidewalk network, particularly along arterial and collector streets to maximize grant funds and other financial partners such as their neighboring communities. He added that when they were doing a road project it only made sense to do the sidewalk right next to the curb at that time. He referred to map that showed the sidewalk plan that highlighted the nine projects that staff was proposing to do in the next year's CIP. He noted that there were three focus areas and one was routes to the schools to the north, one was routes into the Downtown area in the central area and then Shea Boulevard to the south. z:\council packets\2010\r12-16-10\101202m.docx Page 5 of 8 Mr. Harrel referred to the focused areas on the displayed map in a numbered order and explained staff's proposal. He said that the first one would actually complete the sidewalk from Fayette up to the middle school (all federally funded; no Town funds required (S6006). He further stated that the next project (S6005) went along the Shea and Saguaro Street Improvement Project and in that project they would be adding a third lane westbound (west from Saguaro Boulevard to Technology) and so they would have a sidewalk going in with that as well as a sidewalk on the south side in the commercial area. He reported that this project was currently at 80% design and the sidewalks were actually a small part of the project and it was basically a 70/30 Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) grant (the estimated sidewalk cost was $170,000 out of the total cost.). He added that the third focus (S6007 and 6009) was along Saguaro Boulevard from El Lago down to Colony and was currently at 95% design, which was paid for by a grant from MAG. He said that staff looked at a couple of different options on this and one was to build it in pieces over a number of years, the second was to potentially include it in the package for the Saguaro mill and overlay project and the third was to seek additional grant funding. He stated that the project was designed to ADOT standards so that if there was additional Federal stimulus or other similar type programs, this would be a shovel-ready project. He agreed with the Mayor that this was quite an expensive project mainly because of the high slopes coming south from the Colony wash (they would need some big retaining walls there). He discussed the Downtown sidewalks that needed to be done and noted that each year the Town budgets money for sidewalks in that area. He said that last year they had put in a couple of sidewalks crossing Avenue of the Fountains and the year before that they had put in some sidewalks along Saguaro. He stated that they would be selecting on an annual basis which of these to design and construct. He advised that there was no grant funding for this project and staff did not anticipate receiving any funds. He noted that this has been a Council priority so staff was continuing on with that. Mr. Harrel referred to the Fountain Hills Boulevard sidewalk and said it brought residential areas into the Downtown area and noted that the construction was CMAQ grant funded. He stated that it was budgeted for this year to start the design of this project; a consultant has not yet been selected. He advised that project number S6007 was along Palisades Boulevard filling in the gaps between what developers had put in and projects that were there prior to incorporation. He added that project number S6047 was again a grant project, a joint project with Scottsdale, going on the south side of the boulevard from 142nd Street to Eagle Mountain Parkway. He said that staff needed to start coordinating with the Scottsdale staff on this because it was going to require a lot more effort to get two cities to work on it together. Mayor Schlum asked if that had an 11-foot wide path and Mr. Harrel explained that that was what Scottsdale has coming from the west to there. He added that Scottsdale has an ordinance that allows bicycles on the sidewalk and so they constructed from the west 11 feet wide to allow pedestrians and bicycles to utilize it. He noted that Fountain Hills and most other cities did not have similar ordinances (bicycles were not allowed to use the sidewalks unless specifically signed that way). He advised that they had a very narrow area between the retaining wall and the curb and guard rail on Shea Boulevard so they did not have room for bikes to go on the sidewalk. He advised that project number eight fills in the gap along the east side of Fountain Hills Boulevard between the existing sidewalks to the south and the project that was just about to get underway to the north (Fountain Hills Boulevard sidewalk to the middle school). Councilmember Contino commented on the fact that Scottsdale utilized asphalt and asked what would happen if the Town used asphalt on some of this to cut down on costs and get the work done quicker. Mr. Harrel stated that he was not sure there would be a significant reduction in the cost and explained that the asphalt section that Scottsdale used was a rubberized asphalt section that did have a decorative edged section. He added that certainly for this the Town would want to consider that as an option for their section presuming Scottsdale wanted to continue using that same section. Mr. Harrel discussed the San Marcos Sidewalk Project, which went from Fort McDowell to Four Peaks Park and Four Peaks School and the Boys & Girls Club. He stated that staff was in the process