HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007.0607.TCSM.Minutes MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE
FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL
JUNE 7,2007
AGENDA ITEM#1—CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL—MAYOR NICHOLS.
Mayor Nichols called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m.
Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Mayor Nichols,
Councilmember Kehe, Councilmember Leger, Vice Mayor McMahan, Councilmember Schlum,
Councilmember Archambault and Councilmember Dickey. Town Manager Tim Pickering, Town Attorney
Andrew McGuire and Town Clerk Bev Bender were also present.
AGENDA ITEM #1 - PUBLIC HEARING REGARDING THE ESTIMATES OF EXPENSES AND
ASSESSMENTS AND APPROVING THE TENTATIVE BUDGET AS THE FINAL BUDGET FOR
THE 2007-08 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS.
Town Manager Tim Pickering addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and presented an overview of
the proposed budget and identified priorities.
Mr. Pickering highlighted a PowerPoint presentation and discussed the process that was followed in developing
the budget (full presentation available in the office of the Town Clerk). He presented a series of budget
highlights and noted that:
• The budget was balanced
• The strategic goals had been incorporated into the budget
• The General Fund budget only increased by 1.5%over the last year
• The budget was increasing by 15% due to investment in capital projects (investing more than $7.2
million in capital or 23%
• Investing in the design of streets and parks
• Fountain Park and Desert Vista Park were planned for completion
• General Fund revenues of$1 million added to the Capital Projects Fund at year end
Mr. Pickering discussed the Council's goals and noted that a few of them impacted the proposed budget,
including an analysis of revenue shortfall ($45,000); economic study of impact of change ($72,000); ensuring
responsible development of State Trust Land ($30,000); improving pedestrian safety ($164,869); providing
access to McDowell Mountain Preserve ($169,160); creating an environmental policy ($10,000) and promoting
commercial development ($25,000). He said that it was also important as part of the budget to look at the
Town's property tax and noted that Fountain Hills did not have a primary property tax but they did have a
secondary property tax, to pay for the library, some streets, and the mountains. He noted that the tax had gone
down each year because the evaluation of the Town in whole had gone up (has dropped down to less than thirty
cents).
Mr. Pickering discussed the Town's General Fund Balance, which was an issue back in 2002-03 and the fact
that that trend had been reversed and balanced out; the fact that a program and a policy had been established
whereby excess funds were put into the capital projects fund so they were available to meet future needs; every
year they were probably going to bank $6.5 million to ensure that they had monies to cover any unforeseen
situations that might arise; revenues and expenditures and the fact that the total proposed budget was
approximately $30.9 million and expenditures and revenues did not equal because a transfer was taken from the
General Fund and put into the Capital Fund and also there was money left over in the Capital Fund that was
being spent this year; the Town's General Fund was about 50% of the Town's spending and they also had 11%
in Capital Funds and the total revenue was derived mainly from State shared revenues and sales tax;the fact that
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 1 of 17
•
the State shared revenue portion and the sales tax portion equals approximately 84% of the revenues and
therefore the Town was highly dependent upon those two sources;from the State of Arizona, the Town received
state tax and income tax and from local merchants they received sales tax; there would be a 17.5% increase in
State shared revenue this year but this would not be the case every year; expenditures broken up by departments
and the fact that the Fire Department represented the largest expense followed by Parks and Recreation; the fact
that a new division had been created, Public Information, and the fact that the General Fund budget had only
increased by 1.5% over FY 2007; General Fund contract services and the fact that Fire and Police account for
the largest expenditures (Rural Metro $2,884,126 and the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department $2,704,200);
costs associated with legal services and outside services; proposed capital expenditures for FY 2007-08 and the
importance of investing in the Town's future; the Highway User Revenue Fund (separate from the General
Fund), which was the gas tax that comes to the Town for street purposes; the fact that the Town was going to
spend almost $900,000 to slurry seal (coat the streets) for longevity purposes in the northeast section of the
Town; micro-surfacing on Saguaro and Fountain Hills Boulevards ($277,500) and monies allocated for
sidewalks, striping, drainage,the storm water management plan, etc.; downtown development and the fact that a
fund had been set up whereby 1% of the collected sales tax was dedicated for this purpose; the fact that
sometimes capital projects did not get completed within the proper fiscal year and some of the items must be re-
budgeted, the biggest one being Fountain Park (new irrigation system, sidewalk and landscaping), almost a
quarter of a million dollars; the importance of improvements to Desert Vista Neighborhood Park and the fact
that staff was pursuing a grant to assist in this area; the fact that Saguaro Boulevard was approximately 30 years
old and would have to be replaced but first drainage issues must be addressed ($650,000); the proposed decant
disposal facility($149,350) and the purchase of a new fire pumper truck($360,500).
Mr. Pickering expanded on street improvements and noted that a lot of money was going to go into Shea
Boulevard. He discussed the proposed design of a truck climbing lane that would allow trucks to move over so
vehicles can pass. The design of a dirt alley paving off Saguaro would also take place, a third lane was being
designed (Shea Boulevard—Saguaro to Palisades), a sidewalk was being designed for Fountain Hills Boulevard
&Fayette and monies were in the budget to design joint use parks with the School District($300,000). He also
discussed development fee capital projects and noted that the Town would spend approximately $170,000 for
McDowell Mountain access and added that most of the central Trailhead design had been almost completed but
they still needed about $10,000 to finish the job. He noted that a new traffic signal was also being proposed for
Palisades and Sunridge Drives ($441,000).
Mr.Pickering summarized his presentation by stating:
• The General Fund was balanced
• Council and strategic goals frame the proposed budget
• Funding was being proposed for$7.2 million in capital projects
• There were no proposed increases in staff level (actually a small decrease)
Mr. Pickering expressed appreciation to the Mayor and Council, Commissions, Volunteers, Department
Directors and all staff for their contributions and indicated his willingness to respond to questions at this time or
during the public hearing portion of the meeting.
Mayor Nichols thanked Mr.Pickering for his presentation.
Mayor Nichols declared the public hearing open at 6:45 p.m.
The Mayor said that many people were present to discuss and hear what the Council was going to recommend
regarding the Senior Services group. He stated that he thought it appropriate to discuss this issue first before
taking comments from the public relative to the overall budget. Mayor Nichols advised that he was going to
read some comments for accuracy purposes regarding what he would like to see happen with the Senior Services
group.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 2 of 17
•
Mayor Nichols stated the following: "We had received a proposal from the Ad Hoc Subcommittee of the
Fountain Hills Senior Services Advisory Commission requesting proposed structural changes to the Senior
Services organization. This proposal included eight items for us to consider and this proposal was reviewed
and discussed in detail by Walt Dunne, Mr. Pickering, Mike Archambault and myself. And I think we arrived at
a result, a recommended result that was satisfactory to all parties. This result encompassed general agreement
to all eight proposals with minor tweaking. Let me review the outcome of this discussion and the proposed
motions that I will be asking the Council to consider later this evening. Before I ask for any actions to be taken,
I will ask Mr. Dunne to come forward to give you his reaction to this plan as well as I'll be asking for comments
on this subject from the public. Everybody here who wants to talk will be given an opportunity to express their
opinions. Let's begin by reviewing our discussion. I will ask the Council to change the title of the new full-time
position from Senior Services Program Coordinator to Senior Services Supervisor. I will then ask the Council
to make Senior Services a separate department combined with the Community Center. 1 will then ask that this
new department, called Community Center/Senior Services be removed from Parks and Rec and report directly
to the Town Manager. The Senior Services Supervisor would report to the Community Center Supervisor who
would report directly to the Town Manager. This will provide greater access and priority to the Community
Center rooms for the seniors and closer and more direct access to the Town Manager on an on-going basis.
This Senior Services and Community Center will be moved, as I said before,from the Parks and Rec control.
We agree to the rest of the proposals (items 3 through 8) that were recommended by this Ad Hoc Committee
with the following stipulations: That is, the socialization space will be studied by the Senior Services Supervisor
and the Community Center Supervisor to see how this can best be accommodated. Since they both now will be
reporting to the same department, working together should be improved and we should be able to accomplish
the objective of finding where we can had the socialization space. With the two of them working together, I
think that's a good combination. Also, the Senior Services Supervisor and the Community Center Supervisor
will work together to find out how they can use space here in Town Hall for some senior programs, which they
were not currently doing.
Le Let me recap: (1) We want to change the title of the new position; (2) We want to create a new department
called Community Center/Senior Services; (3) We want to remove it from the control of Parks and Rec; (4) We
want to have more direct access to the Town Manager; (5) We want to increase communication between the
Finance Division, Town Hall, Town Manager, and the Advisory Commission regarding financials and budgets;
(6) Provide training for the Senior Services Supervisor in certain areas and (7) Study how to provide
socialization space for the seniors.
I think it was very important to focus on the future and provide our seniors with the appropriate organizational
structure that will allow them to deliver the best programming for the group and make them one of the best
Senior Services organization in the Valley. That was my heartfelt wish that we did this, it was important that we
did this."
Mayor Nichols stated that before they moved forward, he would like Mr. Dunne to come forward and present
his remarks. The Mayor said that after that, he would open the meeting up to allow citizens to present their
input on any issue they wish regarding the budget.
Walt Dunne, 13225 N. Fountain Hills Boulevard, addressed the Council and thanked all of them for their time
and hard work over the past month in trying to resolve the situation that had developed. He said that much time
had been spent trying to develop something that would be acceptable to everyone involved and he encouraged
the Council to continue to pursue the personnel situation that had developed as well (although he acknowledged
that it was not the responsibility of the Council to deal with personnel issues). Mr. Dunne also encouraged the
Council to consider, when adopting the budget, that the budget proposal for this year was $10,000 less than it
was last year and by adding a full-time director or supervisor, they were taking out salary and benefits, at least
another$10,000 from that budget, and they would hope to have some new and revised programs that would fit
L.,„ in to the budget as well. They would basically be looking for something in the area of$25,000 to $40,000 in
additional monies for the Senior Services budget and he asked the Council to take this into consideration. He
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 3 of 17
said that they hoped that with the program that was presented and discussed with many members of the Council,
they could hopefully move forward and have a good Senior Services program in operation once again.
Mayor Nichols thanked Mr.Dunne for his remarks.
In response to a question from the Mayor, Town Clerk Bev Bender advised that twelve speaker cards had been
submitted by those who did not wish to speak but wanted to indicate their support for Senior Services and an
additional eight speaker cards were submitted by citizens who wished to provide input on this issue.
Bruce Florence, 14629 N. Winston Lane, said that he and others were present this evening to participate in and
witness the budget process. They were there because Senior Services was singled out in the budget process to
be punished and said they did not know why. He added that they were there tonight to see if corrections would
be made in the budget that would return dignity to the Senior Services programs and staff. He said that he had
been amazed by the quick response by citizens to the budget process that raised many questions about its
integrity. He added that during discussions with people, he found some recurring themes regarding the budget
process and said that the people in Town rose up to declare their love for a program and a staff that enriched
their lives. They rose up to declare their belief in openness in government, fair play, and open two-way
communication. They rose up to declare their determination that they will no longer blindly accept everything
they were told. The people were ready to support elected officials who also will refuse to accept blindly
everything that was told to them. The people, now fully alert, will insist on integrity, openness, and two-way
communication and that they become and remain common practices in government. The people wanted the
phrase, "I've been told" to be replaced by "I myself have seen." The people believed there must be a greater
degree of inspection and micro-management by elected officials and those who elect them because anything less
was mismanagement. The people believe that there were serious matters associated with the budget process that
must also be reviewed and addressed by the Council. Mr. Florence urged the Council as they ponder this
evening's budget options to look not just to management but to look also to the people in the audience.
Joann Prather, 16236 Lynbrook Boulevard, addressed the Council and said that the Senior Services program had
tried to improve the system. They started as a non-profit group and handled things very well and this could be
accomplished again. If the Senior Center stays under the control of the Town, they need to be a "stand alone"
entity. The Director needs to report directly to the Town Manager. The space used by the Seniors should
continue to be at the Community Center because its objective and goals was to make the community and
residents' usage a number one priority. The Director needs to work closely with the Senior Services Advisory
Commission to meet the various needs of the seniors. The Commission would serve as the watchdog of the
seniors. The budget for the seniors needed to be increased in order to expand the program. Ms. Prather also
addressed Mr. Pickering and asked if he had a reason for not returning the job of a Director to Stephanie Haddy
and said that she had the experience, training, and the best interest of the seniors at heart and their hearts belong
to her. She stated that the seniors wanted Stephanie Haddy as their Director and she hoped everyone was
listening to their voices.
