HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007.0906.TCREM.Minutes r
TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS
MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE AND REGULAR SESSION OF THE
FOUNTAIN HILLS TOWN COUNCIL
SEPTEMBER 6,2007
CALL TO ORDER
Mayor Nichols called the meeting to order at 5:01 p.m.
ROLL CALL AND VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION
ROLL CALL — Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council:
Mayor Nichols, Councilmember Kehe, Councilmember Leger, Councilmember Schlum, Councilmember
Archambault and Councilmember Dickey. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire, Town Manager Tim Pickering,
Sr. Planner Bob Rodgers, and Town Clerk Bev Bender were also present. Vice Mayor McMahan was
excused from the meeting.
VOTE TO GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION — (i) Pursuant to §38-431.03(A)(1), for discussion or
employment, assignment, appointment, promotion, demotion, dismissal, salaries, disciplining or resignation
of a public officer, appointee or employee may demand that the discussion or consideration occur at a public
meeting. The public body shall provide the officer, appointee or employee with written notice of the
executive session as is appropriate but not less than twenty-four hours for the officer, appointee or employee
to determine whether the discussion or consideration should occur at a public meeting. (Specifically,for the
purpose of interviewing Planning and Zoning Commission applicants to fill the current vacancies); and(ii)
kuoy Pursuant to §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, (i)discussing a possible downtown development contract
and(ii)Battel, Firerock and Golf Properties litigation matters.)
Councilmember Archambault MOVED to convene the Executive Session and Councilmember Schlum
SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present(6-0).
Councilmember Leger MOVED to recess the Executive Session and Councilmember Dickey SECONDED
the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present(6-0). The meeting recessed at 6:20 p.m.
RETURN TO REGULAR SESSION
• CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Mayor Nichols called the meeting to order at 6:33 p.m.
• INVOCATION—Pastor Jim Fitz,Fountain Hills Community Church
ROLL CALL — Present for roll call were the following members of the Fountain Hills Town Council:
Mayor Nichols, Councilmember Kehe, Councilmember Leger, Councilmember Schlum, Councilmember
Archambault and Councilmember Dickey. Town Attorney Andrew McGuire,Town Manager Tim Pickering,
and Town Clerk Bev Bender were also present. Vice Mayor McMahan was excused from the meeting.
L • MAYOR'S REPORT
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 1 of 12
(i) Mayor Nichols will read a Proclamation declaring September 17, 2007, as "Constitution
,411)Commemoration Day."
Mayor Nichols stated that the Constitution of the United States was adopted 218 years ago on September 17,
1787 to form "...a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility,provide for the common
defense,promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." The
Mayor noted that everyone shared the blessings granted by the Constitution and the responsibility of ensuring
that those blessings fall upon all our people. He added that as they mark the 220"' signing anniversary of the
United States Constitution, they celebrated the effort, dedication and wisdom of our founders and the
blessings of liberty that resulted from their labors. Mayor Nichols said that it was his honor to proclaim
September 17th "Constitution Commemoration Day" and encouraged all citizens of Fountain Hills to renew
their study of the duties of citizenship and rejuvenate their dedication to the principles of the Constitution.
SCHEDULED PUBLIC APPEARANCES/PRESENTATIONS
(i) Department Division information overview of services provided by Mapping and Graphics
—Ken Valverde and Steve Sikorski,Engineering Technicians/CAD Operators.
Town Manager Tim Pickering advised that this item is part of an on-going series of presentations developed
by staff to highlight the operations of the Town's different departments and divisions and the services they
provide.
Steve Sikorski, a member of the Town's Mapping&Graphics Department(CAS/GIS) addressed the Council
and introduced his co-worker Ken Valverde. He said that Mr. Valverde would provide the Council with a
demonstration of new software later on in the presentation. He thanked the Council for the opportunity to
provide an overview of what they did on an everyday basis. He noted that the department reports to the
Planning and Zoning Division (P&Z) and worked very closely with the other departments that also reported
to P&Z (Building Safety, Code Enforcement and Planning). He discussed production software tools that the
department utilized on a daily basis as well as the production hardware equipment.
