No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003.0403.TCREM.PacketNOTICE OF REGULAR AND EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL Mayor Jon Beydler Councilman Rick Melendez Councilwoman Kathy Nicola Councilwoman Leesa Stevens Councilman John Kavanagh Councilman Mike Archambault Vice Mayor Susan Ralphe WHEN: THURSDAY, APRIL 3, 2003 TIME: 5:30 P.M. EXECUTIVE SESSION 6:30 P.M. REGULAR SESSION WHERE: FOUNTAIN HILLS COMMUNITY CENTER 13001 N. LAMONTANA DRIVE 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 public discussion of that agenda item. The Clerk will indicate when speaker cards are no longer being accepted. After a motion regarding an agenda item has been made, seconded, and discussed by the Council, the Town Clerk will call the names of those who completed a speaker's card. If there is a Public Hearing, please submit the speaker card to speak to that issue during the Public Hearing. Speakers' names will appear on the overhead screen. At that time, speakers should stand and approach the podium in the order listed. Speakers are asked to state their name prior to commenting and to direct their comments to the Chair and not to other Councilmembers or staff. Speakers' statements should not be repetitive. Individual speakers will have three minutes from the time they are recognized. If representing a specific group or more than three minutes are needed, contact the Town Clerk prior to the beginning of this meeting. Please be respectful when making your comments. If you do not comply with these rules, you will be asked to leave. • CALL TO ORDER Mayor Beydler 1.) VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION: (1) PURSUANT TO A.R.S. §38-431.03.A.4, For discussions or consultations with the attorneys of the public body in order to consider its position and instruct its attorneys regarding the public body's position regarding contracts that are the subject of negotiations, in pending or contemplated litigation or in settlement discussions conducted in order to avoid or resolve litigations. (Specifically, the Gibson and Knapp lawsuits). E:\AGENDAS\Regular Session 4-3-03 without times.doc Page I of 3 Last printed 4/2/2003 3:33 PM 2.) RETURN TO REGULAR SESSION • CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL — Mayor Beydler • PLEDGE TO THE FLAG — Mayor Beydler • INVOCATION — Vice Mayor Susan Ralphe 3.) RECOGNITION ITEMS Mayor Beydler will recognize the Goyenas for their sponsorship of the Eggstravaganza Event. Presentation of the Loss Control Award to the Town from the Arizona Municipal Workman Compensation Pool. AGENDA ITEMS Consent Agenda: All items listed with an asterisk (*) 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, they may request so prior to the motion to accept the consent agenda. The item will be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered in its normal sequence on the agenda. *4.) Consideration of APPROVING THE MEETING MINUTES of March 11`h and 201h, 2003. *5.) Consideration of RESOLUTION 2003-10 adopting a Community Facilities District Policy. *6.) Consideration of ADDENDUM to Final Settlement agreement with MCO to clarify Eagle Ridge Drive will be paved upon home occupancy within Eagle Ridge North. *7.) Consideration of the PRELIMINARY/FINAL PLAT for Kepler Casas Condominiums, a 2-unit condominium project, located at 16432 E. Monaco Dr., aka Final Plat 206, Block 7, Lot 17: Case #S2003-03. *8.) Consideration of RESOLUTION 2003-07 abandoning whatever right, title, or interest the Town has in certain public utility and drainage easements located at the northerly property line of Lot 14, Block 6, Plat 603B (15608 E. Cholla Drive) as recorded in Book 161 of Maps, Page 41, Records of Maricopa county, Arizona EA 2003-01. Jerald & Karen Lindeman 9.) CONSIDERATION of accepting a donation of two pieces of public art from the Fountain Hills Arts Council and the Fountain Hills Public An Committee 10.) DISCUSSION and possible direction to staff to develop a policy for regulating pari-mutuel wagering facilities within Fountain Hills. 11.) DISCUSSION and possible action and direction to staff regarding LAW ENFORCEMENT. 12.) PUBLIC HEARING on ORDINANCE 03-08 to receive comments on a proposed amendment to the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance to permit temporary outdoor sales and similar activities to occur on intermitting or nonconsecutive days with Town Council approval through the temporary use permit process, case number Z2003-03. E: AGENDAS\Regular Session 4-3-03 without times.doc Page 2 of 3 Last printed 4/2/2003 3: 33 PM �-_ 0 13.) CONSIDERATION of ORDINANCE 03-08, amending the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance to permit temporary outdoor sales and similar activities to occur on intermitting or nonconsecutive days with Town Council approval through the temporary use permit process, case number Z2003-03. 14.) PUBLIC HEARING to receive comment on ORDINANCE 03-03 on a proposed amendment to Chapter 13, Section 13.03 and Chapter 7, Section 7.04G.5 of the zoning Ordinance of the town of Fountain Hills that would allow business to operate truck rental services by special use permit in the industrially zoned districts, and to establish the parking criteria for the truck rental use. Case Number Z2003-04. 15.) CONSIDERATION of ORDINANCE 03-03 on a proposed amendment to Chapter 13, Section 13.03 and Chapter 7, Section 7.04G.5 of the zoning Ordinance of the town of Fountain Hills that would allow business to operate truck rental services by special use permit in the industrially zoned districts, and to establish the parking criteria for -the truck rental use. Case Number Z2003-04. 16.) COUNCIL ASSESSMENT AND REVIEW of the meeting to identify procedural strengths and weaknesses and discuss possible improvements for future meetings. 17.) SUMMARY of Council requests reviewed by the Town Manager. 18.) CALL TO THE PUBLIC. Pursuant to A.R.S. §38-431 -01 (G), public comment is permitted (not required) on matters not listed on the agenda but must be within the jurisdiction of the Council. All comment is "subject to reasonable time, space and manner restrictions" and 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 Council members may respond to criticism, ask staff to review a matter or ask that a matter be put on a future agenda. 19.) ADJOURNMENT. DATED this 2nd day of April, 2003 Bevelyn J. Bender, Town Clerk The Town of Fountain Hills endeavors to make all public meetings accessible to persons with disabilities. Please call 837-2003 (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. E:\AGENDASUtegular Session 4-3-03 without times.doc Page 3 of 3 Last printed 4/2/2003 3:33 PM ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF EGGSTRAVAGANZA SPONSORS On behalf of myself, the members of the Town Council and Staff, and the residents of Fountain Hills, we wish to recognize the contribution of The Goyena's — MCO Realty for their sponsorship of the 2003 "Eggstravaganza" to be held on Saturday, April 12, 2003. The "Eggstravaganza" is a wonderful tradition for Fountain Hills, began many years ago by volunteers at Fountain Park with thousands of hard- boiled eggs. The event is now held at Golden Eagle Park and consists of over 10,000 plastic eggs stuffed with candy and toys and continues to be an EGGS -citing time for both children and their families each year. Our appreciation to The Goyena's — MCO Realty for their willingness to serve their community through the sponsorship of this unique Town event during tough economic times. Thank you. 11 E Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Submitting Department: Administration Consent:® Regular:❑ Meeting Date: 4/3/03 Contact Person: Bender Requesting Action:® Tvne of Document Needing Annroval (Check all that a ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ® Other: Draft meeting minutes Council Prioritv (Check AnDronriate Areas): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ❑ Community Development Report Only: El ❑ Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ❑ Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation Regular Agenda Worm': Consideration of APPROVING THE MEETING MINUTES of March I Ith and 20th, 2003. Staff Recommendation: Approve Fiscal Impact: No $ Purpose of Item and Background Information; Approve minutes for archival purposes. List All Attachments as Follows: Draft minutes from March 11 and March 20, 2003. Type(s) of Presentation: none Signatures of Submitting Staff: Department Head Town anager / Designee Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE WORK STUDY SESSION OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL MARCH 11, 2003 Mayor Jon Beydler convened the work-study session at 5:00 p.m. Councilman Melendez and Vice Mayor Ralphe updated the Council on the revamping of Channel 11 in connection with the school district. Each councilperson would be asked to submit a person's name to serve on a committee to improve Channel 11. ROLL CALL: Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Mayor Jon Beydler, Vice Mayor Susan Ralphe, Councilpersons Mike Archambault, Rick Melendez, Leesa Stevens, and John Kavanagh. Also present were Town Manager Tim Pickering, Town Attorney Andrew McGuire, Director of Public Works Tom Ward, Accounting Supervisor Julie Ghetti, Interim Town Marshal Todd Tate, Captain Scott Penrose (Maricopa County Sheriff s Office) and Town Clerk Bev Bender. It was announced that Councilwoman Nicola and Judge Armbruster would be arriving late. AGENDA ITEM #1 - DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING LAW ENFORCEMENT. Discussion focused on determining what information needed to be gathered by Staff so the Council could make a final decision on the future of law enforcement in Fountain Hills. Code enforcement and citizen involvement were discussed. Interim Town Marshal Todd Tate provided a brief overview of the contents of the Law Enforcement Report as it related to the Fountain Hills' Marshals Department. Captain Scott Penrose gave a brief presentation relative to the contents of the Law Enforcement Report as it related to the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office. (A copy of this presentation is available in the Clerk's office) Town Attorney Andrew McGuire provided an update on a request for a "reduction in force analysis" that was submitted to the U.S. Department of Justice in order to ensure that grant funding was safeguarded and not placed in jeopardy. The Justice Department had questioned that the grant was in the name of the Marshals Office rather than the Town of Fountain Hills and the process that must be followed to rectify the situation. Additional discussion ensued relative to existing grants and associated timetables, the various types of grants that were applied for and awarded, complexities associated with the actual completion of grant applications, the importance of rectifying the situation that had arisen with the Department of Justice. Councilman Melendez directed Mr. Pickering and Mr. McGuire to pursue this matter with the Department of Justice without delay. Mr. McGuire indicated Staffs intention to continue to work on this matter and to report the status of their efforts to the members of the Council. Additional discussion ensued relative to the grant application/Justice Department issues and that an additional letter will be forwarded to the Justice Department clarifying this matter and emphasizing that the Town of Fountain Hills had not violated any grants. Mr. Pickering said that Staff would prepare long-term projections with an analysis of costs and a recommendation. Councilman Archambault requested breakdown sheets and copies of the pay scale that were approved by the Council for this budget year, as well as graphics and statistics to be collated for review by the Council. Other topics discussed: a "citizens' patrol," liability concerns, workers' compensation, utilization of civilians, volunteers or officers to carry out non -police type work, and training. 40) Mayor Beydler requested that Staff provide information relative to traffic citations and warrants and asked if this was a budget related item to which Mr. Pickering responded yes. Mayor Beydler questioned if the policy decision should be addressed during a budget planning session or an agendized public meeting. EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\03-11 FHworkstudy.doc Page 1 of 3 Councilman Kavanagh requested Staff to collect the rest of the data so that the members of the Council could review the materials and render a decision on this matter in April. A video, Volunteers in Policing (VIPs), was played highlighting a program in effect in the City of Chandler. Councilman Melendez stated that the information could assist them to determine if monies should be allocated for one law enforcement department. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire discussed a letter to be sent to the Department of Justice regarding the completion of the Town's Reduction in Force analysis from the Justice Department and the two steps: 1) Withdraw from the grant; and 2) Provide the Department with the information that has been requested. Mr. McGuire stated that the Town Manager could place the item on a future agenda for Council discussion and/or action but expressed concern relative to what would occur should the Council decide not to rescind that previous action. Further discussion followed regarding the grants. The Mayor requested that the Town Manager agendize this issue for official Council action for formal consideration and action regarding the grant. Discussion ensued that this item would be placed on the April 3, 2003, (6:00 pm) agenda for discussion and Council action and the importance of receiving additional information (in house grants, applications, selection procedures, reports, awards, and issues related to COPS 3, 4, and 5) before the meeting. Mr. McGuire discussed the two separate issues being pursued: 1) the Justice Department to sign off on a lower number of positions allocated to law enforcement, and 2) the current grant which the Town had not drawn upon. He stressed the importance of remembering that the grant applications were very clear about the criteria by which the grant will be evaluated. Additional discussion ensued relative to actual versus budgeted positions as they pertain to grant applications. AGENDA ITEM #2 - ESTABLISH THE NEXT MEETING DATE. The next work-study session has been scheduled for April 8th at 6 p.m. A Special Council Session will be scheduled if needed but is not planned. No Council meeting is scheduled for April 17, 2003. Mr. Pickering announced issues that would be addressed at the April 8th meeting: the Sign Ordinance and Council Procedures. The Mayor requested that an agendized Special Council Session be scheduled in the event one is needed following the April 8 h Work Study Session. Additional discussion ensued relative to the fact that the grant issue would be an issue for discussion at the next Regular Council Meeting. Councilwoman Nicola requested that Staff prepare a budget process timeline for the Council to review and they consider scheduling a Work Study Session to review the budget. Mr. Pickering said he would provide the Council with that information. AGENDA ITEM #3 - ADJOURNMENT. The meeting was adjourned at 7:50 p.m. EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\03-11 FHworkstudy.doc Page 2 of 3 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS :: ATTEST: Bevelyn J. nd , Town Clerk PREPARED BY: Bevelyn J. Bei}�eri'own Clerk CERTIFICATION: I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Work Study Meeting held by the Town Council of Fountain Hills on the I Ith day of March 2003. I further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this 3rd day of April 2003. Bevelyn J. Bcoer, n Clerk EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\03-11 FHworkstudy.doc Page 3 of 3 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS MINUTES OF THE REGULAR SESSION OF THE FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL March 20, 2003 Mayor Beydler addressed the members of the audience and stated that the Town of Fountain Hills initiated appropriate action to prepare for and address any safety issues that may arise as a result of the country's current conflict with Iraq. Channel 11 and the Town's website have the steps necessary. Local media will also publish the information. Mayor Beydler called the meeting to order at 6:34 p.m. Following the invocation by Minister Don Lawrence, Christ's Church, roll call was taken. ROLL CALL - Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Mayor Jon Beydler, Vice Mayor Susan Ralphe, Councilmembers Rick Melendez, Leesa Stevens, Kathleen Nicola, Michael Archambault, and John Kavanagh. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire, Town Manager Tom Pickering, Public Works Director Tom Ward, Senior Planner Dana Burkhart, Director of Parks and Recreation Mark Mayer, Acting Supervisor Julie Ghetti and Bevelyn Bender, Town Clerk, were also present. Mayor Beydler read Proclamations and declared the month of April 2003 "Child Abuse Prevention Month" and "Life Donor Month" in the Town of Fountain Hills. AGENDA ITEM #1 - CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE MEETING MINUTES OF MARCH 6, 2003. AGENDA ITEM #2 - CONSIDERATION OF THE SPECIAL EVENT LIQUOR LICENSE SUBMITTED BY AMERICAN LEGION POST 58, 16837 E. PARKVIEW AVE. THE REQUEST IS FOR A FUNDRAISER SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 12, 2003 FROM 9:00 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M. AGENDA ITEM #3 - CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE TOWN'S LETTER OF REQUEST TO THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE TO RETURN THE COPS GRANT ACCEPTED IN NOVEMBER 2002. Councilwoman Stevens MOVED to approve the consent agenda as read (Items 1-3) and Councilman Kavanagh SECONDED the motion. A roll call vote was taken with the following results: Vice Mayor Ralphe Aye Mayor Beydler Aye Councilman Melendez Aye Councilwoman Nicola Aye Councilwoman Stevens Aye Councilman Archambault Aye Councilman Kavanagh Aye The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. AGENDA ITEM #4 - UPDATE BY THE COMMITTEE TO SAVE OUR COMMUNITY ON THEIR PROGRESS IN PURSUING THE FORMATION OF A NEW FIRE DISTRICT WITH POSSIBLE DIRECTION FROM THE COUNCIL. Hugh Henry, Chairman of the Committee to Save Our Community, addressed the members of the Council. The Committee delivered a copy of the Impact Statement to the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors yesterday. He reported that the document was accepted without any changes or discussion from the floor. EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 1 of 17 He added that April 16, 2003, was selected as the date for the public hearing. The meeting will be open to the public. He reported that Don Anderson, with the firm of Anderson Nelson, prepared a "meets and bounds" summary and said that this document was submitted to the County and accepted by them with a request for one minor change One portion of the community was still owned by the City of Scottsdale and was never appropriately dedicated. He said that the document was revised, resubmitted, and accepted by the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Henry clarified that the Committee to Save Our Community did not receive any funds from the Town or the County to cover the cost of the mailing. He said that the Committee expected to receive a $10,000 bill next week and noted that it must be paid in order for the mailing to take place. He stressed the importance of generating funds to cover the cost of the mailing and said that the Committee had worked diligently to accomplish this goal. Councilman Kavanagh asked how many petitions had to be filed. Mr. Henry responded that the figure waspossibly 1 with 6500 signatures. He added that the County had indicated that all three petitions (essentially there were two, but there were two on one) must be done. He added that there were issues remaining to be resolved. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire recommended that the members of the Committee meet with Staff to review the items that had been requested by the County. Mr. Henry said that as soon as all of the information had been received from the County, he would pursue scheduling a meeting as recommended by Mr. McGuire. Tammie Rothermel, a member of the Committee, addressed the Council and asked the Town to consider covering the cost of the mailing and the printing. She stated the opinion that the payment of this expenditure would be appropriate based on the fact that the purpose of the mailing was to accommodate State law and educate the citizens of the Town on the Fire District issue and process. She stated the opinion that since the Town planned to spend money to educate the public relative to the proposed property tax, their approval of the funding for this mandated public information issue as well would be appropriate and beneficial to the entire community. Mr. McGuire explained that State statutes prohibit the Town of Fountain Hills from contributing funds to cover any costs associated with the formation of a new Fire District. Councilman Archambault asked whether a maximum amount of funds might be contributed by citizens to the Committee towards covering the cost of the publishing/mailing, Ms. Rothermel explained that because the matter was not a ballot issue, no maximum limits had been imposed. AGENDA ITEM #5 - CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2003-09, ADOPTING AN INVESTMENT POLICY. Town Manager Tim Pickering commented on the proposed investment policy that had been presented to the Council for their consideration. He noted that in the past the Town of Fountain Hills experienced a number of investment problems. Although the Town was able to overcome those difficulties, he stressed the importance of having a consistent and secure long-term plan to govern future Town investments. He explained that the proposed policy was drawn from several different policies including one developed by the Government Finance Officers' Association and other towns that had adopted policies. He noted that the policy covered different financing aspects, including who had the actual authority to make investments. It outlined a number of institutions that the Town was allowed to invest in, and covered collateralization and diversification. Mr. Pickering commented on the subject of collateralization and recommended that it consist strictly of Federally backed investments rather than stocks and bonds. He noted that Moody's reviewed the Town. One of their major recommendations was that the Town would begin documenting some of its major EABBender\Documen ts\Current Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 2 of 17 policies. He noted that Staff would also be bringing forth a Fund Balance Policy in the future for Council consideration and action. In response to a question from Councilwoman Nicola, Mr. McGuire stated that in terms of the "nuts and bolts" of the policy, he did not have any problems with what had been presented by Staff. Councilwoman Nicola asked whether the adoption of the policy would substantially change the manner in which the funds were held in a pool. Mr. Pickering responded that the Town was currently part of the State's pool, which does not collateralize their investments with only Federally backed collateralizations but noted that the State does have a separate pool that does this. He indicated the Town's intention to switch to the pool that was deemed more secure and better met the goals of the Town. Councilwoman Nicola commented that more risk generally resulted in more income. As part of the budget review she noted that the Town's anticipated interest was higher than the amount of actual interest earned. She questioned whether switching to a more secure investment method would again reduce the amount of revenues that could be generated. Mr. Pickering responded that the number one priority should be "security" rather than "return on investment" and stated that although some income might be lost, he believed that switching to Federally backed collateralization was the safer, more secure manner in which to proceed with the Town's investments. Vice Mayor Ralphe MOVED and Councilman Ralphe SECONDED to adopt Resolution No. 2003-09 as presented. The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. AGENDA ITEM #6 - CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2003-10, ADOPTING A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT POLICY. Mr. Pickering stated that in response to a request from a developer relative to the establishment of a Community Facilities District, Staff contacted other communities within the State and obtained/reviewed copies of their policies governing this issue. Input was also received from Bond Counsel and the Town's Financial Advisor. He stated the opinion that the proposed Community Facilities District (CFD) Policy was all encompassing and would serve the Town of Fountain Hills extremely well in the future. He added that policies from the Cities of Mesa, Scottsdale, Goodyear, Marana and Peoria were reviewed in great detail. He said that Mr. McGuire and Mr. Scott Ruby from the firm Gust -Rosenfeld, who worked with the Town on the Eagle Mountain CFD, were also heavily involved in the process. Councilman Kavanagh commented on the fact that the property owners were the ones who will actually "pay" and the Town would be a property owner because it would own the trailhead. He asked whether the Town would also be assessed as part of this process. Mr. Pickering responded that the policy did not address the individual application of the Adero Canyon CFD. He said that this question could not be addressed until the actual application was received from the developer identifying the boundaries and indicating whether the Town's land was included within the District. He added that initial discussions indicated that the Town was not included and that only the 171 lot owners were involved. He noted, however, that he had not had the opportunity to review the actual application. In response to a question from Councilman Kavanagh relative to whether the Town would be assessed if portions of its land were included in the District, Town Attorney Andrew McGuire stated the opinion that he did not believe that an assessment would be brought to bear against the Town of Fountain Hills. He indicated that he would like more time to research this issue and report back on his findings. Discussion ensued relative to the fact that ongoing operational costs would be built into the assessment, the fact that a settlement agreement existed with MCO relative to Adero Canyon, the fact that the settlement agreement very likely "froze" land use measures for that time period but would not impact the CFD policy, Mr. Pickering's opinion that risks were somewhat reduced as a result of having a written policy in place EABBender0ocurnentsWurrent Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 3 of 17 stating that the Town was not responsible for the developer's costs, and the Town Attorney's opinion that the real protection for the Town lay in the guarantees provided by the entity proposing the CFD. Councilwoman Stevens commented on the fact that the Town received a two -page letter of concerns from the developer and indicated support for reviewing each of those concerns in order to determine whether the Council would like to initiate changes to the policy. Mr. Pickering stated that he would review each of the points as requested by Councilwoman Stevens. He added that point 1 pertained to the question of who would pay for the ongoing operations and maintenance. He reported that the proposed policy included an additional charge that would cover those costs. He added that the developer did not want to see that item included in the cost of the CFD. Mr. Pickering discussed point 2 raised by the developer suggesting that language be added to the policy indicating that Town Staff would review applications in a timely manner. He stated the opinion that the language should not be included as part of the policy and emphasized that although every effort would be made to process all of the applications in a timely manner, Staff did not believe it appropriate to place language in the policy that might be used in the future to negatively impact the Town. Councilwoman Stevens expressed the opinion that guidelines were appropriate for all applications coming into the Town. She believed they provided clarification and direction. Mr. Pickering clarified that providing a timeline was much different than stating that an application would be reviewed in a timely manner. He said that Staff did not have any problem stating in the Town's policy that they would provide timelines once the applications had been received. He added that a change could be made to the policy indicating that Staff would provide a timeline to an applicant if it was the desire of the Council. Mr. Pickering noted that a disagreement existed relative to point 3 raised by the developer and stated the opinion that the language was far too broad (i.e. to say that anv bond proceeds). He added that Staff believed that the proceeds from a CFD should go for brick and mortar and not any legally permissible costs that someone could attempt to place in there. He reiterated that the money should pay for the amenity and not for every conceivable administrative cost that might arise. Mr. Pickering referred to No. 1 in Specific Language Topics and stated that this represented language that Staff added in response to additional questions that were posed by the members of the Council. He said that several members asked, "What if we don't do this project, when would the project be built?" He expressed the opinion that this was a very legitimate question and should be asked of anyone who came before them. Councilwoman Stevens disagreed with Staffs opinion relative to this matter and stated the opinion that although the Council would like to know the answer to this question, it was really none of their business and developers should not be required to provide the answer to this question. She suggested that language be crafted stating that the Town would be "appreciative of a timeline" if the proposal did not go through. Mr. Pickering indicated that he did not support Councilwoman Stevens' point of view on this matter and expressed the opinion that it was appropriate to request this information based on the fact that the Town was being asked to go through required steps. He added that it was the Town's right to render a decision based on the facts and the facts were that if the developer stated that the project would be delayed for one year, this information should be known and considered as part of the decision making process. He said that on the other hand if a developer stated that the project would never come forward without benefit of a CFD, this information was critical and must be made known. He added that he had seen this type of language included in economic development incentives wherein developers certified that they would not proceed with a project unless the incentive was in place. He said that this was similar in that the Town was saying "If you are not going to do it, when will it be done or was it not going to be done at all?" Mayor Beydler commented on the fact that during the last meeting on this matter, he posed that question to Mr. Bielli. He said that he then read in the newspaper that it could be five or six years before the project went forward. He agreed with Mr. Pickering that reason existed to pinpoint and tie this matter down. He EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 4 of 17 stated the opinion that developers were seeking CFDs to assist them with financing projects and to handle some of the "big ticket" items that might not otherwise be able to be financed. Councilman Archambault asked whether the intent of the language under No. 2.9 was to hold the developer to a specific date. Mr. Pickering responded that they were trying to determine how much need was really there. He stressed the importance of being provided some type of assurance since this was on what the Council was basing its decision. Councilman Archambault added that he would not like to see penalties imposed and Mr. Pickering said that penalties were not being proposed. He reiterated that Staff would like to obtain a reasonable assumption and estimate of their timeline if the proposal did go through so that an informed decision could be made. Councilman Kavanagh stated that he concurred with the remarks presented by Councilwoman Stevens and asked whether it was legal to ask for this information and whether the matter was legally enforceable. He also asked whether other towns had included a request for this information in their policies. Mr. McGuire expressed the opinion that there was no impediment to requesting the information or making it a requirement but added that he always cautioned against having something in place that was unenforceable. He commented that if you ask the question, and the response was "25 years from now," there was no process in place that could ensure the accuracy of the estimated response. Mr. Pickering responded to Councilman Kavanagh's other question and said that he did not research other towns to determine whether they requested this information as part of their process. He noted that three or four members of the Council had requested that he pursue language to this effect. He added that at each of the presentations the developer had made on this subject, this same question had come up. He agreed that there was no way this could be enforced but added that if the developer was offering that information, he believed it would be appropriate and beneficial to document that information. Mayor Beydler commented that according to the documents the Council had received, the CFD process had been used approximately 25 times in the State of Arizona. He added that the Town of Fountain Hills has been involved in such a process before (Eagle Mountain). He stated the opinion that developers were not rampantly misrepresenting their need when they were looking to use this process and added that it was a selective tool that was used when necessary and appropriate. He indicated that he supported the language proposed by Staff. Councilwoman Nicola also agreed with the comments offered by Councilwoman Stevens relative to the fact that the language could not be enforced and asked that it be removed from the proposal. She added that she was uncomfortable with the fact that the Town was not being required to provide any timelines but wanted to require the developer to do so. In response to a question from Councilman Melendez, Mr. McGuire advised that the first time he had an opportunity to review the entire policy was mid -week last week. Councilman Melendez stated the opinion that the proposed policy required additional legal review, based on the comments contained in the letter received from the developer. He said that he wanted to hear what the applicant had to say and added that he had a hard time voting on something like this when adequate review time has not been provided. Mr. Pickering proceeded to highlight the points contained in the letter and said that in point No. 2 under the language, the developer was attempting to reduce the administrative up -front fee to $25,000 rather than the $60,000 that had been set by Staff. He commented on the fact that a correction needed to be made (on Page 8) of the policy and clarified that although a $25,000 figure was included once, the actual figure was $60,000 and that figure was previously included in the proposal. He added that Staff supported the $60,000 figure and reported that this figure was also the one used by two or three other communities for their administrative review deposit. Mayor Beydler asked how much up -front monies developers were required to pay when they applied for a CFD. Mr. Pickering responded that Staff was recommending that they pay $80,000 up front and EABBender\DocumentsWurrent Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 5 of 17 commented on expenses associated with the extensive review process that was involved with CFD's, including outside bond and legal counsel and financial advisors. Mayor Beydler asked whether an expense analysis was performed and Mr. Pickering indicated that the figure was taken from the policies in place in other communities. The Mayor said that he was uncomfortable with the numbers since they had not been reviewed specifically in association with the Town of Fountain Hill's budgetary/fiscal perspective. Mr. Pickering stressed the importance of leaning on the side of protecting the Town. He emphasized that no out-of-pocket expenses should be borne by the Town as a result of this process. He added that as the process continues, an additional $25,000 deposit was also required if costs justified that amount. Councilman Kavanagh commented on all of the questions and issues surrounding this matter, in addition to the points raised by MCO in their letter, and recommended that this issue be reviewed at a Work Study Session. He stressed the importance of sitting down at the table with MCO to address all the points. He suggested that an expedited Work Study Session be scheduled for this purpose. He added that if the matter came to a vote this evening, he would be forced to abstain since there were so many outstanding, confusing issues that remained to be clarified and addressed. Mayor Beydler agreed with Councilman Kavanagh's overview but clarified that the Council was discussing a policy and not an application specific to MCO. He said that he would prefer to open the discussion up to a broader spectrum of participants and added that the Workshop should include other individuals as well. Mr. Pickering stated the opinion that the Council should exercise caution in this area and pointed out that this was not a "negotiation process" but rather a Town policy. He added that the policy was not being developed for MCO. He clarified that MCO had expressed concerns regarding the proposed policy and stated the opinion that the points that had been raised could be overcome with additional time. He said that he would not recommend that a Workshop be scheduled for the Council to meet with a developer who had an application before them in an effort to "work out points of contention." He added that this was a decision that had to be made by the Town since it would affect all CFDs in the future. He said that some of the concerns were legitimate and that he did not believe the proposal should be approved this evening. He indicated his willingness to address the issues raised by MCO and the members of the Council, but stressed the importance of rendering decisions based on the Town's desire rather than the desire of an individual applicant. Councilman Archambault agreed with Mr. Pickering's comments and said that he did not believe this should be discussed at a Workshop. Councilwoman Stevens agreed that they were discussing a policy for the entire Town and stated that the changes that were proposed during this meeting could be incorporated by Staff and the proposal could be placed on the Consent Agenda of a future meeting. Vice Mayor Ralphe also agreed with Mr. Pickering's comments but said that scheduling a Workshop to further address this issue might be a good idea. She agreed that a number of the issues raised in MCO's letter might not be in the best interest of the Town. Mayor Beydler said that dual direction was being given, to schedule a Workshop and for Staff to take Council's suggestions this evening and incorporate them, along with input from other concerned parties, into the proposal for future review and consideration. Councilman Kavanagh commented that based on the fact that the only two major developments left in Town were on land owned by MCO, that entity appeared to be the major CFD player. He said that although he did not want to exclude anyone from the process, he did believe that input should be provided by MCO during a Work Study Session. He added that complex legal issues also came into play and noted that the policy must interact with the Settlement Agreement. He added the opinion that Mr. McGuire was not prepared to address those legal issues at this time. EAB Bender\Docu men ts\Curren t Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 6 of 17 Councilwoman Nicola stated that she would not be comfortable scheduling a Work Study Session, having just MCO at the table, and not providing members of the public an opportunity to comment. She stated the opinion that the Council should expend effort to provide Staff with direction and then the matter could either be placed on a future Consent Agenda or it could be continued for further discussion. Councilman Kavanagh recommended that a Special Council Meeting be scheduled to discuss this issue but that an action item not be part of the agenda. He said that this would provide MCO and anyone else who wished to comment an opportunity to do so. He estimated that it would take another three hours to adequately discuss this matter. Mr. Pickering stated the opinion that another three hour discussion was not necessary and said that he had a discussion today with Greg Bielli relative to the fact that although some revisions would be made, there were going to be items included in the policy on which they disagreed. He noted that MCO had reviewed the proposed policy in depth and noted that all of their comments were contained in the letter that was currently being discussed. He stated the opinion that another Workshop was not necessary and said that based on the extensiveness of the policy, it appeared that only a few minor issues needed to be discussed and addressed. He commented on the trailhead and clarified that the costs associated with that were the responsibility of the Town. Councilman Kavanagh said that he was talking about the road and added that his question to Mr. McGuire was if the Town was a property owner in the CFD, would the Town then also have to share in the costs with other CFD property owners. He commented that if this was the case, the Town was going to wind up paying for a road, which, if the CFD did not exist, would not cost the Town any money. Mr. Pickering indicated Staff s intention to research the matter and get back to him. Councilwoman Stevens recommended that the Town Manager complete his review of MCO's list, that members of the audience who wished to provide input be allowed to do so, and that the Council then review the remaining items in an effort to reach a consensus and provide direction to Staff. She added that if the information compiled by Staff was non -controversial, the item could be placed on a future Consent Agenda and if further discussion was needed, the members of the Council could address them during a Regular Council meeting. Mr. Pickering said that the next item on MCO's list involved pre -approval and post -approval fees. He commented that MCO's contention was that cities did not require the fees but pointed out that at least three of the other cities he had contacted do impose those fees. Mr. Pickering stated that he strongly disagreed with the last point raised by MCO, that there should be a 4 to 1 ratio for a public offering and a 3 to 1 for a private offering. He said that, in an effort to remain conservative, the Town's ratios had been set at 6 to 1 for a public offering and, for a private offering 4 to 1. He commented on the fact that MCO was an extremely reputable developer and added that the Town was extremely fortunate to have them. He added, however, that in the future there was no way of knowing who might apply for CFDs and that was the reason why the higher ratios had been included in the proposal. He commented that the higher the ratio, the safer the development. He noted that other cities had included similar ratios in their proposals as well. Mr. Pickering said that this concluded his review of MCO's letter. Councilwoman Stevens MOVED and Councilman Archambault SECONDED to approve Resolution 2003-10 as presented. In response to a call from the Mayor, no citizens came forward indicating their desire to speak on this issue. Councilman Kavanagh commented on the fact that one of the issues raised by MCO was start-up costs. He said it was his understanding that the developer would have to bear these costs, which were not eligible for reimbursement. Mr. Pickering clarified that a $20,000 fee was required up -front and added that the EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regutr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 7 of 17 additional fees were to cover administrative costs that would be borne by the Town once they were involved in the process of putting together the CFD. Councilman Kavanagh said he was referring to initial costs to get the CFD up and running and questioned five to ten years down the road. When lawyers were needed to provide occasional legal opinions, who would be responsible for covering those costs. Mr. Pickering responded the people involved in the actual CFD would be responsible. He clarified that the policy stated that the district would pay for the operational and maintenance costs. He noted that the developer would like to see this changed and discussions had occurred regarding this point. Greg Bielli, President of MCO Properties, addressed the Council relative to this agenda item. He said that for the most part, MCO supported Staffs policy as presented with few exceptions. He said that they reviewed the proposal in the context of a Town -wide policy and added that there were items specific to MCO's application that would come forward after the policy was adopted. He clarified the issue raised under point No. 1 in the letter and said that MCO did not oppose the language that Staff had proposed, relative to operations and maintenance. He stated that the Town might in the future, on a policy -wide community basis, want to form a CFD that simply was an operations and maintenance CFD and would deal with the assessment of the .30 per $100 valuation. He added that the proposed policy also articulated that there could be exceptions to the policy in these areas when an application came in. Mr. Bielli explained that MCO included point No. 1 because they did not want anyone to be misled that on MCO's application that would come forward in the future, and said they would be sticking to the settlement agreement. He said that the Eagle Ridge Drive extension up to the trailhead was a public road and was going to continue to remain a public road. He said it was MCO's understanding that because of the trailhead and the traffic that goes up there, that the road was going to be maintained by the Town. He said that was why they made the statement they did in point No. 1 and clarified that MCO was not opposed to the Town having a policy in place that stated that in future CFD's across the community, the Town wanted to gauge whether maintenance responsibilities existed for the CFD. He added the opinion that a public road up to a trailhead should not be MCO's responsibility and said that they are also looking at the fact that in the future, the 171 property owners would already be paying taxes to the community to pay for the public road system, and would also be forced to pay another tax for the maintenance of that road. He expressed the opinion that those buyers should not be responsible for costs associated with the maintenance of that road. He reiterated that MCO did not object to the language contained in the policy that was before the Council at this time, particularly in view of the fact that exceptions could be granted when warranted and deemed appropriate, such as in MCO's case. Mr. Bielli also commented on point No. 2 and said that the language Staff prepared relative to timeframes that would be used when an application was received was acceptable. He said the company believed it was important to have some understandable timelines in place and that as drafted there were no timelines. MCO used the generic term that they would work in a positive manner. He said that the language previously discussed by Mr. Pickering and the Council was acceptable. Mr. Bielli referred to the language that pertained to reimbursement and said that there were legal requirements under the CFDs and there were permissible expenses. He added that it was implied that when MCO came in with a detailed application, Staff and MCO would look at those issues and what should or shouldn't be included in the bond issue. He said that they simply wanted to provide up -front notice of what MCO would like to see down the road. Mr. Bielli also commented on the issue of the timeline and said that in an effort to clarify what Mayor Beydler read in the newspaper, what he said to the Mayor was what he had been telling everyone, that it would be delayed possibly for months. He added that there was discussion at the meeting relative to going with Eagle's Nest and the question arose what would happen to Adero Canyon. He stated that the Town could only do one of the projects at a time and Adero Canyon would possibly be delayed for four to five years. He added that time estimates had remained consistent but pointed out that he could not tell the members of the Council honestly what the exact delay would be because it was a financing delay and his best estimate was that it would take months. EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 8 of 17 Mr. Bielli commented on the fact that confusion also existed on page 7 (paragraph 3.2) of the policy. He clarified that MCO was not saying that they wanted to reduce the figure from a $60,000 to $25,000 deposit. He said that they were talking about the inconsistency in the paragraph itself and if you look at the intervals, the $20,000 to be paid and the $60,000, as Mr. Pickering said, for a total of $80,000. He said that the last part of the paragraph was what was confusing because it talked about $25,000 increments and if you had $80,000 in deposit and then you go in $25,000 increments, it did not work. He added that MCO understood that the Town was going to have an application fee and stated that they did not have a problem paying that. MCO simply had concerns regarding the increments and the inconsistencies they reflected. He suggested that the $60,000 figure be dropped down to $50,000 and then every time Staff needed additional funds, that $25,000 increments be used. Mr. Bielli also discussed pre and post approval fees and said that they were addressing the tandem nature of the two paragraphs. He said that MCO had consistently said that the ongoing operational and maintenance costs of the CFD could be borne by the tax on the district. He added that the district people should pay that and not the Town. Mr. Bielli commented on the ratios and noted that the Town's proposed policy stated "a minimum." He added that Staff was recommending a 6 to 1 and 4 to 1 ratio based on the public offering. He said that the public offering was 6 to 1 and private was 4 to 1. He stated that because the policy did say a minimum, when an applicant brought in an application, many issues were going to be weighed by the Town. He stressed the fact that the policy was just that, a generic policy, and said that MCO was asking that applicants not be precluded and stated the opinion that the proposed 4 to 1 ratio might in fact do that. He commented that a 3 to 1 ratio would address the policy without having to having an amendment in the future and asked the Council to consider MCO's thoughts on this issue. Mr. Pickering stated that Mr. Bielli was correct and that Paragraph 3.2 needed further clarification as to the fact that the Town required $20,000 and $60,000 and that after that, $25,000 increments would occur. He said that he still believed that the actual numbers should remain the same, although the payments needed clarification. Mr. Bielli said that Staff might want to consider $20,000, $60,000 and then $20,000 increments. Councilman Archambault said that he would like to make a motion to change the figure in the last sentence of Paragraph 3.2 to $20,000. Councilman Archambault MOVED that the figure in the last sentence of Paragraph 3.2 of the proposed policy be changed to $20,000. Councilwoman Nicola cautioned against offering motions that represent numerous amendments to the policy and stated the opinion that it might be more effective and productive to give direction to Staff and then let them prepare an updated policy based on that direction for future review and action. Councilman Archambault agreed with Councilwoman Nicola's statement and WITHDREW his motion. He added that Staff should include that revision in the updated policy. Councilwoman Stevens stressed the importance of ascertaining that there was consensus among the members of the Council relative to the direction that was given to Staff. She added that she believed a motion to amend was a good idea and added that members of the public should also be provided an opportunity to provide input prior to delving into an amendment process. In response to a call from the Mayor for public input, there were no citizens who wished to speak on this issue. Councilwoman Stevens expressed the opinion that the first thing MCO was referring to was the first sentence which stated: "A community facilities district ("CFD") provides a funding mechanism to finance construction, acquisition, operation and maintenance of public infrastructure, " and said that perhaps the EABBendeADocumentsWurrent Minutes 2003\Regutr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 9 of 17 Council could change this sentence to state: "A community facilities district ("CFD") provides a funding mechanism to finance any or all of the following" instead? Mr. Bielli clarified that he was referring to other portions of the document, specifically Paragraphs 1.5, 1.10 and 4.2 that addressed maintenance issues. He reiterated that MCO agreed with the policy as written; however, when MCO came in with a case in hand, it was the company's intention to ask for an exception in accordance with paragraph 1.11. Councilwoman Stevens thanked Mr. Bielli for his clarification. Councilwoman Stevens MOVED and Councilman Kavanagh SECONDED that the sentence on the top of Page 5 be amended to state: "Additionally, the applicant shall be encouraged to submit a timetable showing the project schedule should a CFD not be granted. " MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE (6 to 1) with Councilman Archambault voting Nay. Councilwoman Stevens MOVED and Councilman Kavanagh SECONDED that Paragraph 3.2 on Page 7 be amended to state: 120,000 down and an additional $50,000" and that the $25,000 remain in place so that the numbers remain even. MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE (6 to 1) with Vice Mayor Ralphe voting Nay. Councilman Kavanagh noted that on Page 1, under Paragraph 1. 1, the word "substantial" only applied to commercial developments and asked whether this was on purpose or whether it inadvertently occurred. He questioned whether the word "substantial" should be moved and placed before the word "residential." Mr. Pickering agreed that the word should be moved to accurately reflect the intent of the sentence. Councilman Kavanagh MOVED and Councilwoman Stevens SECONDED that Paragraph 1.1 on Page 1, should be amended to state: "CFD's should be utilized in connection with the financing of infrastructure for development of substantial residential projects, master planned communities or projects involving commercial development. " MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilwoman Nicola also indicated concern relative to the wording contained in Paragraph 3.2 on Page 7 (third sentence) where it states "by the Town in its sole discretion" and stated the opinion that the wording should be struck. She also commented on Paragraph 3.6 on Page 7 and stated the opinion that the first sentence should be amended to state: All costs and fees related to the application must be paid by the Applicant.... " Following discussion, it was determined that Paragraph 3.2 on Page 7 (third sentence) should remain unchanged. Councilwoman Nicola MOVED and Councilwoman Stevens SECONDED that Staff be directed to rephrase Paragraph 3.6 on Page 7 to reflect that all costs must be paid by the applicant. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilman Kavanagh stated the opinion that Paragraph 2.16 on Page 6 should be amended too for consistency purposes. Councilman Kavanagh MOVED and Councilwoman Stevens SECONDED that Staff be directed to amend Paragraph 2.16 on Page 6 to reflect that any and all sellers are required to provide the disclosure statements and that the requirement would obviously expire with the expiration of the CFD. EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 10 of 17 Councilwoman Nicola said she would like to offer a friendly amendment to the effect that the fourth sentence in Paragraph 2.16 on Page 6 (beginning "Upon each sale of the property in the CFD.... ") be deleted from the document. Mr. Pickering explained the reason that sentence was included was so that there would be some proof that when they were selling to a landowner that they made the new owner aware of this fact. In that way, when people came in to complain to the City, there was a signed document on file to show them as proof that they were made aware of this fact. Councilwoman Nicola stated the opinion that it would be easier on Staff to mail out a statement every year during tax time rather than monitoring and maintaining records on the 171 parcels. Mr. Pickering said he preferred that the burden be placed on the landowner rather than on the Town. Following additional discussion, Councilman Kavanagh stated that he would like to remove his "friendly" amendment to reword Paragraph 2.16 on Page 6 from the floor. Councilwoman Stevens agreed to the withdrawal. In response to a question from Councilman Melendez, Mr. McGuire stated that Staff would attempt to ensure that whatever disclosures they were proposing, as far as the closing documents, would be a separate disclosure and not "grouped" with other disclosure statements. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Councilman Archambault MOVED and Councilwoman Stevens SECONDED that Paragraph 4.1 on Page 8 to be amended to reflect the same figures that were to be included in Paragraph 3.2 on Page 7 ($20,000 and $50,000). Mr. Pickering explained that these were "post fees" and should be much less and therefore the current figures contained in Paragraph 3.2 on page 7 should remain unchanged. Councilman Archambault stated that he would like to withdraw his motion and Councilwoman Stevens agreed to remove her second. In response to a request for clarification from Mr. McGuire, the Council stated that following Staffs amendments to the policy as recommended this evening, a revised policy should be placed on the Consent Agenda of the next meeting. Councilman Kavanagh MOVED and Mayor Beydler SECONDED that this issue be continued to the next Regular Council meeting. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. AGENDA ITEM #7 - CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2003-05 REGARDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE COMMUNITY CENTER FEES. Mark Mayer, the Director of Parks and Recreation, addressed the Council relative to this agenda item. He reviewed the contents of a Staff report and noted that it was anticipated that the fees would reduce the Center's annual deficit, would be more in line with comparable facilities and rates, would lower dependence on the annual contribution from the General Fund and were reflective of Staffs experience in operating the facility over the last 18 months. Mr. Mayer noted that the facility opened in 2001 and at that time rates were proposed and approved. Since that time, however, one adjustment to the rates had taken place and this evening a second adjustment was being recommended. He noted that the earlier budgeted deficit for this Fiscal Year was in excess of $300,000 and said that the figure was reduced to a figure in the range of slightly over $200,000 as a result of a number of budget cuts as well as additional fees. He added that Staff anticipated that with the EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page I 1 of 17 reductions that had already taken place as well as the additional recommended fees, the deficit for next year will be in the less than $200,000 range. Mr. Mayer reported that the proposed rate increases involved the costs associated with meeting room rentals, ballrooms and categories associated with outside uses and rental potential for utilizing the lobby, a request which had been received from members of the public. He commented on the fact that fees were divided into two categories, (1) resident, and (2) not -for -profit, which were typically the higher rate and were associated with a non-resident and commercial rate. Mr. Mayer noted that fees for residents were approximately half of those charged for commercial uses and added that Staff was recommending an approximate 18% rate increase. He said that Staff estimated that with adjustments to those rates for meeting space and ballroom uses, an estimated $23,000 in additional revenue would be generated. He commented on additional adjustments, such as bartender rates, which were now paid by the Town, and said that they would be transferred to the groups renting/utilizing the facilities as well as liquor security, which was required at major liquor events. He noted that this service that had historically been borne through the Sheriffs Department would now be passed on to the participants. He also commented on the elimination of liquor splits and a modest fee increase associated with fees for coffee service. Mr. Mayer reported that the combination of proposed fees would generate an estimated $43,000 of additional revenue for the facility. He added that in response to questions previously posed by members of the Council relative to facility rates compared to those in effect in other cites, information was included in the packets comparing Fountain Hills' facilities with facilities located in Mesa and Phoenix. Mr. Mayer informed the members of the Council that with him this evening was the Chair of the Community Center Advisory Commission, Wally Nichols, and noted that the members of that Commission had reviewed the proposed fee increases and supported Staffs recommendations. He added that language was included in the resolution for Council's consideration relative to considering fees on an annual basis from this point forward. Mr. Nichols addressed the Council and spoke in strong support of the fee increases that were recommended by Staff. He noted that the proposed rental rates would bring the commercial rates up to competitive standards in the Valley. He pointed out that the increase for commercial rental rates was twice as much as it was for residential, which was still a bargain and remained at a level that was approximately half of the commercial rates. He commented that the Staff of the Community Center had done a good job controlling costs through revenue enhancements and noted that the original subsidy when the Center was established was estimated to be approximately $350,000 a year. He reported that with all of the combined efforts of staff, the forecast was that the subsidy would be below $200,000, at the $170,000 level, almost half, and commended Staff on their outstanding efforts in this regard. Mr. Nichols commented that the Commission would like to request two things from the Council this evening; first, that they approve the new rental rates and, second, that they reaffirm or change the Community Center Mission Statement for the Community Center during the upcoming budget process. He urged the members of the Council to review the Center's proposed Mission Statement and stated that Center Staff needs direction on how to operate on an ongoing basis so they could plan out for a year, two or three. He thanked them for their support and cooperation. Councilwoman Nicola said that she did not see a Mission Statement included in the materials that had been provided this evening. Mr. Nichols noted that one would be supplied to the Council for review during the budget process. In response to a request from Councilwoman Nicola, Mr. Pickering stated that he would provide the Council with copies of all Mission Statements for their review. Councilwoman Nicola asked how Staff verified the status of non-profit organizations and Mr. Mayer responded that they were required to show proof of 501-3C tax-exempt status in accordance with IRS EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regutr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 12 of 17 regulations. In response to a question from Councilwoman Nicola, Mr. Mayer stated the opinion that residential rates were established in an effort to provide residents with rates that were significantly less expensive than typical rates. Councilman Kavanagh requested that the members of the Commission provide the Council with suggestions as to needed revisions in that organizations' Mission Statement. Mr. Nichols responded that the members concur with the contents of the current Mission Statement and said they were seeking reaffirmation on the part of the Council that the Mission Statement was in fact true and correct. Mayor Beydler asked what the utilization rate was at the Community Center. Mr. Mayer stated that he did not believe the actual number of booking hours for the facility had been analyzed but noted that the figure continues to increase. The Mayor said that he would be interested in finding out this figure from a business perspective. He added that he would also like to know what the anticipated negative impact might be as a result of the proposed fee increases. Mayor Beydler also commented on the fact that Staff compared the use and computed it on a square footage basis of the Community Center to larger facilities such as the Phoenix Civic Plaza and Mesa's Centennial Hall. He said that he would be curious to know (based on the assumption of the economy of scale) whether it related to the retail rate that those facilities charge. He added that a direct correlation might not exist and challenged Staff to pursue this issue and find out more information in an effort to determine whether the square footage rate was in fact an accurate or good indicator of what the market might bear. Councilwoman Nicola added that she did in fact read past monthly reports the Council received relative to facility utilization and said that she would appreciate receiving those reports again as well as an accounting of Staff and operational costs. She stated the opinion that the information would assist her in evaluating proposed costs and recommended fees. Councilman Melendez commented that he had requested that the Council be provided a different type of report that reflected net dollar amounts and added that he believed Staff had already provided this information. Councilman Kavanagh MOVED that the Council accept and approve the proposed changes to the Community Center fees, as presented. Councilman Kavanagh expressed concern relative to imposing a $35.00 an hour security charge and eliminating the 50/50 liquor splits for non-profit organizations. He said that he was deeply concerned that these revisions would negatively impact the non-profit organizations and prevent them from holding events at the Center and instead move their functions to other facilities. Councilman Kavanagh stated that he would like to place a stipulation on his motion to the effect that the Community Center contact the large non-profit users and poll them as to the effects the proposed fee changes would have on their future bookings at the Center and report the results of their surveys to the Council. Councilwoman Nicola commented that she had never liked the liquor split and added that she did not understand the reason for it. She added that if the reason behind it was just to generate money, she did not like it and added that if it was a security issue, she believed that the person throwing the party should pay for security. Councilwoman Stevens SECONDED the motion. Councilwoman Nicola indicated that she could not support the motion in its current form based on her previous remarks. Councilman Archambault concurred with the remarks offered by Councilwoman Nicola. EAB Ben der\Documents\Cu rren t Minutes 2003\Regutr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 13 of 17 Councilman Kavanagh clarified that he was not eliminating the liquor split provision and said that his motion would allow the liquor splits to end. He added that he would like the larger, non-profit users to be polled now to find out what the effects of this action would be on them. He said that he would rather find out now because he might want to bring the liquor splits back if the larger users were going to go elsewhere. He clarified that his motion would eliminate the liquor splits but require that polling take place among the larger non-profit users to determine potential negative impacts of this action. Mayor Beydler noted that there were representatives from non-profit organizations present at this meeting to address any concerns. Councilwoman Stevens clarified that the motion currently before the Council was to approve the recommendations as presented. She added that direction had also been given to Staff to contact the larger non-profit groups, determine their response to the action that the Council had taken, and report their findings to the Council. In response to a question from Vice Mayor Ralphe as to the motivation that existed for non-profit organizations to support the fee increases, Councilwoman Nicola pointed out that the organizations were also not sharing in the liability issues with the Town. She added that she was also not interested in finding out their opinion relative to the 50-50 split. Councilman Kavanagh clarified that the poll question was to determine whether the organizations would still utilize the Community Center for their functions or would go elsewhere. Mayor Beydler commented that this was a sales and marketing issue and noted that the Town appeared to be co-dependent upon the larger non-profit organizations. He said that this brought up a point he had made earlier today to Mr. Mayer relative to the fact that they were not talking this evening about the development of a sales and marketing program to bring in new users, but added that he would hope that they would get into a competitive situation where groups were booking in advance in order to use the facilities. He commented that he could not support the motion in its current form. Councilman Kavanagh noted that the Community Center was not a private, commercial profit making organization and was built with taxpayers' money. He added that as far as he was concerned, that building existed for the residents of Fountain Hills and the commercial dollars that were generated were a "bonus." He indicated that he would rather see nothing other than local non -profits utilizing that facility, even if less revenue was generated. In response to a request from Councilman Melendez, Mr. Nichols read the Community Center's Mission Statement into the record. The Mayor clarified that the motion currently on the floor was to approve Staffs recommendations with the caveat that non-profit organizations be polled in an effort to determine whether they would still use the Community Center despite the fact that the 50-50 liquor split was eliminated as well as the fact that they would now have to cover costs associated with providing security at events. In response to a question from Councilwoman Nicola relative to the loss of the 50-50 split, Mr. Mayer estimated that the organizations would have to spend an additional $7500 for 8 to 10 events over the course of a year. Mayor Beydler commented on the fact that the deficit represented taxpayers' dollars as well and pointed out that Fountain Hills was the only community that offered residents special rates for the facility's use. He recommended that the Council adopt the policy as recommended by Staff and that the poll of non-profit organizations not be conducted. He said that input would be received from the community as well as the Advisory Committee and indicated that this was the most appropriate manner in which to proceed. Councilman Kavanagh clarified that if any of the groups indicated that they did not want to respond to the poll, they should not be pressed to do so. EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 14 of 17 Councilman Melendez noted that press representatives were present and would sufficiently and expeditiously get the word out. Mayor Beydler moved the question and said that the motion was to approve Staffs recommendation and to poll non-profit organizations. MOTION FAILED ( 6 to 1) with Councilman Kavanagh voting Aye. Mayor Beydler MOVED and Vice Mayor Ralphe SECONDED that the proposed changes to the Community Center fees be approved as presented. Councilman Kavanagh MOVED to amend the motion to remove the provision which eliminates the 50-50 liquor split. AMENDED MOTION DIED FOR LACK OF A SECOND. Mayor Beydler said that they would now vote on the main motion. MOTION CARRIED BY MAJORITY VOTE (6 to 1) with Councilman Kavanagh voting Nay. Mayor Beydler thanked everyone for their efforts. AGENDA ITEM #8 - COUNCIL ASSESSMENT AND REVIEW OF THE MEETING TO IDENTIFY PROCEDURAL STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES AND DISCUSS POSSIBLE IMPROVEMENTS FOR FUTURE MEETINGS. Councilman Melendez commented on the fact that the Council was not given sufficient time to review the documentation on Adero Canyon and said he felt rushed. He added that when that happened, there was a greater likelihood that bad decisions would be made. He asked the Town Manager to make a concerted effort to ensure that meeting materials were presented to the Council far in advance of meetings so that they would have sufficient time to review the documents. Mr. Pickering explained that the developer delivered the materials today and agreed that the Council did not have sufficient time to review the materials. Rita Brown, 16738 East Nicklaus Drive, stated that she had the opportunity to attend a meeting of the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors yesterday and noted that the Board utilized an excellent procedure for solving time problems associated with conducting their extensive meetings. She reported that a very controversial issue was on the agenda and the members of the public were requested to fill out speaker forms. She added, however, that the speaker forms also included space for the citizens to indicate whether they were for or against the issue and also to indicate whether they wanted to speak. She said that all of the forms were presented to the Chairman and noted. She added that many of the citizens indicated their support or opposition but added that they did not wish to speak and this resulted in allowing them to be included in the meeting, but allowed the meeting to end in a much shorter period of time. She suggested that the Council consider utilizing a similar process in Fountain Hills. AGENDA ITEM #9 - SUMMARY OF COUNCIL REQUESTS REVIEWED BY THE TOWN MANAGER. Mr. Pickering indicated Staffs intention to revise the CFD policy and place it on the Consent Agenda of the next Regular Council meeting. He added that Staff would also prepare information on the utilization rate at the Community Center, as requested, and would obtain copies of various Mission Statements to present to the Council for their review during the budget process. EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 15 of 17 Councilwoman Stevens said that she also requested that the Council be provided a copy of guidelines for submitting timely applications. Mr. Pickering indicated that he had already requested that the Planning Department put together a report on this issue. Mr. Pickering also commented on Staffs intention to send out a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice relative to the grant. Councilwoman Nicola requested that the Council be provided a copy of the final letter that was sent out to the Justice Department and commended Staff for their hard work on Resolution No. 2003-09 and 2003-10. AGENDA ITEM #10 - CALL TO THE PUBLIC: Cindy Bonomolo, 15809 E. Cholla Drive, referred to a Letter to the Editor that was in the newspaper last week that was basically addressed to her and said that she wanted to publicly respond to that letter and did so in yesterday's paper. Ms. Bonomolo commented that the recall had been completed and the committee to recall Mayor Beydler ran a successful campaign. She added that as Chairperson of that Committee, she recognized the difficulties associated with that task and added that she and her family were placed in the public eye and under close scrutiny. She stated the opinion that based on her findings and her beliefs, she felt and still feels that Jon Beydler should be removed from the office of Mayor before the Town falls victim to what she termed his unethical business practices. Ms. Bonomolo reiterated previous comments relative to her dissatisfaction with Mayor Beydler's performance and said that she has not withdrawn the recall. She reported that her committee came together in January to bring to a close their political relationship and added that she reported at that time that Wally Nichols was an appropriate candidate to run for the office of Mayor. She added that although she did not know Mr. Nichols at that time, she had had the opportunity to look into his background and believed that he was what the Town of Fountain Hills needed. She asked the citizens to vote for Wally Nichols for Mayor on May 20th. Ms. Bonomolo also announced that the recall remains in effect and negatively referred to a paid political ad she read in the newspaper in support of Jon Beydler for Mayor. She presented a number of allegations against the Mayor and spoke in opposition to his continuing to serve in the capacity of Mayor of the Town of Fountain Hills. Phil Gaziano, 14946 E. Sierra Madre Drive, addressed the Council and said that he was present at the meeting when a vote to censure was taken. He noted that four members of the Council abstained from the vote and three voted to censure. He pointed out that a question was raised as to whether or not the censure should go forward. He added that this question had never been answered and they had been waiting for months for someone to come forward, state that the issue had been looked into, and report their findings as to whether or not the Mayor was censured. Mr. Gaziano added that a suit was filed by three firemen against Councilwoman Nicola and stated that he did not know whether the Town defended Councilwoman Nicola in this action, what the suit was about, and what the final determination was in this action. He said that if this was a private suit and the Town was not involved, then he had no questions to pose. However, if the Town spent money defending her, this action was similar to action undertaken by previous Councils and he would like to know the status. He asked specifically whether the Town was involved in Councilwoman Nicola's defense and whether funds were spent for this purpose. In response to a request from the Mayor, Town Attorney Andrew McGuire recommended that Mr. Gaziano contact him at his office for information relative to the issues he raised. AGENDA ITEM #11 - ADJOURNMENT Councilwoman Stevens MOVED that the Council adjourn and Councilman Archambault SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The meeting adjourned at 9:18 p.m. EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003Utegulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 16 of 17 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS LIM ATTEST AND PREPARED BY: CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Session held by the Town Council of Fountain Hills on the 20th day of March 2003. 1 further certify that the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present. DATED this 3rd day of April 2003. �L Bevelyn J. Be er, TWWn Clerk EABBender\Documents\Current Minutes 2003\Regulr Session 3-20-03.doc Page 17 of 17 M � t cz T W � U � o � o E W �o �°�a)L �N U c� j _0 cz a_ U) r r o -0 0 C: (n cz U) >° i c cz cz o U .� cn cz O H V .a O LL LncM0�� � Q) 4-J •� U .- O •L E�� a� Ll� ~ � O p C: C- 4-J 0)•U N cn O - O U ca N 0 O U � V)°Z5 V)-0 (UO �Q)Q�O 4-J 4- 7 L U) .� O ) a--' _ � C U) � - � LOL � p cn � _ O a� >- U u c 4-J O' N � 0 0--o M O U ,•-� E -o U � • L O 4- 0 O E � L i � 0 V> N a- J Cl 4-J }+ �— W O n(n Q O C D (n . ^ C D OT >ECa >Ev" Eu Q) L C U C L C E > 0-O � (A U L O 0 U� o 0 O U> V i a) .LA O �o o�L.— — a) hoc L. U U U U cn U O U 0 AL� -- O — 'U �+ —�� —o . N C C OQ.0 O >Q C V >.Uv C Q E .� O _OQ O�� L. � 4 c� Q a-+ Q) U U > q � c a) O c U-)(n c L _Q Q) ��� C.°;0D �� LLJ ca 30 L 00� L p. L 0 L U 0 L.0 O0U pc p0 �.0�+= Oct W p W U •-> W� =c4-1� 0 W� N p W 0) O Q1 N 0) � '� 0) (0 V S 0) L /_mow■ U), (� x i 0 I— O L V) O U Ui O v a W O �N _N Z _Nu_ _Nu U) _N 0 ■ OZS is oZS iQ oZS (p E OZ5 (p � fC oZ� U O 0 U) � LL 0 c) U c U~ L v~ L U C U U fa U O �'d - 70 L - L (1) L (3) Q)- L LL ao ooa ooLnw oocnw o0U) o � al 0) o V4 74 74 74 N O v E (il) O O L L O U o O D 0 v U O L O It 0 �O 0 O M M 6LO cn Q) a-J a :3 O O LO C 00 m CV > E co 0 o O C co — �1 \ X Q) O � — O N rn m T U LO Q ro Uj C C Q) cc O N T �} U p Q) X co N pl O -a L O O a0 (O U N Q Ln Z Q +-� N N 06 ry r .0 ru Q) O �\ i U m N ka O N O O -a O cm u L O V N-0 ro O O V) N I N O C N 0 O -0 CZ p T U cl� OM a�'3 Q N t o V) N o v 0 C cu � U U u N O�Q) aU-+ I � 4—J ell 6 O o O ru CO C D p p c O ,- U)L U E � _ _. -_ L � /W-�� L V� N N Ln O O O O O O O O T W '� 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U N L p i CD Q) � � N CD NO O_ 000 (00 0 NO � O 0 ^ O V�,000p O T T T uT VT D I (f)- r "� o LL C p cn �NNN, ' V) O M I N C aj U M _r O 4-J O ON - C 0 cn NO w E W ct� Q) OL Q) • • • 4-- 4-J 4--) O � O N UO cV) O r -0 L O L N _ ro Q E -C r O U C O [a O L L V U 0-U +-+ U coL. I, ro � Q U•) a) �o m co � � C° 0 a- 3 U) C: u w 70 O a� Q �O O N 0 4- E c o M r 0_0 Q U N `1 O- O ca a� O O 4—� 06 -p _ru cn C � u/ W T Z) V/ V � • O a U m 1- U a J Z) N N U ru O C a ■� +�+ � O Ln C OO O U p 0 (0-d —> mco co LO r- O UCON N coU)v N a-� N > EO -0 U L f ■ — O O O O O O O (O � }+ O O O O O O O O O O O o 0 0 o 0 �, L ru D o �� O CO Ln N O N LO .- O LO U = E > U O L Q) > 4-1O L- �, L f- C O . o L c U w U E E _ L _V) M "O -0" fa U Q o Q • • ca. • •-� N U O � U) N 0-0 c U) o - N r _0 N N O � O N 4, _0 N O E O NO N O 70 U Q (n L O C L Ci 00 LO N O L +r T O N O U � flo N O O U) a-J a-J 4-- ■T� (f� N c O N i U • T O W U O O D O O �O O ) OOQ) Q) O O O O O O U L (!) Q- O LO N r O LO T W U Cl O U ccz G U O cz C: O a) E I-- a N U 2 W O O O O cz (Z � O +� 0 � U O17 +� O O U) U cz p CZ W O = O O CZ �_m cz .O cz O O O .� .p .O L O O C/) a. Cn U) (1) 0) (1) J O cz n V J Ecz •� VJ (� E U E •U c� c� O O U cn ~ U U _ O Q E %O %O O .� W W a_ 0 W � 70 cz O ca. N cz m o cn U) O0 (� U c�E E CL cz •TO —0 —0 p Q Q p U/ CV 70 -0 r- (1) o U LL■ o o ■� T TT U) 4--j L U) 0- CD C i Cn ® 0 .- O � U) o CU m coC o I---. d- C'0 CY) 00 (3) 0 0 U) (D co co m (� i N O 0 > V W T i r N C� O .O _4-a O cz 4 me O O O O O O O 00 cc d' N T— N O O N T— CD N O O N U E cz O E O O (n N i O O � 4 cz _ E •X � O O Q -0 N 06 cz cz O U U N E E O O c U O N Ca- 0 E O Cll N 70 O O cz N � � O r C � CN O N N m E c� O U o CD 0 >1 O Q ^, T O cz o O N E ,� N X O O +� O O O Q 0,o Q O ,E M N O U Cll O >, cZ O o cz •O � � T O N Q C� CZ Cz � i T O O N, s= O O (z •� O O O O O O O LO O LO N r r cn O c N � OCD �_ `1 N }' O O .V cn 06 a) cz cz 0 cn cn 'r— cz . :3 E i--� 70 (Z E O 70 .�70 o ) (3) cz N O 0 — U U CD O O N � C � c� X O N (Z O I- U Q 0- Q O +r CZ cz � N M cn > a) CZ .� o " cn a)U }, cn x 0 o a� O —_ CD O 0 -#� � cn E cZ CV (Z E O }' O O U O Q O N cn a--� E O O CZ CD CD CD o CD o N CV r r . cz yg CD N N (n ■�. 4-0> O O \7C3 i :3 70 O T czCD i E_ O cm•X 0 a C: O O cz cz 06 O a� U O O p •O cn (CD U CD 2 N — U co N O E O > O cZ O � Lc)O Q5 E cz 01 O N U) c � U 0 �_ 0 O a) >11 cz � N cz O CDU N XO O r 11 Q O_ 0- > cz cn a) cz O C-) C) •— cn N O .O p U N � O Q cn O O O O O Cl co CD 41* N • • N E cz T O V / N 4-0o cn V ♦ 0 N CV _ 1--a� cz N N 70�z c� U CDE NNWN 'X � �- > cz N E U O Q •� 0 cn -0 CD � N � O O 0 cz Ln O LO O LO O U E cz a) N E O N U) C- 0) U) 0 O 4--j O Q� N � � N N C: N r (Z O -0 +r 70 7C) CD E - - O ' U U N x0 � Q i O •� -0 _ . ' w N cLS (n O :+_. 0- CD 06 (Z Q) U � � MCD 0O � O U O c C cQ O N O LO O LO O LO O 00 00 1` 1` (D r r r r r r • • • • 0 00 (D 0) rl- cy") r�- C\j co (C) C\j N LO A I I CO T LO V V J LO M U) U)', U) U) ^vvJJ ^v ^, ^' (�) TWA TWA -TWA[ TWt ^,� W ^,� W TWA 0 TWA TWA V TWA V ♦C) 'n` �0 ♦C3 �0 �0 i ^U^)' i ^v^ `J` ^U^)' ^y^ `/` ^v^,J, i i W CD i i L L. L L E O O 0 0 �, O O 00 00 00 N � (1) 0 T 0 T � T T T T O T T T O L L L p a) (1) 2) Q Q Q Q (1) Q N Q 0- 4— o Q Q o N CD c 't 0) CA °' "t LO � C- C(°; 4 N L 6 6 cy? CY5 U) N ICT _U) N I` v N T T T � T O T N cz v J Q) U) 0 i� C� —_ a) — Q) a) O a) N a) U = (Z > (Z (Z (n p (Li (n N (3) . (2 ■ — — CZ — � — —(Z %+- -0 m 70 -) m L L �o v C (35 /® O E WACv A' ,# >1 O CV N � O E CD+r N N U � O _ _0 O Cs ■ -- -0 O N cz N E co cz O 06 O Q N U j� -0 Cn V r � V • � O cz O O C Q N L) N O = � E (Z CZ U 70 (� Z3 U) O Q p CD O O O co r�- � � 0 O O O O qR* N O E O N O O O E N �_, •+•, cz N L � Cfl O N �j N • � 0 O 0 0 O N 0 � \ T (Y) O N CN +r (� `T/•� 07 U 0 'X (1) T C� o a-o N cz N � 0 O N r O U LL N • C O p 0 CN c� j O O 00000000 00000000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Lno LnoLno Lc) U L!'»qtzr 414,MCMNN r r r r r T r r {�} {,g {�} �} fg {�} Eft Ef? • • �U N � Q � a� U +-+ O O Q U a, ��n �y'� W � � }' i � :� � � � .V Q O � Q�j I- J d Cn Q � � Q � Ax W ^�♦ V ■� i 0 (n T C -0 Cz CD CD E -CZ CZ C cz p O O m U H W .0 y� O V L� W r�n ♦V^♦ v W OQO!O} N r-(� dM Cfl N fl-00 COCON ��� ��fffK}fff3� O DNLQ OD cy)OOLoNIQCON tf t000 CO It M OO OO r _0 CO MO m CD M dLr O(0 M 00 I'll rLr)NI- r- =3 N O M N MLO N LOH} fc.OEo,�OrLAn fyMOfl' EH fCI_�.dLOM U O O D EZ o2F �. W i 0 � O o >1 U a) O a) c: canC: . 4--j O o � U ._ C:F--j CZcz O cn a) CD cm cn o '� cZ CZ O O O O Q -;= (D m m }, U) cz Fj p Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Submitting Department: Administration Consent:® Regular:❑ Meeting Date: 4/3/03 Contact Person: Julie Ghetti Requesting Action:❑ Tvne of Document Needing Ammoval (Check all that a ❑ Public Hearing ® Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ❑ Other: Council Prioritv-(Check Annromiate Areas): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ® Community Development Report Only:❑ ❑ Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ❑ Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation ❑ Finance Regular Agenda Wording: Consent of approving RESOLUTION 2003-10 adopting a Community Facilities District Policy. Staff Recommendation: Approve Fiscal Impact: No $ Purpose of Item and Background Information: The Community Facilities District policy has been updated with the Council comments from the March 20, 2003 council meeting and reviewed by the Town Attorney. List All Attachments as Follows: Revised CFD policy. Type(s) of Presentation: N/A Signatures of Submitting Staff: Department Head 03 Town Manager / Designee Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) e:\agenda cover sheet\agenda cover sheet masterdoc.doc RESOLUTION NO. 2003-010 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, ADOPTING THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS POLICY. WHEREAS, the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills (the "Town Council") has determined that it is in the best interests of the citizens of the Town of Fountain Hills (the "Town") to establish written policies that ensure a consistent procedure for the Town Council to evaluate a request for formation of a community facilities district ("CFD"); and WHEREAS, the existence of such written policies will guide the Town Council and the Town staff in (i) evaluating the relative costs, benefits and risks of a proposed CFD, (ii) ensuring conformance with existing Town plans and (iii) establishing application procedures. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA as follows: SECTION 1. That the "Town of Fountain Hills Community Facilities District Policy" is hereby adopted in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. SECTION 2. That the Town Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to ensure that the Town of Fountain Hills Community Facilities District Policy is implemented and applied to all requests for formation of a CFD. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills, Arizona, March 20, 2003. FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO: Tim G. Pickering, Town Manager 9196.001\. A1003-10 - M.Policy.m.doc 3-14-03-1 / � -�� j -",gz�L 2� Bevelyn J.%ender, Town Clerk APP VED AS TO FORM: 1 An w J. NIcGuire, Town Attorney TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA POLICY GUIDELINES AND APPLICATION PROCEDURES FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS In order to secure for the Town of Fountain Hills, Arizona (the "Town") the benefits of the Community Facilities Act (the "Act") enacted by the Arizona Legislature in 1988 and to promote the best interests of the Town, the following Community Facilities Districts Policy Guidelines and Application Procedures (this "Policy") is hereby adopted by the Mayor and Council of the Town (the "Town Council"). A community facilities district ("CFD") provides a funding mechanism to finance construction, acquisition, operation and maintenance of public infrastructure that benefits the real property comprising the CFD and its ultimate users. The Town Council recognizes the ability of the CFD to allow the construction and/or acquisition of infrastructure that might otherwise not be provided. Because a CFD is an entirely separate political subdivision of the State located within the boundaries of the Town, the Town Council believes that the formation of the CFD should be entered into carefully, to ensure its lasting success. Therefore, the Town Council has established the following Policy to create a uniform process for formation of CFDs within the corporate boundaries of the Town. ARTICLE 1. General Policies 1.1. CFDs should be utilized primarily in connection with the financing of infrastructure for development of substantial (i) residential projects, (ii) master planned communities or (iii) commercial development. 1.2 Special consideration should be given to CFDs that provide an enhanced level of infrastructure amenities and/or municipal services. Any public infrastructure financed by a CFD should be in conformance with the Town's General Plan in order to encourage orderly growth and development. 1.3 All costs incurred by the Town and/or the CFD in connection with the CFD application, formation and administration and operation expenses appurtenant thereto, will be paid by the applicant/landowner (the "Applicant") through a series of monetary deposits as provided herein. These deposits shall be applied to payments for services rendered by the Town staff, CFD staff and services rendered by outside consultants who may be retained by the Town and/or the CFD, including but not limited to attorneys, financial advisors, engineers and appraisers. The Town may use outside consultants as "staff' to review or confirm any analyses prepared in conjunction with an application or financing of the CFD. If the Town or CFD uses outside consultants as "staff', such as attorneys or engineers, those consultants will also be paid their customary rate for services. If authorized by the CFD board of directors, exercising its sole discretion, all or part of such costs may be reimbursed to the Applicant from a CFD tax levy, CFD assessments, CFD revenues or CFD bond proceeds, provided such reimbursement is in conformance with federal law, state law and these guidelines. 1.4 The Town will encourage an area to be governed by as few CFDs as possible, and a preference will be given to one master CFD for a single development. This policy is adopted to facilitate ease of administration and to create the largest tax/revenue base possible. The decision to form a CFD shall be determined by the Town Council exercising its sole and absolute discretion. 1.5 Unless otherwise agreed to by the Town Council, and pursuant to state statutes, the CFD will be governed by a seven -member board of directors (the "CFD Board") comprised of the seven members of the Town Council. The day-to-day administrative responsibilities of the CFD will be performed pursuant to a contract by outside personnel or by the Town staff. The Town will determine that adequate safeguards and controls are in place to ensure the soundness of any CFD financing program, as well as the adequacy and legality of the legal proceedings and disclosure documents in connection with any financing. At the option of the CFD Board and with approval by the Town Council, advisory committees may be utilized. 1.6 Unless otherwise agreed to by the Town, the CFD must be self-supporting from the standpoint of financing, operations and maintenance. Town funds shall not be used for any CFD purposes. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Policy, the property, the full faith and credit or the taxing power of the Town shall not be pledged to the payment of any CFD obligation or indebtedness. 1.7 After review of the project feasibility report, property appraisals and other required pertinent information, the CFD Board will determine, in its sole and absolute discretion, the amount, timing and form of financing to be used by a CFD. 1.8 All public infrastructure constructed or acquired by the CFD shall adhere to the statutory public procurement procedures in accordance with applicable laws, rules and regulations. 1.9 The CFD will not use bond proceeds or other CFD funds to purchase from Applicant requesting CFD financing any public rights -of -way or other real property to be used for public infrastructure improvements if such real property would be required to be dedicated and conveyed to the Town by the Applicant upon development of the Applicant's property. 1.10 Unless otherwise agreed to by the Town, all costs of administration and operation of the CFD and the operation and maintenance of public infrastructure in the CFD, including replacement reserves as appropriate, shall be the responsibility of the CFD, the Applicant, 2 applicable homeowners associations, or any combination of the foregoing, as may be acceptable to the Town and the CFD Board. 1.11 This Policy maybe modified from time to time by the Town. Any Applicant will be given the opportunity to propose alternative approaches to those provided herein, with the understanding that concerns of the Town must be adequately addressed before the staff of the Town will recommend approval of a CFD to the Town Council. ARTICLE 2. Content of Application An application for the formation of a CFD (the "Application") must be completed prior to any determination that a CFD will be formed. The Application shall be submitted to the Town's Director of Public Works. The Application shall, at a minimum, contain the following information and be organized in the manner described below. Applicant Information 2.1 Applicant Information. A general description of the Applicant, including its corporate and organizational structure. This description should also include the names of all officers and/or corporate directors directly related to or associated with the proposed development and the proposed CFD. 2.2 Applicant Contact. The name address hone number and other relevant t information of the primary contact for the Applicant. This information should also list the names (and other relevant information) of any legal representatives, engineers, architects, financial consultants and/or other consultants significantly involved in the Application. 2.3 Experience. A general description of the Applicant's experience with similar types of projects, including a detailed description of the Applicant's professional experience. 2.4 Financial Capability. A description of the proposed equity contribution from the applicant/landowner and a calendar showing the timing and sources of such equity contribution. Evidence demonstrating Applicant's financial capacity to undertake the development associated with the public infrastructure and private development (including financial statements if necessary). Proposed CFD and Project Description 2.5 General Description. The Application shall provide a general description of the CFD, its purpose, proposed improvements and/or services to be provided and a statement describing the overall community benefit or enhanced public services to be derived from the CFD. This description should also include a statement of how the proposed CFD meets the existing development objectives of the Town, including the degree to which the CFD is consistent with the goals of the Town's General Plan for promoting orderly development, 3 consistent with growth management policies and zoning requirements and the degree to which the land use plan for the CFD is consistent with the Town's General Plan. 2.6 Location. The Applicant shall provide a description of the proposed CFD's general location within the Town, including an area site map illustrating the proposed boundaries and a legal description of the proposed boundaries. This description must include an analysis of the appropriateness of the CFD boundaries. 2.7 Ownership Interests. The Applicant shall provide the identity and address of all persons or entities with any interest in the property, including lienholders and purchasers under pending sales contracts, and the names and addresses of any qualified electors located within the proposed boundaries of the CFD. A current title report and certificate from the Maricopa County Elections Department shall be submitted as evidence of names or persons with any interest in the land and qualified electors, respectively. Proposed Improvements 2.8 Description of Project. The Application shall contain a detailed description of the types of public infrastructure to be financed and/or acquired by the CFD. 2.9 Estimated Costs. The Application shall provide an estimate of the construction and/or acquisition costs of the public infrastructure to be completed by the CFD. This information shall include a detailed list of the estimated cost of each component of the public improvements. 2.10 Development Timetable. A detailed timetable describing the scheduling, timing or phasing of the improvements shall be provided in the Application. This schedule should include a timetable for constructing/acquiring both the public and private components of the overall development. Each phase of the development should be shown separately. Additionally, the Applicant shall be encouraged to submit a timetable showing the project schedule if a CFD is not formed. Financing Plan 2.11 Description of Financial Plan. The Application shall include a detailed description of the capital financing plan for the public infrastructure and the private development, including both public and private components of the development including both capital and operating/maintenance costs. This description should include the proposed types of tax-exempt/taxable bonds to be issued for the public improvements as well as the financing plan of the Applicant for the private developments and the sources of the proposed financing of debt or equity. 2.12 Sources and Uses of Funds. The Application shall include a detailed sources and uses of funds for the public improvements. This schedule should include the description of components of the public improvements that will be financed by the type of bond to be issued. 4 2.13 Financial Feasibility. The Application should include a 20-year financial feasibility study for the entire project including both the public infrastructure and the private development. This feasibility study should include: a. A market absorption study for the private development in the CFD prepared by an independent consultant acceptable to the Town. Such study shall include estimates of the revenue to be generated by the development and an estimate of the ability of the market to absorb the development as well as a market absorption calendar for the private development. b. A financing plan for the private development in the CFD. 2.14 Fiscal Impact. The Application shall provide an analysis of how the proposed debt financing, operation and maintenance costs, user charges and other CFD costs will impact the ultimate end users of the property, specifically projected property taxes and property tax rates, special assessments, fees, charges and other costs that would be borne by owners/residents/users in the CFD. The analysis should also address the impact these costs will have on the marketability of the private development. A comparative analysis of such taxes, assessments and fees of similar or adjoining areas and/or CFDs should also be provided. 2.15 Value -to -Lien Ratio Analysis. Based on the estimated value of the property within the development, including the acquisition and/or construction of the public improvements within the CFD, the Application shall include an analysis of the value -to -lien ratios of the proposed public financing. 2.16 Operation and Maintenance Costs. The Application shall provide a detailed description and a financial pro -forma of the estimated annual operation and maintenance cost of the public infrastructure along with the governmental approvals that will be required for both the public and private improvements to be constructed and operated. The Application must clearly detail the specific entities such as CFD, Homeowners Associations, Applicant, Town, etc. that will be responsible for funding the on -going operation and maintenance costs for all CFD improvements. This section should also provide a description of the revenue source of such operations. A description of the proposed equity contribution from the applicant/landowner and a calendar showing the timing and sources of such equity contribution shall also be included. Miscellaneous Information 2.17 Marketing Plan. The Application shall provide a detailed description of the proposed marketing plan to be used by the Applicant to market the property within the CFD. This information may include comparisons of the proposed CFD to similar CFDs in the area. 2.18 Disclosure to Prospective Property Owners. The Application shall include information regarding the proposed disclosure forms that will be used to describe to prospective buyers the potential tax, assessment and fee implications of the CFD (the "CFD Disclosure Form"). The CFD Disclosure Form shall include provisions requiring the signed acknowledgement of receipt by all buyers of property within the CFD. The Applicant and any 5 subsequent developer/builder shall explain, in their promotional materials, the expected and possible tax, assessment and other financial burdens of the CFD to prospective CFD landowners. The Applicant shall record the CFD Disclosure Form in the office of the Maricopa County Recorder, including an accurate legal description of the real property contained within the boundaries of the CFD. The recorded CID Disclosure Form shall contain a clear, unambiguous statement that, upon each sale of property in the CFD, the Applicant, developeribuilder or any future land owner shall file with the Town Clerk and the CFD District Clerk (if different from the Town Clerk) at the close of escrow, a copy of the CFD Disclosure Form, signed by the purchaser. 2.19 Operating Plan. The Application shall include an operating plan for the CFD, describing the functions of the CFD and how the operation and maintenance of the infrastructure and any other services will be provided. 2.20 Development Agreements. The Application shall include (as an Appendix) any development agreements entered into between the Town and the Applicant relating to the proposed development within the CFD. ARTICLE 3. Application Review Procedures 3.1 Ten copies of the Application shall be submitted to the Town Public Works Director who will coordinate an inter -departmental analysis of the Application. Within a reasonable time after receipt of the Application, the Town Public Works Director shall provide the Applicant with a schedule of the review and approval process. 3.2 At the time of submission of the Application, the Applicant shall pay a non- refundable application fee of $20,000 and shall deposit an additional $50,000 on account with the Town Finance Department (the "Review Fee") to be applied by the Town in its sole discretion to the costs incurred in connection with processing and reviewing the Application and the formation and administration of the CFD. When $25,000 of the Review Fee (and each subsequent $25,000 amount hereinafter described) has been expended, an accounting will be made to the Applicant for all costs incurred by the Town and Applicant shall deposit an additional $25,000 as part of the Review Fee. 3.3 After the application fee and deposit are submitted, the Accounting Supervisor shall arrange a pre -review conference with the appropriate Town staff, for the purpose of reviewing the Application for conformity with Town policies. 3.4 If, following the pre -review conference or any other time during the Application process Town staff requests additional information, the Applicant shall provide any and all supplemental information requested prior to proceeding to the next step of the review process. 3.5 The review, analysis and implementation of an Application will be generally conducted in four sequential phases. .I a. Phase 1 will consist of a preliminary review of the Application to identify missing or incomplete information and to identify and discuss any initial concerns prior to the Town undertaking a more complete review of the Application. b. Phase 2 will consist of a detailed review of the Application as amended. The review will include, but will not be limited to, examining the project feasibility, financing analyses and evaluation of community benefits. This phase may include several iterations of review, comment and re -review. Under the direction of the Accounting Supervisor, a report may be prepared including recommendations related to the CFD and an analysis of the impact of the formation of the CFD and its effects on the Town. This report may provide a recommended disposition of the Application and any additional requirements that will be placed on the Applicant, developer/landowner, builder and/or the CFD. C. Phase 3, if undertaken, will consist of the planning, development, creation, financing and bond issuance for the CFD. d. Phase 4, if necessary, will consist of the continuing administration, oversight and management of the CFD. 3.6 Except as set forth herein with respect to ongoing operation and maintenance costs which will be paid by the CFD in the future, all costs must be paid by the Applicant and received by the Town at least 14 days prior to the date of the Town Council meeting at which the Application is to be considered. If the Application meets the qualifications provided herein, the Application, along with any report and recommendations by Town staff, will be forwarded to the Town Council. 3.7 If the Town Council approves an Application for formation of a CFD, the Applicant and the staff of the Town shall coordinate a schedule of events for formation of the CFD. Prior to formation of the CFD the Applicant and the Town shall enter into a development agreement incorporating the requirements of any report, recommendations of the Town staff relating to such CFD, the requirements of these policy guidelines and any other restrictions, provisions and agreements required by the Town. 3.8 If the Town Council approves the formation of a CFD and there are existing agreements with the Applicant and/or any other developers/landowners for the provision of infrastructure proposed to be furnished by the CFD, then those agreements will be amended to reflect the agreements and conditions pertaining to the CFD. The amendments will reflect that such infrastructure improvements will be provided (including by acquisition) by either the Applicant, developer/landowner or the CFD. 7 ARTICLE 4. CFD Operations and Debt Financing 4.1 Upon formation of a CFD the Applicant shall deposit with the CFD a nonrefundable start-up fee of $10,000 and an additional $25,000 as a deposit on account for ongoing administrative expenses. The administrative expense fee shall be applied by the CFD to the costs and expenses incurred in connection with administration, operation and maintenance of the CFD or its public improvements. These deposits shall be applied to payments for services rendered by the Town staff, CFD staff, if any, and services rendered by outside consultants who may be retained by the Town and/or the CFD, including but not limited to attorneys, financial advisors, engineers and appraisers. From time to time, upon depletion of the administrative expense fee, the CFD may request, and the Applicant shall promptly deposit with the CFD, additional $25,000 deposits to be applied to the purposes contemplated in this Section 4.1. 4.2 In order to provide for the CFD to be self-supporting for its administrative, operation and maintenance expenses the Town and the CFD, unless otherwise agreed, will require the imposition of a $0.30 per $100 of assessed value ad valorem tax upon the CFD taxable property. Failure to agree to impose any necessary tax for the operation and maintenance of the CFD will relieve the Town and the CFD from undertaking any obligations or operations. 4.3 In connection with any request for debt financing, the Applicant will provide a current appraisal of the fair cash market value of the property within the proposed CFD that is to be taxed or assessed, prepared by a person who is designated as a Member Appraisal Institute ("MAP') and a certified general real estate appraiser (such person hereafter referred to as an "MAI Appraiser"), such appraisal to be in form and substance acceptable to the Town, in its sole discretion. 4.4 The amount of debt of a CFD may not have any substantial direct or indirect negative impacts on the debt or financing capabilities of the Town, and the debt imposed on the CFD may not impose an unreasonably high financial burden on future CFD residents. 4.5 If general obligation bonds are to be issued by the CFD, those general obligation bonds will be secured by an unlimited ad valorem tax on all taxable property located within the CFD. Prior to the issuance of general obligation bonds by the CFD, the applicant shall describe in the project feasibility report, in addition to the statutory requirements, the following information: a. The current direct and overlapping tax and assessment burden on the taxable property that is proposed to be taxed and the full cash value and assessed valuation of the taxable property as shown on the most recent assessment roll. b. The amount and timing of CFD general obligation bonds to be issued. C. The expected market absorption of development within the CFD. d. The effect of the CFD bond issuance on CFD property tax rates, calculated over the entire period of time that the proposed General Obligation Bonds are estimated to be outstanding or based on the phasing of the project to be financed, as applicable. e. The CFD Board may attempt to limit the total tax rates of the CFD. If the pre -established debt service tax rate is not sufficient to pay the entire debt service in respect of outstanding General Obligation Bonds when due, the Applicant will be required to contribute an amount annually sufficient to pay the difference between the revenues produced by the pre -established tax rate and the actual CFD debt service coming due in that fiscal year. Security for the Applicant's payment of this contribution may be in the form of a cash contribution, standby contribution agreement or other form of security approved by the CFD Board in its sole discretion. The security provided shall be bankruptcy -proof and shall be submitted to the CFD Board prior to issuance of the first General Obligation Bonds for the CFD, including a cash flow schedule illustrating the security amount and the time period required to cover any such shortfall. The security shall remain in full force and effect until such time as the CFD Board, exercising its sole discretion, determines the assessed value of real property in the CID is sufficient to generate ad valorem taxes at the pre -established CFD tax rate sufficient to pay the actual CFD debt service. At that time, the CFD Board, exercising its sole discretion, will determine whether the Applicant's security will be released in whole or in part. f. Any economic advantage or the estimated savings, if any, to residents in the form of reduced purchase prices, enhanced public services and/amenities, additional community benefits, etc. that are projected to result from CID financing. g. The marketing plan for the issuance of bonds shall be described. The plan should include a statement of whether the bonds will be publicly offered or privately placed. Publicly offered bonds must be rated in one of the four highest investment grade ratings from either Standard & Poor's Corporation, Moody's Investors Services, Inc., or other nationally recognized bond rating services. Pursuant to state statutes, the CFD will not issue non -investment grade bonds in a public offering. Privately placed bonds need not be rated. However, purchases of such general obligation bonds must be "qualified buyers" (similar to those acceptable pursuant to the Securities Exchange Commission) and must agree to hold the bonds for their own account and not to resell the bonds except to "qualified buyers" in a private placement. 4.6 Revenue bonds shall be payable from a specified revenue source. An Applicant for revenue bonds must describe in each project feasibility report, along with the statutory requirements, the following: a. The current direct and overlapping tax and assessment burdens on the taxable property within the CFD and the full cash value and assessed valuation of that taxable property as shown on the most recent assessment roll. b. The revenue source from which bonds will be payable. The Town reserves the right to require the applicant to produce such independently prepared financial feasibility studies or reports as it deems necessary to confirm the amount and availability of revenues. C. The expected market absorption of development within the CFD. d. The amount and tinting of CID revenue bonds to be issued. e. The financial impact of the proposed issue(s) on prospective residents. f. Any plan for subsidizing revenues to meet obligations, including financial guarantees in a form acceptable to the Town in its sole discretion. g. Whether the bonds will be publicly offered or privately placed. Publicly offered revenue bonds must be rated in one of the four -highest investment grade ratings from either Standard & Poor's Corporation, Moody's Investors Service, Inc., or other nationally recognized bond rating services. Pursuant to state statutes, the CFD will not issue non -investment grade bonds in a public offering. Privately placed bonds need not be rated. However, purchasers of such revenue bonds must be "qualified buyers" (similar to those acceptable pursuant to the Securities Exchange Commission) and must agree to hold the bonds for their own account and not to resell the bonds except to "qualified buyers" in a private placement. 4.7 Assessment bonds shall be secured b first lien subject only to the lien for Y (subject Y o general taxes and prior special assessments) on the property benefited. Applicants for assessment bonds should describe in each project feasibility report, the following: a. The current direct and overlapping tax and assessment burdens on real property to comprise the CFD and the full cash value and assessed valuation of that property as shown on the most recent assessment roll. b. The amount and timing of CFD assessment bonds to be issued. C. The expected market absorption of development within the CFD. d. The estimated assessment amount to be placed on prospective assessed parcels. e. Whether the assessments will be paid upon the sale of lots by the Applicant or will remain on the property after sale. f. Whether the assessment bonds will be publicly offered or privately placed. Publicly offered assessment bonds must be rated in one of the four highest investment grade ratings from either Standard and Poor's Corporation, Moody's Investors Service, Inc., or other nationally recognized bond rating services. Pursuant to state statutes, the m CFD will not issue non -investment grade bonds in a public offering. In a public offering, an appraisal of the land to be encumbered, prepared by an MAI Appraiser and in form and substance acceptable to the CFD Board, in its sole and absolute discretion, shall indicate a minimum land value to debt ratio of 6 to 1 prior to the issuance of debt. Privately placed bonds need not be rated. However the purchasers of such assessment bonds must be "qualified buyers" (similar to those acceptable pursuant to the Securities Exchange Commission) and agree to hold the bonds for their own account and not to resell the bonds except to "qualified buyers" in a private placement. Further, in connection with the sale of unrated privately placed assessment bonds, the CID Board must have received an appraisal of the land to be encumbered, prepared by an MAI Appraiser and in form and substance acceptable to the CFD Board, in its sole discretion, indicating a minimum land value to debt ratio of 4 to I as of a date prior to the issuance of debt. If a 4 to 1 ratio is not achieved, a scaling down of the proposed debt and phasing of the infrastructure is expected. 4.8 Notwithstanding the restrictions pertaining to public sales and private placements of the bonds set forth in this Article 4, the restrictions may be modified if other financing structures are presented which, in the sole discretion of the CFD Board, provide other means to address the CFD Board concerns. ARTICLE 5. Financing Considerations 5.1 The Applicant or developer/landowner shall provide at leas t $0.25 in infrastructure or community improvements for each $1.00 of debt to be issued by a CFD to finance public infrastructure purposes. If agreed to by the CFD Board, in its sole and absolute discretion, prior infrastructure and community improvements constructed or acquired by the Applicant or the developer/landowner and benefiting the property within the CID may be included in calculating the Applicant's or developer/landowner's compliance with this Section 5.1. As described in Article 2 above, the Applicant shall provide a detailed description of how the Applicant will provide the equity contribution of the proposed total costs of the project. This description shall include details of whether the developer is using cash and/or debt and the source of such equity contribution. 5.2 If allowed by law, all bond issues shall include a reasonable debt service reserve fund or acceptable debt service surety in an amount acceptable to the CFD Board. The Town Council and/or CFD Board shall have the right to require the Applicant to fund a reserve account in such amounts as determined by the Town or CFD Board to ensure payment. The Town or CID Board will determine whether the reserve shall be funded through bond proceeds, project revenues or directly by the Applicant. 5.3 Unless otherwise agreed, it is expected that general obligation bond authorization for a CFD shall expire no later than 15 years from the date of voter authorization. 5.4 The Applicant or developer/landowner (or such other third party acceptable to the Town and the CFD) for any CFD bonds, shall indemnify the Town and the CID and their agents, officers, and employees and shall hold the Town and the CFD and their agents, officers and employees harmless for, from and against any and all liabilities, claims, costs and expenses, including attorneys' fees, incurred in any challenge or proceeding to the formation, operation, administration of the CFD, the offer and sale of CFD bonds, the levying by the CFD of any tax, assessment or charge and the operation and maintenance of public infrastructure financed or owned by the CFD. In addition, if such insurance is not otherwise available from another source, the Applicant shall be responsible for the cost of a Director's and Officers (D&O) insurance policy to cover all actions and activities taken by the CFD Board and officers of the CFD relating to the CFD formation, financing, administrative actions of other related activities. The Applicant shall be responsible for depositing the amount of any deducible in escrow with the CFD or for providing a plan for providing for such deductible. The amount of the D&O coverage will be determined by the CFD at the time of formation. 5.5 Unless otherwise provided to the Town pursuant to other requirements, prior to CFD financing and acquisition by the CFD or Town, the CFD or Town will require an independent environmental report or assessment of any real property which will be dedicated to or otherwise owned, leased or operated by the Town or the CFD and a proposed form or indemnity agreement with respect to all environmental law liability, 9196.001\CFD Policy.v2.doc 3-28-03-1 12 1 Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Submitting Department: Legal Meeting Date: 4/3/03 Contact Person: Andrew McGuire Consent:® Regular:'❑ Requesting Action:❑ Tvpe of Document Needine Approval (Check all that a ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Resolution ® Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ❑ Other: Council Prioritv (Check Aparonriate Areas): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ® Community Development Report Only:❑ ❑ Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ❑ Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation ❑ Finance Regular Agenda Wordine: Consideration of APPROVING AN ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT with MCO Properties, Inc. Staff Recommendation: Approve Fiscal Impact: No $ Purpose of Item and>Backeround Information: This addendum has been requested by MCO to clarify that the construction of Eagle Ridge Drive (the main road leading into what they are now calling Adero Canyon) up to the trailhead will not be required to be completed until the issuance of the first certificate of occupancy for Adero Canyon. This addendum simply memorializes the understanding between the Town and MCO that the Eagle Ridge Drive improvements are intended to be constructed in conjunction with Adero Canyon, notwithstanding the possibility that Adero Canyon may be developed after Eagles Nest. List All Attachments; as Follows: Final Settlement Agreement Addendum Tyne(s) of Presentation: None Signatures of Submitting Staff: — , I kYA4�_� Departme Head -[-U AC AIT094WI Town Manager / Designee c:\ajm docs\agenda cover sheet.doc Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) Town of FOUNTAIN HILLS April 10, 2003 Mr. Shawn Hurwitz Maxxam Inc, 5847 San Felipe, Ste. 2600 Houston, TX 77050 RE: Final Settlement Agreement Addendum dated April 3, 2003 Dear Mr. Hurwitz, Enclosed you will find two copies of the final Settlement Agreement Addendum between the Town of Fountain Hills and MCO Properties. The Town of Fountain Hills has signed the document. Please sign where indicated and return both originals to me. Once recorded a copy of the recorded document will be mailed to you. Thank you for your immediate attention to this matter. If you have questions, I may be contacted at 480-816-5115. Sincerely, Bevelyn J. B der Town Clerk Enclosures: two copies of the Final Settlement Agreement Addendum E:\BBendeADocuments\letters\Final Settlement Agreement Addendum 4-3-03.doc 16836 East Palisades Boulevard, Building A - P.O. Box 17958 - Fountain Hills, Arizona 85269 - (480) 837-2003 - FAX: (480) 837-3145 MC � t ('ROP�IEQS1n May 27, 2003 Via Federal Express Ms. Bevelyn J. Bender Town Clerk Town of Fountain Hills 16836 East Palisades Boulevard Building A Fountain Hills, Arizona 85269 5847 San Felipe, Suite 2600 Houston, Texas 77057 713-975-7600 fax 713-267-3702 Re: Final Settlement Agreement Addendum dated April 3, 2003 Dear Ms. Bender: Enclosed please find a fully executed Final Settlement Agreement Addendum between The Town of Fountain Hills and MCO Properties. I regret the delay in getting a fully executed copy back to you. Please note that per my conversation with Andrew McGuire, since the original Settlement Agreement was not recorded, this Addendum will similarly not be recorded. Since a Memorandum of the original Settlement Agreement was recorded, and this should continue to serve- to reference the document, even as it has been amended. Please feel free to call me at (713) 267-3667 if you have any questions or comments appreciate your assistance in this matter. �ery truly yo , ✓`' ` ��_ Erik A. Eriksson Vice President/Sr. Assistant General Counsel EAE:an Enclosure cc: Greg Bielli Andrew McGuire, Esq. W:\Real Estate\EAE\CORS\Bender Letter 052703.%vpd 5/27/03 8:18 am FINAL SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ADDENDUM This Addendum to Final Settlement Agreement (the "Addendum"), dated 2003, is an addendum to the Final Settlement Agreement between the Town of Fountain Hills, an Arizona municipal corporation ("Town") and MCO Properties L.P. d/b/a MCO Properties Limited Partnership, a Delaware limited partnership, doing business in the State of Arizona ("MCO"), dated December 4, 2001 (the "Agreement"). FOR GOOD AND VALUABLE CONSIDERATION, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: General. a. All capitalized terms used herein shall have the meanings provided for in the Agreement. b. The Agreement remains in full force and effect and' -unmodified except as provided herein. 2. Addendum. Paragraph 7.1 of the Agreement is restated as follows: The parties acknowledge that Eagle Ridge Drive as located on the Master Plat shall remain a public roadway. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Town shall prohibit all mass transit vehicles (e.g., public or charter buses) from Eagle Ridge Drive except Fountain Hills school buses carrying children to and from school and school - sanctioned field trips. MCO shall construct Eagle Ridge Drive, a sidewalk on one side of Eagle Ridge Drive, and a bicycle lane (the roadway, the sidewalk and bicycle lane not to exceed eight (8) feet in aggregate width), within the standard right-of-way for Eagle Ridge Drive. MCO shall pave Eagle Ridge Drive no later than the date that a certificate of occupancy is issued for a home within Eagle Ridge North. The public shall have access to Eagle Ridge Drive following acceptance of MCO's improvements by the Town. 11r IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Addendum on the date fist written above. _ TOWN: MCO: Town of Fountain Hills, an Arizona municipal MCJ Properties L.P., a Delaware limited 'q� partnership By: MCO Pr perties, Inc., a Delaware corporatio ge ral partner By: Its: C. Town Attorney for the Town of Fountain Hills ATTEST: Bevelyn BendeV Town Clerk ti Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Meeting Date: 4/3/03 Submitting Department: Com. Dev. Contact Person: Dana Burkhardt, Senior Planner Consent:® Regular:❑ Requesting Action:® Report Only.❑ Tvne of Document Needing Annroval (Check all that a ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ❑ Other: Council Prioritv (Check Annronriate Areas): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ® Community Development ❑ Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ® Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation Regular Agenda Wording: Consideration of the Preliminary and Final Plat for "Kepler Casas Condominiums", a 2-unit condominium project, located at 16432 E. Monaco Dr., aka Final Plat 206, Block 7, Lot 17; Case #S2003-03. Staff Recommendation: Approve Fiscal Impact: No Purpose of Item and Background Information: This request is for preliminary and final plat approval for "Kepler Casas Condominiums", a 2-unit condominium project, located at 16432 E. Monaco Dr., aka Final Plat 206, Block 7, Lot 17; Case #S2003-03. This building is existing and has a certificate of occupancy. List All Attachments as Follows: Staff Report; Application; Final Plat Reduction Type(s) of Presentation: N/A Signatures of Submitting Staff: Dep tment H� 3 �7 3 Town Manager / Designee Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS PLANNING & ZONING TOWN COUNCIL MEMO TO: The Honorable Mayor Beydler and DT: March 26, 2003 Town Council FR: Dana Burkhardt, Senior Planner -- RE: Case # S2003-03; Preliminary and Final Plat Kepler Casas Condominiums LOCATION: 16432 Monaco Dr. aka Lot 17, Block 7, Final Plat 206. REQUEST: Consider the Preliminary and Final Plat for "Kepler Casas Condominiums", a 2-unit condominium project. PROJECT MANAGER: Dana Burkhardt, Senior Planner DESCRIPTION: OWNER: Robert & Kathryn Kepler APPLICANT: Robert & Kathryn Kepler EXISTING ZONING: "R-2" EXISTING CONDITION: Developed LOT SIZE: 12,677 square feet (.29 acres) SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING: NORTH: Duplex; zoned "R-2" SOUTH: Duplex; zoned "R-2" EAST: Single -Family Residence; zoned "R-2" WEST: Duplex; zoned "R-2" SUMMARY: This request is for approval of the Preliminary and Final Plat "Kepler Casas Condominiums" Declaration of Condominium, which subdivides cubic airspace, and is not a land sell project. Due to the simplicity of this request and the fact that this project does not involve any off -site public improvements, a "fast track" process is being allowed. The owners, Robert & Kathryn Kepler, has chosen to convert a two -unit residential complex and record a Declaration of Condominium to sell the units individually. The units have a maximum livable area of 1,531 square feet and a minimum livable area of 1,218 square feet. The property was developed and received a certificate of occupancy prior to the Town's incorporation, under building permit #78-14195. The Unit 2 garage does encroach into the 20-foot minimum front yard -building setback by approximately 1.15 feet. Any future reconstruction of the encroaching portion of the garage must conform to Chapter Four (4) of the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of S2003-03; Preliminary and Final Plat "Kepler Casa Condominiums". PBA 1 /02 The Town of Fountain bills fficial Use COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Case Manager: Only ao ,o Fountain Hills, Arizona • _ Aft 1W APPLICATION Area Specific Plan or Change Preliminary Plat "44�:-el\/'A�-- P(:. General Plan Amendment Cut/Fill Waiver Plan of Development Special Use Permit Zoning Change SU Comprehensive Sign Plan Variance HPE Change or Abandonment NATURE OF THE REQUEST: PROJECT NAME l'Mrs. Applicant:�4'Q Day Phone 4 - c) � Ms. Address: X& �`- 3/2 037 Z�°.t--' sr'— City: State: •4 7 zip: , __ZMrs. Owner: /&:�a 77/A_' W �i f Day Phone Ms. Address: 1643 /��r��s�« �C% city: 4L11LB State: 14� Zip:---`�- G If application is being submitted by someone other than the owner of the property under consideration, the secdon below must be completed. SIGNATURE OF OWNER - DATE I HEREBY AUTHORIZE A TO FILE THIS APPLICATION. Please Print Subscribed and sworn before me this day of Notary Public My Commission Expires 20 -)-I �-& j 3 *� bd FILING DATE: FEE PAID: ACCEPTED BY: (See Fee Schedule) Application1L Page 2 of 7 Case Number PBA 1 /02 The Town of Fountain Hills LEGAL DESCRIPTION 2a4e — 17 /'7 Plat Name Block Lot PROPERTY ADDRESS /6'¢S 2 10-"^ za r, D-t-,7 PARCEL SIZE (Acres) �ZG/I ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER / ('U5 -3�4 / NUMBER OF UNITS PROPOSED h i �TRACT� %Z Z EXISTING ZONING: 21'-12,04-F y - 72 7 ``. Application Page 3 of 7 PROPOSED ZONING Gc:K��O/7iA1140-1 Case Number . ,.� ten; -- � - - _ 1a:. }Siu to �: �a eOG: UOu.n :•UW-. :Yl Wfi^! ••.,• ••• - -tf8•.C9r) _ c IIYGC�O: _j 1� ...'Y '-t, a•: ,,,p N0Y1 'a zC>= TJI ..3_Cu Sy-��, 3Aia0 �rN01� '� ��tr�: N A4z.P 'v0,,•i,^! 171r4 NIC]N�0! I i >UZ ^S -Y•" ,V.3!•. r. � - o��?� `I- .la --.x<`Z <-:aT-c«`�----r acyt ••'� i'.�.C18 90Z J`fl '0'1'1 '1N3N30rNYM T `JNItl33NMN3 S r+9G w —_—~� A�3/VDq1N�W smINIMONO3 x o svSvo a3ld311 �,- BCD by �•Y'�y pY °y R .S� -- '=rtg Z '• `sy"•�4` <Ye �$ Sri �" I� _ :Yy �J ter :o stR [4 y w �_' ' ' _Y F V _-_ifi.Y . J `�' mew zz a,�tzz a of ? • I IR t� F z y.-n 'ybgebs 5° biro �Y ISP Ds ?I Y ; _ k O L%PT .•c:. 1' O a�esS CI �P T W / //^''11 Ca gW i 4 L= Wz$ 7 r Vl 'r^„ �$c: Yib .-_'i �•. t "b cD e _ S •_ zY, fb ,. bg 25 ''Ts'.,. O < • s� b q g a S e¢ :3a X j�� � �e i Y� _ O" bo a. V �--••r �` c W z d x?� ,�3 gp? °X'$ a'„g AD =, Ffitas .. � Q CC �oirsV vi `` rffi x •-� � 7 $$ �� rt=fir '� L., �$�Y3�'� � n$�7y'E "� ^1 i`.b g CJ o.., .� p MbMa '9 5�°yy++' Nf $: OI �` p3 S x_ _F n.2 qg�� M L' Cii U,•x e'g¢ �:5r kSb 3 `oJ<"z _ _Ie " `. 't i` :�cr 7- €, -�'- 9DCu rt 3 GY' 6 y f a_ ye' e S ab x $ b9 ci. 4 C$i sa�,^,t EGE x ? g A" 4- 0 "kt �' e c ? _"•_ r`ciaetl„ aY D� ; v yr°r;a lz J 1 i FE I 1 16 9Z Z _ I 3'I'd ,01 ' a A 5.., r, sa8r � vv 1",• R 307 Sgvf, >•rrSrf� i R� r— - -- -; ;T J n � aut99 v JN'u to __S_. sl:iK l.• 1v ;a U'l caw 00 JZ,a *057 LC —r. ,.. =AIhO "✓1'<JA -^':SB YNC_iLti '� lw '1'.— n; ?_0\ SY �%x`-----COnC _I }� 1Z-11 3AIyG `r1c� 10� _-. _ _ 'O•l'l '1N3W3�JVNVW 4 ONIH33NION3 I - -- J���W��1N�W swnwiwoalloo o SVSVU 8311d3N N ta� ai- SW afz T LJ � J Z �I W 5'OL 1 iviZ• sTs I L Oi Q 9L_._.__.._T SI _ I_1^ 2EZ�2 Q -.]-- iz skims N ^I 9 N � r^isyr!s eq I J — SCt tY; pR Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Submitting Department: Public Works Consent:® Regular:❑ Meeting Date: 4-3-03 Contact Person: Art Candelaria Requesting Action:❑ Type of Document Needing ADDroval (Check all that a ❑ Public Hearing ® Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ❑ Other: Council Priority (Check Apnronriate Areas): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ® Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ❑ Community Development Report Only:[--] ❑ Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ❑ Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation ❑ Finance Regular Agenda Wording: Consideration of RESOLUTION 2003-07 abandoning whatever right, title, or interest the Town has in certain public utility and drainage easements located at the northerly property line of Lot 14, Block 6, Plat 603B (15608 E. Cholla Drive) as recorded in Book 161 of Maps, Page 41 Records of Maricopa County, Arizona - EA2003-01, Jerald and Karen Lindemann, with stipulation. Staff Recommendation: Approve Fiscal Impact: No Purpose of Item and Background Information: Mr. & Mrs. Lindemann submitted a request for a 10' public utility and drainage easement abandonment on February 4, 2003 for the purpose of building a swimming pool. List All Attachments as Follows: Staff memo, resolution, exhibit, agreement letter, neighbor letter Type(s) of Presentation: Consent Agenda Signatures of Submitting Staff: 14Z 2*4 �14 Dep tment Head 3 -2-7 -c3 Town Manager / Designee Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) \\earth\bbrannon\agenda\agenda cover sheet - lindemann ea.doc TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor Beydler and Town Council DT: March 21, 2003 FR: Art Candelaria, Civil Engineer RE: Easement Abandonment 2003-01 Randy Harrel, Town Engineer( _ �' 15608 E. Cholla Drive Reviewed: Tom Ward, Director of Pu lic ork Plat 603B, Block 6, Lot 14 This item on the Town Council's agenda is a proposal to abandon the ten (10) foot public utility and drainage easements located at the northerly property line of Lot 14, Block 6, Plat 603B, (15608 E. Cholla Drive) as shown in Exhibit "A". The property owners of Lot 14 desire the assurance that any future improvements made to the lot will not be infringed upon by the construction of utilities. All affected utility companies have been notified of this abandonment proposal and have approved of the proposed abandonment of this public utility easement. The Engineering Department has reviewed the site to ascertain any drainage issues in addition to the Town's general interest in the easement. It is the professional opinion of the Engineering Department that there is no need for the Town to retain the drainage easement proposed to be abandoned, with the understanding that certain lots within this subdivision are subject to lot -to -lot drainage runoff. The property owners of Lot 14 are required to pass the developed flows generated by the upstream lots across their property. Staff had originally sent our notices of this proposed abandonment on February 18, 2003. Staff then received response letters from two adjoining neighbors, Donald/Todd Meinberg and Green Turner, which had been primarily concerned with the proposed rear yard improvements (masonry retaining wall, leveling, and swimming pool) rather than the abandonment per se. The applicant has now substantially modified his improvement plans --clearly ditching the water flow away from the Meinberg's wall, and combining their rear wall by removing the Turner's existing rear masonry fence (see attached notarized agreement letter). Staff has additionally received a copy of a letter from the side yard house owned by Donald Meinburg regarding the side yard drainage and potential fencing/wall. However, as staff has since discussed with Mr. Meinburg, that side yard fencing does not have a bearing on the rear drainage easement abandonment. Staff believes that the adjacent resident concerns are being addressed and recommends approval of the drainage and public utility easement abandonment, with the following stipulation: Drainage flow and fence issues must be resolved satisfactory to the Town prior to receiving a building permit for a rear fence/wall, major rear yard grading, and/or a swimming pool. Eric: Resolution Exhibit Turner/Lindemann agreement letter dated 3/12/03 Meinburg side fence letter dated 3/21/03 C: Jerald & Karen Lindemann Donald Meinburg Mark & Donna Crotts Green Turner ACandelaria/BBrannon EA2003-01 - 60313-6-14.doc When recorded, return to: Public Works Department Town of Fountain Hills P.O. Box 17958 Fountain Hills, AZ 85269 RESOLUTION 2003-07 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA ABANDONING WHATEVER RIGHT, TITLE, OR INTEREST IT HAS IN A PORTION OF THE CERTAIN TEN (10') FOOT PUBLIC UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS ALONG THE NORTHERLY LOT LINE OF LOT 14, BLOCK 6, OF PLAT 603B, FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, AS RECORDED IN BOOK 161 OF MAPS, PAGE 41, RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA. WHEREAS, The Town Council of the Town of Fountain Hills, as the governing body of real property located in the Town of Fountain Hills, may require the dedication of public streets, sewer, water, drainage, and other utility easements or rights -of -way within any proposed subdivision; and WHEREAS, The Town Council of the Town of Fountain Hills has the authority to accept or reject offers of dedication of private property by easement, deed, subdivision, plat or other lawful means; and WHEREAS, All present utility companies have received notification of the proposed abandonment; NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the Mayor and Common Council of the Town of Fountain Hills, Arizona as follows: SECTION 1. That a portion of the certain ten (10) foot public utility and drainage easements, located along the northerly property lot line of Plat 603B, Block 6, Lot 14, Fountain Hills, Arizona; as shown in Exhibit "A"; as recorded in book 161 of maps, page 41 records of Maricopa County, Arizona; are hereby declared to be abandoned by the Town of Fountain Hills. Certain lots within this subdivision are subject to lot -to -lot drainage runoff. The property owner of Lot 14 is required to pass the developed flows generated by the upstream lots across their property. SECTION 2. That this Resolution is one of abandonment and disclaimer by the Town solely for the purpose of removing any potential cloud on the title to said property and that the Town in no way attempts to affect the rights of any private party to oppose the abandonment or assert any right resulting there from or existing previous to any action by the Town. Resolution 2003-07 Page 1 of 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of April, 2003. ATTEST: REVIEWED BY:...., G. Timothy G. Pickering, CEcD, Town Manager r FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS n Beydle May APP OVED AS TO FORM: An w McGuire, Town Attorney Resolution 2003-07 Page 2 of 2 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS EASEMENT ABANDONMENT EXHIBIT "A" PLAT 603-B BLOCK 6 LOT 14 LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 15 0�0 T%h 80 w ABANDON 10'_-/' P.U.E & D.E. BLOCK 6 LOT 14 ,000 00 \ LOT 13 \ 8 DO'O; w \ C N / \ 16645 ` R IDY L. SCALE: 1 "=40' DATE: 2-06-03 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS March 12, 2003 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN MAR 2 1 2003 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT This is a letter of agreement between Jerald & Karen Lindemann and Green & Jane Turner. The Turners agree to allow the Lindemanns to remove the Existing masonry wall at the rear of the Turner's property. The Lindemanns agree to build a new masonry retaining wall/ fence as per the plans prepared by Montgomery Engineering of Fountain Hills and referenced by the Town of Fountain Hills building permit #2003 - 87. The new wall shall be on the Lindemanns property and belong to the Lindemanns. The Lindemann's further agree to build the wall immediately after removing the Turner's wall. Furthermore the plans prepared by Mongomery Engineering shall be a part of this agreement. Green & Jane Turner 15621 E. Cholla Dr. FountaHills, Az. 85268 Green Turner Date ' 3l C ane Turner Da e _'yam/ 3- tary [:NATOFFICIAL SEAL C. HOGESOOM ALILIE OTARYPUBLIC - ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTYy Comm. Expires i i new Jerald & Karen Lindemann 15608 E. C olla Dr. ounta' i Is, z. 268 y/o Jerald Lin Date Kpa,4e 3 Alee3 mann Date WN-W SA-0 OFFICIAL SEAL NATALIE C. HOGESOOM NOTARY PUBLIC - ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY My Comm. Expires 11/30/03 MAR-21-03 04:26 PM P. 01 Don Mcinburg 1600 Oldridge A.vcnuc North Stillwater, MN 55082 651-436-7307 651-775-2715 March 21. 2003 Preferred Building Systems 10413 Sarazen Circle Fountain hills, jV 85268 Attn: Bill Reilly Re: Addition at 15608 E. Cholla Drive (Flasemcnt Abandonment 2003-01, Plat 60313, Block 6, Lot 14) Dear Bill: Per our on -site meeting on 3-1 1-03 and our phone conversation on 3-18-03, you indicated that you would be providing me with drawings and specifications regarding the upstream water problem that would be created by the project at 15608 Cholla. This project adjoins our property at 15602 Cholla and our concern is that water from our property could be trapped. According to conversations with Todd and Ali, you have started construction of the project. I have asked you 3 or 4 times to see your plans and you promised to send a site plan Tuesday. l am really confused as to your intention along; our property line since you are reluctant to share your drawings with us. At this point, I feel the upstream water problem has not b-en addressed along; our property line. If your intentions are to do nothing; within thr,_e tcet of our fence, then we have no problem. However, at this point, flllina alone our fence or adding on to the ton of the fence is not authorized. Anything; to alter the existing; conditions within three feet ol'our property line will be of concern to us, and any changes must be in writing prior to authorization and commencement of work. Thank you in advance for addressing our concerns. Sincerely, DA inburg bg Cc: Todd and Ali Vleinburg; Betty Brannon Town of Fountain ifills Public Work% Depirtment Town of Fountain Hills PR Town Council Agenda Action Form Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Submitting Department: Admin Meeting Date: 4/3/2003 Contact Person: Julie Ghetti Consent:❑ Regular:® Requesting Action:® Type of Document Needing Approval (Check all that a ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ® Other: Public Art Council Priority (Check ADArovriate Areas): Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ® Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ❑ Community Development Report Only:❑ ❑ Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ❑ Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation ❑ Finance Regular Agenda Wording: Consider accepting a donation of two pieces of public art from the Fountain Hills Arts Council and the Fountain Hills Public Art Committee. Staff Recommendation: Approve Fiscal Impact: Yes $150.00 Purpose of Item and Background Information: Mr. Jerry Miles will represent the Fountain Hills Arts Council and the Fountain Hills Public Art Committee who wish to donate two sculptures to the Town of Fountain Hills. The first sculpture was created by artist Randy Hand and entitled "George, The Tortoise" and is to be placed in or near the Fountain Park children's playground. The second piece is a sculpture created by artist Marianne Caroselli named "Free to Be Me" and will be placed in the Community Center. List All Attachments as Follows: Memorandums dated March 27, 2003 to Mayor Jon Beydler from Jerry Miles with photographs of art pieces. Type(s) of Presentation: oral Signatures of Submitting Staff: Department Head ��7-5 -,2&- 6, � Town Manager / Designee \\earth\jghetti\wpdata\agenda cover sheet.doc Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) MEMO TO: Mayor Jon Beydler FROM: Jerry Miles SUBJECT: George the Tortoise DATE: March 27, 2003 The Fountain Hills Arts Council and Public Art Committee would like to request approval by the Town Council, at neat week's council meeting, of the acquisition by the Town of Fountain Hills of a sculpture piece by artist Randy Hand known as "George, The Tortoise". A photo of the piece of sculpture is attached. It is anticipated that the piece will be installed in Fountain Park, in or near the children's playground. This acquisition has been funded by a major grant from the Sunridge Foundation and by donations from a number of Fountain Hills residents. The immediate urgency to obtain approval of this acquisition is to satisfy the need of the artist to obtain funds to pay for the casting of the piece, which has already been done. The artist has made a very substantial reduction is the purchase price, on the condition that we fund the purchase this month. We are in a position to do so and would like to do so, but we don't want to pay for this piece without the assurance that the Town will accept this gift. jacfik .Hulse, President of the Fountain Hills Arts Council. taut 3 a&uz&, Chairman of the Fountain Hills Public Art Committee MEMO TO: Mayor Jon Beydler FROM: Jerry Miles SUBJECT: Teen Angel Project DATE: March 27, 2003 The Fountain Hills Arts Council and Public Art Committee would request approval, at next week's council meeting, of the acquisition by the Town of Fountain Hills of a sculpture piece by artist Marianne Caroselli named "Free to Be Me." This piece was acquired last fall by the Arts Council, working with the youth committee: "Teen Angel Committee" as a tribute to the youth of Fountain Hills and as a special tribute to Ashley Williams who was killed in a traffic accident in Fountain Hills about two years ago. The immediate urgency of this actions is an attempt to accommodate a request by the Teen Angel Committee that the piece be dedicated, in a public ceremony, in mid -April before all of the girls on the committee graduate from high school. A side note is that this dedication will provide a justification to remove the informal memorial at the corner of Fountain Hills Blvd. and El Lago which some people view as a traffic distraction. A photo of the piece of sculpture is attached. It is expected that the piece will temporarily be housed in the Community Center and, possibly, be permanently located at the Boys and Girls Club when their new facility is built. lack& Afdw, President of the Fountain Hills Arts Council. Ymd NoBuw0e, Chairman of the Fountain Hills Public Art Committee Imo! Ivor r On ,4 4 FA Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Submitting Department: Legal Consent:❑ Regular:❑ Meeting Date: 4/3/03 Contact Person: Andrew McGuire Requesting Action:® Tvne of Document Needin! Anaroval (Check all that a ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ❑ Other: Council Prioritv (Check Appropriate Areas): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ❑ Community Development Report Only:❑ ❑ Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ❑ Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation ❑ Finance Regular Agenda Wording: DISCUSSION and possible direction to staff to develop a policy for regulating pari- mutuel wagering facilities within Fountain Hills. Staff Recommendation: Fiscal Impact: No $ Purpose of Item and Background Information: A request by staff for direction from the Town Council regarding its desire to create a policy for regulating pari-mutuel wagering facilities. List All Attachments as Follows: Memorandum from Andrew McGuire. Type(s) of Presentation None Signatures of Submitting Staff- 0, 1 , Atj Departmen ead Town Ma►rn'ger / Designee c:\ajm docs\agenda cover sheet.doc Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) JORDEN BISCHOFF 11"" MCGUIRE & R o S E P.L.C. LAW OFFICES MEMORANDUM TO: Town Council Town Manager FROM: Andrew J. McGuire Town Attorney DATE: March 27, 2003 SUBJECT: Pari-mutuel Wagering 7272 E. INDIAN SCHOOL ROAD, SUITE 205 SCOTTSDALE, ARIZONA 85251 TELEPHONE: 480-505-3900 FACSIMILE: 480-505-390I ANDREW J. MCGUIRE DIRECT LINE: 480-505-3905 e-mail: amcguire@jordenbischoff.com The Town has recently been presented with a request by a local establishment to allow pari- mutuel wagering (otherwise known as "off-track betting") within an existing sports bar; the Town does not currently have a policy in place with respect to requests for such facilities. Staff is seeking policy direction from the Town Council regarding whether regulations for pari-mutuel wagering facilities should be developed for later consideration by the Town Council. The State has the exclusive power to grant pari-mutuel wagering licenses and permits pursuant to ARIZ. REv. STAT. §§ 5-101 - 5-115. However, ARIZ. REv. STAT. § 5-111(A) reserves the authority to approve or deny such uses to the Town as it requires prior approval by the Town Council as a condition to obtaining a new pari-mutuel wagering license from the State. A large number of municipalities in the Phoenix metropolitan area have adopted policies for regulating pari-mutuel wagering facilities. Therefore, I believe that the Town Council is empowered to either deny pari-mutuel wagering facilities altogether or develop a policy for regulating same. The policy question before you this evening is limited to whether or not this is an area into which the Town Council wishes to delve. If it is the Town Council's direction to move forward with a policy, staff will prepare the appropriate Town Code provisions for your consideration at a later meeting. TURF PARADISE TELETRACK WAGERING FACILITY AGREEMENT Date: January 25, 2003 Parties: 1. TP Racing, L.L.L.P. dba Turf Paradise, an Arizona Limited Liability Partnership, hereinafter referred to as "Track". 2. Nick Morgan's Sports Bar, hereinafter referred to as "Lessor". Terms: A. Date of Commencement January 25, 2003 B. Date of Termination May 31, 2003 Premises: A portion of the facility known as Nick Morgan's Sports Bar located at 16737 E. Parkview Ave., Fountain Hills, AZ 85268, as more fully described in Exhibit A attached hereto. 1 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 AW F This Agreement is made by and between TP Racing, L.L.L.P. dab Turf Paradise, an Arizona Limited Liability Partnership (hereinafter sometimes referred to as 'Track") and Lessor, as more fully described on the first page of this Agreement. WHEREAS, Arizona Revised Statutes 5-111 (A) permit the operation of additional wagering facilities (hereinafter sometimes referred as "Teletrack Wagering Facilities") for wagering on the races composing the racing program of Track; and Track and Lessor desire to establish an additional wagering facility pursuant to the provisions of A.R.S. 5-111 (A) and to memorialize their various rights, duties and obligations by this Agreement; and WHEREAS, Lessor is the owner of or leases from the owner that certain premises described on the first page of this Agreement (hereinafter sometimes referred to as "the Premises" of which the additional wagering facility is a part; and WHEREAS, Track is the holder of a permit to conduct a horse racing meeting at Turf Paradise Race Track in the State of Arizona and desires its program to be transmitted to the additional wagering facility for teletrack wagering pursuant to the provisions of A.R.S. 5-111 (A) as more fully set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto; and 0 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 A W F WHEREAS, Track desires to lease that certain portion of the premises as more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and hereinafter referred to as the "Facility" on a non- exclusive basis for the purpose of conducting teletrack wagering. NOW THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows: 1. Term and Premises (a) Term. The term of this Agreement shall be for the period commencing as set forth on the first page of this Agreement or as soon thereafter as is practicable after receiving necessary approvals, permits and licenses pursuant to Section 3(a) and 11(d) of this Agreement, through the termination date and for such additional periods as the parties may from time to time agree in writing. (b) Premises. Lessor, for and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements of the parties, hereby leases, on a non-exclusive basis, to Track and Track hereby leases from Lessor those portions of the facility referred to herein as the Additional Wagering Facility more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. The leased portion of the Premises is limited to the areas specifically designated and described as the leased area, which area shall also be known as the "Facility." The parties acknowledge that the Facility is occupied by Track on a non- exclusive basis and Lessor reserves to itself all other rights of use, occupation and entry of the 3 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 A W F Facility and the parties agree that all other rights except the right of non-exclusive occupancy and use as provided herein are reserved to Lessor. 2. Duties and Responsibilities of Lessor. (a) Additional Wagering Facility. Lessor shall maintain the Premises of which the leased facility is a part, in a manner suitable for the operation of an additional wagering facility and shall open the facility to the public for purposes of teletrack wagering each day that a racing program conducted by Track is transmitted to the facility unless otherwise agreed to by Track and Lessor. (b) General Obligations of Lessor. Lessor shall furnish or maintain or cause to be furnished or maintained, at the teletrack wagering facility, at no expense to Track- (1) Reasonable physical protection at all times of the teletrack wagering system components installed or present on the Premises of Lessor which are owned by Track or leased by Track from third parties from loss, harm, damage or destruction by any cause whatsoever including, but not limited to, theft, removal, trespass, damage, interference by other person, vandalism or water damage. Such protection shall be afforded on a reasonable best efforts basis and shall, among other things, provide such protection from elements and fire extinguishing methods as are reasonably required to protect the same. Lessor further waives any claim or right of ownership, possession or lien against all components, equipment, trade 4 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1AWF fixtures, materials or supplies owned by Track or placed or installed by Track in or upon the premises or facility. Lessor further agrees that all such components, equipment, trade fixtures, materials and supplies shall remain the property of Track, free of any claim of any kind whatsoever, regardless whether the same are fixed or attached thereto. (2) Necessary electrical power, telephone cabling, outlets and voltage regulation for the proper, normal and emergency operation of the teletrack wagering system equipment, including without limitation a dedicated circuit to the pari-mutuel wagering terminals for teletrack operations. (3) Secure space for the storage and care of printer ribbons, ticket materials and other supplies of Track reasonably necessary for the conduct of teletrack wagering operations as well as secure areas for the storage of spare or additional pari-mutuel wagering machines. (4) Lessor shall permit the officers, directors, employees, agents and authorized representatives of Track access to the teletrack wagering system located at the Premises at all reasonable times for the proper supervision, maintenance, repair or operation of the system and to permit removal by Track or its designated agents or contractor's of the removable parts of the system when not required or necessary for teletrack wagering. (5) Pay all taxes, fees, impositions or assessments levied or imposed by any governmental agency whether state or local by reason of the Lease, occupation, use or 5 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 AW F operation of the teletrack wagering facility and the conduct of business therein including without limitation all ad valorem real or personal property taxes, special taxes, sales, gross receipts, use or transaction privilege taxes, city, county and state permit or license fees or other excise taxes or fees. (c) Gates and Admissions. Lessor shall be responsible for and shall control the admission of the public to the teletrack wagering facility. The cost of labor, materials and supplies associated with maintaining the facility in a clean and orderly manner shall be the sole responsibility of Lessor. Lessor further agrees not to charge admission to the Teletrack Wagering Facility. Lessor shall be responsible for compliance with and enforcement of laws and regulations of the State of Arizona or any local governmental entity and shall, at all times, maintain a safe, orderly Premises and shall be responsible for control of any interfering activities on or about the Premises. (d) Parking. Lessor shall provide for parking space reasonably necessary to accommodate the anticipated patrons at the teletrack wagering facility. The cost of labor, materials and supplies associated with construction, maintenance and operation of parking facilities shall be the sole responsibility of Lessor. Lessor further agrees not to charge for parking at the teletrack wagering facility. (e) Food and Beverage. Lessor shall maintain and establish appropriate food and beverage service at the teletrack wagering facility. The costs of labor, materials and supplies 301 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1AWF associated with construction, maintenance and operation of food and beverage service shall be the sole responsibility of Lessor. Lessor shall be solely responsible for compliance with all requirements imposed on the facility in connection with any required beverage or liquor licenses or permits. (f) Amenities and Facilities. Lessor shall be responsible for providing and maintaining a first-class, clean, safe and habitable teletrack wagering facility suitable for public attendance and adequate facilities for patrons to permit handicapping and appropriate seating areas sufficient to accommodate all patrons. Appropriate facilities for handicapped patron access shall also be provided. The facility shall not be used for any other purposes during the time teletrack wagering is being conducted. Lessor shall provide suitable furnishings and fixtures approved by Track for the tellers' stations or positions located in the Premises. Lessor shall be entitled to all revenues from food and beverage services and all other commercial enterprises conducted by Lessor. The cost of labor, materials and supplies associated with construction, maintenance and operation of the facility shall be the sole responsibility of Lessor. (g) Securi . Lessor shall provide adequate security for the protection of the public and all employees, including such uniformed or plainclothed security personnel as shall be reasonably necessary and as required by the Arizona Department of Racing to protect the public and teletrack wagering facility from unlawful and improper acts or conduct. The cost of labor, materials and supplies associated with security of the teletrack wagering facility shall be the sole responsibility of Lessor. 7 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 AWF (h) Utilities. Lessor shall provide such air conditioning, electrical service, water, heat, telephone service and light as are reasonably necessary to maintain a proper first-class teletrack wagering facility for the comfort of the patrons and for the operation of the facility. The cost of such utility services shall be the sole responsibility of Lessor. (i) Maintenance. Lessor shall be responsible for all repairs, maintenance and janitorial services necessary for the facility and all equipment therein, except the pari-mutuel and other equipment installed by Track. In the event Lessor shall fail or refuse to provide such repairs, maintenance and janitorial services in a first-class manner, Track shall be permitted to perform such repairs, maintenance and janitorial services at the expense of Lessor. 0) Price Lists. Lessor shall furnish Track prior to the commencement of the Racing meeting, a price list setting forth the amounts to be charged to the public for food and beverage services and all other vended items. 3. Duties and Responsibilities of Track. (a) Permits and Licenses. Track shall apply for and secure at its sole cost and expense all necessary approvals, licenses or permits required by the State of Arizona or any other governmental entity to conduct and operate a teletrack wagering operation under Arizona law and shall maintain such approvals, licenses or permits in good standing at all times during the term of this Agreement, provided however, that Lessor shall be responsible and shall pay for all TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1AWF taxes, fees, impositions or assessments by all such governmental entities as provided in Paragraph 2(b)(5) of this Agreement. (b) Receiving and Display Equipment. The cost of all labor, materials, supplies and services associated with the transmission reception or display of the audio -video signal to Lessor shall be the sole responsibility of Track. Track shall have the absolute right to remove any or all equipment, materials, supplies, fixtures owned by or installed in the teletrack wagering facility by Track during the term of this Agreement and/or for a reasonable period of time after the termination of this Agreement for any reason. (c) Pari-mutuel Operations. Track shall employ and supervise such qualified pari- mutuel operations management and personnel together with such equipment as is reasonably necessary for the proper operation and management of the Tletrack wagering system given the reasonably anticipated attendance and pari-mutuel wagering handle at the Premises. The cost of all materials and supplies associated with the maintenance and operation of the pari-mutuel wagering equipment at the Premises shall be the sole responsibility of Track. The cost of labor to operate pari-mutuel equipment (mutuel clerks) at the Premises shall be the sole responsibility of the Track. Track reserves the right to designate a managing agent, to supervise, operate and manage the pari-mutuel operations at the Teletrack wagering facility on behalf of track. Track shall notify lessor, in writing, of the designation of such managing agent. Track shall be responsible and pay for all pari-mutuel taxes levied or assesed by the state of Arizona on pari- mutuel wagering conducted at the facility. 9 TURFFORM Rev. 92A1AWF 4. Programs. For the purposes of this Agreement, Track shall have the exclusive right to distribute and sell all forms, tip sheets or other written materials for handicapping and the racing programs relating in any way to the teletrack wagering program. 5. No Commission Fee. Lessor shall not be entitled to receive any commission fee or payment from Track from or related to the wagers accepted and received at Facility on races which are telecast to the Facility by Track. 6. Insurance. (a) Track. Track shall, on request, provide certificates of insurance for, and will maintain, at its expense, insurance coverage with companies having an A.M. Best rating of A, XIII or better as follows: (1) All risks of physical damage coverage on its operations and facilities subject to normal exclusions; (2) Workers' Compensation on Track's employees providing statutory benefits and an employer's liability limit of $100,000-1 and 10 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 A W F (3) Comprehensive general liability coverage of not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit, which shall include extensions of coverage for products, complete operations, personal injury and specified contract coverage. (4) Track shall also maintain an excess line of comprehensive general liability coverage in such amounts that Track may deem appropriate. (5) In each and all such policies, save and except the Workers' Compensation policy, Lessor shall be an additional insured. (b) Lessor. Lessor shall, on request, provide certificates of insurance for, and will maintain, at their expense, insurance coverage with insurance companies having an A.M. Best rating of A, XIII or better as follows, or if governmental entities, said entities may, after giving notice to Track, self -insure some or all of the following coverages or be covered by an insurance pool, where the risk is born by insurance companies acceptable to Track: (1) All risks of physical damage coverage on the facility, including the leased Premises, subject to normal exclusions; (2) Workers' Compensation on Lessor's employees providing statutory benefits and an employer's liability limit of $100,000-1 and 11 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 A W F (3) Comprehensive general liability coverage of not less than $1,000,000 combined single limit, which shall include extensions of coverage for products, complete operations, personal injury and blanket contract covering the entire facility. (4) Liquor liability coverage of not less than $1 million combined single limit. (5) Lessor shall also maintain an excess line of comprehensive general liability coverage in such amounts that Lessor and Track may deem appropriate. (6) In each and all such policies, save and except the Workers' Compensation policy, Track shall be an additional insured. 7. Interruption or Interference with Signal. Track shall not be liable to Lessor, its agents or employees or third persons claiming through Lessor for any losses occasioned by interruption or loss of the audio -video or pari-mutuel signal or transmission, for whatever duration, except that Track shall save and hold Lessor harmless from and against any claims of patrons or third parties relative to wagers made or claimed to be made and accepted through the pari-mutuel system. Any recovery of commission losses from the contractor or services supplier of Track, incurred as a result of interruption or loss of the audio -video or pari-mutuel signal or transmission, shall be for the sole benefit of Track. 12 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1AWF 8. No Competing Teletrack Wagering. The parties agree that because of the costs incurred by Track in establishing teletrack wagering and implementing this Agreement and the various factors affecting the patrons of pari-mutuel wagering involving horse racing that it shall be a material breach of this Agreement justifying the termination of this Agreement forthwith or the suspension of the audio -video signal to Lessor by Track for all or part of the remaining term of this Agreement in the sole discretion of Track in the event Lessor accepts an audio -video signal for pari-mutuel wagering purposes of any racing program which is not transmitted to Lessor by Track during the time period that Track transmits its signal to Lessor. 9. Right to Lease. Lessor represents and warrants that Lessor has the requisite power, authority and right to lease the facility to Track as provided for in this Agreement. In the event that Lessor is not the owner of the Premises of which the facility is a part and is the lessee under a valid lease of the premises, then Lessor shall secure and deliver to Track a consent and approval to sublease the facility as provided in this Agreement duly executed by an authorized agent or officer or the owner of the premises, as the case may be, in a manner and form acceptable to Track and Track's legal counsel, as a condition precedent to Track's obligation under this Agreement. 10. Termination. The parties agree that Track and Lessor shall at all times have the right to terminate this Agreement, upon fifteen (15) days written notice to the other party, provided that in the event of the condemnation or destruction of all or any part of the facility which renders the facility unsuitable or unusable in Track's sole opinion, or in the event Lessor shall fail to comply 13 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 A W F with any or all of the laws, rules or lawful orders of the Arizona Department of Racing and the Arizona Racing Commission or the State of Arizona or other governmental entity, then Track may, in Track's sole discretion, terminate this Agreement immediately upon written notice to Lessor and Track shall not be responsible for any costs, expenses or damages incurred by Lessor by reason of any such termination under this Paragraph. Lessor acknowledges and agrees that in the event of the sale or transfer of any interest in the business or of any license or permit required to operate the business located in the premises in which the teletrack wagering facility is located or any change in management or control are a violation of the rules of the Arizona Department of Racing and that all such transfers must be subject of a pre clearance of such transfer by the Department prior to the completion such transfer or of the completion or execution of any agreement providing for such transfer or sale. 11. Miscellaneous Provisions. (a) Prohibition of Pari-mutuel Wagering. If at any time during the term of this Agreement pari-mutuel wagering on racing or teletrack wagering or the operation of the teletrack wagering facility contemplated by this Agreement is made, declared, or held to be illegal or prohibited by statute or decision of a court of last resort, which decision has become final, or by any competent public authority whose decision is final and not appealable, or in the event the teletrack race permit issued by the Arizona Department of Racing is canceled, revoked, not renewed or otherwise terminated for any reason, this Agreement shall thereupon be deemed terminated and the parties hereto shall be released from any and all further liability or obligation 14 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 A W F hereunder, provided however that such termination shall not relieve Track or Lessor from any obligation or liability that accrued under the terms of this Agreement prior to the date of such termination. (b) Third Party Liability. This agreement is not intended to benefit any third party and no person or entity other than Track and Lessor shall have any right of action arising under any of the terms and provisions of this agreement. (1) Track Liability. Track shall assume responsibility for the defense of, and will indemnify and hold harmless Lessor, its directors, officers, shareholders, employees, representatives and agents from and against any losses, claims, damages, costs, suits, penalties, demands or liabilities, except claims of Lessor's employees for personal injuries arising in the scope of their employment, including reasonable legal counsel fees, occasioned by or arising out of, in whole or in part, any willful or negligent act or omission of Track or any of its officers, directors, contractors, subcontractors, agents, servants or employees, provided that prompt written notice of such claim or suit is given to Track by Lessor, and provided Track is given full control over all negotiations and litigation in connection therewith, including selection of counsel. Track shall not be responsible for settlements made or costs or expenses incurred without its prior written consent. (2) Lessor Liability. Lessor will assume the responsibility for the defense of, and shall indemnify and hold harmless Track, its directors, officers, shareholders, employees, 15 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1AWF representatives and agents from and against any losses, claims, damages, costs, suits, penalties, demands or liabilities, except claims of Track's employees for personal injuries arising in the scope of their employment, including reasonable legal counsel fees, occasioned by or arising out of, in whole or in part, by any willful or negligent act or omission of Lessor or any of its officers, directors, contractors, subcontractors, agents, servants or employees, and for any and all expenses for injury to or death of any person or loss of or damage to property in or about the Premises or in or about the facility of which the premises is a part that arises out of or in connection with the use or occupancy of the facility, provided that prompt written notice of any such claim or suit shall be given to Lessor by Track and Lessor shall be given full control over all negotiations and litigation in connection therewith including selection of counsel; and Lessor further agrees to indemnify and hold Track harmless from and against all claims, liabilities, losses, damages, fines, penalties or clean-up costs incurred in connection with either the removal or containment of any hazardous or toxic substance in or about the Premises or in or about the facility of which the premises is a part that arises out of or in connection with the use or occupancy of the facility, provided that prompt written notice of such claim or suit shall be given to Lessor by Track, and Lessor shall be given full control over all negotiations and litigation in connection therewith, including selection of counsel. Track shall not be responsible for settlements made or costs or expenses incurred without its prior written consent. (c) Independent Contractor. Track and Lessor each agree that they are not joint venturers or partners and that their status as to one another is, for the purpose of this Agreement, independent contractors and that neither they nor any of their contractors, 16 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 AW F subcontractors, agents or employees shall, at any time, constitute agents or employees of the other. Neither Track nor Lessor are granted any rights or authority to assume or create any obligation or liability, express or implied, on behalf of each other or to bind each other in any manner or thing whatsoever. (d) Approval. The parties agree that their obligations under this Agreement are subject to the approval of the Arizona Department of Racing and Arizona Racing Commission and that in the event the Arizona Department of Racing or the Arizona Racing Commission fails or refuses to approve this Agreement or to authorize Track to conduct teletrack wagering at the teletrack wagering facility contemplated in this Agreement, then this Agreement shall be terminated and neither party shall be entitled to compensation for losses or damages arising out of or as a result of such termination. (e) Compliance with Law. The parties agree that they will comply with any and all applicable laws, rules and regulations of the United States of America, the State of Arizona, the Rules of the Arizona Department of Racing and the Arizona Racing Commission, all agencies of the State of Arizona, including, without limitation, all applicable anti -discrimination, affirmative action, and conflict of interest provisions. During the term hereof, both Track and Lessor shall at all times be in good standing with the Arizona Department of Racing and the Arizona Racing Commission. 17 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 A W F (f) Governing Law. The laws of the State of Arizona and the applicable rules promulgated thereunder by the Arizona Department of Racing and Arizona Racing Commission shall govern as to the interpretation, validity and affect of this Agreement. No principle of conflict of laws shall make the substantive law of any other state or jurisdiction applicable hereto. In the event of any further amendments to the Arizona Revised Statutes as they relate to Horse Racing or Pari-mutuel Wagering, or the Rules promulgated by the Arizona Department of Racing or the Arizona Racing Commission after the date hereof, the parties hereto agree to negotiate in good faith any necessary or advisable modifications to this Agreement. (g) Attorneys' Fees. In the event suit is brought to enforce or interpret any part of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover as an element of its cost of the suit and not as damages, reasonable attorneys' fees to be fixed by the Court. (h) Notices. All notices required by provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and sent, postage prepaid, by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, personal delivery or via telefax. In the case of Track to: Turf Paradise, Inc. ATTN: Randy Fozzard, General Manager 1501 W. Bell Road Phoenix, Arizona 85023 with copies to: John K. Mangum Law offices of John K. Mangum, P.C. 340 E. Palm Lane, Suite 100 Phoenix, Arizona 85004 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1 A W F ffQ In the case of Lessor to: Christopher Noteboom, Nick Morgan's Sports Bar 16737 E. Parkview Ave., Fountain Hills, AZ 85268 With copies to: (i) Entire Agreement. This Agreement shall be deemed to include and incorporate the entire Agreement between the parties and may be amended, modified or superseded only by an instrument in writing signed by duly authorized officers of both parties. 0) Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed by any number of counterparts, each of which may be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute a single document. (k) Titles and Captions. Section titles, captions and numbers are provided for each section or subsection only as a matter of reference and in no way define, limit, extend or describe the scope of this Agreement or the intent of any provision herein. 12. Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Track, by their respective signatures hereon, certify and represent that they are the duly authorized and acting corporate officers of Track and that they are authorized and empowered by the Board of Directors of Track to execute this Agreement on behalf of said corporation, and that this Agreement has been duly 19 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1AWF approved and they are authorized to obligate and to take such other and further action as may be necessary or appropriate to effectuate and carry out this Agreement. The persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Lessor, in the event that Lessor is a sole proprietorship or is a partnership, by their respective signatures certify and represent that they are duly authorized to execute this Agreement on behalf of Lessor and, in the event that Lessor is a corporation, that they are the duly authorized and acting corporate officers of Lessor and that they are authorized and empowered by the Board of Directors, or Managing or General Partner, if a partnership or Limited Liability Company, of Lessor to execute this Agreement on behalf of said corporation, and that this Agreement has been duly approved and they are authorized to obligate the corporation and to take such other and further action as may be necessary or appropriate to effectuate and carry out this Agreement. WHEREFORE, the parties hereto have set their hand the date first above written. ck Christopher Noteboom, Nick Morgan's Sports Bar Randy Fozzord, Pr _ ident, CEO, General Manager 20 TURFFORM Rev. 92.4.1AWF Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Submitting Department: Town Manager Consent:❑ Regular:® Meeting Date: 4/3/03 Contact Person: Tim Pickering Requesting Action:® Tvne of Document Needing Annroval (Check all that a ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ® Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ❑ Other: Council Prioritv (Check ADDroDriate Areas): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ® Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ❑ Community Development Report Only:❑ ❑ Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ❑ Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation ❑ Finance Remular Agenda Wording: Discussion and possible action and direction to staff regarding Law Enforcement. Staff Recommendation: Approve Fiscal Impact:.. Yes Purpose of Item and Background Information: As requested by the Council at the March 11, 2003 work study session, both the Marshals and Sheriffs departments refined their budgetary numbers for their respective single agency law enforcement estimates. The Council will continue its discussion regarding the future of law enforcement in Fountain Hills with possible direction to staff. List All Attachments as Follows: Memo from Town Manager, Memos from MCSO and Marshals Dept., graph of case filings Type(s) of Presentation: Sil4natures of SubmittinV, Staff: Department Head Town Manager / Designee e:\agenda cover sheet\law enforcement.doc Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS .. Office of Town Manager INTER OFFICE MEMO TO: The Honorable Mayor Beydler and DT: March 28, 2003 Town Council FR: Tim Pickering, Town Manager- - : Law Enforcement Discussion As requested by the Council, both the Marshals and Sheriff's agencies prepared single agent law enforcement budgetary estimates versus the current dual system approach. The costs prepared for our March 1lth workshop were $2,126,413 for an all Marshal Department and $1,710,847 for an all Sheriff Department. Since the workshop, each agency did an outstanding job of refining their numbers to $1,980,030 for the Marshals and $1,591,207 for the Sheriff Department. Regardless of assumptions, there is approximately a $400,000 difference. SHOULD WE HAVE OUR OWN DEPARTMENT? I believe the question is framed incorrectly. The question is framed as a decision between utilizing an all Marshals department or an all Sheriff department. In our financial condition, it is ill advised to begin an all Marshals department. I am strongly against the creation of our own police department at this time for several reasons. • The Town is in no financial condition to accept such a large responsibility. We lose money every month. Our costs are larger than our revenues. Our fund balance has continued to shrink, which means we are spending our savings. We will not begin to break even until the temporary sales tax is received in May. • We have just completed a well publicized reduction in force that reduced our budgeted FTE (Full Time Equivalent) employees from last year's budgeted FTE of 106 down to an estimated FY 2003-2004 of 79, resulting in 27 employee positions reduced, some in the Marshal department. Recruitment of large number of exceptional personnel who would trust the Town as an employer would be exceedingly difficult. • There is no dedicated revenue source for taking on this responsibility. We cannot afford the additional cost of approximately $400,000 annually. We have learned from our experience of taking on the responsibility of fire operations that a dedicated revenue source is needed before assuming such a large liability. Deciding to have a municipal department will have long-term negative financial ramifications on the Town budget and is not advised until we can afford it. As a result of these previously stated reasons, the discussion of our own municipal department is a moot point at this time. The only discussion that is constructive should be retaining any Marshals or contracting all law enforcement activities through the County. WHAT IS THERE TO DECIDE? The Town has four months left in its fiscal year. I believe changing how law enforcement is provided is impractical until the start of the new fiscal year and after the Department of Justice provides a ruling on our reduction of force analysis resulting in a total number of required officers. With that said, what could we be really talking about? After Marshal Tate's departure, eight Marshals remain. After the new fiscal year and after receiving the Department of Justice ruling, three could possibly be transferred to building safety for strictly code and sign enforcement leaving five Marshals if the Justice Department would allow us to replace the code enforcement officers with Sheriffs until the end of the COPS V retention period (June 2004). Our COPS V grant requires us to retain two marshals through June 2004, thus the only decision could come down to eliminating three marshal positions while replacing them with Sheriff employees. WHAT IF THE JUSTICE DEPARTMENT ALLOWS THE REDUCTION IN FORCE? If the Justice Department ruling allows us to reduce our minimum number of officers and the flexibility to choose whom those officers are, I recommend contracting with the County for all law enforcement (except the two required Marshal positions in FY 2003-2004) for the following reasons. Cost savings: Sheriff department personnel cost less. The average cost of a Sheriff employee is approximately $4,400 less than a Marshal employee in addition to equipment and operational savings. Additionally, the Town could save, after the retention period of all Justice Department grants are complete, between $300,000 and $500,000 or more a year. The Sheriff has submitted a proposal to provide all law enforcement services for $1.6M as compared to law enforcement costs of $2.6M in the FY 2002-2003 approved budget. Employees need a secure future. Leaving them in limbo is no way to treat employees. We may not have a Marshals department to think about because many of our Marshal employees are leaving and natural attrition may abolish the department. Historically, each time a political decision is made, it affects officer production as indicated in the attached Case Filings by Month chart. Consistency is needed in law enforcement, the courts, and by the citizenry. The Council needs to decide the issue. RISKS Clearly, there are risks associated with the potential benefits received from contracting with one agency. Using the negotiating position with the County of starting our own department is diminished. Municipal department start-up costs would be more. Additionally, the County could raise our contract costs in future years which would make affordability difficult. SUMMARY Because the Justice Department has scheduled their annual site visit in April, we will not know the outcome of their ruling until May. At that time, a final determination as to the number of Marshals and Sheriff Deputies should be determined. If the Justice department requires a certain number of Marshals, we must retain them. If the Justice department leaves the decision of which agency to the Town, I recommend we contract for those personnel. C: Ken Martinez, Interim Town Marshal Scott Penrose, Captain, MCSO Andrew McGuire, Town Attorney Tpickering/tgp/my documents/lawenforcementrecommendation/3.28.03 O 2 >% N a =_ N y U- U U) .� cc� _ 0 cc cn - E O ca O c p O O (n W cc J • a O O O O O O (D 1n It co N *- Contract Law Enforcement Services A Partnership for Law Enforcement and Community Policing Services A Proposal Prepared for The Town of Fountain Hills April 3, 2003 Jon Beydler, Mayor Joseph M. Arpaio, Sheriff Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Wells Fargo Plaza 100 W. Washington, 19th Floor Phoenix, Arizona 85003 1 Page Executive Summary..................................................3 Fountain Hills Law Enforcement & Community Policing Services................................5 Fountain Hills Law Enforcement & Community Policing Services (flow chart)..................9 Comparison...........................................................10 Benefits of Contracting with Maricopa County Sheriff .........11 Why Fountain Hills Should Contract with M.C.S.O............ 14 Vision and Mission Statement ..................................... 16 2 Executive Summary The Maricopa County Sheriffs Office is currently providing quality customized law enforcement services to the citizens of Fountain Hills. This document will acquaint the Fountain Hills Town Council with the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office by providing an overview of the Sheriffs Office outlining the many benefits of contracting with the Maricopa County Sheriff s Office. In the decision to select a law enforcement agency with which to contract, one would want to consider many factors. An Overview of the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office detailing the major functions and services that is provided. Providing those services are more than 740 sworn officers and another nearly 2400 non -sworn staff who, combined, possess a level of education, training and professionalism equal to any law enforcement agency in the nation. There are many subject matter experts who work in all major areas of the Office whether investigating a complicated homicide or lending technical support to figure out a programming question with one of our new technological advancements. The Benefits of Contracting with the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office are also described in this packet. Those benefits have great value, both in tangible and intangible. They range from assuming responsibility for the actions of Office employees and holding the Town of Fountain Hills harmless in litigation arising out of actions by Office employees, cost savings, to an in-depth knowledge of Fountain Hills. Members of the Town Council and the citizens of Fountain Hills have voiced a desire to promote Community Oriented Policing, which is the very philosophy the Office has been based since its inception over 100 years ago. Another benefit is state-of-the-art technology. Included in this technology is the Automated Finger Print Identification System (AFIS), computer aided dispatch (CAD) system, the Federally mandated 800 MHz radio system, laptop report writing system, wide area network system and more. A contract with the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office results in Fountain Hills having access to these advanced systems at no additional cost. The Council will want to look at the many ancillary services available through the Sheriffs Office. All combinations of these services are utilized by Fountain Hills to enhance law enforcement in the community. Bicycle patrol, helicopter patrol, narcotic investigations, and K-9 support, are examples of the type and range of ancillary services currently serving Fountain Hills. The Town Council has flexibility to adjust this number upward or downward depending upon their law enforcement strategy. A variety of enhancement options may be added to customize services. This flexibility puts Fountain Hills at the helm in terms of fashioning the contracted services in a manner that best suits your needs. A Cost Methodology is presented, which is designed to address contracting issues and provides an easy to follow methodology that is built around a philosophy of requiring the Town to pay only for those services they utilize. Instead of using a methodology where a percentage is charged based on population or something else, the methodology costs services out on a per item basis or percentage rate, as appropriate. 3 In closing, this proposal should provide the Fountain Hills Town Council with the information to conclude that the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office has given considerable thought and preparation to this plan and is well prepared to continue providing contract services on July 1, 2003 and beyond. The Fountain Hills Town Council can be assured that the Maricopa County Sheriff s Office is willing and ready to provide quality, customer -oriented service to Fountain Hills. 4 Fountain Hills Law Enforcement & Community Policing Services The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office is prepared to provide the Town of Fountain Hills with all of their law enforcement needs effective fiscal year 2003/2004. This would be accomplished by an agreement based upon 3.5 full-time beats. This manpower would ensure that the Town to benefits from enhanced services, while maintaining a one agency law enforcement system capable of providing any law enforcement need. Presently the Sheriffs Office provides Law Enforcement coverage for the geographic area that surrounds the Town of Fountain Hills this area of coverage is designated by the Sheriffs' Office as District 4 South. All unincorporated area from the Beeline Highway north to Needle Rock, from the Fort McDowell Indian Community Reservation to Pima Road falls within this district. The Town of Fountain Hills is situated in the south east corner of this geographic area. Deputies and services that are administered to all of District 4 South are coordinated and administered through the Fountain Hills substation. The unincorporated county areas west of this description up to and including the community of Anthem comprise the District 4 North area. There is a Sheriffs Office Substation located in the Town of Cave Creek for this part of the district. Both of these two geographic areas are combined to form the District 4 patrol sector. It is the structure of the Sheriffs Office to accommodate the needs of each District by assigning the necessary administrative personnel along with any support staff, supplies, equipment, etc... that may be necessary to facilitate the needs of the citizens in that area and to deliver those services in the most efficient way possible. In Fountain Hills, an Administrative Sergeant and Administrative Deputy are assigned, and work out of the Fountain Hills substation to assist the District Commander in implementing the District and Office goals and procedures. It is through this structure that contract communities benefit from economy of scale. The resources that are made available to the unincorporated areas are also available for use within the contract cities. This also represents the most effective way to maintain "unity of command and control" when it comes to administering the law enforcement needs to a large diverse geographic area. It enables the cost effective use of resources and personnel. Correlations can be shown that the use of such resources benefits the citizens of the Town and the County (district) as a whole. 5 The contract being considered encompasses 3.5 beats. That would provide the town with the following: 14 Patrol Deputies 3 Detectives 4 Community Policing Deputies 2.5 Sergeants 1 Commander 1 Administrative Assistant 35 Posse Members Multiple Resources A break down of this law enforcement plan shows a cost of $1,591,207. This amount will provide a total of 25.5 full-time employees (FTE's). The ratio of police personnel based on a town population of 24,000 residents, equals 1.06 officers per 1000 residents. (See attached Contract Proposal Worksheet for detail.) Under the organizational structure of the Sheriffs Office, District 4 South, the following resources are a more accurate account of all personnel that would be utilized to provide for the needs of the Town. 16 Patrol Deputies 3 Detectives 5 Community Policing Deputies 6 Sergeants 1 Commander 1 Administrative Assistant 35 Posse Members Multiple Resources This will provide 32 employees. The ratio of police personnel based on a population of 24,000 residents, equals 1.33 officers per 1000 residents. (A flow chart depicting this is displayed later in this proposal) A breakdown of the services provided under this ratio is as follows: Four Patrol squads each with four patrol deputies assigned to a squad. Every squad would have an assigned sergeant. Sergeants would be responsible for the supervision of the deputies assigned to the Town in addition to supervising the deputies assigned to the towns of Carefree/ Cave Creek, and the unincorporated areas within the district. A Detective Division with three detectives assigned exclusively to Fountain Hills. The Detective Division would be assigned a sergeant who is also responsible for supervising two Lake Patrol detectives. A Community Policing Division with five deputies and a sergeant assigned to Fountain Hills. The areas within the Community Policing Division are: Youth Services, Crime Prevention, Court Services, Right of Way Enforcement Deputy, and Traffic Complaint Coordinator. One Administrative Assistant assigned to Fountain Hills. One District Commander assigned to Fountain Hills. 6 Job Descriptions: Patrol Deputy- Responsible for enforcing the state criminal and traffic codes. Patrol deputies must maintain order, protect life, respond to calls for service and investigate these calls. Patrol deputies are also responsible for making arrests, attending training, issuing warrants, appearing in court, and providing public service whenever needed. (Contract F. T. E -14 / Utilized -16) Patrol Supervisor- Responsible for assisting the District Commander, supervising patrol deputies, completing records, handling administrative matters, completing citizens complaints, assigning and maintaining equipment, attending training, and completing any special projects assigned by the District Commander. (Contract F. T. E - 2 / Utilized -4) Community Policing / Admin Sergeant- Responsible for assisting the district commander in the day to day operations of the Town. In addition, they are responsible for supervising all community policing deputies, administering equipment, maintaining files, and re-evaluating the progress of the community policing programs. (Contract F. T. E - 0 / Utilized -1) Detective- Responsible for investigating all types of reports, interviewing victims, witnesses, collecting evidence, maintain a crime scene, and writing search warrants. They are also responsible for preparing reports for prosecution, attending detective training, testifying in court, and appearing in front of grand juries. (Contract F.T.E -3 / Utilized -3) Detective Supervisor- Responsible for the supervision of the district detectives, maintaining all detective records, reviewing reports, assigning cases, assisting with search warrants, attending training and evaluating the quality of reports written by patrol deputies. (Contract F. T. E - . S / Utilized -1) Commander- Responsible for maintaining operations within the Town of Fountain Hills. Monitoring the duties and responsibilities of the supervisors and deputies while providing operational support, materials, and equipment. The commander is also responsible for keeping abreast of activities within the district. They must work with the Town Manger, Town Council, and members of the community to form a successful partnership to help deter criminal and unsafe activity. He is the Town's equivalent of a Chief of Police. (Contract F.T.E -1 / Utilized -1) Youth Services- Responsible for providing and coordinating security at all schools within the Town of Fountain Hills. In addition, the youth services deputy must create and instruct educational programs quarterly. These programs will include drug, driver, and traffic education. They are also responsible for coordinating the Midnight Madness program, annual charity golf tournament and working with the Town Park's and Recreation coordinator. 70% school security and education, 30% Midnight Madness and other youth activities. (Contract F.T.E -I / Utilized-1) 7 Crime Prevention / Admin Deputy- Responsible for coordinating crime prevention programs. They will work closely with business owners, the LEAP Committee, and other town groups and organizations. They will also coordinate the Block Watch programs and communicate with patrol deputies the concerns of the business owners and citizens. 60% business owners, 20% block watch, and 20% other groups and organizations. (Contract F. T.E - 0 / Utilized 1) Right of Way Enforcement Deputy- Responsible for working with the planning and zoning enforcement officers along with enforcing Town code violations that pertain to vehicles and violations that occur on the roadway. The Right of Way deputy will also be responsible for animal control problems and animal registration. 70% town code and 30% animal control. (Contract F. T. E -I / Utilized -1) Traffic Complaint Coordinator- Responsible for enforcing traffic violations, accident investigation, and working with town engineers on possible solutions to traffic problems. This deputy will answer citizen's complaints about traffic violations and take appropriate steps to help alleviate them. These steps include coordinating enforcement action, radar, and driver education. 70% traffic coordination, enforcement and investigation, 30% education. (Contract F. T. E -I / Utilized -1) Court Services- Responsible for providing security and administrative services to the Fountain Hills Municipal Court.: 100% court duties (Contract F. T. E -1 / Utilized-1) Administrative Assistant- Responsible for coordinating with the community policing I"' sergeant and district commander. They are responsible for telephone communication, computer entry, filing, coping and working on any other assignment the office may have. This position will also include staffing the front window counter in the public safety building. This will continue already established service that allows a town resident to come to the station and speak with a law enforcement representative in person during the normal business hours of the work week. (Contract F.T.E -1 / Utilized -1) Posse (Volunteers)- Working under the direction of the Sheriff, the Fountain Hills Posse members are responsible for assisting the patrol deputies, transporting prisoners, vacation watches, crime prevention, block watch coordination, community service, traffic direction and many other community policing duties. The Fountain Hills Posse donated over 8,000 man hours last year serving Fountain Hills. This equates to four fulltime positions at no additional cost to the Town. 8 Fountain Hills Law Enforcement & Community Policing Services Founl�n Hills Town Sheriff Arpaio Mana er Sheriffs Commander Resources (K-9 / Swat I Air Unit /etc..) Patrol Sergeant Patrol Sergeant Patrol Sergeant Patrol Sergeant Detective Unit Community Policing Squad t Squad 2 Squad 3 Squad 4 Sergeant Sergeant Patrol Patrol Patrol Patrol Detective Youth Deputy Deputy Deputy Deputy Services Patrol Patrol Patrol Patrol Detective Crime Deputy Deputy Deputy Deputy Prevention Patrol Patrol Patrol Patrol Detective Deputy Deputy Deputy Deputy Court Services Patrol Patrol Patrol Patrol Right of Way Deputy Deputy Deputy Deputy Enforcement Traffic Complaint Coordinator Administrative Assistant fountain Hills Posse (Chart depicts contract at 3.5 beats. one patrol deputy on each squad would spend 50% of his/her shift in Fountain Hills and 50% of the shift serving the unincorporated areas around Fountain Hills.) .11 Police Costs Per Capita $500 $400 $300 $200 $100 $0 Tempe Tolleson Mesa Paradise Avondale Fountain Gilbert Oro Valley Valley Hills (projected FY 03/04) Cost Comparison (FY 02-03) What local Cities and Towns pay for their Law Enforcement services fir,• In closing, when you contract your law enforcement services through the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office you receive a service that will cater to you from start to finish. All this from an agency that has the resources to get the job done and can do so while taking the responsibility of any potential liabilities that may arise. The advantages for this type of law enforcement program are numerous. First, having only one agency allows the dissemination of communication to flow freely. Deputies also have the common goal of supplying quality law enforcement, without the risk of interfering with another agencies operation. Another advantage is that this type of plan represents a flexible alternative, designed to meet the needs of a changing community. Should a supervisor see a change in a crime trend they can re-evaluate their staffing or use the abundance of Sheriff's Office recourses to help alleviate this negative trend. Lastly, the Sheriff's Office has always been accommodating to the needs of Fountain Hills. Having supplied law enforcement from the beginning, our Office will not allow the town to fall victim to substandard performance. Our partnership represents a long history of working together and sharing the benefits of contract law enforcement. The Sheriff's Office hopes that this partnership can continue for many years to come. 10 Benefits of Contracting With the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office The quality of law enforcement services delivered by the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office reflects professionalism, exemplary ethics, and the highest quality of commitment and dedication to duty. Beyond "blue ribbon" service are many reasons that make contracting with the Sheriff's Office an excellent choice. Consider the following benefits.. Community Oriented Policing - Community Oriented Policing (COP) has always been the way of doing business at the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office. Office managers and personnel adhere to the philosophy of Problem Solving; effective police -community partnerships are forged. The community actively participates in the identification of community problems, the resolution of those problems, and the evaluation of the outcomes. Through this kind of partnership, the Office and the Town of Fountain Hills will build upon a common goal —to control crime, maintain order and improve the quality of life in the community. The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office has provided law enforcement to the Fountain Hills area since Arizona became a territory in 1863 and continues to do so. Knowledge of Fountain Hills - Since the establishment of Fountain Hills as a community, the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office has been providing law enforcement services to Fountain Hills. A close relationship has been established with the residents of this community. In fact, many of them volunteer their time in the Sheriffs Fountain Hills Posse, and the Fountain Hills Mounted Posse located in The Town of Fountain Hills. In addition, a cadre of officers presently working in the Fountain Hills area has gained invaluable knowledge of the community and its issues. Several of its members have been long time residents of Fountain Hills. Economy of Scale - The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office is a large organization with more than 3,000 employees. The crucial functions of recruitment, selection and hiring are both time intensive and costly for such a sizable organization. Additionally, a sophisticated infrastructure including communications ability, 9-1-1 operators, record keeping, evidence storage, and fleet management is already in place. The Town would pay only for the services provided, rather than having to purchase, operate and maintain each of these systems. Liability Issues - The Maricopa County Sheriffs Office will assume responsibility for the actions of Office employees and hold the Town of Fountain Hills harmless in litigation arising out of actions by county employees. MR 11 Training - The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office seeks the very best personnel and maximizes the human resources of all members of the Office, sworn, civilian, and volunteer. In 1999 the Sheriffs Office began its own Deputy Sheriff Training Academy. Its goal is to maintain the highest standards possible while pinpointing the instruction to fit the needs of the citizens served by this office. Mandated training for all sworn staff --basic, advanced, and management, is provided at the Sheriffs Training Center. The Maricopa County Sheriffs Office is committed to the precept that training is essential to the development and maintenance of excellence in the organization. Ancillary Services - The Maricopa County Sheriffs Office is the most diverse law enforcement agency in Arizona. In addition to Patrol Services stationed in the north, east, south and west areas of the County, the Office offers a broad spectrum of ancillary services. Uniform operating procedures, common radio frequencies and a unified command structure enable the Office to function as a highly efficient law enforcement service provider when handling local emergencies, countywide disasters and special events. Ancillary services are included in contract services provided by the Office. 12 Services The Town does not need to devote staff to hire and process prospective Police applicants. The Sheriff's Office conducts recruitments for hiring. We complete all the necessary pre - hire screening, to include, testing, polygraph examination, psychological examination, physical agility testing, medical examination, background investigation, Academy training, and Field Training. When Fountain Hills contracts with the Sheriff's Office the county assumes the liability for the actions of its deputies. Thus, the town is in the position of saving money from potential lawsuits. The county also takes care of vehicle maintenance which means that there is a large fleet of vehicles to draw from, in the event a vehicle goes out of service. • Consistent Manpower Availability • Built into Contract Overtime Sick Time Court Time Training Time Industrial Injury Vacation • Personnel Hiring/Hiring Costs Polygraph Background Physicals Training Academy Field Training Psychological Services Critical Incident Stress Management Team Transfers Deputies may be transferred to another post outside of Town at the desire of the Town Manager/ City Council • Vehicle Replacement/Service Scheduled Replacement Accident Replaced Service Centers in Place Patrol Cars Always Available 13 Why Fountain Hills should contract with The Maricopa County Sheriffs Office The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office is a unique law enforcement agency that has many resources to offer, in the way of contract law enforcement. When a town contracts its law enforcement services through M.C.S.O., they receive more then just the deputies that patrol their streets. They receive the resources that are available to these deputies. Support Services M.C.S.O. has many specialty units that can be deployed at a moment's notice as First Responders. They have the ability to mobilize up to fifty deputies at any given time. These deputies have the necessary training and experience to quell riots and unlawful protests. Our SWAT team has the ability for strategic insertions and management of hostage and barricade situations. Our K-9 unit is diversified enough to detect drugs and explosives, as well as track fugitives and missing persons. Our Lake Patrol Division has the skills necessary to respond to mass disasters and treat casualties, as most of these deputies are also certified Emergency Medical Technicians or Paramedics. Lake Patrol deputies take home their assigned vehicles and are available for immediate response. The Sheriff's Office maintains other specialized skills such as hostage negotiators, bomb technicians, search and rescue personnel, undercover narcotics investigators, homicide detectives, arson investigators, other specialized detectives, and traffic fatality reconstruction specialists. Other resources include highly skilled evidence technicians, S.T.A.R deputies (replaces D.A.R.E. program), and an established property / evidence room, commercial vehicle inspectors, mounted wilderness deputies, and bicycle patrols. The Sheriff's Office adheres to the philosophy of community oriented policing, that is: working with the communities we serve as partners in solving specific problems. As a result, the Sheriff's Office has the largest volunteer law enforcement contingent in the nation. This contingent is made up of 3000 Posseman and 120 Reservists. To further serve the community, the Sheriff's Office has the ability to transfer deputies in and out of an assignment here in town in an attempt to find deputies who are the most compatible and best suited to provide the services offered under contract law enforcement. The Sheriff's Office also operates a 24-hour communications center, which is responsible for dispatching calls for police service. This state of the art center is equipped with the latest technological advances including the Federally mandated 800 MHz radio system. The communications center also maintains the enhanced emergency 911 system and employs professional dedicated 911 operators and dispatchers who are also trained in Emergency Medical Treatment (E.M.T.). When a community contracts with The Maricopa County Sheriffs Office we will assume responsibility for the actions of Office employees and hold the Town of Fountain Hills harmless in litigation arising out of actions by county employees.The county also takes care of vehicle maintenance, which means that there is a large fleet of vehicles to draw from, in the event a vehicle goes out of service. 14 Available Resources • Investigations Arson Auto Theft Homicide Internal Affairs/Inspections Special Investigations Narcotics White Collar Crime • Investigative Support AFIS (Automated Fingerprint Identification System) Identification Technicians Print Specialist Photographic Specialist Composite Artist Crime Scene Reproduction Secure Property and Evidence Facilities • Enforcement Support SWAT K-9 Motorcycle Enforcement Squad Aviation Explosive Technicians Riot Response Unit Bicycle Unit S.T.A.R Program ( replaces DARE Program) Search and Rescue • Posse and Reserves • Training • SCUBA Divers • Incident Command Vehicles Command Center Trucks Booking Vans Logistical Support Vehicles FRI Vision and Mission Statement The Maricopa County Sheriffs Office Contract Law Enforcement Mission is to provide cost effective municipal law enforcement service responsive to the varied characteristics of the served. Our guiding values are: SERVICE TO CITIES AND TOWNS We recognize contract cities and towns as the ultimate focus of our municipal law enforcement activities. We are committed to understandings each city's and towns vision, underlying values and specific needs ant to administer/develop law enforcement services that respect the desires of the cities and towns. ETHICS We recognize our badge as a symbol of public trust and expect exemplary behavior from our employees both in the performance of their duties and in their personal lives. We monitor adherence to department rules and standards to ensure the highest level of law enforcement service and the respect of our contract cities and towns. QUALITIES We strive for kind, understanding, and courageous professional service in delivery of community -oriented law enforcement. We accept change in meeting the specific needs of contract cities and towns. We encourage questions on established practices and suggestions for doing the job better. TEAMWORK We work as partners with our contract cities and towns. We share our plans and strategies, providing on -going honesty and candor in communications. We require individual accountability. INTERNAL OPERATIONS We aggressively pursue the internal efficiencies and flexibility necessary to deliver quality service at a reasonable cost. The Maricopa County Sheriff's Office Vision Statement The Maricopa County Sheriff s Office is a fully integrated law enforcement agency committed to being a leader in establishing the standards for providing professional quality law enforcement, detention, and support services to the citizens of Maricopa County and to other criminal justice agencies. 16 Fountain Hills Maricopa County Sheriffs Office Law Enforcement Contract Proposal Worksheet FY 2003/2004 Total Number of Patrol Beats to be Provided I DRAFT 1 1 3.50 Classifications Number of Personnel Average Hourly Rate Average wl var. Fringe Costs Annual Hours Total Fixed Fringe Costs Annualized Costs Patrol Deputies 18.20 $19.32 $22.32 2096 $90,545.00 $941,932 COPS Universal Deputy 0.00 $16.76 $19.36 2096 $0.00 $0 Detectives 2.91 $19.32 $22.32 2096 $14,466.31 $150,492 Sergeants 2.09 $28.22 $32.60 2096 $10,396.42 $153,186 Lieutenant/Captain 1.01 $36.82 $42.53 2096 $5,030.28 $95,173 Clerical 0.61 $12.18 $14.07 2096 $3,022.81 $20,942 Traffic Enforcement 0.00 $19.32 $22.32 2096 $0.00 $0 Trans ortation Deputy 0.61 $19.32 1 $22.32 1 2096 $3,022.81 $31,446 Total Staff Costs $1,393,171 variable Fringe costs Fixed Fringe Costs (per employee) I o.Dz7o $4,975 Manpower Allocation Factor FTE Staffing Requirements 24 hour 17 day post 5.2 FTE Employees 0.67 Detectives 1 Beat 8 hour 17 day post 1.75 FTE Employees 1.00 Sergeant for 9 Deputies 8 hour / 5 day post 1.24 FTE Employees 1.00 Lieutenant for 18 Deputies 0.14 Clerical for 1 Beat 0.14 Transport Deputy 1 Beat S ecial Pay IFTE's IPer FTE Cost I Total Special Pay Costs Overtime/Shift Differential 1 25.421 $1,283.00 1 $32,619 Total Personnel Services $1,425,789 Qr. nlfn lz nrl P..f Supplies Based on average supply use carved by dividing costs for supplies by number of employees in the Districts. The average is then multiplied by the number of FTE's. Cost for Supplies $10,854 Total Employees 17 Average per Employee $638 Total FTE's 25.42 Total Supply Costs $16,232 Vehicle and Equipment Based on full mileage rate, depreciation of vehicle, and depreciation of equipment multiplied by number of estimated miles. Vehicle Cost with Warranty 29,960 Vehicle life 100,000 miles. Equipment Costs 6324 Equipment life 200,000 miles. Per Mile Estimated Annualized Rate Annual Miles Costs Mileage Rate $0.228 176,000 $40,128 Vehicle Depreciation $0.296 176,000 $52,096 Equipment Depreciation $0,032 176,000 $5,632 Total Vehicle and Equipment Costs $97,856 Communications Based on the per Deputy cost for radio service derived by dividing the users into the. Communications budget. Total Users of the System 113udget Per Deputy Cost ISwom FTE's 2,1541 $4,455.288 1 $2,068 1 24.82 Total Communications Costs $51,329 Total Contract Costs $1,591,207 Revised March 4, 2003 TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS �. MARSHALS DEPARTMENT INTER OFFICE MEMO TO: Tim Pickering, Town Manager DT: 03/19/03 FR: Todd Tate, Interim Marshal 77w:f RE: Updated Costs - Marshal's Department / Police Department This memorandum outlines an updated cost projection for the Marshals Department becoming a full -service Police Department. The total cost for the first full budget year has been lowered from $2,126,413 to $1,980,030. This is a decrease of $146,383. Through further analysis of our operating and personnel budgets, we determined that these areas could be trimmed to produce a more cost effective department. Personnel Costs On the original cost estimate, Deputies showed an average salary of $39,000 and Sergeants at $50,000. These amounts are much higher than the starting salaries currently being used by the Town of Fountain Hills. As of today, Deputies start at $34,029 and Sergeants at $41,454. By starting new employees at the posted starting salary, the cost has been reduced by $104,926. The total personnel budget includes salaries & benefits for an entire year. The average cost per employee is $53,783. The cost per shift (5.2 officers) is $279,676. Communication The Marshals Department has received a cost estimate from the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office for complete dispatching services. The cost of this service is $278,000 annually. Vehicles & Supplies (Operational Costs) The operational costs for a Police Department are $142,300 for the first year. This includes all operational costs and the costs associated with hiring 21 additional officers. The budget also includes a capital purchase of two Motorola XTS 3000 portable radios. The projected department would use a total of ten of the newer vehicles from the existing Marshals fleet. The other vehicles can be used a spares, or auctioned to the public. Currently the Town of Fountain Hills purchases fuel at $1.47 per gallon of unleaded. To project future costs, our facilities manager Don Thumith suggested budgeting at 1%""' approximately $1.91. The mileage estimate was based on MCSO's reports (January 2002 — December 2002) of 172,002 miles per year. A 10% increase has been added to the total MCSO mileage. To Calculate fuel economy, Marshals Department vehicle M10 was used. This vehicle is a 1997 Ford Crown Victoria. The vehicle averaged 13.8 miles per gallon in January 2003. A fleet wide estimate of 12 MPG was used for the gasoline consumption calculation. Other Resources The formation of a Police Department will require mutual aid agreements to be arraigned with neighboring cities to share resources. The Department of Public Safety (DPS) and the Maricopa County Sheriffs Office (MCSO) are required to provide services by state statute. A portion of our state and county taxes paid by Fountain Hills residents goes toward appropriations for both the DPS and MCSO. In addition, the Town of Fountain Hills would most likely enter into mutual aid agreements with neighboring cities so that resources may be shared. These mutual aid agreements are very common in the law enforcement community. Currently the department uses the services of the DPS Crime Lab for processing evidence at no cost. This would continue in the future. Future Projections Wn As requested, the cost of a Police Department has been projected out for twenty years using a standard of a 5% increase each year. In addition, two replacement vehicles have been budgeted every other year. However, the replacement of these vehicles would be based on two factors. First, the vehicle will have to have exceeded 100,000 miles of service, and that the vehicle be determined to be too costly to maintain by the Town Mechanic. Second Year $2,129,032 Third Year $2,235,483 Fourth Year $2,402,257 Fifth Year $2,522,370 Tenth Year $3,439,369 Twentieth Year $6,194,542 MR Law Enforcement Sheriffs Office only / FH Marshals -Police only model Marshal's Number of Department / Budget Sheriffs Office Budget Difference Personnel Police Department 21 Officers $1,042,9161 Deputies $1,063,575-$20,659 4 Sergeants $249,213 Sergeants $233,494 $15,719 2 Detectives $1089677 Detectives $98,130 $10,547 1 Chief $85,506 Commander $84,089 _ $1,417 1 Clerical $48,363 Clerical $21,685 $26,678 Overtime $25,055 Overtime $35,612-$10,557 Personnel Total $1,559,730 Personnel Total $1,536,585 $23,145 Average cost per employee (29) $53,783.79 $52,985.69 Cost per Shift 676Cost per Shift (5.2 officers) $279,� (5.2 officers) $275,526 Contract Operating Dispatching Dispatching Expenditures Services $278,000 Services $57,904 $220,096 Estimate Vehicles & $142,300 Vehicles & $116,358 $25,942 Supplies Supplies Operating Total $420,300 Operating Total $174,262 $246,038 GRAND TOTAL $1,980,030 GRAND TOTAL $1,710,847 $269,183 0 a ] ■k%\ @�\ cm \ � 2@@� @@@ @ mR�co @ �_§� co@ ts E�LO 0) K J ® k � �aq qt § # §s § K - . 2 c LO Rco c k \�a6 r— � § d _ 2 § 2 � � I � . §2§ §^ f rC6 fz $ . -. _ m � ) Ogg /gf � k8\§ 2_82 f g- , § / \�& \ § § § 2 K 334 « co % Q Qp S 7 @ B « ©Kks.«.fo .n, Q -�- �&, r- L / \\k)� A§k K $E�2§$ ca m\Sk SUS � a 2$K®$%@ $ ® m-$ R E� k �« a o f 2 ■ a g $ � e �� c �ƒ$�■ . .�' §�a� a■. e2 jAa� ,2§� zS2 dAk�D3a IL _I O O .- Ln N - 69 co + N N O U) O . N + Cll > U (D O) O U 0) u N L _ O N T fll i U 7 "O cz 0 Z3 U U >"-0 (n LL Q) Q CD C) Cl) a) '0 (n cn Z cz E a ctS +. C) 7 C O O C3 Ln O t (U 69 a) mU [L > a) E �U W .� Ua c c (u te r+ EQ m — a � U C Q t T 3 -0 C 00)O C c� Vj C)(U N Y (D Z Un a) Ln co O C CZ W 0) m cz O IL " O L O_ `� ' ui > D Q (n E LL p Vi - C 2 a L Q (o �° p O u Q cn -- -O Z3 c�O0 (Z co X coON O N O U — p cz N U c C 0 3 (6 T C C - 0. C C 0 N O N co"W V) II II F- 61} 0) (n co o C:)co V C 6R p 3� O O J Lo O O N U � U Nco C ZT O r- E cd O L L L _ O U 0C C O 0 0 >CZ a L> i co T L co u O a O N O) o CL a. IL O Q? O t- Uc Q) (D Q) It O/Oy, 64r W QLLF-TUU .� .L� p •cam TQ2�zzz O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 69 60 6R O O O O O O O O O m O O LO LO 0 0 LO O V) (D N N r L T C7 N r- Ln L6 TQ91 O N r T (f} 6FJ Ufa 6'i C'7 N H} U7 Uy N T .' cq 69 Ef} EfJ 69 6R T c O U a O (U E 7 O U (ll O U) C _ U L CO c0 7 N 0- O as C c0 >WU N W Q � O >, >, >, cz c� co co CyOi a) U 0) C C2 O U S 7 5 0E,O 00ro C—n U) O - 3 5N .E a) a E 2 cz•a) (D (D a O O Z3 cc> Q U U a cz N E cz (D O a. F- � D F- O N m ca U U U U L O O r LO 1-- 00 'IT O r I,- O O CO O O O p C C C)O O O O O r N M M LO �'t r N C'7 O O O V N 4 o Lo Lo Lo m Lo o m Lo LoLo V 3 LO (0 CD O (fl (D CD (D CD (O (D (D (D co co 00 Q Z cm C C C C C C C C C C a Li n 2- Q a 2- 2- 9- 2- w w w w w w w w w w 06 06 0 0 0 06 06 06 C-6 06 U_ U_ U_ U_ U_ U_ U_ U_ U_ U_ L L L L � L L L L L O O O O O O O O O O L L L L L L L L L L IL a. a_ a a_ a. a_ a_ a. a. ai m (D (D aa) (D aa) aa)i aa) 0) z z z z z z z z z z F- F- F- -it- F F 75 7a 76 76 F a U U U U U U U U U U ++ N Mrl, O O 00 O O O rl� O .- N 00 (O O (D N N Cl) CO U) r- 00 M r [,- (D M Cl) LC) Cl) N LO LO O CO � O O It N M CA It N 00 m co It O C7) 00 O (D N LO CA Ln N N CO I�i CM LL7 Cn r N (D t` L!) N t` r t` y N Cl) O N O d U) O M r r (D LO t- O 'It r- 00 CA L — N Ln t` 00 O N d' (D o0 O ClL1) CA — Lt7 t` w0, NNNNNNCococomm.4't�d LoLoU)Co 3 61)6969696969649,Q3.Q9,Q9-QT E�?649,(;aV3. 6AK}K)Efl LL .O a) LO E N w LO r- 0) OOUl LL NL L� I o0 O LA O (D C`) O 00 r- r- r- O � � 6q 6q 64 � � 69 - .T- 0 69 69 N .Q LO U d N a) o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CLi LO LO LO LO LO LO LO LO U) U) LO LO LO LO Ln Ln LO LO LO C -W O N 0) r-O m w O O m r-O+ N w w m w r N Cl) C') 00 LO r- CO 0) r rl- CD C`) C') Ln CO N U) LO M 00 O O O ":t N CM c' ":t N OC M 0) ct O CA 00 O r (D N V O C) LO N N CO 'It C`) LO M r N CD t- LO N N r N 00 N C) O N O It to O CY) .- N (D LO N OIct 00 H CA r- N Ln � 00 O N 'It (Cl CO O CM Lf) C7J r Ln t� N N N N N N Cl) C`) CM Cl) Cl) 'It I�t It LO U) LO y 69E09,6969696969 6969696960}EA696969696969 L O a N L cc I*fti d L C r-. L L L C C C C LL OU i s L .� > N a� j� a> a> a> r-O (U .- .E a) (D 3 O Un P LL LL U) cn w z F- w F- P LL LL 0 0 w z F- 04/07/03 13:40 %Y480 505 3901 JORDEN BISCHOFF 2002 Resolution on Law Enforcement WHEREAS, the current two -agency law enforcement system involving both the sheriff's Department and Marshal's Department is an expensive duplication of services that would be a questionable financial burden upon the taxpayers in good fiscal times and is' - - an intolerable burden upon them in these difficult fiscal times and WHEREAS, the existence of two law enforcement agencies in the same town has created great controversy within the town, which as divided the people and hindered law enforcement operations and WHEREAS, the additional funds spent on dual agency law enforcement could be better spent on other necessary services, especially for our seniors and youth, or on tax cuts for our residents and WHEREAS, the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department has provided quality law enforcement services to the people of Fountain Hills for over a quarter of a century and WHEREAS, a thorough and complete review of law enforcement services in Fountain Hills by a professional and reputable management consulting firm commissioned by the town recently advised the town to transfer almost all law enforcement services to the Sheriff's Department and 04/07/03 13:41 $480 505 3901 JORDEN BISCHOFF z Z 003 WHEREAS, the taxpayers of Fountain Hills can save anywhere from one half a million to three quarters of a million dollars per year by making the Sheriff's Department our sole police agency and WHEREAS, the taxpayers of Fountain Hills can additionally save potentially millions dollars in civil liability lawsuit costs by making the Sheriff's Department our sole police agency and WHEREAS, the taxpayers of Fountain Hills can additionally save potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in police overtime costs for high profile investigation cases by making the Sheriff's Department our sole police agency because unlimited detective overtime is already built into its contract and WHEREAS, the Marsh IsDepartment is currently at an extremely low sta ng level due to recent resignations, thus making this an opportune time to switch to the Sheriff's Department with minimal negative impact on staff and WHEREAS, because other police agencies are hiring police officers, including the Sheriff's Department that has reached out to our Marshal's Deputies, which will provide currently employed Marshal's Deputies with potential alternative police employment opportunities and 04/07%03 13:42 'U480 505 3901 JORDEN BISCHOFF Z004 3 WHEREAS, the constant uncertainty and apprehension among both Sheriff's Department and Marshal's Department personnel caused by either group not knowing their career futures in Fountain Hills is unfair to them and WHEREAS, the town cannot bear the extraordinary startup costs of its own police department now or in the foreseeable, The Town Council of Fountain Hills directs the town manager to immediately begin taking all necessary steps to change the delivery of law enforcement services in Fountain Hills from its present expensive, inefficient and controversial dual agency model to a single agency model with said services being provided by the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department with the start of the coming fiscal year being the target date for such transition and the The Town Council further directs the town manager to cause local code enforcement and animal control duties to be transferred to less expensive civilian town employees and that Such changes be made subject to any legal limitations imposed upon us by the U.S. Department of Justice due to our past acceptance of grants but that all efforts be made by the town manager and town attorney to release or minimize the town from said grant limitations as soon as possible and to transfer any remaining grant staffing responsibilities to Sheriff Department's personnel. RESOLUTION NO. 2003-16 A RESOLUTION OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, RELATING TO CONSOLIDATION OF LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES. WHEREAS, the current two -agency law enforcement system involving both the Sheriffs Department and the Marshal's Department is an expensive duplication of services that would be a questionable financial burden on taxpayers in good fiscal times and is an intolerable burden upon them in these difficult fiscal times; and WHEREAS, the existence of two law enforcement agencies in the same Town has created great controversy within the Town, which has divided the people and hindered law enforcement operations; and WHEREAS, the additional funds spent on dual agency law enforcement could be better spent on other necessary services, especially for our seniors and youth, or on tax cuts for our residents; and WHEREAS, the Maricopa County Sheriffs Department has provided quality law enforcement services to the people of Fountain Hills for over a quarter of a century; and WHEREAS, a thorough and complete review of law enforcement services in Fountain Hills by a professional and reputable management consulting firm commissioned by the Town recently advised the Town to transfer almost all law enforcement services to the Sheriffs Department; and - WHEREAS, the taxpayers of Fountain Hills can save anywhere from one half million to three quarters of a million dollars per year by making the Sheriff s Department our sole police agency; and WHEREAS, the taxpayers of Fountain Hills can additionally save potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars in police overtime costs for high profile investigation cases by making the Sheriffs Department our sole police agency because unlimited detective overtime is already built into its contract; and WHEREAS, the Marshal's Department is currently at an extremely low staffing level due to recent resignations, thus making this an opportune time to switch to the Sheriffs Department with minimal negative impact on staff, and WHEREAS, other police agencies are hiring police officers, including the Sheriffs department that has reached out to our Marshal's Deputies, which will provide currently employed Marshal's Deputies with potential alternative police employment opportunities; and 9196.00M..\2003-16 Law enforcement consolidation. res. doc 4-4-03-2 WHEREAS, the constant uncertainty and apprehension among both Sheriffs ,,`qw Department and Marshal's Department personnel caused by either group not knowing their career futures in Fountain Hills is unfair to them and their families; and WHEREAS, the Town cannot bear the extraordinary startup costs of its own police department now or in the foreseeable future. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA as follows: SECTION 1. That the Town Council of the Town of Fountain Hills (the "Town Council") hereby directs the Town Manager to immediately begin taking all necessary steps to change the delivery of law enforcement services in Fountain Hills from its present expensive, inefficient and controversial dual agency model to a single agency model with said services being provided by the Maricopa County Sheriffs Department with the start of the coming fiscal year being the target date for such transition. SECTION 2. That the Town Council further directs the Town Manager to cause local code enforcement and animal control duties to be transferred to less expensive civilian Town employees. SECTION 3. That such changes be made subject to any legal limitations imposed upon the Town by the U.S. Department of Justice due to past acceptance of grants, but that all efforts be made by the Town Manager and Town Attorney to release or minimize the Town from said grant limitations as soon as possible and to transfer any remaining grant staffing responsibilities to Sheriff s Department personnel. SECTION 4. That the Town Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to provide the Town Council with an outline of his research and recommendation on the position of Town Marshal/Public Safety/Emergency Preparedness Director during the 2003- 04 budget process. SECTION 5. That the Town Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to provide the Town Council with a plan for formation of a citizens Public Safety Commission. SECTION 6. That the Town Manager is hereby authorized and directed to take all steps necessary to pursue intergovernmental agreements with neighboring communities to enhance the Town's emergency preparedness and public safety contingency plans. 9196.001\2003-16 Law enforcement wnsolidation.res.doc 4-4-03-2 [SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE] 4 '`�rrar PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills, Arizona, April 3, 2003. FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO: Jon M. Beydl r, M or Bevelyn J. nder, own Clerk REVI D APPROVED AS TO FORM: Tim G. Pickering, Town M r Andrew J.-McGuire, Town Attorney 9196. 001\2003-16 Law enforcement consolidation. res.doc 4-4-03-2 .i 1 3 N o! Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Mee"tmg'ype Regular Meeting Com. Dev. Consent:❑ Regular:❑ Meeting Dates, 4/3/03 Contact Person: Dana Burkhardt, Senior Planner Requesting Action:;® Type of Document Needing Approval (Cheek all that apply): s Public Heari ng 'ng ❑Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ❑ Other: Council Priority (Check Appropriate Areas): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ® Community Development Report Only:❑ ® Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ❑ Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation Regular Aaenda Wordings:: Public Hearing and consideration of Ordinance 03-08, a proposed amendment to the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance to permit temporary outdoor sales and similar activities to occur on intermitting or nonconsecutive days with Town Council approval through the temporary use permit process, case number Z2003-03. St4;Rndation: Approve No $ Pusnose of Item and'$ackgrouud Infornnation: At the January 16, 2003, Town Council meeting, the Council approved Temporary Use Permit Case #TU2002-04 for outdoor retail sales, with stipulations. The Council stipulated that the temporary use permit is active until May 31, 2003, and directed Staff to prepare an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that would better suit a request of this nature. Please find the proposed text amendment attached. The Planning & Zoning Commission unanimously recommend approval of Ordinance 03-08 with a minor amendment to the proposed text. Staff Report, Proposed Ordinance 03-08 Tve(s)kof Presentation: Verbal Presentation Only Depfirtment Head 7C3 Town Manager / Designee Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS 1-4w COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TOWN COUNCIL MEMO TO: Honorable Mayor Beydler and DT: March 26, 2003 Town Council FR: Dana Burkhardt, Senior Planner RE: Temporary Use for Outdoor Sales Text Amendment; Case #Z2003-03 On January 16, 2003, the Town Council initiated an amendment to The Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance. The proposed text amendment is to allow outdoor retail sales, such as open- air retail markets to occur on intermitting or nonconsecutive days over a period determined by Town Council with a temporary use permit. The Town currently permits outdoor retail sales and similar activities by temporary use for a period not to exceed seven (7) consecutive days per permit and no more than four (4) temporary use permits can be issued for the same use during any calendar year, unless otherwise approved by Council. The temporary use permit procedure consists of a person applying to the Town for the permit. Staff then posts the property for ten days and sends a notification of the request to the owners of the property within 300 feet of the subject property by first class mail. Generally, if there is no written objection received during the ten-day notification period, staff issues the temporary use �'.,. permit. If there is an objection, the matter is brought to the Town Council for mitigation. This amendment would require all requests to hold outdoor retail sales and similar activities on an intermitting or nonconsecutive day basis to be considered by the Town Council. The staff does not see any negative aspects to this proposal. Regardless of public input, or the lack thereof, the Town Council will consider each request, evaluate each request on its own merits, and will be free to approve or deny any requests. The Planning and Zoning Commission held its public hearing on March 13, 2003. There were no objections. The Planning and Zoning Commission unanimously voted to recommend approval of this proposed amendment, with the amendment that the events permitted under the temporary use permit shall recur within thin 30 days of the prior event held under such permit, rather than the ten (10) days suggested by staff. If the Town Council desires to allow outdoor retail sales by temporary use on intermitting days, the Town Council should adopt Ordinance 03-08. ORDINANCE NO. 03-08 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, AMENDING CHAPTER 5, SECTION 5.16, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS BY ALLOWING TEMPORARY OUTDOOR RETAIL SALES AND SIMILAR ACTIVITIES TO BE HELD ON INTERMITTENT OR NONCONSECUTIVE DAYS FOR A PERIOD APPROVED BY TOWN COUNCIL WITH A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT. WHEREAS, the Town of Fountain Hills (the "Town") adopted Ordinance 93-22, on November 18, 1993, which adopted the Zoning Ordinance for the Town of Fountain Hills; and WHEREAS, public hearings were advertised in the February 26, 2003, edition of the Times of Fountain Hills pursuant to ARiz. REv. STAT. §9-462.04; and WHEREAS, public hearings were held by the Fountain Hills Planning & Zoning Commission on March 13, 2003 and by the Mayor and Council on April 3, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA as follows: SECTION 1. The Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 5, General Provisions, Section 5.16, is hereby amended as follows: 5.16 Temporary Carnivals, Circuses, Revivals, Rodeos, Swap Meets, Outdoor Retail Sales and Similar Activities. A. Applicability. The provisions of this Section do not apply to garage sales or rummage sales. All other temporary carnivals, circuses, revivals, rodeos, swap meets, outdoor sales, and similar activities may be permitted only in OSR, Commercial and Industrial Zone Districts subject to the restrictions of Subsection B of this Section. B. Temporary Use Permit. A temporary use permit shall be obtained from the Zoning Administrator in accordance with the following: I. The Zoning Administrator shall ensure that health and safety are considered, and shall obtain the approval of the Maricopa County Health Department, the Fire Distr-iet DEPARTMENT, and the Town Marshal's Office prior to issuing the temporary use permit. 2. The Zoning Administrator shall ensure that land area is adequate for the proposed use and consequent parking, and shall ensure that traffic safety is considered. 9196.001\ Outdoor sales.zone.ord.doc 4-3-03-1 A. SUBMIT A SITE PLAN, TO SCALE, SHOWING THE PROPOSED LOCATIONS OF TEMPORARY STRUCTURES AND ACTIVITIES, AND IDENTIFY THE AVAILABLE PARKING AREAS. B. ALL PARKING AREAS MUST BE PAVED OR HAVE AN APPROVED METHOD OF DUST CONTROL FROM THE TOWN ENGINEER. C. IF THE PROPOSED TEMPORARY USE LOCATION IS WITHIN AN EXISTING PARKING AREA, THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES SHALL NOT BE REDUCED MORE THAN TEN PERCENT OF THE TOTAL SPACES EXISTING, UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY COUNCIL. 3. The Zoning Administrator shall require any measures necessary to protect surrounding property. 4. A time limit shall be established for each use conducted under the temporary use permit. Unless otherwise pay approved by the Town Council, the time limit shall not exceed seven (7) consecutive days, nor shall there be more than four (4) temporary use permits issued for the same use during any calendar year. The Town Council may grant permission for the same use to be held more than four (4) times during a calendar year. OUTDOOR RETAIL SALES AND SIMILAR USES SUCH AS FARMERS MARKETS, MAY BE PERMITTED `~- UNDER A SINGLE TEMPORARY USE PERMIT, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING: A. THE RECURRING EVENT SHALL NOT EXCEED A MAXIMUM OF FIFTY (50) DAYS DURING A CALENDAR YEAR. B. THE EVENT PERMITTED UNDER THE TEMPORARY USE PERMIT SHALL RECUR WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS OF THE PRIOR EVENT HELD UNDERR SUCH PERMIT; IF THE PERIOD OF RECURRENCE IS GREATER THAN THIRTY (30) DAYS, A SEPARATE TEMPORARY USE PERMIT SHALL BE OBTAINED FOR EACH OCCURRENCE. 5. Permanent structures shall not be permitted under a temporary use permit. SECTION 2. If any provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable, such provision of portion hereof shall be deemed separate, distinct and independent of all other provisions and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. 9196.001\ Outdoor sales.zone.ord.doc 4-3-03-1 2 PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills, Arizona, April 3, 2003. FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO: Jon . Beydler, ayo Bevelyn BPnder'Town Clerk VIEW BY: --- APP OVED AS TO FORM: Tim G. Pickerfg, Town Manager An w J. McGuire, Town Attorney r 0 9196.001\ Outdoor sales.zone.ord.doc 4-3-03-1 9 0 9196.001\ Outdoor sales.zone.ord.doc 4-3-03-1 9 0 Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Regular Meeting Meeting Date: 4/3/03 Community Development Consent:❑ RegnlarE Requesting Action:® Type of l)"ocuinent-Needffii�An""Vit(Gh k"Ia11 hat aunly): ® Public Hearing ❑ Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ❑ Other: Co"ft Priority (Check Appr Pjk Area): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ® Community Development Denise Ruhling, Planner ® Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ❑ Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation jii6lai AgendaWordinj PUBLIC HEARING to receive comments on ORDINANCE #03-03 a proposed a text amendment to modify The Zoning Ordinance for the Town of Fountain Hills in Chapter 13, Section 13.03 and Chapter 7, Section 7.04.G.5 to allow businesses to operate truck rental services by special use permit in the Industrially zoned districts, and to establish the parking criteria for the truck rental use. Case number Z2003-04. Consideration of ORDINANCE #03-03 a proposed a text amendment to modify The Zoning Ordinance for the Town of Fountain Hills in Chapter 13, Section 13.03 and Chapter 7, Section 7.04.G.5 to allow businesses to operate truck rental services by special use permit in the Industrially zoned districts, and to establish the parking criteria for the truck rental use. Case number Z2003-04. Approve Ftscal Impact:; No $ Purpose"aItem and $aCkgr�Iufo ation: This request is for approval of Ordinance 03-03, a text amendment to modify The Zoning Ordinance for the Town of Fountain Hills in Chapter 13, Section 13.03 and Chapter 7, Section 7.04.G.5 to allow businesses to operate truck rental services by special use permit in the Industrially zoned districts, and to establish the parking criteria for the truck rental use. All lighting, setbacks, landscaping and screening requirements would remain in full force and effect as stated in the existing zoning ordinance. Parking for truck rental use would be required in addition to the parking requirements for any other use on the site. For example, a mini -storage site requesting a special use permit for truck rental would continue to have the requirement of one parking space for every 35-rental units, and would need additional parking spaces for truck rental use at the rate of 1 per truck, with a minimum of four spaces required. The applicant would need to identify the number of trucks that would be rented from the site and would need to allow periodic site inspections to insure conformance to the special use permit. Staff and the Planning & Zoning Commission recommend approval of Ordinance 03-07. List All Attachments as Follows: Ordinance 03-03, Staff Report. Type(s) of Presentation: Signatures of Submitting Staff: D artment Head 7 �3 Town Manager / Designee Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor Beydler and Town Council DT: March 26, 2003 FR: Denise Ruhling, Planner RE: Ordinance Number 03-03 a Text Amendment to allow truck rental in the industrial zoned district with a special use permit and establish parking criteria for said use. Case number Z2003-04. This request is for approval of Ordinance 03-03, a text amendment to modify The Zoning Ordinance for the Town of Fountain Hills in Chapter 13, Section 13.03 and Chapter 7, Section 7.04.G.5 to allow businesses to operate truck rental services by special use permit in the Industrially zoned districts, and to establish the parking criteria for the truck rental use. All lighting, setbacks, landscaping and screening requirements would remain in full force and effect as stated in the existing zoning ordinance. Parking for truck rental use would be required in addition to the parking requirements for any other use on the site. For example, a mini -storage site requesting a special use permit for truck rental would continue to have the requirement of one parking space for every 35-rental units, and would need additional parking spaces for truck rental use at the rate of 1 per truck, with a minimum of four spaces required. The applicant would need to identify the number of trucks that would be rented from the site and would need to allow periodic site inspections to insure conformance to the special use permit. Below are the proposed text changes to Chapter 7, Section 7.04.G.5 followed by the proposed text changes to Chapter 13, Section 13.03, of The Zoning Ordinance for the Town of Fountain Hills: (deleted text has stfiketlfeugh and added text is double underlinedl: CHAPTER 7 PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS 7.04 Schedule of Required Off -Street Spaces. G. Schedule. 5. Manufacturing and industrial uses a. Manufacturing b. Telemarketing, data processing centers C. Other industrial uses d. Warehousing or wholesaling e. Mini -Storage 2 per every 3 employees 1 per 50 square feet 1 per 300 square feet 1 per 800 square feet 1 per 35 spaces; plus 1 for the manager. Text amend-IND Truck Rental-PZ Initiation l.doc Page 1 of 2 f. Truck Rental 1 per truck, with a minimum of 4 spaces CHAPTER 13 GENERAL PROVISIONS 13.03 Uses Subject to Special Use Permits. In IND-1 and IND-2 Zoning Districts, the following uses are permitted by special use permit only: A. Manufacturing, processing, storing of hazardous materials. B. Recycling Operations. C. Utility Services, but not including public utility treatment and generating plants or office, and wireless communication towers and antennas, unless otherwise specifically permitted elsewhere in the ordinance. D. Truck rental. The applicant shall provide the number of trucks that will be rented from the site on the special use permit application and shall allow intermittent periodic inspections to ensure conformance with the special use permit. Recommendation: The Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed the amendment at their March 13, 2002, meeting and unanimously voted to recommend approval. Staff recommends approval of Ordinance 03-03 allowing truck rental by special use permit in industrially zoned districts and establishing parking requirements for truck rental. Text amend-IND Truck Rental-PZ Initiation l .doc Page 2 of 2 ORDINANCE NO. 03-03 AN ORDINANCE OF THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA, AMENDING CHAPTER 13, SECTION 13.03, OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS TO ALLOW BUSINESSES IN INDUSTRIALLY ZONED DISTRICTS TO OPERATE TRUCK RENTAL SERVICES BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND AMENDING CHAPTER 7, SECTION 7.04.G.5 RELATING TO PARKING CRITERIA FOR TRUCK RENTAL USE. WHEREAS, the Town of Fountain Hills (the "Town") adopted Ordinance 93-22, on November 18, 1993, which adopted the Zoning Ordinance for the Town of Fountain Hills; and WHEREAS, public hearings were advertised in the February 26, 2003, edition of the Times of Fountain Hills pursuant to ARiz. REv. STAT. §9-462.04; and WHEREAS, public hearings were held by the Fountain Hills Planning & Zoning Commission on March 13, 2003 and by the Mayor and Council on April 3, 2003. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA as follows: SECTION 1. The Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 7, Parking and Loading Requirements, Section 7.04.G.5 is hereby amended as follows: 7.04 Schedule of Required Off -Street Spaces. G. Schedule. 5. Manufacturing and industrial uses a. Manufacturing b. Telemarketing, data processing centers C. Other industrial uses d. Warehousing or wholesaling e. Mini -Storage F. TRUCK RENTAL SPACES 9196.001\ Truck rezone.ord.doc 4-3-03-1 2 per every 3 employees 1 per 50 square feet 1 per 300 square feet 1 per 800 square feet 1 per 35 spaces; plus 1 for the manager 1 PER TRUCK WITH A MINIMUM OF 4 SPACES SECTION 2. The Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 13, Industrial Zoning Districts, Section 13.03, is hereby amended as follows: 13.03 Uses Subject to Special Use Permits. In IND-1 and IND-2 Zoning Districts, the following uses are permitted by special use permit only: A. Manufacturing, processing, storing of hazardous materials. B. Recycling Options. C. Utility Services, but not including public utility treatment and generating plants or office, and wireless communication towers and antennas, unless otherwise specifically permitted elsewhere in the ordinance. D. TRUCK RENTAL. THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE THE NUMBER OF TRUCKS THAT WELL BE RENTED FROM THE SITE ON THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION AND SHALL ALLOW INTERMITTENT PERIODIC INSPECTIONS TO ENSURE CONFORMANCE WITH THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT. SECTION 3. If any provision of this Ordinance is for any reason held by any court of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable, such provision of portion hereof shall be deemed separate, distinct and independent of all other provisions and such holding shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY the Mayor and Council of the Town of Fountain Hills, Arizona, April 3, 2003. FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS: ATTESTED TO: Tim G. Pickering, Town Manager 9196.001\ Truck rezone.ord.doc 4-3-03-1 2 Bevelyn Baiide , Town Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: oj�- '� . 1( L-1—z' Andrew J. cGuire, Town Attorney APR-02-03 WED 04:53 PM FAX 2. P. 02 c ARLINGTON HOSPITALITY, INC. 3 rf Caton I.1 i ?_05:� :;nu:it /� .n 'ci�tns nor. n • t 47-226-54O;) F� g.1�-2 ^ r 00 Jlriind'on He,r_l�ts, li_ 6COi;5 �.;c. 2O-5.'G0 !-�.:w.�rEnO;onno�hit�lity.com k i t { April 2, 2003 u Ms. Denisc Ruhling Planner The Town of fountain Hills K 16836 F. Palisades Boulevard { Fountain Hills, Arizona 85269 Re: Proposed New Ameriliost Inn & Suitcs is Fountain Hills, Arizona 1 e Dear Nis. Ruhling, We are formally requesting that the Town of Fountain Hills withdraw our application forsubdivision concept plan and not subinit to town council on Thursday, April 3, 2003. hPs with Breit r Bret tha/end have decided to not pursue this project and are very appreciative of the To It effort in working with us on its' development to this point (W If you have any questions or need any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Arlin * Hospitality evelopment, Inc. Paul Eskenazi, AIA E Senior Vice President o(C nstruction t 's a t 4 S L t' t f 1 r 1 Yi k D E V E L O P M E N T STAFFING MANAGEMENT Town of Fountain Hills Town Council Agenda Action Form Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Submitting Department: Planning & Zoning Meeting Date: 4-3-03 Contact Person: Denise Ruhling, Planner Consent:❑ Regular:® Requesting Action:® Tvpe of Document Needing Annroval (Check all that a ❑ Public Hearing ❑ Resolution ❑ Agreement ❑ Emergency Clause ❑ Special Consideration ❑ Intergovernmental Agreement ❑ Grant Submission ❑ Liquor/Bingo License Application ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Special/Temp Use Permit ❑ Other: Council Prioritv (Check ADDrODrlate Areas): ❑ Education ❑ Public Fitness ❑ Public Safety ❑ Community Activities ❑ Public Works ❑ Human Service Needs ❑ Town Elections ® Community Development Report Only:❑ ❑ Ordinance ❑ Special Event Permit ❑ Acceptance ® Plat ❑ Library Services ❑ Economic Development ❑ Parks & Recreation Regular Agenda Wording: Consideration of a preliminary/final plat of property located at 17140 Shea Boulevard, aka Final Plat 705, Parcel A. Case Number S2003-01. Staff Recommendation: Approve Fiscal Impact: No Purpose of Item and Background Information: These parcels were originally plated in 1995. In 1998 the parcel was replatted to form one lot. At that time a slope analysis was done and the Hillside Protection Easement was set in place to accommodate our subdivision ordinance requirements. The applicant is requesting a subdivision of the lots to once again form two lots to accommodate the development of a hotel on the southern lot (2A) and allow the northern lot to be sold independent of the hotel site. The proposed lot sizes (61, 623.04 sf and 113,248.05 sf) meet, or exceed, the minimum requirements of the C-2 zoning district. The Planning & Zoning Commission recommends approval of this application. List All Attachments as Follows: Staff Report, Plat Maps Type(s) of Presentation: Overhead Signatures of Submitting Staff: 4/� I A /-W' 1, /'V.WV' / "0 partment Head Town Manager / Designee Budget Review (if item not budgeted or exceeds budget amount) TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor Beydler and Town Council DT: March 26, 2003 FR: Denise Ruhling, Planner RE: Amerihost Inn Preliminary/Final Plat. Case Number S2003-01 This request is for approval of a preliminary/final plat of property located at 17140 Shea Boulevard, aka Final Plat 705, Parcel A. DESCRIPTION: APPLICANT: Arlington Hospitality Development Inc. (Paul Eskanazi) OWNER: Fountain Hills 802-Limited Partnership EXISTING ZONING: "C-2" EXISTING CONDITION: Vacant Commercial Land SURROUNDING LAND USES AND ZONING: NORTH: Existing Single Family Residential; zoned "R1-6 PUD"/ Vacant & Existing Commercial; zoned "C-1" SOUTH: Cerreus Wash / Existing Commercial; zoned "C-2 PD" / Shea Boulevard EAST: Existing Residential; zoned "R1-6 PUD" WEST: Existing Commercial; zoned "C-2" SUMMARY: This is a request for approval of a preliminary/final plat for property located at 17140 East Shea Boulevard, aka Final Plat 705, Parcel A. These parcels were originally plated in 1995. In 1998 the parcel was replatted to form one lot. At that time a slope analysis was done and the Hillside Protection Easement was set in place to accommodate our subdivision ordinance requirements. The applicant is requesting a subdivision of the lots to once again form two lots to accommodate the development of a hotel on the southern lot (2A) and allow the northern lot to be sold independent of the hotel site. The proposed lot sizes (61, 623.04 sf and 113,248.05 sf) meet, or exceed, the minimum requirements of the C-2 zoning district. Amerihost Inn & Suites S2003-01 Proposed lot lA is 61,623.04 square feet (1.4 acres) and fronts both Shea Boulevard and Monterey Drive. Proposed Lot 2A is 113,248.05 square feet (2.6 acres) fronts Shea Boulevard and is adjacent to Cerreus Wash. The replat includes an ingress/egress easement providing access to both lots from Shea Boulevard. The Hillside Protection Easement is included on the plat and has not changed from previously approved plat. The approximate size of the HPE is 28,433 square feet (.65 acres). Proposed Lot 2A will require the establishment of an emergency access easement and the abandonment of a portion of the Non Vehicular Access Eaasement to accommodate the emergency access. Engineering has reviewed the subdivision and has approved the application with the following stipulations: 1. Connect drainage easements. 2. The construction of meandering sidewalks adjacent to Shea Boulevard and Monterey Drive shall be required in conjunction with building permit requirements for each lot. 3. Applicant is required to abandon the 17 linear feet of one -foot non -vehicular access easement (lot 2A) prior to the issuance of a building permit and concurrent with the recording of the final plat. EVALUATION: Staff has reviewed this application and finds it to be in conformance with the requirements of the Town of Fountain Hills Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance. The Planning & Zoning Commission reviewed this application at public hearing on March 13, 2003. Although no public input was received on this application, input was received on the associated concept plan to allow an 86 room hotel on the parcel shown as 2A. Five speakers were heard with the following concerns: close proximity of parking to adjacent wall; light intrusion to adjacent residential; liability for damages to adjacent wall. The commission recommended approval of the subdivision by a unanimous vote. The commission recommended approval of the concept plan (with stipulations) by a vote of 5 yes and one no. The no vote was based upon the proposed height of 40' (allowed by ordinance). RECOMMENDATION: The Planning & Zoning Commission and Staff recommend approval of the preliminary/final plat S2003-01, for property located at 17140 East Shea Boulevard aka final plat 705, Parcel A with the following stipulations: 1. Connect drainage easements. 2. The construction of meandering sidewalks adjacent to Shea Boulevard and Page 2 of 3 IR Amerihost Inn & Suites S2003-01 Monterey Drive shall be required in conjunction with building permit requirements for each lot. 3. Applicant is required to abandon the 17 linear feet of one -foot non -vehicular access easement (lot 2A) prior to the issuance of a building permit and concurrent with the recording of the final plat. Page 3 of 3 o� Iwo-.wn.�wnnasi Ixx rx3soi�t3u.o y r, ", n .3T 33 2 ' z n a 8 m,3'm t�{� gpyli7 n z az C Ci N 0� O> 0 le ocDit m / v N m t = c� v0oo OOo-0 _T>-. z > O C �l Z (on > -4 =OZr arm D �1 JmA D O=D s>z 3l� m �U m�5 m f*1 $o-• xro mD>-2z.. D ASDr A_D NmrD aR 1 0 D N G� L"I D l m O w� r p �Cioof u n = a)Au3� f ✓� ke m kd 1-3 N � C) N N O3 i 0�//1 �y o � M❑NTG❑MERY ENGINEERING 6 MANAGEMENT, L.L.C. y 167ts E. PARKwEw AVE. sunE 204 FOUNTAIN HILLS, APIZONA 85268 (A80) 837-1845 fox (A80) 837-8668 �_ _, e—mail: dmontgomcfyl ®gwest.net i AMERIHOST INN S SUITES ARH 2-12-02 REPLAT OF LOTS 1 & 2, PLAT 705 DRM a -- .AS NOTED 17140 E. SHEA BOULEVARD PRELIMINARY PLAT wo. o E ocscnv mn 17 01wo-Iwtrwrx�rosr tm n��oi-rc�u.aa rn om z� os. zs..z x» �oY'z 3Y3 `�b M -------------- z O Z \ Q Cn I � m O b� CV'YNiGHi � 1J0] 9v 4p� M❑NTG❑MERY AMERIHOST INN & SUITES ARN 12-12-02 ENGINEERING d MANAGEMENT, L.L.C. LOT 2A;'` ORM .� 16716 E. PARKOEW Ab$, SUITE 204 o REPLA OF LOTS 1 & 2 PLAT 705 FOUNTAIN MLLS, ARIZONA 85268 AS NOTED N (450) 837-1845 !ax (480) 837-8668 17140 E. SHEA BLVD CONCEPT PLAN e—moil: dmontgomeryll gwest.net 1. °... ... "..... "°° . �m 0 - , '11-11 r, 2.1 �l 1'�11-11Y � —­­T. �.­ ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT, L.L.C. FOUNTAIN HILLS, ARIZONA 85268 05 AS NOTED