Sue Frederick, 15116 E. Zapata, addressed the Council and read a statement on behalf of Gloria Zalig who could
not be there and herself. She read as follows, "We, the Seniors of Fountain Hills, were not afraid of change if it
makes things better. What had been going on the past few weeks makes us believe we were going backwards
and not forward on to better things. Why make a change in the Senior Services staff when everyone was happy
with the way things were operating? If you wanted to make a change from a part-time job to a full-time job that
made sense, but taking away the person that had been doing a great job just did not make sense. Please give her
the opportunity to do the job at the full-time level; that was the reason why the seniors were upset. You took
away our leader. Cutting the budget for us was a bad change too. The Council can see that a cut in the budget
will also be a cut in programs. Was this what you want for us? You, the Council, keep saying no but your
actions tell us a different story, so please do the right thing. Let Senior Services be as it was. Another point I
would like to make was the Town did not need to increase the fees for some of our bus trips. These trips did not
cost the Town anything; they were paid through their own organization. Most of the seniors were on a limited
income. We enjoy our time at the Community Center, the classrooms were ideal to use when we had speakers
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 4 of 17
•
or other activities. The staff at the Community Center has always bent over backwards to help us in any way
needed. Please don't limit us in the use of classrooms; most of the time they were vacant so we were putting
them to good use. Thank you."
Dan Coughenour, 13847 N. Hamilton Drive, #102, a member of the Senior Services Advisory Commission,
addressed the Council and said he concurred with Mr. Dunne's comments and the need for an increased budget.
He stated that the members of the Commission had been actively involved in meetings with the Council, Town
Administration, and seniors since the last Council meeting. He thanked Ms. Ghetti for her prompt and detailed
responses to the group's requests for information. He said that he was still uncomfortable with the revenue
projections and wanted to have more discussions take place relative to the pricing structure for trips and
programs. He added that he would like to find some way for the proposal that had been presented to work but
said that he did not understand the proposed interaction yet. He advised that the proposal was written by
Stephanie Haddy at the Commission's request because they continued to view her as a valued resource and they
made appropriate additions/deletions. He noted that the Council and staff continues to state that they viewed the
Town's Senior Services Center as one of the top centers in Arizona and wished to see that continue and he
believed they did. He said that was the Commission's goal as well and pointed out that they got there by
forward thinking, combined with reaching out to the seniors. He noted that a 25% in membership had occurred
over the last two years, a 20% increase in participation and some terrific programming by reaching out to meet
seniors' desires. He questioned the need to go in a different direction under the new reporting structure and said
he did not think so. He thanked Karen Holloway and Stephanie Haddy for their efforts and said they should be
given the credit that they deserved.
Carrie LaPenta, 10218 N. Nicklaus Drive, President of the Fountain Hills Botanical Garden, addressed the
Council and said that the Botanical Garden originated in the 1970's and was currently being restored by the
group. All labor for trail digging and plant marking/identification was being done by them, by volunteers, and
donations from the Town and its residents. The area was currently about 19.5 acres of Town property, which
would be a nice addition to local parks. Their goal was to have a self-guided native botanical garden trail that
the public could use. It would serve as an educational, recreational,and historical addition to the many parks
already in Fountain Hills. Currently, 99% of the trail had been completed, plants had been identified, but they
were left with the issue of parking and trailhead staging areas. They only had parking along the west shoulder
of Fountain Hills Boulevard, which can be very dangerous. To access the trailhead, people must cross a large
culvert, which again can be very dangerous. The group would like to see funds used to help make the trail more
easily accessible to the residents. She said that they had acquired a verbal cost estimate for a cut-off off of
Fountain Hills Boulevard that would allow enough parking for four vehicles and turnaround room and which
would resolve the culvert issue. She reported that the estimate was $15,000 and added that the Fountain Hills
Botanical Garden would like to see funds allocated to help make this possible. In the future they also envisioned
adding sitting and viewing areas with benches and an informational kiosk. They would like to have an opening
day celebration this fall and said they would appreciate the Council's consideration regarding budgeting funds
for them.
Stephanie Haddy, 14810 E. Vista View Court, stated her objection to the proposal and said she finds it a direct
conflict of interest that the Community Center and Senior Services Center be combined because every room that
Senior Services used was a room that the Community Center was not able to rent. She added that she came to
the meeting because Mayor Nichols had said that he would entertain ideas for future revenue for Senior
Services. She pointed out that the Hooks and Needles group had been cut and stated that she did not understand
that — there were 31 people there this week. The group meets 52 weeks a year and she requested that the
program be reinstated. She said she would also like to see some monies allocated to the support groups and
advised that when she requested funds for that purpose during the budget process she was told"we're not giving
money to those people." She stated the opinion that "those people" deserve some money. She had asked for
$75.00 to help with some printing, an honorarium for a speaker, etc. —just something to help "those people."
Loy Ms. Haddy also discussed the vehicle for Senior Services and reported that they were currently using a Parks &
Recreation 15-passenger van that was entirely unsafe. She cautioned the Council relative to safety issues
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 5 of 17
associated with the continued use of this vehicle. She urged the Council to purchase a 15-passenger mini bus
that would not require a chauffeur's license and would provide seniors safer travel and boarding/unboarding.
Larry Haddy also addressed the Council and said that he was there to follow up on a letter he sent to them by e-
mail in May that raised about seven different issues. He stated that his concern was that the Council was about
to accept a budget, which as far as the seniors were concerned, contained an unresolved issue. That issue was a
10,000-pound elephant that was sitting in front of all of them and none of them were seeing it. That issue was
that the very changes and reorganization that they were talking about were done illegally back in April and he
keeps waiting for someone on the Council to address Mr. Pickering and direct him to go back to April 27th,
reinstate the program the way it was, reinstate the two Directors, if they would come back, and get moving in
the correct direction. He added that he could not believe that the Council could not take action with respect to
decisions the Town Manager made regarding personnel issues. He emphasized that the Council represented the
elected leadership of the Town and they should carry out their responsibilities. He referred to a Mayor's Coffee
that was held where the Mayor listened to the seniors' concerns and said "I hear you, I hear you, I'm going to
have Mr. Pickering meet with the seniors." Councilmember Dickey stood up and said "yes and Stephanie and
Karen, the two Directors who know more about this program than anyone else, should also be involved." The
Mayor agreed and wrote it down and directed Mr. Pickering to conduct that meeting with the seniors and Mr.
Coughenour put Karen and Stephanie on the Committee but Mr. Pickering refused to meet with them. He asked
for an explanation regarding this matter.
Burt Fischer, a resident of Eagle Mountain, addressed the Council and noted that approximately 20% of the
Town's population lives within the 16 gated communities in Town. They did not receive any Town services for
maintenance, replacement, cleaning of streets and sidewalks. In addition, maintenance of washes and bridges
were not funded or maintenance of landscaping in common areas. All of those expenses were paid for by the
people who live within the gated areas. In addition, although the Sheriff will respond to serious matters like
accidents or felonies, there was no coverage for misdemeanors such as speeding or ignoring signs. He stated
that the 5,700 citizens living within these gated communities paid the same taxes as other residents in Town and
expressed the opinion that the inconsistency in providing Town services to those residents appeared unfair but ..,„.4)
that was an issue for another day. He said that he was not there to "break the budget" but rather to enhance its
revenue stream. Mr. Fischer advised that at Eagle Mountain, the residents maintain 1,220,000 square feet of
asphalt streets and said that they needed help in the following areas where the Town had the expertise that was
needed and the residents were willing to pay a reasonable fee for: (1) Inspecting their streets to develop
specifications for repairs and seal coating (that the residents would pay for); (2) Specifying the terms for the
Requests for Proposals and evaluating responses and (3) Inspecting the work performed. He stated that these
areas were way beyond the expertise of the voluntary board and previous attempts to employ competent
contractors had been much less than satisfactory. He said that the residents of Eagle Mountain were willing to
pay the Town to conduct these services and he was sure other gated communities would be willing to follow
suit. He requested that the staff be directed to meet with them to explore the feasibility of a mutually beneficial
arrangement.
Bruce Tominello, 16208 N. Sunridge Drive, addressed the Council and expressed the opinion that Fountain Hills
was a community in crisis. He said that one mismanaged affair after another had occurred and the situation at
the Senior Center was the"straw that broke the camel's back." He called for immediate changes and expressed
the opinion that the Town Manager was responsible for bringing employee and volunteer morale to an all time
low. He questioned the Town Manager's performance both in previous employment as well as his current
position. He called upon the Town Manager to resign and to take the Town Attorney with him.
Mayor Nichols advised Mr. Tominello that he was out of order and asked him to take his seat.
Mr. Tominello refused to follow the Mayor's direction and expressed the opinion that the Mayor was spending
more and more time away from the Town. He added the opinion that things had not and would not"blow over"
and that the Mayor was ultimately the reason why the Town Manager was "out of control."
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 6 of 17
Councilmember Dickey stated that Mr. Tominello's remarks were highly inappropriate and another
Councilmember declared that Mr. Tominello's actions were out of order. Mr. Tominello responded by insisting
Ls, that he was not out of order, he was speaking under the Call to the Public.
Mr. Tominello continued to express his opinions relative to the Mayor and Town Manager's performance and
said that the citizens wanted their Town back and would not allow the Mayor or any other elected official to
stand in their way. He called upon the Mayor to have the courage to resign his position and added that should
he not tender a resignation by 5:00 p.m. on Friday, June 22, 2007, a recall process would commence on
Monday, June 25, 2007 at 10:00 a.m. He stated that this timeframe would allow the Mayor sufficient time to
straighten out the situation at the Senior Center before he leaves office. Mr. Tominello addressed the other
members of the Council and said that they could choose to "work with them or face a recall as well."
Mayor Nichols declared the public hearing closed at 7:20 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM #2— CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2007-23, ADOPTING THE TENTATIVE
BUDGET AS THE FINAL BUDGET FOR THE 2007-08 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET FOR THE TOWN
OF FOUNTAIN HILLS.
Councilmember Archambault MOVED to adopt Resolution 2007-23.
Councilmember Kehe said that he would like to have some discussion directed at the Senior Services issues and
he also had a question for Mr. Dunne. Councilmember Kehe addressed Mr. Dunne and stated that in a
document dated June 1, 2007, the Ad Hoc Subcommittee presented the Council with a proposal containing two
items that varied from Mayor Nichols' previous statements. He asked Mr. Dunne to address these items and
advise whether he was satisfied with the changes that had been made, particularly in those two areas. He said
that first, Senior Services would become a separate division of the Town and that proposal seems to be in accord
with Mr. Dunne's proposal. Mr. Dunne concurred. Councilmember Kehe added that the second item states that
a Senior Services Director or Supervisor would report directly to the Town Manager and he said he was
wondering whether Mr. Dunne was in full accord with that proposal, which in effect would require the Director
to report to the Community Center's Supervisor.
Mr. Dunne replied that this issue was discussed yesterday and he was originally in favor of having a separate
department. They had indicated that a department in this Town was something bigger than what they were
considering and they felt it would be much better to have that person working with the Community Center as a
department (working together with them). He added that he did agree with Stephanie's remarks relative to the
fact that there could be some conflicts because of the space allocations and although he could not speak for the
other members of the Committee, in his opinion that was a workable solution. He confirmed for
Councilmember Kehe that he was satisfied with the proposed changes in those areas.
Councilmember Kehe referred to Ms. Haddy's remarks relative to the fact that on one hand there was a certain
pressure on the Community Center manager to reduce the difference between expenditures and revenues and
quite possibly choices would have to be made between a use by Senior Services of a given facility as opposed to
the pressure to bring in revenue from an outside use. He requested input from Mr. Dunne.
Mr. Dunne concurred that that issue was a concern because when they were looking to rent the Community
Center and the seniors were looking to utilize the Community Center, obviously some conflicts might arise. He
added that earlier this evening he heard some people say that when the space was available, the seniors would
like to use it. He noted that there were some rooms available and noted that the Hooks and Needles group had
been meeting at the Senior Center in the old Library, etc. and now they had been eliminated from the budget
because of space he presumed. He emphasized the importance of working out those types of conflicts so that
the programs that they wanted for Senior Services could continue.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 7 of 17
Councilmember Kehe asked how Mr. Dunne believed problems such as the one just mentioned could be worked
out in the proposed organization and Mr. Dunne responded that scheduling, in his opinion, would be the main
conflict that might arise. He added that if the Senior Services Supervisor and the Community Center Supervisor
worked together to set the Senior Services agenda and then rent around that, they could certainly live with that
situation.
Councilmember Kehe asked Mr. Dunne what he viewed the role of the Commission would be in the
reorganization. Mr. Dunne stated the opinion that the Senior Services Commission being new this year really
did not understand their role. They had no input into the budget or job descriptions/positions. Their only input
was receiving a monthly report that said everything was running smoothly and then suddenly, on April 27th, they
found out differently. He stated that he envisioned the Commission meeting on a monthly basis, hearing from
the citizens, hearing from the supervisors of those two departments to determine how the departments were
functioning together. He said that what they were trying to avoid was moving backwards into the situation
where they tried to run this as an independent corporation. They did not have a building, they did not have
space, they did not have the money coming in to run it and it should be a social service provided by the Town.
That was what they were trying to work with and that was why they wanted to achieve a compromise with the
Town so they could carry on and move forward in a positive manner.
Councilmember Kehe thanked Mr. Dunne for his input.
Vice Mayor McMahan asked whether it would be possible to add a stated role directly within the proposal for
the Senior Services Advisory Commission.
Mr. Dunne said that administratively, he did not see that a commission would be able to become involved in that
kind of situation. He said he believed the Council had to work with the Town Manager and the Commission had
to work with their supervisors at the Senior Center; they were not a governing board and they did not make
those kinds of decisions. The Vice Mayor said he was thinking more in the line of a day-to-day or month-to-
month role.
Councilmember Leger noted that the Commission's Charter outlined their responsibilities and stated the opinion
that if those duties were fulfilled and the Town worked with the Commission in that regard, those things would
be accomplished.
Mr. Dunne concurred with Councilmember Leger's remarks and said that in the monthly reports they received it
appeared that everything had been going fine; they had not heard anything about a budget shortfall and so they
were taken by surprise in April. He added that that was as much their fault as anyone else's.
Councilmember Leger commented that there was room for improvement in terms of how the Commission
interfaced with the Council and the Town Manager,etc.
Mayor Nichols stated that this came under the Town a little less than a year ago and he believed it was a
learning experience for both the Advisory Commission and the Town on how to manage this function. He
added that they had to forget the past and work in a positive manner in the future as they moved forward with
the proper organizational structure in place. He said that the reorganization was an attempt to respond to the Ad
Hoc Committee's recommendations.
Mayor Nichols asked Mr. Dunne how much money he would like to see the Council add to the budget for the
seniors for the upcoming fiscal year. Mr. Dunne replied that $30,000 would probably cover new programs,
revised programs, and things that needed to be included in the Senior Services area without any cuts.
Mayor Nichols stated the opinion that the figure was probably appropriate when they look at last year's budget,
growth in membership, etc.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 8 of 17
•
Mr. Dunne discussed the point raised by Ms. Haddy relative to the need for a vehicle and said that the Boys &
Girls Club got rid of all their vans because they were unsafe and the Senior Services van was sold for the same
reason. He stressed the importance of pursuing this issue either through a grant or some other method that
would allow them to obtain a safe,usable vehicle for seniors,children and/or any adults.
Additional discussion ensued relative to revenues and expenditures for the Senior Services and leaving the
selection of programs up to the supervisors.
Councilmember Archambault said that his goal all along was to try and schedule/price events at the Center that
would encourage participation. He stated that the $30,000 under expenditures seemed to be appropriate and
would help to encourage participation. He added that they were anticipating between 1,000 and 1,100 members
this year and Councilmember Archambault commented that he just wanted to be sure in his own mind that they
were providing sufficient funding that would encourage senior participation in the programs.
Mr. Dunne agreed that the trips must be both attractive and affordable.
In response to a question from Councilmember Archambault, Finance Director Julie Ghetti stated that the
current proposed revenues were a reflection of the programs and she did not believe that the figure was inflated.
She said that if they were to add money to the Senior Services budget then she would assume that some
revenues would increase as well but she would hesitate to increase that number. She noted that the proposed
amount was agreed to based upon the number of programs so if there were going to be more programs she was
even more comfortable with that number.
Councilmember Archambault addressed Mr. Dunne and said that the Commission was the eyes and ears of the
Council and added that he would expect the members to come back to the Council if a need arose so that the
Council could address the situation in a proper manner.
Le Mr. Dunne agreed and said that Councilmember Archambault's point was well taken. He added that they
probably should have some type of indoctrination session for new Commissioners when formed. He noted that
if they had met with the Community Center Commission they probably would have learned better what their
role was.
Councilmember Leger MOVED to increase the Contract Services, which includes the program budgets, trips,
activities, etc. from the current $88,173 to $118,173, a $30,000 total increase and Vice Mayor McMahan
SECONDED the motion. The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
Councilmember Leger commented on the fact that the Council received the proposed budget quite some time
ago and said it was important to understand that the budget was a proposal. He had the opportunity to attend the
Mayor's Coffees and the Advisory Commissions' special meetings and had listened and learned a great deal.
He added that the Councilmembers independently look at the budget and there were items that caught his
attention. He noted that in the 05-06 Fiscal Year, revenues were $66,000 and in the current year they were
projected to be $66,000 and they might hit $70,000. When he looked at the Senior Services Center his
viewpoint was that when you take on this responsibility, you had to understand that it was not a profit center, it
was a cost center and the Town had to determine what level of obligation it wanted to assume. He said that they
must come to the realization that fees and costs were part of the formula but they should not rule.
Councilmember Leger MOVED to lower the revenue projections for the seniors, which were currently at
$127,750 to$80,000.
Councilmember Leger explained that his rationale for doing so was to take pressure off whoever was managing
with respect to fees and what those fees need to be. He added that additional program dollars and a decrease in
revenue would hopefully result in more affordable trips/events for that important segment of the community.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 9 of 17
Councilmember Kehe SECONDED the motion.
Councilmember Dickey asked Ms. Ghetti what the effect would be on the overall budget. Ms. Ghetti responded
that what they would effectively be doing was increasing the budget by$30,000, which meant they had to take it Noir
from somewhere else. If they decreased the revenues by $40,000 that was another $40,000 they would have to
take from somewhere else.
Councilmember Dickey asked whether they could keep the revenue projections at that amount but look at it as
just that,a projection that did not have any punitive value if the amount was not achieved.
Councilmember Leger responded that for him it was a "mind set." He noted that the $127,000 should be
lowered to $80,000 because he believed it took the management philosophy away from spending so much time
trying to develop and design a program and operation that hits what he felt was an unrealistic revenue target. He
had added the numbers up; the Council reduced a contract at a previous meeting by $25,000, so he believed that
covered the cost of increasing the contract services and program budget. He added that in terms of making up
the other $40,000, he was prepared to make other changes to the budget to recover at least $50,000. He
indicated his willingness to outline his recommendations at this time if the Council so desired. He added that
the money was there.
There being no additional discussion on the issue,the Mayor called for a vote on the motion.
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
Councilmember Archambault MOVED that the proposal submitted by the Ad Hoc Committee move forward
and that Senior Services become a separate entity combined with the Community Center under the Town of
Fountain Hills and that the Supervisor report directly to the Community Center Supervisor who would report to
the Town Manager in order to encourage and enhance two-way communication.
Councilmember Dickey SECONDED the motion.
There being no further discussion on this issue, the Mayor called for a vote.
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
Councilmember Leger asked whether there was anything left to discuss as far as the Senior Services budget.
Councilmember Schlum commented that there was still some sensitivity surrounding the space allocation issue
and some of the programs. He said that he believed that the Commission would actively become involved in
these matters and questioned whether it would be appropriate to conduct quarterly oversight meetings to ensure
that things get off to a good start(discuss space allocations,etc.).
Mayor Nichols stated that he would not want to tell the Advisory Commission members what to did but he
believed what Councilmember Schlum was saying was they should ask them to come back to the Council when
they wanted to talk about issues and then a couple of Councilmembers could meet with them on a quarterly
basis to discuss whatever items they brought forward.
Councilmember Schlum stressed the importance of letting the Commissioners know that Council and staff were
interested in playing a role and staying in contact so he would encourage that to occur over the next six months
to ensure that they got off on the right foot.
There being no additional items of discussion relative to senior-related budget issues, the Council moved on to
other areas of the budget.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 10 of 17
Councilmember Leger stated that he had looked closely at the downtown Development Program and said that
part of the Assistant to the Town Manager's salary was paid out of that excise tax, the downtown Development
Low fee. Currently, 75% of the salary of the Assistant to the Town Manager came from the downtown Development
Program.
Councilmember Leger MOVED that 50% (rather than 75%) of the Assistant to the Town Manager's salary be
taken out of the downtown Development Program budget (fees) and that the other 25% be allocated back to
General Administration. Councilmember Schlum SECONDED the motion for discussion purposes.
Councilmember Schlum requested more detail relative to the reasoning behind Councilmember Leger's motion.
Councilmember Leger stated the opinion that it was difficult to accept that 75% of the Assistant to the Town
Manager's time would be spent on downtown economic development and that was a hardship on that budget.
He added that he believed that 50% was a fair assessment and it was simply a matter of distributing the other
25% to another portion of the budget and that salary would typically be under General Administration. The net
was that at the end of the year, hopefully, there would be more dollars remaining in that fund for what it was
intended for,downtown development and downtown development projects.
Councilmember Archambault commented that he agreed with Councilmember Leger's philosophy and said that
he had some concerns as well.
In response to Councilmember Kehe, Councilmember Leger emphasized that approval of his motion would not
downgrade economic development in any sense. He said that he was simply trying to take the burden off and he
believed that 50%of the Assistant's salary rather than 75% was a more appropriate way to allocate the funding.
Mayor Nichols called for a vote on the motion.
LThe motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
Councilmember Dickey referred to remarks made earlier in the meeting relative to the Town's Botanical Garden
and asked whether funding for that purpose could come out of the development fee portion of the budget for
open space.
Mr. Pickering advised that he did not believe they had listed that item as a capital project but added that staff
could look at that since it did have to do with beautifying the Town's open space. He said that was something
they could review but he could not guarantee at this time that the funds could be used for that purpose.
Mayor Nichols asked whether a motion was needed to allocate $15,000 to improve the Botanical Gardens. Mr.
Pickering said that the Council could make a motion and vote on it but cautioned against identifying specific
funds to cover the allocation at this time.
Councilmember Dickey MOVED that $15,000 be allocated for improvement of the Town's Botanical Garden
and Councilmember Leger SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
Councilmember Dickey advised that she had been talking with Mr. Pickering about right-turn signals from Shea
to Saguaro and three-way stop signs on Avenue of the Fountains and perhaps one day that becoming a
pedestrian crossing. It was her understanding that even if they did not do those kinds of things tonight, there
was an opportunity to do them later. She said that she wanted to share that information.
Councilmember Dickey commented that the Mayor had every right to control personal attacks and expressed
the opinion that they erode themselves as a community (and she had lived in Fountain Hills for 24 years) when
this occurred and there were other ways to do things. She added that everyone of course had the right to an
opinion.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 11 of 17
Councilmember Dickey stated that she had asked whether they were going to be doing any roofing repairs over
the year and there did not seem to be any in this budget at this time but that would probably come into play
when they discussed some of the environmental issues later on this year.
Councilmember Dickey said that she wanted to talk about the budget for the Council because discussion had
taken place relative to the fact that it appeared to have gone up. She noted that a large portion of the increase
was the result of the addition of contracting for services to pursue some of the goals that they had identified.
Councilmember Dickey noted that they had a lot of talks relative to sharing playgrounds with the School District
and that discussion had been put off for a while but there will be a lot of opportunity for input on that issue.
Vice Mayor McMahan asked whether the budget contained an allocation for the Sister Cities (matching fund)
and Mayor Nichols advised that there was no allocation at this time but it was his intent to make the
recommendation that the Council add $10,000 to the budget for the Sister Cities. He noted that this was a team
program and said that the Town was trying to pay half of the cost to allow high school youths to visit the
Town's Sister Cities. He said that if the students raised half of the necessary funding, the Town would then
have the monies in place to cover the remaining half. Mayor Nichols emphasized that the program was a
matching funds program and the funds would not be given to the Sister Cities organization to spend in whatever
manner they chose, the matching funds would be used for the youths.
Mayor Nichols MOVED that $10,000 be allocated in the budget to serve as matching funds for the Town's
youth as part of the Sister Cities program and Vice Mayor McMahan SECONDED the motion.
Councilmember Dickey commented on the fact that the Council just went through a difficult policy change as
far as removing the Town from making these types of value judgments (determining who was deserving, etc.)
and they decided to go with what they thought the Town should do as far as needs and services and then contract
out for them. She said that this appeared to be going back to that same practice of making grants to non-profits.
She added that she would support, through the course of the year, looking at whether the Town felt it had a
cultural or educational reason to contract like they did for other future contract services. She said that this
particular issue appeared a little too non-specific and the amount was not related to an actual or projected
expense. She added that it also did not have a broad enough appeal to her at this time to warrant spending
taxpayer money on it.
Councilmember Schlum stated that setting aside the funding was a nice gesture but said he believed they had to
consider Councilmember Dickey's remarks and identify whether there were ways this could be brought into the
same process of identifying services for which they contracted out.
Mayor Nichols agreed that there would had to be a process in place before funding was released but said that he
did not want this to go by because if they did come up with a process, the money could not be added to the
budget later on. He said that they could set up some parameters to be followed.
Councilmember Schlum asked where the funding would come from and said he was aware of the fact that 50%
of the total cost must be raised by the individuals themselves before Town monies were allocated to Sister
Cities. Mayor Nichols clarified that the monies would not be allocated to Sister Cities. The Town would write
the checks to the individual youths who qualified and the organization would not have control over the monies.
Mayor Nichols said that that type of request for services could probably come in the following year but said he
would hate to have to put this off for another 18 months.
Councilmember Archambault asked how funding had been handled in the past and the Mayor explained that
Sister Cities was part of the Civic Association, which was funded by grants from the Sunridge Foundation and
other contributions. He noted that the grants had since gone away and Sister Cities had broken away from the
Civic Association and formed their own 501 3(c)trust.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 12 of 17
Councilmember Archambault said that he would like to become more familiar with the parameters (i.e. how did
a student qualify other than by raising 50% of the needed funds) and said that he would like to have more
Loy discussion on this issue next year.
Councilmember Schlum stated that it would be great to show some support, particularly for the recent efforts
regarding the Town's new Sister City, and said that perhaps they could allocate some funding for this fiscal year
and agreed to have the same contractual relationship with the Sister Cities organization before monies were
allocated (some constraints). He added that perhaps they could allocate $4,000 or $5,000 this year to get it
started and then fold it in through the contract process.
Councilmember Dickey said it was her understanding that there was $2,500 set aside in the budget for a
reception and asked whether the reception would be open to the public. Mr. Pickering advised that it would be
open to the public. Councilmember Dickey commented that she supported the reception because it would be
open to the public, attract attention, and, hopefully,participation, grants and/or private donations. She suggested
that they use the $2,500, publicize the program, see whether it received support and then see where they went
from there. She added that she was not ready to put any more in the budget for this purpose at this time.
Councilmember Leger asked whether the $10,000 funding being proposed was in addition to the $2,500 and
Mayor Nichols confirmed that it was. Councilmember Leger said that he would be comfortable looking at
different places in the Council's budget, taking $2,500 and moving it into Sister Cities and increasing the
amount from$2,500 to $5,000.
Councilmember Schlum indicated support for the rebirth of the Sister Cities organization within the community
and said that he believed that the reception was geared towards doing that. He added that he would suggest
$5,000 rather than $10,000 for this fiscal year be infused into that effort only when those monies could be
matched so the money would not be given away until it had been earned. He noted that the monies would be
used strictly for transportation purposes. He stated that he viewed the reception as a different function and
lbw recommended that they reduce the $10,000 to $5,000 and leave the $2,500 in place for the reception. He noted
that the$5,000 would then be available if in fact the matching funds were earned.
Mayor Nichols commented that funding should also be contingent upon the Sister Cities organization coming up
with selection criteria(how the youths would qualify to go to any of the Town's three Sister Cities).
Councilmember Leger said that he was feeling more comfortable with the $5,000 amount in addition to the
$2,500 but said that the only way he could support the $5,000 allocation was if it came out of the existing
Council budget. He pointed out that the Council's budget had funding set aside for supplies and services,
conferences and continuing education and stated that he would be willing to reduce the Council's continuing
education fund for the education of the youths in terms of exchange programs.
Mayor Nichols said that the Council typically provided the Town Manager with the flexibility to move things
around in the budget when the Council decided to make a particular change.
Councilmember Leger explained that his goal was not to increase the Council's budget any more than it was.
Mayor Nichols stated that there were other areas of the budget where the monies could be utilized. The Mayor
added that the Council should advise the Town Manager of the changes they wanted made and then ask him for
input relative to the best way to did it. Councilmember Leger reiterated that he did not want the Council's
budget to increase by $5,000 and reiterated that the money allocated in the budget for Council's education
would be a good place to start(providing funding for students).
Councilmember Dickey said that they put so much effort into determining how to handle this type of situation in
the future, not having community committees and figuring out who was deserving and asked what they would
do next year if something very similar and worthy comes forward.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 13 of 17
Mayor Nichols stated that he believed what he heard from both Councilmember Schlum and Councilmember
Archambault was that they should put together a Request for Proposals (RFP)for this purpose next year(say we
want to provide these types of services and then put it out and let people bid on it). He said that what they were ,taii)
discussing this evening was just an interim measure so that they did not have to wait 18 months to get it going.
Mayor Nichols MOVED to amend his motion to state that that $5,000 be allocated in the budget to serve as
matching funds for the Town's youth as part of the Sister Cities program and Vice Mayor McMahan
SECONDED the motion.
In response to a question from Councilmember Kehe, Mayor Nichols said that his intent would be for the
monies to come out of Youth Services and that an RFP be issued to solicit another contractor to provide the
Youth Services.
Councilmember Dickey commented that at that point they would be trying to make a decision on whether they
think that a Town function should be to pay for youths to be Sister Cities exchange students.
Councilmember Schlum said that he was not looking at continuing this on to next year; he was looking at
helping them get a start this year. He stated the opinion that once it got started,this was the type of organization
that could be self-funding. He added that next year the Council should look another at the entire process and
determine where they felt Town contracted services should be placed.
The motion CARRIED by majority vote(5-2 with Councilmembers Dickey and Archambault voting nay).
Councilmember Kehe referred to Page 65 of the budget and asked whether the Town had received an RFP on
tourism yet. Mr. Pickering advised that an RFP had been received but added that they were still working on the
contract.
Councilmember Kehe said that from time to time he had heard complaints from citizens (both viewers of Nod
Channel 11 and audience members)relative to the fact that the only thing they saw when speakers addressed the
Council were the speakers' backsides. He spoke with a person who was manning the camera a few months ago
and he was advised that they were going to include in their bid a system that would provide a facial view of the
speakers. He asked whether anything relative to this had been included in the proposed budget.
Mr. Pickering informed Councilmember Kehe that funding had been included in the budget for this purpose
(improved camera system). He confirmed that the improvements would take place during the 07-08 Fiscal Year.
Councilmember Kehe also commented on the significant increase in funding for the Sheriff's Department and
requested that Mr.Pickering provide input relative to this area.
Mr. Pickering advised that basically the Town would be receiving more service and a Sergeant as well as a
Clerk to manage the window downstairs when Town Hall was open had been added. He reported that the
largest increase was from the employee salary increase that all County Sheriff employees had received. The
cost of personnel had gone up. If the County's costs for our personnel increased, the Town had to pay for that.
The amount also covers the cost of dispatching and explained that the Town was now paying on a per-call basis,
which he believed was the most fair, because if there were not many calls, the Town did not have to pay but if
the calls went up, they would have to pay more (an $80,000 difference). He noted that the overall law
enforcement cost was approximately the same as it was five years ago.
Councilmember Kehe said that in the performance pad, they had talked about a stage covered facility for
dressing rooms for performers, etc. He asked what the status was on this issue. Mr. Pickering advised that
monies were included in the current budget to look into what needed there. He added the opinion that that
would be more of a public/private partnership between the Town and hopefully some of the community groups
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 14 of 17
that would come forward. He stated that this was in its infancy and they would probably study it more during
the upcoming year.
Councilmember Kehe stated the opinion that they had to take a look at their Development Fee revenue and they
would be "missing the boat" if they did not re-evaluate that. He said that the Town Attorney mentioned that it
would be possible to connect Development Fees to rising construction costs and since they were talking about
revenue, he would like to hear some more on this issue, i.e. raising the fees or at least analyzing them and tying
them to construction costs so there would be automatic increases.
Town Attorney Andrew McGuire responded that in terms of this year's budget and allocating funds for a study,
the Town Manager would have to provide his input. He said as far as efforts this year at the Legislature with
Senate Bill 1423, he had spent countless hours discussing issues with the Homebuilders Association in order to
arrive at an agreement. If the Town wished to amend the Development Fees in any way, there was now an
Infrastructure Improvements Plan component that needed to go along with it, but the Town had already been
doing that anyway so that portion really would not affect them but it would be an addition that would have to be
added into the fee study. Most importantly, the provision in the Bill this year allowed for the addition of an
automatic indexing feature. All they had to do was identify an index that would roughly track construction costs
and staff rejected and successfully fought back efforts to identify that index in the statute because they wanted to
make sure that they were identifying the proper index for whatever the fee was; it might not be the same for
each of the fees. If the Town Council would like to go back and amend the Development Fee provisions for the
Town to include an automatic indexing provision for each one of the fees that would be allowable 90 days after
the Bill was signed, whenever that occurred. He estimated that that effective date would be sometime in late
September. They would have to do an amendment to the study in order to do that.
Mr. Pickering noted that no money had been allocated for that purpose this year and said he did not know how
much it would cost to conduct the analysis of the index. He agreed that it was a smart idea and said that staff
would be happy to pursue this matter.
Councilmember Kehe said he just wanted to make the point that they might be missing the boat and they did not
have to wait two years.
Councilmember Schlum asked whether they needed to allocate funds to look into this and Mr. Pickering
confirmed that they would need to do that and suggested allocating $10,000. He said he was not sure whether
that amount would cover the entire cost but it was a good place to start.
Councilmember Kehe MOVED that the Council allocate $10,000 to conduct a Development Fee study and
Councilmember Schlum SECONDED the motion.
Councilmember Leger asked whether they were talking about capital and Mr. Pickering stated that it would be
contract services. He added that the study would just be for the indexing increase, it was not for a full-blown
study, which would cost$100,000 or more.
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
Councilmember Leger commented that in light of everything the Council had discussed this evening, the
motions he was about to make would seem minor in terms of dollar amounts. Looking at the budget(Page 53)
under Professional Services they had $3,500 allocated to Performance Management (Evaluations) and $12,200
allocated to Customer Service Surveys. He believed that that the money should be re-allocated to General
Administration because they needed to establish those line items or roll those into Contract Services for General
Administration. He wanted to incorporate that into the culture of the Town organization. He had no idea what
Councils in the future would do in terms of budgeting for Performance Management or Customer Service
Surveys.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 15 of 17
Councilmember Leger MOVED that monies currently allocated in the budget under Professional Services
($3,500) for Performance Management (Evaluations) and Customer Service Surveys ($12,200) be re-allocated
to General Administration. Councilmember Kehe SECONDED the motion. ,4011)
Councilmember Archambault said that historically the Performance Evaluations was the Council's Performance
and Evaluation monies allocated to review the Town Manager's performance. He stated the opinion that this
should stay in the Council's budget. He added that the Customer Service Surveys should probably be in the
Public Information Office's budget. He spoke in opposition to moving the$3,500 to General Administration.
Mayor Nichols concurred with Councilmember Archambault's remarks relative to the$3,500.
Councilmember Schlum stated that he understood that Councilmember Leger's intent was to remove the items
from under the Council's purview and make them more of something that would be on an on-going basis
(regular line item in the Administrative budget).