of applying for a grant from ADOT for Safe Routes to Schools funding and if they were successful, that would be a 100% grant and if they were not, they would go back to the drawing board and look at other options. He indicated his willingness to response to questions from the Council. Mayor Schlum thanked Mr. Harrel for his presentation. z:\council packets\2010\r12-16-10\101202m.docx Page 6 of 8 Councilmember Contino said that Mr. Harrel was probably here when they built the McDowell Mountain School and going down Fayette they had to put a sidewalk in and asked if Mr. Harrel remembered how they put the sidewalk in. Mr. Harrel responded that that predates the Town and him as well. Councilmember Contino advised that everyone donated money for one section of sidewalk all the way down and said that he was just wondering if they could do that with #4 where they could not seem to get connected. He asked whether that would be a possibility. Mr. Harrel stated that was certainly a possibility if the Council would like to pursue that. Councilmember Contino noted that it was such a short strip and Mr. Harrel advised that the Council could consider a Donate to a Sidewalk fund or something like that. He added that he was not sure that with the Town's funding today versus no funding and questionable jurisdiction from the Road District back in that time whether that would be something that the citizens would be as open to. Councilmember Contino said that it was just a suggestion. Councilmember Hansen referred to #6 and noted that there was a little section that was actual future sidewalk as opposed to proposed sidewalk (on the same block where Bashas was) and said it seemed as though that one should be moved up more than the ones on the north side. She said that she frequently sees people walking down that dirt stretch and there was more commercial on that side of the street and it would seem a good idea to get that one finished up before the north side. She added that right now it was in a secondary position to the north side. Mr. Harrel advised that they could certainly do that but said that the reason staff had not shown it at this point was because this was a ways out yet and also staff had actually seen a concept plan for expansion of Bashas into that area and if they actually moved into that, they did not want to preclude them from doing that (have the Town spend their money on it instead of letting them do it). He further stated that he agreed that they should consider that in this project unless Bashas or the developer of that center was moving forward with something because that was a sidewalk segment that the Town did receive complaints on because a lot of people do walk on that. He said that the problem was whatever they build there will become a "throw away" when it was built on. Councilmember Hansen stated that they have that in other areas too because with the sidewalks along Fountain Hills Boulevard, if there were any even minor improvements to that Boulevard (they were putting in a long stretch of sidewalk) that could conceivably be a "throw away" too. She discussed #4, a proposed sidewalk that runs from the Library/Museum down to Verde River, going across the empty lot, and she questioned the rationale behind that because if something was done on that property would that site be consistent with an easement or something that belongs to the Town. She added that the same was true for the one that goes along at the Avenue down into Fountain Park and she wondered if that location was taken into consideration (any planning for that intersection to make sure that that sidewalk location was strategically placed and consistent with the proposed site plan for that area). She said that the Council might need more information on some of these. Mr. Harrel commented that on #4, they certainly wanted to look at maximizing their resources by letting developers do projects on their frontage and then the Town can spend its money on frontages that were not going to be built by developers. He added that that was why staff had not put together a specific project list because it would be nice if all of the vacant lots were built by developers. Councilmember Hansen said that if you watched people on a daily basis, some areas were just begging to have work done. Mayor Schlum stated that when they get out to 2015-16, some of the reds on the maps should be more orange, more contemplated ideas like Councilmember Hansen was saying (the ones across the park and the one that crosses from the Library down to Verde River, etc.). Councilmember Hansen referred to #5 (on Fountain Hills Boulevard) and asked if the grant could be used for something else or was it site specific. Mr. Harrel first went back to #4 and stated that staff did not anticipate that they would complete all of these within five years unless developers built a sizeable portion. He advised that the grants they have were all specifically tied to specific z:\council packets\2010\r12-16-10\101202m.docx Page 7 of 8 projects and had all gone through various committee actions. He confirmed that staff will continue their efforts to obtain grant funding for these types of projects. Councilmember Hansen stated that the report said in 2007 the Council's consensus was that the Sidewalk Plan map should be a working document rather than have the constraints of an adopted document, since the Council reviewed everything before it went out to bid. She said her only concern