Mr. Sikorski described the services provided by the division, including the preparation of aerial exhibits for
Town staff, development projects, utilities, the School District, Chamber of Commerce, residents, etc. and
technical mapping (easement abandonments/acquisition exhibits, legal descriptions/exhibits); capital
improvement projects (sidewalks, parking lots, storm drainage design); parks infrastructure, trails mapping;
engineering and mapping/graphics responsibilities; CAD/GIS integration and the future of mapping; the
manner in which GIS puts "layers of data" together; typical GIS-related tasks, including land records
management, tracking assets, routing public services, fulfilling requests for information from internal
customers/other departments and citizens and future goals. Mr. Sikorski stated that the addition of identified
new software would provide other staff the opportunity to access information and therefore maintain staffing
levels. He added that they had field mapping capabilities as a result of a contract with EMS (Engineering
Mapping Solutions) and said that the proposed software, that had the look and feel of a Window's program,
would be people friendly. He discussed future proposed upgrades that will provide additional analytical
tools as well.
Mr. Valverde presented the Council with a field map demonstration and discussed the benefits of this
technology.
Mr. Sikorski and Mr.Valverde indicated their willingness to respond to questions from the Council.
Mayor Nichols and the members of the Council thanked Mr. Sikorski and Mr. Valverde for their informative
„v.)
presentation.
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 2 of 12
r
On another note, the Mayor advised that this year both a new School Superintendent (Bill Myhr) and a new
L. high school Principal (Katie King) came on board. Mayor Nichols acknowledged the presence of Ms. King
in the audience and thanked her for her attendance at the meeting.
CALL TO THE PUBLIC
In response to a question from the Mayor, Ms. Bender advised that one citizen has submitted a request to
speak to the Council. She added that another citizen has requested that Agenda Item#2 be removed from the
Consent Agenda and placed on the Regular Agenda for discussion purposes.
Paul Getty, 15055 N. Santiago Place, addressed the Council relative to recycling as part of trash pickup and
said that in this day and age of environmental awareness and sustainability of the planet, he found it
appalling that many residents still did not have recycling as part of their trash pickup. He asked the Council
to make it mandatory to have recycling part of the Town's trash pickup and said that if they were to limit
waste service companies to one or two service providers, they could offset the use of the roadways for
recycling pickups and reduce the amount of wear and tear as well as the carbon dioxide emissions from the
garbage trucks. He emphasized that he was not saying that the Town should assume the responsibility of
taking on waste services; he was saying use existing companies but make sure that they also include
recycling services. He thanked the Council for allowing him the opportunity to address them.
Mayor Nichols commented that part of the Town's initiatives for 2007-08 was to come up with a policy on
environmental awareness in an effort to help save the environment. He added that hopefully by the end of
this fiscal year a policy statement would be issued relative to that issue.
CONSENT AGENDA
Lie In response to a request from a citizen, Agenda Item #2 was removed from the Consent Agenda and placed
on the Regular Agenda for discussion purposes.
AGENDA ITEM #1 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
MINUTES OF AUGUST 2, 14 and 16,2007.
AGENDA ITEM #3— CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2007-38, APPROVING AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH MOHAVE EDUCATION SERVICES, INC.,
RELATING TO A COOPERATIVE PURCHASING PROGRAM.
AGENDA ITEM #4 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH
FIVE STAR FORD FOR ONE 4X2 HYBRID FORD ESCAPE FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT IN
THE AMOUNT OF$25,947.22.
AGENDA ITEM #5 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE REVISED CONTRACT WITH
SUMMIT EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT TO BUILD ONE FIRE PUMPER, TO BE DELIVERED
WITHIN 270 DAYS AFTER COUNCIL APPROVAL. COST NOT TO EXCEED$369,225.12.
Councilmember Leger MOVED to approve the Consent Agenda as listed (with Agenda Item 2 removed and
placed on the Regular Agenda)and Councilmember Schlum SECONDED the motion.
A roll call vote was taken with the following results:
Councilmember Kehe Aye
Councilmember Schlum Aye
Councilmember Leger Aye
Lie Councilmember Dickey Aye
Mayor Nichols Aye
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 3 of 12
Vice Mayor McMahan Absent
Councilmember Archambault Aye
The motion CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present(6-0).
REGULAR AGENDA
AGENDA ITEM #2 — CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTION 2007-48, ABANDONING
WHATEVER RIGHT, TITLE OR INTEREST THE TOWN HAS IN PORTIONS OF THE
CERTAIN PUBLIC UTILITY AND DRAINAGE EASEMENTS LOCATED AT THE
NORTHESTERLY PROPERTY LINES OF PLAT 511,BLOCK 1, LOT 5 (15431 N. CERRO ALTO
DRIVE) AS RECORDED IN BOOK 366 OF MAPS, PAGE 6, RECORDS OF MARICOPA
COUNTY,ARIZONA. EA07-18(MORTGAGES,LTD.).
Mr. Ward advised that he was not prepared to discuss this issue and was unaware of the fact that it was going
to be removed from the Consent Agenda. He said that it appeared to him to be an easement release on Cerro
Alto Drive and suggested that the Council ask the person who requested that it be removed from the Consent
Agenda to voice his concerns.
Vincent Marsello, 15647 Cerro Alto Drive, addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and questioned
why the Town wanted to abandon the easements at Plat 511,Block 1,Lot 5. He stated that his residence was
located in that plat.
Mr. Ward responded that typically the reason people come to the Town for abandonments was because they
wanted more room on their land and they felt that if the easement was not being utilized for drainage or
utilities it was a waste of land. Staff looked at these issues on a case-by-case basis and determined whether
or not the easements were necessary for those purposes. He explained that in the original platting of the
Town all of the subdivisions had easements on them that were to be used for drainage and utilities and after
much thinking and seeing how homes were going to be built, staff determined that a lot of the easements,
specifically sewer lines, were not to be used for the utility easements and the drainage areas, which
meandered behind these lots, were not necessary because the channels were out in the middle of those
designated areas for drainage. He stated that they were able to release those easements to give people more
property, for their backyards, fences or pools. He said that he would be happy to address any additional
concerns.
Councilmember Leger stressed the importance of pointing out that this was not something that the Town
initiated; a property owner had made the request for the abandonment of the easement. He said that once a
request was received, the Town went through a process to determine whether any reason existed to deny the
abandonment request.
In response to a request from Councilmember Leger, Mr. Ward provided a brief overview of the process that
was followed when requests such as this are received by the Town.
Mr. Marsello stated the opinion that the process had not been property followed and noted that he was one of
the lot owners. He said that the Council was being asked to vote on abandonment and the process had not
been adhered to. He added that whoever made the request was also trying to obtain approval from Planning
and Zoning to split this particular piece of land up and they too were not following the process properly
based on Mr. Ward's previous statements. He noted that as a lot owner in Plat 511, he should have received
a letter and been given the opportunity to discuss the proposal. He expressed the opinion that the Council
should delay voting on this item until the process had been properly followed and thanked the Council for
their consideration.
Councilmember Kehe asked whether Mr. Marsello's property was located adjacent to the parcel under
discussion and he replied that it was not. He explained that Plat 511, Block 1, consisted of five lots that the
Town approved when they accepted the land from MCO ("The Estate Lots of Fountain Hills"). It was
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 4 of 12
determined then that the lots would contain only one home and since there was a casita ruling in the Town,
zoning for one home and one casita was approved for each lot. He noted that it did not matter whether the
lot was three acres in size or twenty nine and a half acres. It was approved by the Town to be that way and
that was the way it should stay. He requested that the Council protect the value of the homes and the land in
that area. He reiterated that he and other property owners should have at least received notification from the
Town of the intent to abandon the easement.
Mayor Nichols MOVED to table this item to allow staff time to research the points raised by Mr. Marsello
and Councilmember Leger SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present
(6-0).
AGENDA ITEM #6 — RE-CONSIDERATION OF A REVISED CUT WAIVER REQUEST TO
PERMIT AN AREA OF 3,984 SQUARE FEET TO HAVE UP TO 20 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 reclused himself from discussion/action on this item and left the meeting at
7:15 p.m.)
Senior Planner Bob Rodgers addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and said that this was a
continued application for Lot#87 in the Eagles Nest Subdivision to allow the applicant to create a visible cut
up to 19-feet deep in order to construct a single-family house with a driveway that conformed to the Town's
maximum allowable slope of 18%. This proposal was continued from the July 7, 2007 Council meeting with
direction from the Council for staff to take another look at reducing the exposed cut areas that are in excess
of 10-feet deep. Lot #87 was a hillside lot and it rose with a 93-foot elevation change (from 2,180 up to
22,073). He referred to an aerial photograph of the site and noted that the area behind the house and
driveway was subject to this waiver request. The previous July 7th request was for 5,220 square feet, with a
maximum depth of 24 feet and the current request was for 3,984 square feet with a maximum depth of 19
feet.
Mr. Rodgers referred to a cross section of the proposed cut waiver area that showed the tiered walls and rock
cuts. He noted that approximately 12 feet of the hillside cut had been eliminated in the new proposal. He
advised that staff was not fully convinced that the areas and depths of cuts could not be further reduced and
therefore recommends that this item either be continued to allow more discussion to occur or denied by the
Council based on excessive visible cuts. He stated that the applicants were present and wished to make a
presentation to the Council.
Jeremy Hall addressed the Council and noted that Civil Engineer David Montgomery was also present and
would be happy to respond to questions. He noted that the lot was 2.5 acres in size and was a very
challenging lot due to its steep slopes. They only had a 3/4 acre maximum disturbance on the lot and the
grade was at 30% unbroken slope. He said that the unbroken slope was fairly important to consider.
Normally on property out there, they had more of an undulating slope where it "tables out" and they could
work with the house and the grade better. This was a flat 30% slope from the curb to the crest of the hill and
they could not exceed an 18% driveway slope for fire and safety reasons. There was a 60-foot elevation
change across just the building envelope (not the lot) and that was the equivalent of a five or six story office
building. They could only cut a maximum of ten feet exposed and fill a maximum of ten feet. He pointed
out that the access was from below this lot and oftentimes, because of the steepness of the lots, the roads
were along the ridges and access was from above, which allowed for a shorter access and coming in from the
second level of the house (a"walk out" house) that provides added flexibility. He said that they were unable
to do that in this case.
Mr. Hall noted that they had previously proposed a 5,200 square foot cut and that had been reduced to just
Lre under 4,000 square feet. They had eliminated all of the cuts over 20 feet and from a square footage point of
view, they have reduced the cut by 24% and the cut depth had gone from 14 feet to 9 feet, a 35% cut
improvement. An ancillary benefit was that through this exercise they were also able to leave about 1,300
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 5 of 12
square feet undisturbed (they will not use the full disturbance on this lot) and that was something that would
be contributed as part of the Town's Hillside Protection Easement.
via)
Mr. Hall informed the Council that they had buried the north one-third of the house all the way up to the
front door and they had to lose some house windows in order to do that. They had extended the driveway
(they could not increase the slope) and were able to raise the parking and garage area. They also raised and
stepped the front entry of the house; steepened the cut to drop the top of the cut farther down the hill and
tucked the cut closer to the house. He referred to illustrations/photographs displayed in the Council
Chambers and further explained the proposed changes that have been made to the proposal. (A complete
copy of the PowerPoint presentation is available in the office of the Town Clerk.) He discussed plans to
stain/age the cut and re-vegetate the area. Mr. Hall discussed the different scenarios they had reviewed in an
effort to achieve compliance with the ordinance and said that their current proposal represents the best
possibility.
Mr. Hall noted that the proposed cut was behind the house and virtually obscured from the street and
adjacent lots. He reiterated that the cut would be aged and re-vegetation will take place. The narrow
footprint of the house (long and narrow) followed the hill contours and provides very effective screening.
The patios and pool in the foreground of the house step a natural grade so they were able to step the house
back down and they would not require any fill waiver at all. The 18% driveway grade did not compromise
fire and life safety. The roofline followed the hill profile and was very sensitive to the natural environment
and the total lot disturbance with this revision would be reduced by almost 1,300 feet and this area would be
added to the Town's HPE on the lot. He indicated his willingness to respond to questions from the Council.
Mayor Nichols MOVED to approve the cut waiver request for discussion purposes and Councilmember
Leger SECONDED the motion.
Councilmember Schlum thanked staff and Mr. Hall for their presentations and for the work that had been
,4100)done on this project. He noted that the Council is very sensitive to setting precedents and added that the
Town's ordinances were in place for a reason. He added that the lots were platted with the understanding
that they would be built upon without having to garner cut and fill waivers. He said he was sure that there
would be cuts that were visible and that the builder/developer would make every effort to minimize the
impact on the million plus dollar homes. He added, however, that he was still not comfortable granting a cut
waiver to this degree where it could be visible.
Mr. Hall commented that they did look at completely burying the house but a cut had to be there for
fire/safety access. He said that their idea of putting the cut behind the house was to screen the cut, pull the
garage out and screen it so it was not visible from the street. He stated that this lot could not have a house
built on it without a waiver of some sort.
Councilmember Schlum asked what the result would be if the house was carried down the hill further from
its current location, with a couple different steps, and shortened from its north/south orientation. Mr. Hall
responded that if they had some variation in the slope they could make a difference but because this was an
unbroken slope with a 30 degree angle, no matter where they go (move it up or down) they still needed the
cut for the Fire Department.
Mayor Nichols asked if they started with a blank piece of paper, whether they could design a house on that
lot that would comply with the Town's ordinances and fire/safety regulations and Mr. Hall replied that he did
not think that would be possible.
Mr. Montgomery addressed the Council and stated that he had also spent extensive time studying this lot and
although he could not say that they absolutely could not design another house that would work; he could say
that they could not design another house that would be practical. They were either fighting the 10 feet of fill
(to raise the house and reduce the cut) or increasing the fill, going over the 10-foot limit. If they started stair
stepping the house, they would have to raise part of the house and then they were fighting the 30-foot
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 6 of 12
building height limit. He added that they were "boxed in" and they were trying to fit within the box and also
Liv come up with something that would be marketable.
In response to a question from Councilmember Dickey relative to fire truck access, Mr. Montgomery
explained that the distance from the street to the house was not a factor on the slope, but it did factor in as far
as having a landing or a flat area that was required. There were also some sprinkler issues that"kick in" if a
driveway was a certain length or slope. He added that the 18% was the "magic number"for fire trucks to go
up and down and that was listed in the Zoning Ordinance.
Councilmember Kehe commented that the proposed cut/fill waiver grossly exceeds what was
allowed under the Town's ordinance. He said that the rules in this regard were well established and
added that cut and fill regulations were good, they served the community by protecting the
landscape from excessive scarring. The fundamental message of cut and fill was that a home shall
essentially be designed to conform to topography, not the reverse. He noted that the citizen driven
Strategic Plan called for the strict enforcement of the General Plan and ordinances. He added that
they had already said that this did not require zero tolerance but rather allowed for reasonable
variation. He said that the Council's decision in this case would set a standard for future homes.
Councilman Kehe indicated that he had spoken on site with the applicant on August 2 and had gone
over the applicant's proposal for changing the original application. Councilmember Kehe stated
that he had felt, at that time, the changes were really not significant in terms of what the Council
was asking for as there were still options for building placement and the size of the building. He
stated the opinion that the proposed changes he could not accept as it was substantially the same as
what was previously submitted. By denying the plan, by the admission of the applicant, would not
prevent the applicant from building on the lot although it would not be this house and those were
not Councilman Kehe's words. Councilman Kehe noted that there was one common theme, that
there had been no significant change in the house. He added that he believed there were answers
which had not yet been discovered and he encouraged them (the applicant) to look deeper and come
up with a plan that was more closely in line with the Town's ordinances (not zero tolerance). He
said that he could not support a request for a cut and fill waiver for this case at this time.
Councilmember Kehe MOVED to continue this case to allow the developer an opportunity to reexamine and
revise the proposal in an effort to further reduce the cut and Councilmember Leger SECONDED the motion.
Mr. Hall re-stated that because of the required fire access, it was not possible to design a house for that site
without a waiver. He said that the alternative was a house that still had an access problem because the issue
was not the house, it was the access. He respectfully requested an up or down vote rather than another
continuance.
Councilmember Leger clarified that Councilmember Kehe did not say that waivers would not be considered
in the future if the developer brought forward a different plan, he was hearing him say that the current
waivers were excessive.
Mr. Hall replied that he could reduce the 19-foot cut probably by 5 feet if he could get a 20% driveway but
stressed that if the house caught on fire, a fire truck could not access that house. He stressed that fire/life
safety issues could not be compromised for aesthetic purposes. He agreed that they could reduce the cut but
said that it would require obtaining waivers in other areas(fill waivers or compromising the fire/life safety).
Fire Chief Scott LaGreca said that he would be happy to respond to any questions from the Council relative
to this issue. Councilmember Leger requested input from the Chief relative to access and Chief LaGreca
stated that the Zoning Ordinance and the fire standard, which was comparable to the City of Scottsdale's,
was what he felt comfortable with. He added that he was not in a position to negotiate a cut and fill waiver
for this lot, the requirement is at 18% and unless directed otherwise by the Council and/or Town Manager to
revisit this issue, his feeling was that it should remain at 18%. He indicated his willingness to sit down with
appropriate Town staff to further review this issue if the Council so desired.
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 7 of 12
Councilmember Kehe stated that when they talk about an 18% incline, they were not talking about what the
fundamental issue really was — it was not to change the 18 degrees, but rather to make some changes in the
design and placement of the house. He expressed the opinion that there was still room for changes and he
was not satisfied that everything that could be done had been done to get them closer to what the ordinances
called for. From a Council standpoint, he had to look at the 423 other homes that would have similar
problems because the sites were located in a mountainous area. This would also carry over onto the State
Trust Land where,because of the hills, variances/waivers would be needed to address cut and fill issues.
In response to a request from Mayor Nichols, Chief LaGreca confirmed that the access met the minimum
requirements for fire and life safety. He reiterated his willingness to explore possible alternatives for the
future but emphasized that without meeting with his peers and thoroughly reviewing all of the critical aspects
of the issue, he was not able to make any other recommendations at this time.
Mayor Nichols called for a vote on the motion to continue.
A roll call vote was taken with the following results:
Councilmember Schlum Nay
Councilmember Archambault Reclused(temporarily away from the dais)
Councilmember Kehe Aye
Councilmember Leger Nay
Mayor Nichols Nay
Councilmember Dickey Nay
The motion FAILED by majority vote(4-1) by those present for the vote and at the meeting.
The Mayor called for a vote on the main motion (to approve the request).
The motion FAILED for lack of a majority vote (1-4) with Mayor Nichols voting aye. (Councilmember
Archambault (reclused) temporarily away from the dais and Vice Mayor McMahan was absent from the
meeting.)
(Councilmember Archambault rejoined the meeting at 7:55 p.m.)
AGENDA ITEM #7 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE THREE-YEAR PROFESSIONAL
SERVICES AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS AND THE
FOUNTAIN HILLS CHAMBER OF COMMERCE TO PROVIDE TOURISM SERVICES IN THE
AMOUNT OF$275,000.
Town Manager Tim Pickering addressed the Council relative to this agenda item and stated that staff went
out for proposals (RFP's) from individual organizations interested in providing services to the Town, one of
which was tourism. He advised that the Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce was the sole applicant that
had submitted a response to the RFQ (Request for Qualifications). This item was brought forward on the
Council's August 2nd agenda and at that time the Town was not able to come to an agreement with the
Scottsdale Convention & Visitors Bureau, which was part of the requirements of the RFP (managing the
contract with that entity). At that time, the Council directed staff to go back and pursue further negotiations,
mainly because of the input received from local hotels/resorts that value that relationship, in an effort to craft
an agreement that would take into account all of the parties involved. Mr. Pickering stated the opinion that
staff had achieved this goal and thanked everyone who worked together in order to accomplish that feat.
Mr.Pickering advised that following extensive discussions and negotiations, everyone compromised in order
to come up with this evening's proposal. He reported that the Scottsdale Convention &Visitors Bureau had
reduced their price from $75,000 to $60,000; the hotels had agreed to "chip in" and provide $10,000
annually to help pay for that contract; the Chamber of Commerce had reduced its price by $15,000 annually
and the Town took on the responsibility of contracting with the Scottsdale Convention & Visitors Bureau.
Previously, that responsibility would have been with the contractor but the Town had taken it on and that
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 8 of 12
meant that if there was an increase in price for next year (this is a one-year contract, not a three-year
contract), the Town would be responsible for that increase. Mr. Pickering stated the opinion that all of the
parties would be able to make this arrangement work and that the Town's tourism services and activities
would improve because of it.
Councilmember Leger MOVED to approve the Professional Services Agreement between the Town of
Fountain Hills and the Town of Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce and Councilmember Kehe
SECONDED the motion.
Councilmember Dickey commented that she greatly appreciated the cooperation that everyone involved had
demonstrated but said that she was going to be voting against Agenda Items #7 and#8, not because she had
any problem with the organizations or the partnership but rather because she was personally uncomfortable
with the act of changing the scope of work. When they moved forward with contracting for these services
and others earlier this year, she opposed that action and she remained ill at ease with that process.
Councilmember Kehe referred to the target numbers on the gross hotel sales and stated that when this item
was brought up last month he had raised some concerns about these numbers because he was not sure, and
no one could give him the information he needed, whether they were monitored and changed as a result of an
increase in hotel rooms over the given period of time in the two-years that preceded this Fiscal Year, which
was used as the base point for determining the gross number. However, it was accepted by all of the parties
and he went along with it. He said that after reviewing the contract, he would like to know what would
happen if the target goal of$6.5 million in gross hotel receipts was not reached in Fiscal Year 07-08.
Mr. Pickering responded that staff believes they would be successful in meeting the target goal. He said that
if they did not reach that target, the issue would need to be analyzed. The ultimate penalty would be to
cancel the relationship based on not meeting those numbers and they had the ability to do that. He added
car that cancellation was the ultimate penalty and before that took place they would most likely examine why
that occurred and determine what could be readdressed in order to make improvements. He agreed that
ultimately if the goals were not met, the Town would not reap the benefits they desire and the parties would
not be fulfilling their requirement and the arrangement would need to be cancelled.
There were no citizens wishing to speak on this agenda item.
The motion CARRIED by majority vote of those present(5-1) with Councilmember Dickey voting nay.
AGENDA ITEM #8 — CONSIDERATION OF APPROVING THE PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE TOWN OF FOUNTAIN HILLS AND THE SCOTTSDALE
CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU FOR NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL TOURISM
SERVICES IN THE AMOUNT OF$60,000.
Mr. Pickering reviewed the process that was followed and noted that staff met with the Scottsdale
Convention & Visitors Bureau. He added that the hotels were helpful in this discussion and provided
information on why this relationship is valuable to them. He said that their contribution to the solution
represents a strong indication of how much they value maintaining that relationship. He indicated his
willingness to respond to questions from the Council.
Councilmember Archambault MOVED to approve the Professional Services Agreement between the Town
of Fountain Hills and the Scottsdale Convention &Visitors Bureau and Councilmember Leger SECONDED
the motion.
Councilmember Leger stated that he appreciated all of the work that had been done in this regard and
following a thorough review of both agreements, he has determined that there were some pretty stringent
performance requirements, specifically hotel bookings, rooms, gross sales at a tune of$6.5 million for Fiscal
Year 2007/08 and that was in the contract with the Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce Tourism Bureau.
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 9 of 12
He said that when he looked at the Scottsdale contract, he became concerned that there was a lack of
accountability measures in that particular document. There were the typical measurements and a very
specific requirement for reporting and he had an opportunity to review a number of Scottsdale's reports and
they did a good job. There were measurements pertaining to expressions, hits and other things that to him
were extremely nebulous. That was why when they go back to the main contract he liked the idea of holding
the vendor to something that was really measurable and at the end of the day for hotels that was bookings,
real money realized. He expressed the opinion that the Scottsdale contract fell somewhat short in providing
specific performance measurements that would demonstrate the value that the Town would be getting for the
$60,000.
Councilmember Leger MOVED to amend the motion to include the following statement for the Scottsdale
contract: "That the Scottsdale Convention & Visitors Bureau was to contribute leads that directly result in
the bookings and gross hotel sales of$1.625 million for Fountain Hill's hotels and bed&breakfasts."
Councilmember Leger explained that the proposed $1.625 represented 25% of what the total requirement
was and he believed it to be a realistic figure. He added that he understood the complexities of adding
something to the contract but this was stemming from his conscience and it really went to a statement that
was included in the Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce's contract that says that the Chamber was to
provide the necessary operational oversight and management of the Tourism contract with Scottsdale. He
stated the opinion that for anyone to manage anyone else they needed to have some specific criteria and some
leverage.
Councilmember Kehe SECONDED the amendment to the motion.
Mr. Pickering said that they would not be able to measure that until the contract was done and it was only a
one-year contract so they could not cancel the contract because they had to wait to see whether they met it.
He added that they could certainly put that language in as criteria for renewal next year. He discussed the
scope of services and said that one of the things they wanted to see the most in the contract was
measurements. In previous contracts, a lot of the wording was "when available" or "if necessary" — words
that mean they did not have to. He stated that this contract was very secure in the sense that meeting/planner
lists must be provided, a certain amount of advertising must also be provided as well as websites, certain ads
in certain publications, etc. He advised that this contract was much more secure than previous contracts with
the Scottsdale Visitors and Convention Bureau.
Councilmember Leger agreed that both contracts were better than the contracts they had seen in the past but
noted that the only accountability measure he saw in the contract for Scottsdale was the quarterly reports they
must file regarding their efforts on the Town's behalf. Typically, in the reports from Scottsdale that he had
reviewed, they encompassed impressions, a value ad, press releases, etc. He said that he had made the
amendment because in this day and age it seemed to him that with the technology that was in place, a hotel
on a fiscal quarterly basis should be able to track bookings directly related to leads received. He added that
he would differ with the opinion that they would have to wait until the end of the year to have the data. He
said that perhaps the Fountain Hills Chamber of Commerce should request that information from the Town's
local hotels but overall there needed to be some method of a tangible measure in place for anyone to manage
anyone else's service contract.
The Mayor called for a vote on the amended motion.
The motion FAILED for lack of a majority vote by those present (2-4) with Councilmembers Kehe and
Leger voting aye.
In response to a question from Mayor Nichols, Town Clerk Bev Bender advised that two citizens submitted
requests to speak on the item.
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 10 of 12
•
Mayor Nichols asked the speakers to come forward as their names are called.
Low
Marcia Taylor, the Director of Sales for Copperwynd Resort & Club, addressed the Council and noted that
the Convention Bureau did supply them with quarterly reports on all booked business at the hotels and they
themselves tracked that information on a quarterly basis. She stressed the importance of having a "close
finger" on the amount of business that the Bureau was producing for them. She said that speaking on behalf
of Copperwynd and the other hotels in Fountain Hills they wanted to express their appreciation to the Town
for revisiting this agreement with the Scottsdale Visitors & Convention Bureau. The relationship with the
Scottsdale Bureau was vital, not only to the hotels but to the Fountain Hills tourism industry as a whole. She
thanked the Council for the time spent considering their viewpoint and allocating funds to continue this very
important relationship.
(The second speaker, Barbara Bruce, did not speak).
Councilmember Schlum said that he appreciated Councilmember Leger's amendment and agreed that
contract parameters were a necessity. He also thanked all of the other involved entities for their efforts to
reach an acceptable compromise. He stated that he was not in favor of the amendment because he did not see
a practical way to exercise that requirement or termination right but he did believe that the contribution from
the hotels directly to the membership that largely benefits them would probably lead to their ensuring that
they receive the most for their money. He added that this contract represented a one-year agreement with
Scottsdale and the organization seemed to be one that was needed although costs had increased. He stated
the opinion that they needed to enter the agreement at this time and hopefully, next year when they review
the contract,they would find that they had received sufficient returns on their investment.
Mayor Nichols concurred with Councilmember Schlum's remarks and said that when they receive the
renewal next year, they could include these types of provisions and make the payments dependent upon
accomplishments.
Councilmember Leger asked Town Attorney Andrew McGuire whether he could place another amendment
on the floor with respect to the main motion and Mr. McGuire advised that he has the option to do so until
the main motion has been voted on.
Councilmember Leger advised that he would like to include an amendment that stated specifically in the
contract that the contract would not be renewed unless the target of$1.625 million was met. He said that he
thought he had heard Mr. Pickering mention that as an alternative (renewal based on hitting a specified
target) earlier in the meeting. Mr. Pickering commented that he would simply tell them that the$1.625 is the
goal, discuss the monitoring that would take place, and make them aware of the fact that next year when this
issue came up again,the Council's decision would be based on the tracking results.
Mayor Nichols asked Mr. McGuire whether the current Council could bind another Council by this type of
amendment. Mr. McGuire expressed the opinion that the key issue here was that the Council was approving
a contract for one year with no renewal. He added that any new contract that came up would not be bound
by the terms of the contract that would terminate a year from now. He stated the opinion that a provision in
the contract would not really do anything they were trying to accomplish unless it contained renewable terms
subject to that condition. He stated that the point had been clearly made that as far as next year's
negotiations, it was important that the targets be met. He said they could make it part of the approval motion
(that consideration of any future contracts would take that into consideration).
Councilmember Leger MOVED to amend the motion to approve the contract with notification to the
Scottsdale Convention & Visitor's Bureau that any future contract consideration would be dependent upon
meeting the target goal and Councilmember Archambault SECONDED the motion, which CARRIED by
majority vote(5-1) of those present with Councilmember Dickey voting nay.
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 11 of 12
In response to comments from Councilmember Leger, Mr. Pickering clarified that the Council would receive
copies of the quarterly reports.
444111
Mayor Nichols called for a vote on the main motion.
The amended motion CARRIED by majority vote (5-1)of those present with Councilmember Dickey voting
nay.
AGENDA ITEM#9—SUMMARY OF COUNCIL REQUESTS BY TOWN MANAGER.
Mr. Pickering advised that staff will follow up on the Cerro Alto Drive issues raised by a citizen during this
meeting relative to easement abandonment.
On another note, Mayor Nichols said that he would like to take this opportunity to let the public know that he
will not be seeking re-election for a fourth term next year.
AGENDA ITEM#10- COUNCIL DISCUSSION/DIRECTION TO THE TOWN MANAGER.
ITEMS LISTED BELOW ARE RELATED ONLY TO THE PROPRIETY OF (i) PLACING SUCH
ITEMS ON A FUTURE AGENDA FOR ACTION OR (ii) DIRECTING STAFF TO CONDUCT
FURTHER RESEARCH AND REPORT BACK TO THE COUNCIL:
A) NONE
AGENDA ITEM#11—ADJOURNMENT.
Councilmember Schlum MOVED that the Council adjourn and Councilmember Leger SECONDED the
motion, which CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present(6-0). The meeting adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
(Following the adjournment of the Regular Session,the Cr, I cil reconvened the Executive Session.)
TOWN OF F Ai A HILLS
By A ' �_.�
Wally Nich ls,Mayor
ATTEST AND
PREPARED BY:
Bevelyn J. nd ,Town Clerk
CERTIFICATION
I hereby certify that the foregoing minutes are a true and correct copy of the minutes of the Regular Session
held by the Town Council of Fountain Hills on the 6th day of September 2007. I further certify that the
meeting was duly called and that a quorum was present.
DATED this 20th day of September 2 07.
Bevelyn J end ,Town Clerk
z:\council packets\2007\r9-20-07\09-06-07 minutes.doc Page 12 of 12