Mayor Nichols called for a vote on the motion.
The motion CARRIED by majority vote (5-2 with Mayor Nichols and Councilmember Archambault voting
nay).
Councilmember Leger referred to the Capital Improvements portion of the budget and noted that monies were
allocated in the amount of$100,000 for a water feature.
Councilmember Leger MOVED to reduce the amount of Capital Improvement dollars allocated for a new water
feature from$100,000 to$50,000.
The motion FAILED for lack of a second.
Councilmember Leger asked whether the Council needed to make up some dollars for some of the changes that
occurred this evening. He requested that Ms. Ghetti provide some input into this issue.
Mayor Nichols requested that Mr.Pickering respond to Councilmember Leger's question.
Mr. Pickering advised that decisions relative to adjustments were typically left up to staff to decide. He said that
they were probably talking close to $100,000 and he knew they had $30,000 under the Community Theater that
was not allocated and an additional $45,000 for a study in Public Works that would not be conducted. He stated
the opinion that staff would not have a problem making up the remaining difference.
Mayor Nichols commented that there was$75,000 in the Contingency Fund.
Mayor Nichols called for a vote on approving Resolution 2007-03 as amended, adopting the tentative budget as
the final budget for the 2007-08 Fiscal Year budget for the Town of Fountain Hills.
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
AGENDA ITEM#3—ADJOURNMENT.
Councilmember Schlum MOVED to adjourn the meeting and Councilmember Leger SECONDED the motion,
which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The meeting adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
J
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 16 of 17
TOWN OF FO TAIN HILLS
114
By itg/
W,lly Nichols,Mayor
ATTEST AND
PREPARED BY:
Bevelyn J. nd ,Town Clerk
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes were a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Special Session
held by the Town Council of Fountain Hills on the 7th day of June 2007. I further certify that the meeting was
duly called and that a quorum was present.
DATED this 21st day of June 2007.
Bevelyn J. B der own Clerk
(1160,
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 special session meeting minutes.doc Page 17 of 17
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR AND EXECUTIVE SESSION OF THE
FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL
June 7,2007
Mayor Nichols called the meeting to order at 5:00 p.m.
AGENDA ITEM #1 — ROLL CALL AND VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION: PURSUANT
TO A.R.S. 38-431.03(A)(4), FOR DISCUSSION OR CONSULTATION 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 LITIGATION.
(SPECIFICALLY, (A) A POSSIBLE LICENSE AGREEMENT WITH MCO AND (B) THE FIREROCK
TAX LITIGATION.)
ROLL CALL—Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Mayor
Nichols, Councilmember Kehe, Councilmember Leger, Vice Mayor McMahan, Councilmember Archambault
and Councilmember Dickey. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire, Town Manager Tim Pickering, Parks and
Recreation Director Mark Mayer, Assistant to the Town Manager Kate Zanon, and Town Clerk Bev Bender
were also present.
Councilmember Archambault MOVED to convene the Executive Session and Councilmember Dickey
SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present.
(Councilmember Schlum arrived at the meeting at 5:03 p.m.)
Councilmember Kehe MOVED to adjourn the Executive Session at 6:05 p.m. and Councilmember Schlum
SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0)
AGENDA ITEM#2—RETURN TO REGULAR SESSION
Mayor Nichols reconvened the Regular Session at 8:40 p.m.
INVOCATION—Pastor David Iverson,Fountain Hills Christian Center
ROLL CALL—Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council: Mayor
Nichols, Councilmember Kehe, Councilmember Leger, Vice Mayor McMahan, Councilmember Schlum,
Councilmember Archambault and Councilmember Dickey. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire, Town Manager
Tim Pickering and Town Clerk Bev Bender were also present.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES/PRESENTATIONS.
None.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC
None.
CONSENT AGENDA
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 1 of 16
•
Councilmember Archambault requested that Agenda Items #12 and #13 be pulled from Consent and placed on
the Regular Agenda and Vice Mayor McMahan requested that Agenda Item #14 be pulled from Consent and
(how placed on the Regular Agenda.
AGENDA ITEM #1 —CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE TOWN COUNCIL
MEETING MINUTES FROM MAY 17,2007.
AGENDA ITEM #2 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING A LIQUOR LICENSE APPLICATION
FOR TIMOTHY KERSEY (FOUNTAIN VIEW VILLAGE) FOR A CLASS 12 — RESTAURANT
LICENSE,LOCATED AT 16455 EAST AVENUE OF THE FOUNTAINS,FOUNTAIN HILLS.
AGENDA ITEM #3 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING A CONSTRUCTION MANAGER AT
RISK AGREEMENT WITH VALLEY RAIN CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION IN THE AMOUNT
OF $29,404.87 FOR PRE-CONSTRUCTION PHASE SERVICES RELATED TO CONSTRUCTION OF
FOUNTAIN PARK—PHASES 4 & 5 IMPROVEMENTS.
AGENDA ITEM #4 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH INFINITY
ELECTRIC IN THE AMOUNT OF $110,500 FOR THE DESERT VISTA NEIGHBORHOOD PARK—
DOG LIGHTING PROJECT.
AGENDA ITEM #5 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING RESOLUTION 2007-24, ABANDONING
WHATEVER RIGHT, TITLE OR INTEREST THE TOWN HAS IN A PORTION OF THE CERTAIN
PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED AT THE SOUTHERLY PROPERTY LINE OF PLAT
603B,BLOCK 4,LOT 2(15639 E. CHOLLA DRIVE)AS RECORDED IN BOOK 161 OF MAPS,PAGE
41,RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY,ARIZONA. EA07-05 (WAMBOLDT).
AGENDA ITEM #6 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING RESOLUTION 2007-25, ABANDONING
WHATEVER RIGHT, TITLE OR INTEREST THE TOWN HAS IN THE CERTAIN PUBLIC
UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENT LOCATED AT THE NORTHWESTERLY PROPERTY
LINE OF PLAT 506B, BLOCK 1, LOT 18 (14970 E. ASPEN DRIVE) AS RECORDED IN BOOK 159
OF MAPS,PAGE 3,RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY,ARIZONA. EA07-08(TERRILL)
AGENDA ITEM #7 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING RESOLUTION 2007-29, ABANDONING
WHATEVER RIGHT, TITLE OR INTEREST THE TOWN HAS IN THE CERTAIN PUBLIC
UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWESTERLY PROPERTY
LINE OF PLAT 017, BLOCK 14, LOT 06 (14822 N. DEERSKIN DRIVE) AS RECORDED IN BOOK
141 OF MAPS,PAGE 18,RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY,ARIZONA. EA07-11 (NEMIRE)
AGENDA ITEM #8 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING RESOLUTION 2007-30, ABANDONING
WHATEVER RIGHT, TITLE OR INTEREST THE TOWN HAS IN THE CERTAIN PUBLIC
UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS LOCATED AT THE SOUTHEASTERLY PROPERTY
LINE OF PLAT 204, BLOCK 9, LOT 13 (17027 E. WINDCHIME DRIVE) AS RECORDED IN BOOK
142 OF MAPS,PAGE 10,RECORDS OF MARICOPA COUNTY,ARIZONA. EA07-08(PUCKETT).
AGENDA ITEM #9 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING RESOLUTION 2007-18, AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH MARICOPA COUNTY ANIMAL CARE AND
CONTROL FOR ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES FOR FY 2008-10.
AGENDA ITEM #10 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING RESOLUTION 2007-27, AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH MARICOPA COUNTY ANIMAL CARE AND
CONTROL FOR ANIMAL SHELTER SERVICES FOR FY2008-10.
AGENDA ITEM #11 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING RESOLUTION 2007-26, AMENDING
AND RESTATING THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE FOUNTAIN
HILLS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT NO.98 AND THE TOWN FOR JOINT USE OF FACILITIES.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 2 of 16
Councilmember Archambault MOVED to approve the Consent Agenda as listed (with Agenda Items #12, 13
and 14 moved to the Regular Agenda)and Councilmember Dickey SECONDED the motion.
A roll call vote was taken with the following results:
Councilmember Kehe Aye
Councilmember Schlum Aye
Councilmember Leger Aye
Councilmember Dickey Aye
Mayor Nichols Aye
Vice Mayor McMahan Aye
Councilmember Archambault Aye
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
REGULAR AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM #12 — CONSIDERATION OF CONSENTING TO FORMATION OF THE
GOLDFIELD PRESERVE DOMESTIC WATER IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT PURSUANT TO
ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES SECTION 48-902(G) AND APPROVING THE TOWN
MANAGER'S DRAFT LETTER OF CONSENT TO GOLDFIELD PRESERVE DEVELOPMENT,
L.L.C.DATED JUNE 7,2007.
Councilmember Leger MOVED to table this agenda item and Councilmember Schlum SECONDED the
motion.
Town Manager Tim Pickering addressed the Council and said that he would like to provide an explanation of
this agenda item. He added that a representative from the group making the request was also present in the
audience and had additional information to present that Mr.Pickering had no prior knowledge of.
'..itiii)
Mr. Pickering advised that this agenda item had to do with a request from a development company to start a
Water Improvement District. The law was that within a six-mile radius of the District the applicant must ask the
municipalities for approval.
Vice Mayor McMahan stated that the situation was very similar to when Fountain Hills incorporated as they had
to have the permission of any town within a five-mile radius.
Councilmember Archambault said that he needed more information on this issue and that was why he tended to
agree with Councilmember Leger's motion to table. He stated that he wanted sufficient time to review the
matter and make sure that they were not making any mistakes as far as the Town's water rights even though
they did not serve the citizens of the Town with a municipal water company; they utilized a private water
company. He stressed the importance of taking a cautious look at this issue and added that he would like to
obtain additional information and possibly discuss the matter at a Work Study Session.
Mayor Nichols asked whether there were any time pressures associated with this item and Mr. Pickering
responded that there were. He suggested that the Council might want to allow the representative to address
them regarding this item.
Wendy Riddell with the law firm of Barry & Damore, L.L.C., 6750 E. Camelback, Scottsdale, addressed the
Council and said that she was representing Goldfield Preserve Development, L.L.C. (a part of the Ellman
Companies). She said that they were in the process of amending a Development Master Plan for the Preserve
out at Goldfield Ranch. It was essentially a 2,200-acre development in Goldfield Ranch that was planned in
1995. They were proposing an amendment that cuts the density in half, doubled the open space, removed the
commercial, and was essentially much more sensitive to the desert environment and the rural nature of
„ow)Goldfield Ranch. As part of that planning process, they had been working very hard to grow the infrastructure
for the project out of the ground;there was no water company in that area or a sewer company. They essentially
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 3 of 16
had to figure out how to organically grow these utilities. One of their best options was to form a domestic water
district. That district did not mean that they would not contract with Fountain Hills (Chaparral) if they wanted
Le to enter into a contract and provide water or ultimately contract with the Tribe to provide water. It was simply a
mechanism that would be established to give them the ability to figure out the best alternative for providing
water to the site. It did not preclude any of the other options on the table.
Ms. Riddell added that there was some time pressure associated with this issue, namely the fact that in order for
Maricopa County to approve the amendment, one of the things they, the applicant, had to have was the
Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) Regional Council amendment approved. In order to do that,
they had to prove that they had this Domestic Water Improvement District (DWID) formed. If you backed up
each of those line items there became some fairly significant time pressure on getting this particular DWID
formed. She understood that this was not a Council problem, it was their problem, and something they were
trying to do in order to develop the site. The applicant was requesting a letter from the Town Council indicating
that the Council did not object to the formation of the DWID (ultimately the applicant might come back to
Chaparral or the Tribe and ask for water service for their project).
Councilmember Dickey asked what the role of the County Board of Supervisors would be and Ms. Riddell
responded that the Board would be forming it but there would actually be members from the Ellman Companies
that would be sitting on the actual Board.
Councilmember Leger thanked Ms. Riddell for her presentation and said that he did not take exception with
anything she had said. However, from a Council perspective and his rationale for tabling the item, he simply
needed more information and perhaps the developer had the necessary information. He stated that the applicant
was asking for consent and Ms. Riddell had clarified that the applicant was asking for "no objection."
Councilmember Leger said that what he read in the motion was "consent and formation of Goldfield Preserve
Domestic Water Improvement District". He asked if there was a formation of this DWID, had studies been
conducted, did they know what the impact was going to be on the aquifer, did they know how that was going to
Le impact the groundwater in the surrounding area? He said that was the information he needed and that was why
he had requested this item be tabled.
Ms. Riddell stated that they had been working on the project for two years and significant studies had been
conducted (master water and wastewater) but she respectfully pointed out that that was not the issue this
evening. The issue tonight was simply the formation of the legal mechanism to go out and make that
determination and negotiation where the water rights were to come from and how to physically serve the
property with water. The formation of the DWID did not necessarily mean that they would tap into the aquifer
or take the water; it simply meant there had been a legal entity formed to figure that out.
Councilmember Schlum said that the motion to table made sense to him because the Council was trying to
understand why they were being asked to oversee this or not hold back their consent. He added that he did not
know why they were being given this responsibility so he would like to understand what was behind that.
Town Attorney Andrew McGuire stated that he believed this statute was enacted for the same purpose as the
incorporation statute that involved a six-mile radius and served as a "buffer zone" into which most
municipalities might want to interject their own incorporation or annexation to prevent someone from
incorporating an area. This case involved providing domestic water and because of the location of the Tribe and
the fact that the Town did not currently provide domestic water,the issue was coming before them. Although it
would probably be difficult to provide domestic water to this area, they were within the six-mile zone
nonetheless. So it was a protection statute for the Town to make sure that if we provided those services they
were not unduly infringed upon by the new provider.
Discussion ensued relative to the fact that Mr. McGuire believed that if the Town wrote the letter referred to by
Ms. Riddell, it would in fact be giving its consent and the Town's participation at that point would be to be as
everyone else's would be, appearing at the hearings, before the Corporation Commission, etc; the fact that the
Town Manager was a member of MAG and therefore would be able to provide such input, and the fact that the
vibe Town's involvement would only be in this "front end."
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 4 of 16
Councilmember Schlum said that concern was the reason why he seconded the motion and based upon what he
had heard he was comfortable with the situation but would like to hear what Councilmember Leger had to say.
Councilmember Leger addressed the Town Manager and asked whether in contemplating this letter of consent
they had any conversation or interaction with their good neighbors in the Yavapai Nation.
Mr. Pickering advised that staff was contacted by Chaparral Water who indicated that they would not speak
against this proposal. They had submitted proposals to the Ellman Group and that matter was between them.
The Town was contacted both yesterday and today by an individual from Fort McDowell, their Government
Affairs representative, who expressed concerns about the aquifer and things like that. He could not answer
those questions for her but basically he said that Fountain Hills was not the entity that controlled those things.
They obviously did not want the aquifer to be hurt by this and there were many entities that controlled that for
the Town. He had not spoken directly to President Bear but had tried calling both the Fort McDowell Yavapai
Nation General Manager and Enterprise Manager, but found that they were out of town this week. Mr.
Pickering stated that he could not say whether they approved of it or opposed it.
Councilmember Kehe stated that in view of Mr. Pickering's comments involving the Fort McDowell Yavapai
Nation, it seemed to him that it is appropriate to table the issue.
Ms. Riddell said that her organization had a very good relationship with the Tribe and in fact the Ellman
Companies in particular having been joint venture partners on the hockey arena in years past has had a very
good relationship with them. On this particular project they sat down with them over the course of the last year,
they had reviewed the master water and wastewater plans, and the very request that tonight was being brought
before this Council, even though not required by statute, had also been sent to the Tribe asking them not to
object to the formation of the DWID. Active discussions had occurred and would continue. Nothing would
please them more than if the Tribe was willing to work with them and ultimately provide water for the Preserve.
Councilmember Leger asked whether the Tribe had lent their consent and Ms. Riddell replied that they had not
consented to date but they had also not objected. Mr.Leger advised that from the discussions Mr. Pickering had
with the members of the Tribe relative to this issue, it appeared that they were very confused and did not
understand the rationale for the issue and therefore they called the Town Manager to inquire as to the
implications and to obtain the Town's input. There was a"disconnect"regarding this issue.
Ms. Riddell discussed personal meetings she had attended with leaders of the Tribe relative to this matter and
stated that they were well aware of what was going on.
Mr. Pickering asked Ms. Riddell if she would move forward with the application depending upon the Tribe's
response and she said even if the Tribe opposed them,they would move forward with the request.
Mayor Nichols called the question and asked for a vote on the motion.
The motion CARRIED by majority vote (5-2 with Councilmember Archambault and Mayor Nichols voting
nay).
In response to a question from the Mayor, Mr. Pickering stated that staff could bring this item back before the
Council at their next meeting and requested input from the Council relative to the information they would like
the developer to provide for their review and clarification.
Councilmember Dickey said that perhaps the Department of Water Resources could provide some information
that would help assure what developers must do to guarantee water supplies before anything moved forward.
She added that it would also be important to reiterate the connection with the County Supervisors to gain a level
of comfort.
Councilmember Leger said that he would like information on the impact of this District on the region and he
would also hope that they, independent of the attorney group and developer, would have interaction with the
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 5 of 16
Tribe. They had established a very good relationship over time and he wanted to ensure that if they moved
forward and gave consent that the Town's good neighbor had an understanding of the process as well.
Lie Councilmember Archambault stated that he would like to know what information is available relative to
protections the Town might be giving up that would affect their future ability to provide water if they decide to
provide their consent.
Mr.Pickering summarized the information requested by Council and stated that staff could provide that. Mayor
Nichols requested that Mr. Pickering bring the information back to the June 21, 2007 meeting.
AGENDA ITEM #13 - CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE REQUEST OF THE FOUNTAIN
HILLS SANITATION DISTRICT TO CONSTRUCT AN ADDITIONAL TESTING WELL IN
FOUNTAIN PARK FOR THE MONITORING OF EFFLUENT WATER RECHARGE WELLS.
Councilmember Archambault explained that the reason he pulled this item off the Consent Agenda was because
he questioned every time—"What are they doing out there in the Park, what are they doing with the well head?"
He asked the District Manager of the Sanitary District Ron Huber if he would provide a brief overview for the
benefit of the public and then they could move forward with this particular item.
Mr. Huber addressed the Council and stated that the Sanitary District operated an aquifer recharge and recovery
system consisting of a number of monitor wells and recharge wells. Three of the recharge wells were in
Fountain Park. All of the work they had seen over the last several months had been maintenance on the aquifer
storage and recovery wells. Those were typically the wells that would require the heavy maintenance. The
District also, by requirement in their permits, must maintain a certain number of monitor wells to monitor the
movement of water that they inject into the ground. There were currently five and soon to be six monitor wells
that would monitor those wells. The closest monitor well to any aquifer storage and recovery well was located
on the east side of the Park,just north of the parking area. They actually had an aquifer storage and recovery
well and in addition they had a monitor well that was located 100 feet south of that aquifer storage and recovery
well. That well is one that they want to replace and that is what the request is all about. They want to replace it
with one a little further away from the aquifer storage and recovery well that was closest to it.
Mr. Huber noted that the Department of Water Quality has a standard in place that essentially said monitor wells
could be up to 750 feet away. A monitor well in a location where it is currently located was really not in any
kind of position to do any kind of monitoring of movement in that well since they were actually just measuring
what was going in to the well only 100 feet away. The new well was approximately 700 feet away, located at
the southeast corner of El Lago and Panorama Drive (in the low area right off the street). Construction on the
well would begin in July and be completed within two weeks. It would not have to be maintained because there
would not be any water going into it; they would just monitor water movement.
Councilmember Archambault thanked Mr. Huber for his explanation.
Councilmember Schlum asked whether a monitor well was recently placed above the performance pad. He said
he was going to commend whoever was responsible for removing the equipment just prior to the high school
students' graduation. Mr. Huber advised that that was maintenance done on an aquifer storage and recovery
well and said that the timing just happened to work out very well.
Mr. Huber said that once the monitoring well was completed it will constitute nothing more than a 4x4 pad at
grade,a small trap door and a post with an electrical box. It would be pretty obscure.
Vice Mayor McMahan MOVED to approve the request of the Fountain Hills Sanitary District to construct an
additional testing well in Fountain Park for the monitoring of effluent water recharge wells and Councilmember
Archambault SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
AGENDA ITEM #15 - DISCUSSION WITH POSSIBLE DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE
Nor TEMPORARY ACCESS TO THE MCDOWELL MOUNTAIN PRESERVE.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 6 of 16
Mayor Nichols said that he would be willing to accept a motion to table this item until the June 21, 2007
meeting.
Councilmember Archambault MOVED to table this agenda item to the June 21, 2007 meeting and
Councilmember Leger SECONDED the motion.
There were no requests to discuss the issue.
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
AGENDA ITEM #16— PUBLIC HEARINGS TO RECEIVE COMMENT ON (I) RESOLUTION 2007-
04,AN AMENDED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
AND TFM LIMITED PARTNERSHIP FOR THE FOUNTAIN HILLS CONFERENCE RESORT &
SPA, (CASE #DA2006-01); (II) RESOLUTION 2007-21, A MINOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
TO THE OFFICIAL GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
FROM MULTI-FAMILY TO LODGING, (CASE #GPA2005-02); (HI) ORDINANCE 07-06, TO
AMEND A PORTION OF THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
FROM R-4 TO L-3 P.U.D. (CASE#Z2005-04) AND ALLOW SPECIFIC VARIATION BETWEEN THE
PROPOSAL FOR THE FOUNTAIN HILLS CONFERENCE RESORT &SPA(CASE#SU2005-05).
Mayor Nichols declared the public hearing open at 9:10 p.m.
Senior Planner Bob Rodgers addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and advised that the Fountain
Hills Conference Resort and Spa had proposed a 233-room resort hotel with 36 additional townhouse
condominiums for a total of 269 units. Also included in the plans were a sales office, an event lawn,restaurants,
ballrooms, conference rooms, a lounge, a gift shop, outdoor patios, pools, lush landscaping, and rooftop garden
areas. The project was to be located on the east side of Palisades Boulevard just north of the Palisades and Shea
intersection. The project is just slightly over 59 acres in total size and consists of two parcels, Tract A and Lot
1. Tract A is approximately 36 acres in size and would be dedicated open space with a zoning designation of
OSR. It would also be completely contained within a hillside protection easement. Lot 1 contained
approximately 23 acres and was the lot upon which the development would occur. It was currently split by the
R4 PUD and the L3 PUD Zoning Districts.
Mr. Rodgers referred to slides depicting the proposed resort and noted that the main entrance would be on
Palisades and there would be townhouse condominiums wrapping around the higher area of the hill. He referred
to slides depicting the various locations of amenities proposed for the project. Parking was provided both
underground (under the main building) and on the surface in front of the main building and each condominium
would have a two-car garage. He also referred to a proposed preliminary landscape plan showing that the resort
plans to provide lush landscaping on site as well as along Palisades Boulevard all the way down to Shea
Boulevard where it would link to the current water feature.
Mr. Rodgers referred to slides that depicted the various floor levels of the resort and discussed the eight separate
levels that were being proposed. Mr. Rodgers said that the plan proposed to amend the Development
Agreement and consisted of six main provisions: A minor General Plan Amendment, a rezoning, a cut waiver, a
parking waiver, an HPE modification, and offsite public improvements. Mr. Rodgers briefly outlined the
proposed provisions to the Agreement.
Mr. Rodgers stated that there were six customary uses associated with the resort proposal and they were
permitted only by Special Use Permit in the L-3 District. Most were located on the third and fourth levels of the
northern wing of the hotel (retail gift shop, clothing store, restaurant, bar, outdoor seating and dining areas, and
the sales offices).
Mr. Rodgers advised that staff recommended that the Council approve Resolution 07-21, General Plan .441)
Amendment; Resolution 07-04, the Amended Development Agreement; Ordinance 07-06, the Zoning Map and
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 7 of 16
PUD Amendment as well as the Special Use Permit. He said that it was important to note that the concept plan
had not yet been approved and is not a part of this evening's approval. The concept plan would be brought
kir, before the Planning & Zoning Commission only after the entitlements were acted upon by the Town Council.
He stated that the applicants were present and wished to make a presentation of their own and indicated his
willingness to answer any questions the Council might have regarding this issue.
Mayor Nichols thanked Mr. Rodgers for his presentation and invited the applicant to come forward and present
remarks.
Wendy Riddell with the law firm of Barry & Damore, L.L.C., 6750 E. Camelback, Scottsdale, addressed the
Council on behalf of Fountain Hills Resort Developers, L.L.C. She stated that members of the design and
development teams were also present in the audience. She said that as mentioned by staff,they are talking about
an overall 60-acre site and 36.5 of those acres were actually zoned Open Space and they were not proposing any
changes to that property. They were requesting that the remainder of the R-4 property be rezoned to the L-3
PUD to make it consistent. She stated the opinion that the property represented the last large commercial site in
Town, located on a very prominent entrance to Fountain Hills, and was a signature site for the Town. With that
in mind, the applicant had taken great care to plan and determine how best to develop it working with Town
staff over the last two years.
Ms. Riddell said that the best way to show the Council how the proposal improved upon the existing
Development Agreement was to show the areas in the plan that had been refined. She noted that the site was
entitled and had an existing entitlement that ran with it and what they were proposing this evening was a
refinement of that plan. Ms. Riddell provided background information relative to the existing plan/agreement
that was approved in 2003 and noted that the most massive portions of the site (conference center, restaurants,
etc.) were essentially cut into the hillside. The remaining residential units, the 71 villas, the R-4, the multi-
family were spread out along the ridgeline.
thre
Ms. Riddell discussed the fact that previous approval was for a total of 304 units and the applicant was
requesting 35 less units; efforts expended to be more sensitive to the natural topography of the site; the fact that
the proposal placed the residential units more interior to the site to create a cascading village down the hill; the
fact that the Westridge Neighborhood Association requested that the applicant move the residential units so that
they were not looking down over their homes and they had accommodated this request; the fact that the proposal
provided multiple opportunities for integrating landscaping into the actual site and additional efforts were
expended by the applicant in order to address any concerns and develop a project that would complement the
community and the entire Town.
Ms. Riddell also discussed the economic benefit to the Town, $634,000 for the additional five acres of hillside
protection, $790,000 in development fees, and if they took the number of units and figure $150.00 per night (a
figure they believed was low), at a 75% occupancy rate the development would generate $285,000 to the Town
in its first year. She also discussed roadway improvements that were being proposed and financed by the
applicant and said that as part of their discussions with the neighborhood, one of the things that they had been
requested to look into and work with the Town on the placement of a future signal and they(the applicant) were
willing to pay for this as well($450,000).
Ms. Riddell discussed the adjacent neighborhood's involvement and said that they were very happy to have the
support of the Westridge Neighborhood Association. She outlined efforts expended by the applicant in order to
address previously stated neighborhood concerns and requested their support of the proposal.
Town Clerk Bev Bender advised that two citizens wish to speak on this agenda item and the Mayor asked them
to come forward as their names were called.
key Robert Hahn, 15239 E. Redrock Drive, President of the Westridge Village Homeowners Association, addressed
the Council and said that when the previous proposal was presented to the Council, the Association strongly
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 8 of 16
urged that it be rejected and that the zoning request for a change from L-3 to R-4 also be denied. He stated that
the Council at that time did not listen to the citizens and he believed they made a grave mistake but now they
were back and this was a different time, a different proposal, a different Council and a different developer. He
said that the Westridge Village Homeowners Association requested that the Council approve the change in the
ordinance,back to L-3, and to do the right thing this time.
Frank Ferrara, Chief Executive Officer of the Chamber of Commerce, addressed the Council and requested
Council support of this project. He provided background information relative to this site and previous proposals
and emphasized that the current proposal was "absolutely fantastic." The proposals had gone from good to great
and this one was in line with the partnership of the Chamber of Commerce Business Vitality Plan and the
partnership with the Town. He said that the project was something the Town really needed and urged the
Council to support the proposal.
Mayor Nichols thanked the speakers for their input.
Mayor Nichols advised that there were four motions that require action and what he would like to do at this
point in time was to open the floor up for the members of the Council to pose questions relative to all four
agenda items. He said that once all of the questions had been answered, he would then ask for individual
motions on the four items.
Mr. Rodgers,Ms. Riddell and staff responded to a variety of questions from the Council relative to the proposal
including future parking concerns and the applicant's statement that they were agreeable to preparing a
contingency plan for over flow parking; how the development agreement was the guarantee that no condos were
part of the proposed project; and the fact that infrastructure for the future traffic light would be in the ground and
could be installed sooner if necessary.
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed at 9:38 p.m.
*4w)
Mayor Nichols said that overall he was genuinely impressed with the project, especially when they took into
consideration what had been improved—the density, the parking, the site coverage, the cut and fills, the HPE's,
disturbance, etc. He commended the applicant for coming up with such an improved plan and said that he
would support the proposal 100%.
Vice Mayor McMahan concurred with the Mayor's comments.
AGENDA ITEM #17 - CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2007-21, A PROPOSED AMENDMENT
TO THE OFFICIAL GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FOR THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS.
CASE#GPA2005-02.
Councilmember Archambault MOVED to approve Resolution 2007-21 and Councilmember Leger
SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
AGENDA ITEM #18 — CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2007-04, AN AMENDED
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS AND JFM
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP FOR THE FOUNTAIN HILLS CONFERENCE RESORT & SPA. CASE
#DA2006-01.
Councilmember Leger MOVED to approve Resolution 2007-04 and Councilmember Archambault
SECONDED the motion,which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
AGENDA ITEM#19—CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCE 07-06,TO AMEND A PORTION OF THE
OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FROM R-4 TO L-3 P.U.D. TO ALLOW SPECIFIC VARIATION
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 9 of 16
•
BETWEEN THE PROPOSAL FOR THE FOUNTAIN HILLS CONFERENCE RESORT & SPA AND
THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS. CASE#Z2005-03 AND#PD2005-03.
(111101 Councilmember Schlum MOVED to approve Ordinance 07-06 and Councilmember Kehe SECONDED the
motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOULSY(7-0).
AGENDA ITEM #20 — CONSIDERATION OF A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW RETAIL,
RESTAURANT, LOUNGE, OFFICE AND OTHER ASSOCIATED USES WITHIN THE FOUNTAIN
HILLS CONFERENCE RESORT & SPA. CASE#SU2005-05.
Vice Mayor McMahan MOVED to approve the Special Use Permit for Case#SU2005-05 and Councilmember
Archambault SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (7-0).
Mayor Nichols commended staff on their efforts to work with the applicant on this project over the last year and
half and said that they had done a great job. He added that he was looking forward to the project and hoped that
the applicant came back with a concept plan of which everyone would be proud.
AGENDA ITEM #21 — CONSIDERATION OF A CUT WAIVER TO PERMIT AN AREA OF 5,222
SQUARE FEET TO HAVE UP TO 24 FEET DEEP MAXIMUM VISIBLE CUTS FOR THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE ON LOT #87 IN THE EAGLES NEST
SUBDIVISION. CASE#CFW2007-02.
Councilmember Archambault and Vice Mayor McMahan declared conflicts of interest relative to this agenda
item and reclused themselves from any discussion/action.
Mr. Rodgers also addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and stated that this was an application to
allow the applicant to create a visible cut up to 24-feet deep in order to construct a single-family house with a
Ilkw driveway that conformed to the Town's maximum allowable slope of 18%. The house lot was located in the
northwest part of Town in the Eagles Nest development on Lot 87, which was located on the southwest side of
the Mourning Dove Drive cul-de-sac. Lot 87 was a hillside lot and had an approximate 90-foot elevation
change from elevation 2,180 to 2,273 with slopes averaging over 25%. He referred to slides depicting the site.
Mr. Rodgers noted that the deepest proposed cut is 24-feet deep and was located behind the southern corner of
the house (encompassing an area of approximately 602-square feet.) There was a retaining wall and three rock
cuts stepping up the side of the hill and the area above the top rock cut was then graded to daylight for a distance
of about ten feet at a 3-to-1 slope. The wall and the rock cuts were each approximately 6-feet high.
Mr. Rodgers advised that staff identified three criteria that should be considered when determining whether or
not to issue a cut waiver: (1) To reduce the visual impacts of the proposed development as viewed from the
adjacent properties and rights-of-ways; (2) To review the measures applied by the designer to minimize the
amount of cut and fill on the lot and (3) To consider possible alternatives to the proposed plan that would
conform to the ten-foot maximum cut or fill. He said that staff had reviewed the criteria, believed that the three
criteria had been met, and recommended that the Council grant the requested cut waiver to permit up to a 24-
foot deep maximum visible cut for development of a single-family residence on Lot #87 in the Eagles Nest
subdivision as outlined in the staff report. He noted that the applicants were present in the audience and wished
to address the Council relative to their proposal.
Councilmember Dickey asked why this case was not going before the Planning & Zoning Commission. Mr.
Rodgers explained that the Zoning Ordinance specifically stated that cut and fill waivers must go before the
Council.
(iti,, Mayor Nichols said that he would entertain a motion to approve the cut waiver. No motion was presented.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 10 of 16
Mayor Nichols said that he would then entertain a motion to deny the cut waiver. No motion was presented.
Town Attorney Andrew McGuire noted that the applicant wished to have the opportunity to present remarks
relative to the proposal.
Ted Robledo, 14715 N. 78th Way, Suite 700, Scottsdale, the designer of the project, addressed the Council
relative to this agenda item. He said that MCO Properties was planning to construct a very high end custom
home in the Eagles Nest subdivision. RS Homes, one of Scottsdale's most high-end builders and four-year
recipient of the Homebuilder of the Year Award,had been selected to build two of the highest quality residences
ever built in Fountain Hills. Through this, they hoped to set an example to other builders and homeowners of
the quality of construction and sensitivity to the design guidelines that should be expected of other future homes
within the community. These homes were intended to be the highest priced homes in Fountain Hills.
Mr. Robledo stated that Lot 87 is a very challenging hillside lot and the subject of their request was just the cut
portion of the waiver. Lot 87 is a 2.4-acre home site facing the front gate of the community with an
approximate 30% slope towards the street, i.e. it rose above the street rather than fell away. The building
envelope had 60 feet of grade change from front to back. The slope had created a number of significant
challenges in the design of the home, including (1) maintaining a maximum slope of the driveway at only 18%
for emergency access; (2) creating a flat building pad with a significant fill slope in front of the house, and (3)
maintaining a rear cut slope at or below the maximum as required by the Town's ordinance.
Mr. Robledo further stated that site planning of the home had been conducted in a manner that engaged it to the
natural contours, thereby minimizing as much of the cut as possible. Many months had been spent on several
alternative designs to balance the functionality of the home with the challenges of the site to conform to local
regulations. Their final design was presented with this application. They were pleased to state that their final
design had stepped with the slope, with a shallow footprint that follows the natural contours of the grade to
eliminate spill slopes and any need for fill slope restriction relief. In addition, the original design placed the
house near the ridge minimizing the cut; however, the driveway could not maintain an 18% maximum slope on
a 30% grade, so they had pulled the home down from the ridge in order to conform to the 18% guideline since
they felt the life-safety issue was a more critical requirement to address. The net affect was an unavoidable cut
behind the home that would require approval of a waiver of the cut and fill ordinance.
Mr. Robledo requested that the Council consider the following design elements that they have incorporated into
the home:
1) The house had been brought down from the maximum elevation near the ridge
2) The driveway conformed to the 18% maximum grade and would include a large flat staging area for
fire trucks at the house and an emergency turnout area for passing traffic
3) The first floor footprint of the house was long and narrow paralleling the natural hill contours in an
effort to minimize cuts and fills
4) The patio and pool deck areas step with the natural grade
5) The roof line profile followed the hill profile
6) The linear design, exterior materials and colors of the house would blend with the environment
7) These were minimal uses of fill walls and no spill slopes
8) The crest of the ridge on the lot will remain untouched
9) The needed cut would be behind the house and virtually invisible from the street
10) The needed cut would be stepped and enhanced with staining and landscaping as needed.
Mr. Robledo stated the opinion that the house would blend seamlessly into the natural environment and the cut
would be virtually invisible from the street and adjacent lots. He pointed out that MCO Properties, as the
developer of Eagles Nest, was very sensitive to the design of this home as it had implications on the balance of
the Eagles Nest community and conformance to their own strict guidelines. He added the opinion that the
waiver to the cut and fill ordinance was warranted in this case as they had gone to great lengths to site and
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 11 of 16
design the house appropriately and believed the house conformed to all other regulations of the Town's
ordinances. He requested that the Council approve the proposal and added that both the builder and owner were
present should the Council have any questions.
Councilmember Leger MOVED to consider the cut waiver to permit an area of 5,222 square feet to have up to
24 feet maximum visible cuts for the development of a single-family residence on Lot 87 in the Eagles Nest
subdivision and Councilmember Kehe SECONDED the motion.
Councilmember Kehe said that they were all aware of the fact that in the Strategic Plan the Town's citizens gave
the Council direction to strictly enforce the Town's ordinances. That did not exactly mean zero tolerance, but
they were given that direction. In the case of Eagles Nest, they were in effect today setting a standard that
would be the basis by which future developers, engineers, architects, and lot purchasers would engage in their
future home building. So it was important to make sure that the standards sent the right message. He stated the
personal opinion that the 5,222 square-feet of cut was more than he could live with at this point and so he was
going to make a motion to table this with the direction to the applicant to take some time to do whatever
redesigning was necessary so that they could come back with a cut waiver, if that was what was determined,that
was more acceptable to the Council. He further suggested that this occur within 90 days and said that the
Council would not meet during the month of July so that should provide ample opportunity to make some
adjustments and for staff to look at the adjustments to determine whether they were more in keeping with the
kind of building they were looking for in those two developments (Eagles Nest and at some point Adero
Canyon).
Councilmember Kehe MOVED to table this issue for 90 days to provide the applicant time to expend effort to
work with staff and make adjustments to the proposal that would be more in keeping with the kind of building
that the Council was looking for. Councilmember Leger SECONDED the motion.
(imie Mr. McGuire advised that as soon as a motion to table occurred it took precedent over any other motions
currently on the floor.
Mayor Nichols stated that he agreed with Councilmember Kehe's comments that the cut was excessive,as big as
the house. He said that they should be able to come up with a better design, possibly a smaller house. He
expressed concerns relative to setting a precedent for other hard to build lots in the area. He also emphasized
the importance of listening to what citizens had told them during the Strategic Planning process about trying to
live within the Town's ordinances. He added that although that did not mean strict adherence,this proposal was
way beyond his level of tolerance as far as a cut waiver was concerned.
Mr. Robledo pointed out that most of the cut was located behind the house and for the most part would be
hidden from view. He added that only the users would ever see that cut.
Jeremy Hall, representing MCO Properties, addressed the Council and advised that they started designing the
house in the first quarter of 2006 and had gone through four complete redesigns during that time. The goal was
to design a house that did not require any type of waiver from the Town. He emphasized the importance of the
project for them because they did recognize that it would set a precedent in the community. He noted that there
was 100 feet of elevation change on the site and the cut and fill ordinance limited them to a 10-foot cut, which
was not possible. He said that they had worked many issues out of the design, however, they must maintain an
18% grade on the driveway, the maximum grade that would allow emergency services to access the house, and
it was not possible to do that on a 30% grade lot unless they lowered the house. He requested that the Council
support the proposal and approve the request.
Councilmember Schlum said that he appreciated all of the work that had been done on this proposal. Not too
long ago, they had become more comfortable with basements, and obviously each design was unique and each
Lilo, lot must be looked at on an individual basis. He stated that he was more comfortable with the cuts that could not
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 12 of 16
be seen and although they were talking about a hilly area in this case, there were going to be visible cuts and
therefore he was not supportive of the proposal.
Mr. Hall referred to a rendering of the proposed project and noted that they planned to landscape in such a way
as to ensure that there would not be any visible cuts.
There being no further discussion,Mayor Nichols called for a vote on the motion.
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those voting(5-0).
AGENDA ITEM #22 — CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2007-19, APPROVING THE
AGREEMENT FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT SERVICES BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN
HILLS AND MARICOPA COUNTY FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,2007 THROUGH JUNE 30,2010.
Mr. Pickering addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and stated that this contract involved law
enforcement services provided by the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department over the next three years. He
noted that the County had been providing the Town law enforcement services exclusively over the last five
years and before that as well. He noted that the services that would be provided include traffic enforcement,
crime prevention, patrol activities, youth educational services, a high school resource officer, court services,
neighborhood block watch coordination, responding to barking dogs, basically everything that the Town needed
in the way of law enforcement.
The contract includes a staffing level of 3.8 deputies per beat and the total cost was approximately $2.7 million.
The amount had increased from the past as mentioned earlier during the budget discussion and the reason for the
increase was the addition of a Sergeant and a Clerk position as well as an increase in the cost of personnel for all
Maricopa County Deputies. In addition, there were costs associated with paying for individual dispatching on a
per-call basis. Captain John Kleinheinz, the District Commander for Fountain Hills, was present to respond to
any questions from the Council. He advised that prior to the meeting a question was posed by one of the
Councilmembers relative to markings on the patrol cars and anything that identified the deputies as Fountain
Hills' deputies. He said he was happy to report that the Captain was able to make headway on both of those
issues and would provide markings on the cars as well as the uniforms.
Vice Mayor McMahan MOVED to approve Resolution 2007-19 and Councimember Schlum SECONDED the
motion.
Councilmember Archambault stated that he would like to better understand the relevance of having an annual
3% increase in the contract if they typically exceed that percentage (5%, 6% 7%). Mr. Pickering explained that
over the last few years the amount had not increased but during the first of couple of years, at least since he had
been with the Town, the increase did hit that amount and they did not need to provide an explanation. He said
that they had wanted some very low cap included so that if there was an increase larger than that they would
have to explain the increase in detail to the Council. He added that the contract had explained in detail to him
and that began the process of contract renewal. He noted that typically in contracts caps, were put in but said
that in this instance, what the County paid the Town (a cost recovery contract), so they could not cap it. The
best that the Town could do was to put in the contract that any larger rate increases would have to be explained
in detail.
Councilmember Dickey commented that Captain Kleinheinz recognized the importance of Fountain Hills' small
town feel and had been very responsive to numerous questions, which she greatly appreciated.
There being no additional comments from the Council and no citizens wishing to speak on this item, the Mayor
called for a vote on the motion.
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY(7-0).
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 13 of 16
AGENDA ITEM #14 — CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2007-33, AUTHORIZING THE
PRELIMINARY STEPS TO BE TAKEN TO BECOME A PARTICIPATING EMPLOYER IN THE
ELECTED OFFICIALS' RETIREMENT PLAN ON BEHALF OF THE TOWN'S ELECTED
Nitro OFFICIALS OF THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS.
Mayor Nichols advised that this item was removed from the Consent Agenda at the request of Vice Mayor
McMahan.
Vice Mayor McMahan stated that the Council had received a lot of telephone calls regarding this issue that was
briefly discussed at a prior meeting. He said he thought it might be a good idea to table this item to the next
meeting and in the meantime have Town staff put out a press release explaining what this was all about.
Mr. Pickering advised that Human Resources Administrator Joan McIntosh would provide a brief overview of
this agenda item. He stressed that this was just a first step in the process and was not approval of a retirement
plan.
Ms. McIntosh addressed the Council and said that earlier this year she was requested by the Council to research
and to provide information to them on the Arizona Elected Officials Retirement Plan. She contacted the Public
Safety Personnel Retirement System (PSPRS) for the information and subsequently submitted a memo to each
of the Councilmembers summarizing the benefits of the plan. The PSPRS also outlined the steps that must be
taken by the Town to include its elected officials in the plan and the first step was to adopt a resolution
authorizing an actuarial valuation to be conducted to determine the cost of the Town's participation on behalf of
the elected officials. Resolution 2007-33 that was on the agenda this evening was just for that purpose. The
resolution only authorized that preliminary step; it did not authorize implementing this benefit for the elected
officials of Fountain Hills. If approved, staff would contract with the Town's actuarial firm at a cost of $600
and they would conduct the evaluation. If the Council wished to proceed after they received that information,
they would need to adopt a second resolution authorizing participation in the plan. Ms. McIntosh indicated her
willingness to respond to questions from the Council.
Vice Mayor McMahan said that he did not have any problem proceeding this evening on this issue as a
preliminary action but stated the opinion that the Town should put out a press release to inform the public just
what this is all about. He said there were misunderstandings out there that should be clarified.
Mayor Nichols MOVED to approve Resolution 2007-33 and Councilmember Schlum SECONDED the motion.
Councilmember Leger said he noted that there was a schedule of proposed changes to the budget in the
Council's packet relative to this situation, on Pages 53 through 55 in the budget, it said, "Addition of elected
officials' pension plan to the Council's budget in the amount of $9,000." He requested some clarification
regarding this issue and asked whether that amount was in the budget that was approved this evening.
Mr. Pickering advised that the funding was included in the budget approved by the Council and said that this
was necessary in case the Council chose to move forward with this item. He added that that did not mean that
the monies would be spent; this was the first step that must be taken. He noted that he was not sure whether that
represented an exact amount and until they obtained the actuarial study the actual amount would not be known.
He emphasized that the first step would be to move forward with an actuarial study to determine what the cost
would be to the Town.
There being no additional discussion or comments relative to this agenda item, the Mayor called for a vote on
the motion.
The motion CARRIED(6-1) with Councilmember Leger voting nay.
AGENDA ITEM#23—SUMMARY OF COUNCIL REQUESTS BY TOWN MANAGER.
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 14 of 16
Mr. Pickering advised that staff would work on establishing a policy for the fund balance for the Eagle
Mountain Community Facilities District. In addition, the Council requested that eight changes be made to the
budget.
,411)
Mayor Nichols said that the Council would also like Mr. Pickering to take a look at the van situation for the
Senior Center. He added that a few items were also tabled that Mr. Pickering would have to bring back to the
Council(cut and fill and access/discussion regarding the Water District).
AGENDA ITEM #24 — COUNCIL DISCUSSION/DIRECTION TO THE TOWN MANAGER. ITEMS
LISTED BELOW ARE RELATED ONLY TO THE PROPRIETY OF(I)PLACING SUCH ITEMS ON
A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION OR (II) DIRECTING STAFF TO CONDUCT FURTHER
RESEARCH AND REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL:
Councilmember Dickey requested that some discussion occurred relative to the purpose of this agenda item and
said that there had been questions raised regarding this item.
Mr. Pickering stated that when the Council developed rules several years ago, discussion took place relative to
how an individual Councilmember could put something on an agenda. He said that if an individual
Councilmember wanted to have discussion on an item take place among the Council, he/she could ask that it be
placed on the agenda under this item to discuss whether staff time should be utilized to conduct research on the
issue for placement on a future agenda for action. It was to be the first step in airing an issue and the reason
behind it was they did not want a Councilmember to feel stymied if he/she wanted to pursue a certain issue. The
Council would decide whether or not to proceed with future action on the item.
Mayor Nichols said that this gave individual Councilmembers the ability to utilize staff resources to research
items if approved by a majority of the Council. Councilmember Kehe clarified that by obtaining the support of
two other councilmembers that negated the need to wait.
Mayor Nichols commended the Town Manager and staff on the recent positive customer satisfaction survey
results (96%). Councilmember Schlum also commended the citizens for their efforts in submitting their
responses and stated that he felt it was a good response so far. Mr. Pickering stated he too was pleased with the
results.
Mayor Nichols also expressed for the record that he would not resign as requested by Mr. Tominello. He stated
that he was proud to work with this Council. He further requested that none of the Councilmembers take Mr.
Tominello up on his offer to resign. He acknowledged that if Mr. Tominello wanted to go ahead with a recall
that was his right and a privilege as a citizen to do that.
AGENDA ITEM#25—ADJOURNMENT
Vice Mayor McMahan MOVED that the Council adjourn and Councilmember Schlum SECONDED the
motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The meeting adjourned at 10:38 p.m.
j
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 15 of 16
TOWN OF FOUNTAI ILLS
L
By
Wa y Nich s, a
ATTEST AND
PREPARED BY:
Bevelyn J. n r,Town Clerk
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular and
Executive Session held by the Town Council of Fountain Hills on the 7th day of June 2007. I further certify that
the meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present.
DATED this 21st day of June, 2007.
Bevelyn J. nd ,Town Clerk
Lir
z:\council packets\2007\r6-21-07\06-07-07 regular and executive session meeting minutes.doc Page 16 of 16
J
j