with that was it seemed they ran the risk of getting too far along and so this very thing, (a grant applied for that was not part of a Council approved plan, was just going by the staff's working document), by the time it did come before the Council they were pretty well committed to that. Mayor Schlum commented that obviously it was kind of like the chicken or the egg -- you did not get the grant if you did not plan enough ahead but Councilmember Hansen was right, if they were going to get a grant, that was hard to turn down. Councilmember Hansen said that perhaps it would be good to go back to the plan and say are we still looking at this type of a format? Mayor Schlum stated that he thought that would be worthwhile and added that they went to this plan so they could plan out a little further ahead and grab grants whenever they were available. He asked Mr. Harrel if he had any thoughts as far as the process as described by Councilmember Hansen. Mr. Harrel advised that one of the things that staff wanted to do tonight was to show the Council some of the projects that were coming up and projects not only that have grant funding attached to them but also projects that staff would like to submit grant applications for over the next few years. He added that if the Council says "no, we don't want to do this type of project, we want to do more of that type of project and we would like staff to pursue grants in that area," then that was definitely what staff would do. Councilmember Hansen stated that sometimes they hear comments that sidewalks were going in places where you really did not see people walking, like out on Shea and then there were other areas where they saw people walking in the street. She said that perhaps they should be more sensitive to the areas where people are walking as far as sidewalks before they move on with the connectivity that they wanted to achieve at some point in time. Mayor Schlum asked if some of the areas Councilmember Hansen was speaking about did not have plans and Councilmember Hansen said that priority wise she was thinking more about the Downtown area. Mayor Schlum said that they could move #4 up earlier and said that obviously there were other elements that go into that (the grants in particular). Mr. Harrel noted that he was not a part of the decision on how much staff should put forward in the annual budgets and if the Council thought that that was not enough, staff would look at larger projects and accomplishing them faster. Councilmember Dickey referred to #4, La Montana and Parkview, and asked where Councilmember Hansen was talking about with a gate. Councilmember Hansen said it was by Parkview and La Montana where it makes a little curve around the corner. Councilmember Dickey asked if Mr. Harrel would like the Council to make suggestions regarding specific changes around Town. She stated that she understood what he was saying about Bashas. She asked when staff applied for grants whether there were parameters where they think they will have a better chance of receiving funds and that was why they moved forward. She added that she was trying to figure out how to help staff the next time they go for a grant and how Council could provide the best input. Mr. Harrel replied that grants were a moving target every year. He said as far as the project Councilmember Hansen mentioned, twice in the last five years a developer had contacted him about building on that site and it had never gone any further than that. That was one reason why staff had not recommended doing anything in that area -- it looked like it was going to be developed and funded by someone other than the Town. He agreed that that was the one remaining piece along La Montana that needed to be done. z:\council packets\2010\r12-16-10\101202m.docx Page 8 of 8 Vice Mayor Brown discussed the Bashas property and asked whether staff had considered using an asphalt rather than concrete sidewalk since it would be a throw away sometime in the future and asphalt would be less expensive. Mr. Harrel stated that if the Town built the sidewalk prior to a developer he thought that would be a very good option recognizing that whatever they do would be a throw away. The Vice Mayor commented that the area was very well traveled. Mayor Schlum again thanked Mr. Harrel for his presentation and stated that the visuals he provided were very helpful. AGENDA ITEM #16 – COUNCIL DISCUSSION/DIRECTION TO THE TOWN MANAGER Items listed below are related only to the propriety of (i) placing such items on a future agenda for action or (ii) directing staff to conduct further research and report back to the Council. A. NONE AGENDA ITEM #17 – SUMMARY OF COUNCIL REQUESTS AND REPORT ON RECENT ACTIVITIES BY THE TOWN MANAGER. None. AGENDA ITEM #18 - ADJOURNMENT Councilmember Contino MOVED to adjourn the meeting and Councilmember Elkie SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0). The meeting adjourned at 7:12 p.m. TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS By __________________________ Jay T. Schlum, Mayor ATTEST AND PREPARED BY: _________________________ Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Executive and Regular Session held by the Town Council of Fountain Hills in the Fountain Hills Council Chambers on the 2nd day of December 2010. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this 16th day of December, 2010. _____________________________ Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk