Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 1/28/2003 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 28, 2003, AT 7:00 P.M. The meeting was called to order by Mayor Elaine M. Scruggs, with Vice Mayor Thomas R. Eggleston and the following Councilmembers present: Joyce V. Clark, Steven E. Frate, David M. Goulet, H. Philip Lieberman, and Manuel D. Martinez. Also present were Ed Beasley, City Manager; Terry Zerkle, Assistant City Manager; Rick Flaaen, City Attorney; and Pamela Hanna, City Clerk. COMPLIANCE WITH ARTICLE VII, SECTION 6(c) OF THE GLENDALE CHARTER A statement was filed by the City Clerk that the 4 resolutions and 6 ordinances to be considered at the meeting were available for public examination and the title posted at City Hall more than 72 hours in advance of the meeting. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF JANUARY 14, 2003 It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to dispense with the reading of the minutes of the January 14, 2003 Regular City Council meeting, as each member of the Council had been provided copies in advance, and approve them as written. The motion carried unanimously. PROCLAMATIONS AND AWARDS CITY S.A.F.E. PROCLAMATION Auto theft has emerged as one of the fastest growing crimes in the United States. Arizona leads the nation with a theft occurring every 10 minutes. The number of vehicles stolen in Arizona has risen 18% since 2000. The City of Glendale is proud to continue its community awareness City S.A.F.E. campaign with the month of February 2003 focusing on Vehicle Safety and Auto-Theft Prevention. The campaign offers residents and business owners an opportunity to attend programs, activities and events to learn how to keep themselves out of harm's way. Mayor Scruggs called Police Chief Randy Henderlite, Sergeant Dave Madeya and Detective Grant Eaton to the podium and proclaimed February 2003 as Vehicle Safety and Auto-Theft Prevention Month. She also announced Grant Eaton was named Auto Theft Detective of the Year by the Arizona Auto Theft Authority, noting his efforts resulted in the arrest of over 60 auto theft suspects. 1 Chief Henderlite thanked the Mayor and Council for their continued support of the City S.A.F.E. program. He gave credit for the program to all those who worked to make it successful. Detective Grant Eaton announced the first auto prevention fair will be held at Arrowhead Mall on Saturday February 1, 2003, from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. Sergeant Madeya said another auto prevention fair will be held at Glendale Community College on February 26. CONSENT AGENDA Mr. Ed Beasley, City Manager, read Agenda Item Numbers 1 through 4 by number and title, and Ms. Pamela Hanna, City Clerk, read Agenda Item Numbers 5 through 7 by number and title. 1. AWARD OF CONTRACT - GLENDALE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT RUNWAY EXTENSION AND OVERLAY This is a request for City Council approval to award a construction contract to Nesbitt Contracting Co., to extend and overlay Runway 1-19 at the Glendale Municipal Airport. To fully accommodate corporate-type aircraft and operate safely during summer months, the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) recommends a runway length of 7,000 feet. This project will extend the runway 1,000 feet south and 800 feet north, for a total runway length of 7,150 feet. The existing runway is 5,350 feet long. The runway will be widened from 75 feet to 100 feet and overlayed to increase the strength from 37,500 pounds dual wheel loading to 60,000 pounds. The work also includes new runway lighting and paint striping. The city received a $4,623,480 grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) in September 2001, and a $226,960 grant from the Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), Aeronautics Division in February 2002. The amount of the grants is restricted to a percentage of the actual costs of the project. The bids came in substantially lower than estimated and, therefore, the grant amounts are less. The FAA grant provides 91% ($2,949,267.78) of the funding for this project and the ADOT grant provides 4.5% ($145,842.91) of the funding for this project. The city's share is the remaining 4.5% ($145,842.91), which is available in the Airport Division Account. Six bids were received and opened at 10:00 a.m. on November 14, 2002. Nesbitt Contracting Co., a qualified and licensed contractor, submitted the lowest bid in the amount of $3,240,953.60. On November 19, 2002, the city received a letter of protest regarding Nesbitt's bid from Combs Construction Co., the second lowest bidder. On November 27, 2002, the City Engineer denied the protest based on the fact that Nesbitt 2 Contracting Co. had met the requirement for Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) participation. On December 3, 2002, Combs Construction Co. requested a hearing to appeal the denial of the protest. A hearing was held on December 19, 2002, finding that Nesbitt Contracting Co. had met the requirements for DBE participation and the denial was upheld. Engineering staff has reviewed the bids and recommends award of the bid to Nesbitt Contracting Co., a responsive and responsible bidder. Funds are available in FAA Grant No. 13 — Runway Widening and Extending, Account No. 34-8024-8300, for the construction of this project. The recommendation was to approve the construction contract to Nesbitt Contracting Co., in the amount of $3,240,953.60. 2. AWARD OF CONTRACT— FOOTHILLS PARK PHASE II SKATE COURT This is a request for City Council approval to award a construction contract to Hardcore Skate Parks, Inc., to construct the Foothills Park Phase II Skate Court. The work is for the construction of the skate court facility, including three concrete skate bowls, adjacent concrete decking and the installation of metal bleachers, landscaping and a skate court area perimeter fence. The work was included as part of the Foothills Park Phase II project, awarded to Diamond Building Group, Inc., on January 8, 2002. Skate courts are unique concrete facilities and require specialized experience to construct. Diamond Building Group, Inc., planned to do a portion of this work and have it tie into the remaining skate court work performed by their subcontractor Hardcore Skate Parks, Inc. Because of the complex nature of the work, Diamond was unable to complete their portion of the work to meet acceptable quality standards for tying into Hardcore's work. The two contractors could not agree on how much of Diamond's work needed to be redone and Hardcore refused to complete the work. The city intervened and Diamond agreed to eliminate the remaining portion of the skate court facility from their contract allowing the city to contract for this work separately. Hardcore Skate Parks, Inc. has four years experience in constructing skate court facilities and has been involved in the construction of six skate court facilities in the Phoenix metropolitan area. They are the only skate court contractor based in Arizona qualified to do this work. Because of the urgency to complete the construction of the skate court and Hardcore's experience, staff requested a bid from Hardcore to complete the skate court facility at Foothills Park. Hardcore submitted a bid of $333,270. Staff has visited several skate courts constructed by Hardcore and have determined their qualifications and quality construction meet the requirements necessary to complete the skate court facility. The skate court construction period is estimated to be 10 to 12 weeks with completion in April. 3 The city will be performing the construction management for this work and contracting separately for the design consultation during construction, landscaping, temporary fencing, permanent fencing, and security of the court area during it's construction. The costs for these items are $67,000. A transfer of appropriation is required in the amount of $400,270 from the Parks Improvements/Enhancement, Account No. 14-8919-8300 to the Foothills Park Development Zone 3, Account No. 14-8527-8300. The recommendation was to approve the construction contract in the amount of $333,270 to Hardcore Skate Parks, Inc., and the appropriation transfer in the amount of $400,270. 3. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT — WATERLINE REPLACEMENT/ REHABILITATION This is a request for City Council approval of a professional services agreement with Entellus, Inc., for the design and construction engineering services required for the replacement and/or rehabilitation of water lines in the area bounded by 63rd, Glendale, 59th and Maryland Avenues (City Map, Quarter Section 22-14). Quarter Section 22-14 was identified as the quarter section within the study area that is most in need of water line replacement and/or rehabilitation due to pipe age and/or maintenance history. The March 2001 "Water Distribution System Evaluation" report prepared by the engineering firm of CH2M-Hill provided an evaluation of the physical condition of the city's water distribution system in the area bounded approximately by 67th Avenue, Northern Avenue, 43rd Avenue and Camelback Road. The project work will emphasize replacement and/or rehabilitation of deteriorated water lines in three main areas: arterial streets; areas with histories of water line breaks; and areas which are also scheduled for other improvements. On April 18, 2002, a request for letter of interest was sent to over 100 engineering firms that have expertise in civil engineering and/or sanitary/water engineering. The intent of this request was for the city to pre-qualify firms to perform design and construction services for city water and sewer line replacement/rehabilitation. This pre-qualification process will serve as the city's consultant list for this type of work through June 2005. A total of 40 companies provided letters of interest and subsequently received a request for proposal. On June 7, 2002, a total of 30 companies submitted proposals. A team of five staff members, two from the Utilities Department and three from the Engineering Department, reviewed these proposals and pre-qualified 11 of these companies as being well qualified to provide the city with engineering services on water line projects. The firm, Entellus, Inc., was the selected top firm on the pre-qualified consultants list and was chosen to perform the engineering services needed for the Quarter Section 22-14 waterline replacement/rehabilitation work. 4 Subsequent to this selection process, city staff negotiated a project scope of work and fee schedule with Entellus, for project design and construction services. Funds are available for this project in the fiscal year 2002-03 Capital Improvements Program, Water Line Replacement Account No. 83-9249-8300. The current schedule calls for Entellus to complete all required services within 300 days of written notice to proceed. Public involvement, through the use of public meetings and newsletters, is a part of the design and construction process. The recommendation was to approve the professional services agreement with Entellus, Inc. in the amount of$181,392. 4. EMERGENCY PURCHASE OF LOOSE TRASH REARLOADER REFUSE TRUCK This is a request for City Council approval to purchase one rearloader sanitation truck in accordance with the Emergency Purchases of Materials and Services procedure outlined in City Manager's Directive No. 10. As part of a review of operations conducted during the summer, it was decided that the loose trash division needs one rearloader to replace two brush trucks because of the greater compaction ability of rearloaders. For example, brush trucks are capable of hauling about five tons per load. Rearloaders are capable of hauling about seven to eight tons per load, or up to 60% more than the brush trucks on a per load basis. The purchase of one rearloader will allow the loose trash division to use rearloaders for all collection work, thereby increasing on-route productivity. January and March are two of the heaviest months for loose trash collection based on the collection history for the past five fiscal years, as the following tonnage information illustrates: 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02 January Tons 791 983 929 1,072 1,512 March Tons 476 1,017 882 1,124 1,122 FY Monthly Avg 576 707 718 832 979 Given the repeated delays in maintaining the published monthly collection schedule that have occurred over the past few months, equipment downtime must be minimized in order to maintain the published schedule. Equipment breakdowns in September 2002 totaled 131 work hours, or just over 16 workdays — the equivalent of more than three weeks of workdays in a four-week month. In addition, it is almost impossible to rent rearloaders. In September 2002, when one rearloader was down for extensive repairs and crews were trying to clean up storm damage and maintain the loose trash schedule, the only rental that could be located 5 was in Texas. On occasion in the past, we have been able to borrow rearloaders from other cities such as Peoria and Phoenix. However, these cities do not always have spares available. Field Operations staff located three units meeting the city's rearloader specifications: 1. Arizona Truck Center had a 25-yard, 2003 model rearloader that could be delivered, at the earliest, in March 2003 for a cost of $139,830, tax included, as well as full warranties. This was available by way of a City of Phoenix contract award that would allow us to piggyback on the Phoenix bid. 2. Arizona Truck Center had a 25-yard, new 2001 model rearloader that could be delivered within thirty days after the order was placed for a cost of $138,022, tax included, as well as full warranties. This was not available by way of any existing contract award and would require an emergency purchase to obtain. 3. Heil Environmental had a 27-yard, new 2002 model rearloader that could be delivered within five days after the order was placed for a cost of $122,153, tax included, as well as full warranties. This was not available by way of any existing contract award and would require an emergency purchase to obtain. The Heil Environmental unit meets the needs of the loose trash program and, in fact, has a larger capacity than the other two vehicles. In addition, the Heil Environmental vehicle cost less than the other two vehicles and was less than the $125,000 budgeted for the purchase. The Heil Environmental vehicle also cost less than the replacement, 25-yard rearloader that was delivered in November 2002. Just as important, the unit was available for immediate delivery (within a week of placing the order), unlike the other two units. While we normally could have waited to take the purchase award to Council during a January evening meeting, Heil Environmental could not guarantee the availability of the vehicle unless we purchased it in December. Therefore, in accordance with City Manager Directive No. 10, Emergency Purchases of Materials and Services, Field Operations contacted Materials Management and requested the immediate purchase of a rearloader. An emergency purchase requisition for the Heil unit was prepared and the unit was purchased and put into service this month. Funding is available from proceeds in the capital lease escrow in the following account: • Loose Trash Collection, Capital Lease Escrow account 57-9630-8400 for $122,500. 6 The capital lease is a lease-purchase financing arrangement for a variety of capital items for many city departments that the Finance Department is in the process of negotiating. City Council approved a supplemental for $125,000 for the purchase of two replacement brush trucks for the loose trash program as part of the FY02-03 loose trash division's budget. Based on the information above, staff determined the money could be better used for the purchase of the rearloader. The recommendation was to approve the purchase of one rearloader sanitation truck based on the procedures detailed in City Manager Directive No. 10, Emergency Purchases of Materials and Services. CONSENT RESOLUTIONS 5. ARROWHEAD RANCH RECLAIMED WATER RECHARGE AGREEMENTS This is a request for City Council approval to enter into underground storage agreements with developers in Arrowhead Ranch in lieu of current requirements to construct effluent storage and reuse facilities. All development in Arrowhead Ranch is required to accommodate the storage and reuse of effluent produced by the Arrowhead Ranch Water Reclamation Facility. The city adopted Resolution No. 2968, New Series on April 25, 1995 that approved the Arrowhead Ranch Specific Area Plan. The specific area plan provides the city with the authority to require all new land developed on Arrowhead Ranch to store and use an amount of effluent equal to the sewage flow amount that development will generate. The effluent produced by these requirements has resulted in the creation of lakes and provided irrigation for turf on developments across the ranch since its creation in the early 1980s. The requirements allow the developer to satisfy the lake and turf requirements in three possible ways: 1) The developer may build facilities (such as lake and turf areas) that will accommodate the developments storage and use requirements; 2) The developer can make arrangements with another developer/landowner on the Ranch to assume all or part of the facility requirements and; 3) The developer can enter into an agreement with the city to assume responsibility for all or part of the facility requirements. Agreements with the city for assuming responsibility for a development's reclaimed water requirements have been handled on a case-by-case basis during the plan approval process since 1995. The developer must show that providing the required storage and use facilities are physically impractical or otherwise cannot be reasonably accomplished. Since 1995 the city has entered into several agreements to allow developments to pay the city to store and use the water on land owned by the city. 7 4 Currently no additional land in Arrowhead Ranch is owned by the city that will accommodate additional effluent reuse and storage. The city has developed groundwater storage projects that provide the same beneficial impacts as lake storage and reuse. The need for an alternative to the City Storage and Reuse Agreement for small land holdings has been apparent since the city stopped considering additional agreements last year. Staff recommends that since additional storage projects are in the Capital Improvement Plan, future capacity in recharge projects could be used to accommodate lake and turf requirements on small projects. Specifically if the developer's responsibility is less than one acre of lake storage, one option could be to allow them to pay the city the cost of developing a similar capacity in a recharge facility. The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to sign all agreements related to payments to the city for capacity in recharge facilities in compliance with the Reclaimed Water Systems section of the Arrowhead Ranch Specific Area Plan. Resolution No. 3634 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE ANY AND ALL NECESSARY DOCUMENTS RELATED TO PAYMENTS TO THE CITY OF GLENDALE FOR CAPACITY IN RECHARGE FACILITIES IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE RECLAIMED WATER SYSTEMS SECTION OF THE ARROWHEAD RANCH SPECIFIC AREA PLAN. 6. GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF HIGHWAY SAFETY — DUI AND SPEED ENFORCEMENT OVERTIME FUNDING GRANT This is a request for City Council authorization to accept a $50,000 grant from the Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS). The grant pertains to funding awarded for DUI and Speed Enforcement overtime. This funding will be utilized to enhance the availability of officers directly assigned to deter speed violators as well as detect and apprehend impaired drivers. It will allow the Glendale Police Department to increase traffic enforcement efforts to reduce traffic collisions in the City of Glendale. The funding will also be used in updating media coverage of the speed and DUI campaigns taking place within the City of Glendale. Aggressive driving, speeding, DUI, seat belt and child restraint violations will also be addressed. The funds allocated will also be utilized to enhance the City's "It's Our Town, Please Slow Down" speed enforcement campaign. The funds authorized for this project have been appropriated and budgeted by the U.S. Department of Transportation. The expenses are reimbursable under Arizona's (163 Funding) Highway Safety Plan Program Area AL, Task 11, as provided for by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. No matching funds are required. 8 The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to accept the grant award of $50,000 from the Governor's Office of Highway Safety. Resolution No. 3635 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION AND ACCEPTING THE GRANT OFFER FROM THE ARIZONA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF HIGHWAY SAFETY TO SUPPORT OVERTIME ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES BY THE GLENDALE POLICE DEPARTMENT FOR DUI AND SPEED ENFORCEMENT 7. GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF HIGHWAY SAFETY — AGGRESSIVE DRIVER ENFORCEMENT VEHICLE GRANT This is a request for City Council authorization to accept a $33,000 grant from the Governor's Office of Highway Safety (GOHS). The grant pertains to funding awarded to purchase an aggressive driver enforcement vehicle. The aggressive driver enforcement vehicle will be utilized to enhance traffic enforcement efforts within the City of Glendale. Emphasis will be placed on aggressive driving, speeding, DUI, seat belt and child restraint violations. The unmarked vehicle is equipped with a speed detection device and related emergency equipment. Personnel operating this vehicle will take an assertive approach to the enforcement of traffic and criminal statutes relating to these violations. The expenses are reimbursable under Arizona's (163 Funding) Highway Safety Plan Program Area PT, Task 49, as provided for by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. No matching funds are required. The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution authorizing the City Manager to accept the grant award of $33,000 from the Governor's Office of Highway Safety. Resolution No. 3636 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION AND ACCEPTING THE GRANT OFFER FROM THE ARIZONA GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OF HIGHWAY SAFETY FOR THE PURCHASE OF AN AGGRESSIVE DRIVER ENFORCEMENT VEHICLE TO ENHANCE TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT ON AGGRESSIVE AND SPEEDING DRIVERS AS WELL AS ALCOHOL/DRUG IMPAIRED DRIVERS Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Consent Agenda Items 1-7. Leonard Clark, a resident of the City of Glendale Barrel District, said he is glad the Council is approving the contract for the Glendale Municipal Airport runway 9 extension. He expressed his opinion the runway extension is important to the city's future, allowing the airport to accommodate new business. He also voiced his support for the skate park and water line replacement. He said he also approves of the city's efforts to slow traffic down and to deter drunk drivers. Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing. It was moved by Lieberman and seconded by Frate, to approve the recommended actions on Consent Agenda Item Nos. 1 through 7, including the approval and adoption of Resolution No. 3634 New Series, Resolution No. 3635 New Series, and Resolution No. 3636, New Series. The motion carried unanimously. PUBLIC HEARING — LIQUOR LICENSES 8. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-860 EL PICOSO RESTAURANT (REMOVE FROM THE TABLE) This is a request for a new series 12 (restaurant) license for El Picoso Restaurant located at 5821 N. 67th Avenue, No. 101. The previous owner operated this business as T K's Café, but did not hold a liquor license. The approval of this license will increase the number of liquor licenses in the area by one. The establishment is over 300 feet from any school or church. No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period. The Planning Department, the Police Department and the Maricopa County Health Department have reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements. On January 14, 2003, the applicant requested that the City Council table this item to the January 28, 2003 meeting. It was moved by Lieberman and seconded by Frate, to remove Liquor License Applications No. 3-860 for El Picoso Restaurant from the table. The motion carried unanimously. 9. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-861 AJO AL'S MEXICAN CAFE This is a request for a new series 12 (restaurant) license for Ajo Al's Mexican Cafe located at 7458 W. Bell Road. The previous owner operated this business as Don Pablos and held a series 12 (restaurant) license at this location. The series 12 license for Don Pablos was cancelled in September 2002 when the restaurant closed. The approval of this license will increase the number of liquor licenses in the area by one. The establishment is over 300 feet from any school or church. No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period. The Planning Department, the Police 10 Department, and the Maricopa County Health Department have reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements. The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control with the recommendation for approval. 10. LIQUOR LICENSE NO. 3-862 CRUZ CONVENIENT STORE This is a request for a new series 10 (off-sale retail, beer & wine) license for Cruz Convenient Store located at 15414 N. 67th Avenue. The previous owner operated this business as AA Food and Liquor and held a series 10 (off-sale retail, beer & wine) license at this location. A new license is required because a series 10 license is not transferable. The applicant is currently operating this establishment pursuant to an interim permit issued by the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control. The approval of this license will not increase the total number of liquor licenses in this area. The establishment is over 300 feet from any school or church. No protests were filed during the 20-day posting period. The Planning Department, the Police Department, and the Maricopa County Health Department have reviewed the application and have determined that it meets all technical requirements. The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and forward to the Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control with the recommendation for approval. Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item Numbers 8 through 10. As there were no comments, Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing. It was moved by Lieberman and seconded by Clark, to forward Liquor License Applications No. 3-860 for El Picoso Restaurant, No. 3-861 for Ajo AI's Mexican Cafe and No. 3-862 for Cruz Convenient Store to the State of Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control, with the recommendation for approval. The motion carried unanimously. ORDINANCES 11. AMENDMENT TO GLENDALE CITY TAX CODE SECTION 21.1-470 — TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES Mr. Michael Bailey, Regulatory and Communications Manager, presented this item. 11 This is a request for the City Council to amend the Transactional Privilege (Sales) Tax rate in the Glendale City Tax Code Section 21.1-470, Telecommunications Services, from 1.8% to 5%. At City Council workshops on July 2, 2002 and January 7, 2003, a review of telecommunication services and rates was presented by staff. Based on a review of best practices, it was determined there was inconsistent treatment between telecommunications and cable companies. This amendment provides the opportunity to equalize the rate charged to telecommunication providers who pay the Transactional Privilege (Sales)Tax of 1.8% with cable companies who pay a license fee of 5% of their gross revenues for cable television. Amending Section 21.1-470 from 1.8% to 5% provides equalization of the rate charged to telecommunication providers to the level that is already charged to cable companies. This ordinance has an effective date of March 1, 2003. The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an Ordinance amending the Glendale City Tax Section relating to Telecommunication Services. Mayor Scruggs opened the hearing for public comment on Item 11. Mr. John Thomas, Arizona Competitive Telecommunications Coalition, thanked city staff for contacting their organization as Council directed and answering all of their questions. He said his organization opposes the increase because it does not believe it is their sole responsibility to raise funds for the city. He pointed out the increase will make Glendale's tax the highest in the state. He said the increase will be passed along to customer and, pursuant to federal law, they will work with the city to notify all of their customers of the increase as soon as possible. Ordinance No. 2298 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, RELATING TO THE PRIVILEGE LICENSE TAX FOR TELECOMMUNICATION SERVICES; AMENDING "THE 2001 AMENDMENTS TO THE TAX CODE OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, ARIZONA" BY AMENDING GLENDALE CITY CODE SEC. 21.1470; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE It was moved by Martinez and seconded by Goulet to approve Ordinance No. 2298 New Series. Mayor Scruggs said people are under the mistaken idea that the City of Glendale has been raising taxes. She said, in fact, the last increase occurred in 1992 when the City Council voted to increase the sales tax from 1 percent to 1.2 percent. She stated a group of citizens started a petition drive the following year because they did not feel enough money was being spent on public safety. She said the group was successful in putting an initiative on the 1994 ballot, which passed, raising the sales tax another .1 12 percent. She said, once the economy turned around, the City Council tried to relieve the tax burden on citizens of Glendale by lowering the property tax from $1.98 per $100 of assessed valuation to $1.72. She noted the reduced funds directly effected the city's operating budget. She said, since 1992, the population has increased more than 40 percent, resulting in an increase in operating expenses. She explained 50 percent of the General Fund money goes to Fire and Police, leaving 50 percent to provide all other city services. She said they do what they can to spread the revenue collected over as broad a base as possible, while continuing to run the city at the level citizens have come to expect. She pointed out a number of auto dealers have left the city and more plan to leave in the near future, resulting in a significant decrease in revenue to the city. She said the state has also experienced unique problems, resulting in the portion of income tax collections that come to the city being reduced by 36 percent for the coming year. Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Beasley what percentage he directed city staff to cut from their budget for the current and next fiscal years. Mr. Beasley explained they have asked for a 15 percent, or $7-8 million, decrease this year and 10 percent, or $10-12 million, decrease next year. Mayor Scruggs said the Council is trying to provide the services it has taken an oath to provide. Councilmember Clark said there is currently an inconsistency in the way telecommunication and cable companies are treated. She said in today's competitive market, all companies should be given a level playing field. Councilmember Martinez noted the increase brings Glendale in line with other cities in the valley. Upon a call for the question, the motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate and Scruggs. Councilmembers voting "nay": none. 12. PROPOSED CHANGES TO ALTERED SPEED LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE Mr. James Book, Transportation Administration Director, presented this item. This is a request for City Council approval of the proposed changes to altered speed limits of the City of Glendale. Periodically, the Transportation Director conducts an engineering and traffic investigation of the speed limits in the City of Glendale and recommends that speed limits be changed. The most recent investigation has resulted in a recommendation that nine speed limits be changed and added to the list of altered speed limits of the City of Glendale. The City now has 24 altered speed limits. These changes are the result of citizen requests, annexations, and changing roadway characteristics. The locations and recommendations for change include: 13 1. 75th Avenue from Myrtle to Northern Avenues be added to the speed limit ordinance with a maximum safe speed of 40 mph. 2. 75th Avenue from Loop 101 to Deer Valley Road be reduced from a maximum, safe speed of 45 mph to 40 mph. 3. 83rd Avenue from Camelback Road to Northern Avenue be reduced from a maximum safe speed of 45 mph to 40 mph. 4. Glen Harbor Boulevard from Bethany Home Road (alignment) to Glendale Avenue be added to the speed limit ordinance with a maximum safe speed of 30 mph. 5. Litchfield Road from Camelback Road to Luke Air Force Base South Gate be reduced from a maximum safe speed of 45 mph to 40 mph. 6. Litchfield Road from Luke Air Force Base North Gate to Northern Avenue be reduced from a maximum safe speed of 45 mph to 40 mph. 7. Camelback Road from 75th to 99th Avenues be reduced from a maximum safe speed of 45 mph to 40 mph. 8. Missouri Avenue from 43rd to 47th Avenues be reduced from a maximum safe speed of 35 mph to 25 mph (delete from speed limit ordinance). 9. Glendale Avenue from 67th to 99th Avenues be reduced from a maximum safe speed of 45 mph to 40 mph. The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an ordinance establishing the altered speed limits of the City of Glendale. Councilmember Lieberman stated, except in residential areas, he has had few people ask him to lower speed limits on arterial streets. He asked Mr. Book what the average vehicle count is on 83rd Avenue from Camelback to Northern. Mr. Book said the 2001 Traffic Count Study estimated 16,100 vehicles for the first mile, 14,200 for the second mile and 8,600 for the third mile. Councilmember Lieberman asked how many vehicles the street was designed to accommodate. Mr. Book estimated the road capacity to be 35,000 to 40,000 vehicles. Councilmember Lieberman asked at what speed does the average driver travel on that road. Mr. Book responded in excess of 50 mph. Councilmember Lieberman expressed his opinion some of the proposed reductions punish citizens by requiring them to travel slower than necessary. He asked what is the capacity on Glendale Avenue between 81st and 91St Avenues. Mr. Book said the maximum capacity is 30,000 vehicles per day, with approximately 17,400 vehicles currently traveling on the road each day. Councilmember Lieberman 14 expressed concern that the slower speed limits will create accidents. He stated he specifically opposes the reduced speed limits proposed for Glendale Avenue from 67th to 99th Avenues, 83`d Avenue from Camelback to Northern, Glendale Harbor Boulevard and Litchfield Road. Mr. Book explained speed limits are not based on capacity, stating many factors are taken into consideration. He said he frequently gets complaints that speed limits on arterial streets are too high. Councilmember Lieberman said a number of the people who complain about the speed limit being too high are the ones who regularly exceed the limit. Councilmember Clark said the decreased speed limits are for general health and safety of the public. She asked Mr. Book to explain how changing roadway conditions effect the speed limit in an area. Mr. Book said, while a roadway can initially be wide open, development increases the number of factors that affect drivers. He stated drivers do not perceive all of the potential dangers and often drive too fast. He said staff is also very sensitive to the location of schools and their associated pedestrian traffic. He noted the city times traffic signals using a 90 second cycle, which matches perfectly with a 40 mile per hour speed limit. Councilmember Clark expressed her opinion the speed limit on 83`d Avenue should be lowered to allow property owners facing onto 83`d Avenue a chance to get out of their driveways. She agreed the city should provide consistent speed limits, stating the proposed reductions would make those areas consistent with the rest of the grid system in Glendale. She said enforcement will have to be stepped up to reinforce the new speed limits. Mr. Book said they are taking steps to ensure immediate notification and will notify Peoria of the reduced speed limits on streets that border their city. Councilmember Goulet said his constituents have told him they do not feel safe making left turns or crossing the street given the current speed limit. He agreed people are often not aware of all of the different factors they could encounter at an intersection. He expressed his opinion the proposed speed limits are reasonable. Councilmember Martinez asked if staff consulted with the Police Department when deciding on the proposed speed limits. Mr. Book said, while they have a very strong working relationship with the Police Department, they did not ask the Police Department what they believe the speed limit should be. He explained there has to be a separation between setting the limits and enforcing them. Councilmember Martinez said the issue of speeding is brought up regularly at neighborhood meetings. He expressed his opinion the proposed reductions will benefit the city, stating, therefore, he supports staffs recommendations. Vice Mayor Eggleston commented on the success of the PACE car program. He agreed there should be consistency in the city's speed limits. Councilmember Frate pointed out Glen Harbor is an industrial park. He said there are a number of large trucks that have to slow down to make turns. He agreed the speed limit in that area should be lowered to 30 miles per hour. He said the reduced speed limit proposed for Litchfield Park also makes sense given its proximity to 15 Luke Air Force Base. He pointed out a number of people voiced concerns about the rate of speed on Camelback during the public hearing on the recently approved charter school location. Mayor Scruggs opened the hearing for public comment on Item 12. Mr. Leonard Clark, a resident of the City of Glendale Barrel District, said he lives at 59th Avenue and Northern and has often complained to the city about the speed of traffic in that area. He said he does not see a problem lowering the speed limit on arterials. Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing. Ordinance No. 2299 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE CITY OF GLENDALE'S DOCUMENT ENTITLED "ALTERED SPEED LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE" PURSUANT TO GLENDALE CITY CODE SEC. 24-91; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Goulet, to approve Ordinance No. 2299 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate and Scruggs. Councilmembers voting "nay": none. 13. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE FOR 60 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 91s' AVENUE AND THE ORANGEWOOD AVENUE ALIGNMENT (ANNEXATION NUMBER 142) Mr. Jon Froke, Planning Administration Director, presented this item. This is a request to annex approximately 60 acres of land located at the northeast corner of 91st Avenue and the Orangewood Avenue Alignment (Annexation Area No. 142). The annexation process was initiated at the request of the property owner. The blank annexation petition was prepared and recorded on August 20, 2002. A public hearing on the proposed annexation, as required by Arizona Revised Statutes §9-471, was conducted by the City Council on September 10, 2002. There was no public comment on the proposed annexation. Annexation petitions have been circulated and the city has received a sufficient number of signatures to meet the statutory requirements for annexation. Property owners of at least one half of the value of the real and personal property, and more than one half of all property owners in the proposed annexation area have signed the annexation petition. The signatures have been reviewed for accuracy and sufficiency, per statutory requirements. The original signed petition has been filed with the Maricopa County Recorder's Office. 16 The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an ordinance increasing the Glendale city limits, as defined in the annexation petition for Annexation Number 142. Ordinance No. 2300 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, EXTENDING AND INCREASING THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, STATE OF ARIZONA, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 9, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 9-471, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES AND AMENDMENTS THERETO, BY ANNEXING THERETO CERTAIN TERRITORY CONTIGUOUS TO THE EXISTING CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE TO BE KNOWN AS ANNEXATION AREA NO. 142 It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Frate, to approve Ordinance No. 2300 New Series. Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate and Scruggs. Councilmembers voting "nay": none. 14. ANNEXATION ORDINANCE FOR 31 ACRES LOCATED NORTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF 83Ku AVENUE AND ORANGEWOOD AVENUE (ANNEXATION NUMBER 143) Jon Froke, Planning Administration Director, presented this item. This a request to annex approximately 31 acres of land located north of the northeast corner of 83rd Avenue and Orangewood Avenue (Annexation Area No. 143). The annexation process was initiated at the request of the property owner. The blank annexation petition was prepared and recorded on November 6, 2002. A public hearing on the proposed annexation, as required by Arizona Revised Statutes §9-471, was conducted by the City Council on November 26, 2002. There was no public comment on the proposed annexation. Annexation petitions have been circulated and the city has received a sufficient number of signatures to meet the statutory requirements for annexation. Property owners of at least one half of the value of the real and personal property, and more than one half of all property owners in the proposed annexation area have signed the annexation petition. The signatures have been reviewed for accuracy and sufficiency, per statutory requirements. The original signed petition has been filed with the Maricopa County Recorder's Office. The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an ordinance increasing the Glendale city limits, as defined in the annexation petition for Annexation Number 143. Ordinance No. 2301 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA EXTENDING AND INCREASING THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF 17 THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, STATE OF ARIZONA, PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 9, CHAPTER 4, SECTION 9-471, ARIZONA REVISED STATUTES AND AMENDMENTS THERETO, BY ANNEXING THERETO CERTAIN TERRITORY CONTIGUOUS TO THE EXISTING CITY LIMITS OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE TO BE KNOWN AS ANNEXATION AREA NO. 143 It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Martinez, to approve Ordinance No. 2301 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate, and Scruggs. Councilmembers voting "nay": none. 15. UPDATING OF SIGNATURE AUTHORITY Mr. Art Lynch, Chief Financial Officer, presented this item. The City has authorized signatures for deposit or withdrawal of checks. These authorizations need to be periodically updated due to changes in organization structure. It is recommended that the following individuals be authorized signers, effective immediately: Name Position Signature Authorization Ed Beasley City Manager City Manager Terry Zerkle Assistant City Manager City Manager Chris Zapata Deputy City Manager City Treasurer Pam Hanna City Clerk City Clerk Art Lynch Chief Financial Officer Assistant City Treasurer Acting City Tax Collector In addition, the City will have the two signatures as required for all checks over $50,000. The Assistant City Treasurer's signature is imprinted by machine and the second signature is signed on the check by hand. This ordinance would authorize the City's bank to honor the above signatures on electronic fund transfers, checks and drafts. The ordinance also re-affirms the authority of the following signatories pertaining to the non-banking activities of the City: SUPERINTENDENT SIGNATORIES Name Position Signature Authorization 18 Ken Reedy Deputy City Manager, Superintendent of Streets Public Works Larry Broyles City Engineer Assistant Superintendent of Streets The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt the ordinance updating signature authority. Mayor Scruggs asked, in situations where one of the signatures is done by machine, how do they ensure that person is aware a check is being issued with their signature. Mr. Lynch explained the signature plate is maintained in a vault and only accessible by that person. He noted three people review the check prior to it being distributed to ensure all of the signatures are valid and the amounts are accurate. Ordinance No. 2302 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, AUTHORIZING DESIGNATED OFFICERS TO DEPOSIT CITY FUNDS IN DESIGNATED BANK; DIRECTING SAID BANK TO RECOGNIZE THE SIGNATURES OF SAID OFFICERS ON ELECTRONIC FUND TRANSFERS, CHECKS FOR DEPOSIT AND/OR WITHDRAWAL; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to approve Ordinance No. 2302 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate and Scruggs. Councilmembers voting "nay": none. 16. REDISTRICTING ORDINANCE Rick Flaaen, City Attorney, presented this item. This is a request for the City Council to adopt an ordinance amending the Glendale City Code by setting forth the newly-approved six council districts for the City of Glendale. On November 26, 2002, the Mayor and Council held a public hearing for the purpose of receiving citizen input on the National Demographics Corporation's (NDC) recommended redistricting plan and three alternative redistricting plans. After the public hearing and discussion, the Council unanimously approved the NDC's recommended plan. Since that time, staff has been preparing the submittal packet for the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) for preclearance of the City's approved plan. Also since that time, four separate annexations have taken effect in the Yucca District. The addition of these areas increased the population of the Yucca District and the City's total population by four people. This change did not impact any other districts; did not 19 impact the total population deviation of the plan; and did not impact the "ideal population" for a Glendale district. Instead of approving a new redistricting map reflecting these annexations, staff suggests approval of the attached ordinance as the final step to redistricting which includes the newly-annexed areas. The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an ordinance amending the Glendale City Code relating to Council Districts. Ordinance No. 2303 New Series was read by number and title only, it being AN ORDINANCE OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, AMENDING THE CODE OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE II, DIVISION 1, BY AMENDING SECTION 2-20 RELATING TO COUNCIL DISTRICTS It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Martinez, to approve Ordinance No. 2303 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez, Frate and Scruggs. Councilmembers voting "nay": none. PUBLIC HEARING — RESOLUTION 17. AMENDMENT TO THE FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT ANNUAL ACTION PLAN Mr. Gilbert Lopez, Revitalization Manager, presented this item. This is a request for City Council approval of an amendment to the fiscal year 2002/2003 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Annual Action Plan. The amendment will allow the city to reallocate $150,000 of CDBG funds to the In-Fill Housing Program. The Community Development Advisory Committee voted in favor of the amendment on December 11, 2002. These funds were originally budgeted for contingency and service delivery for the Single Family Rehabilitation Program - $30,000 in FY 1999/2000 and $120,000 in FY 2000/2001. A reduction in contingency will not impact the services provided through the Single Family Rehabilitation Program. The contingency budget is being reduced in order for partners to continue to acquire available lots as part of the In-Fill Housing Program. The In-Fill Housing Program is designed to leverage funds to acquire land and to complete site improvements for the construction of new homes. As a result of partnerships developed with non-profit agencies, over the past three years, seventeen new homes have been completed or are in progress. Currently, program funds are nearly exhausted. In-Fill Housing Program partners have identified several lots available for purchase. In order to meet a Council priority and take advantage of current lot availability, the amendment process was selected to expedite available 20 funding. A competitive Request for Proposal process will be used to distribute funds to non-profit organizations and/or private entities. The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing, waive reading beyond the title and adopt a resolution authorizing the approval of the Amendment to the Annual Action Plan for FY 2002/2003 and submission of the amendment to the plan to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Councilmember Martinez asked if any additional money, beyond the $150,000 Contingency carryover, is available for infill housing. Mr. Lopez responded no. Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 17. As there were no comments, Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing. Resolution No. 3637 New Series was read by number and title only, it being A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE ANNUAL ACTION PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002/2003 TO THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT FOR THE REALLOCATION OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $150,000 TO THE IN-FILL HOUSING PROGRAM It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Goulet, to pass, adopt and approve Resolution No. 3637 New Series. The motion carried unanimously. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS 16. BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS Appointments are to be made to the following boards or commissions that have a vacancy or expired term: Effective Term Date Expires Commissions on Persons with Disabilities Grossman, Stan Chair Re-appointment 2/28/2003 2/27/2004 Flowers, Deborah Ocotillo Re-appointment 2/28/2003 2/27/2005 Denmon, Julie Barrel Re-appointment 2/28/2003 2/27/2005 Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission Grosscup, Phyllis Chair Re-appointment 2/27/2003 2/26/2004 21 Personnel Board Herman, James Chair Re-appointment 2/27/2003 2/26/2004 Ojala, Lillie Vice-Chair Re-appointment 2/27/2003 2/26/2004 The recommendation was to make appointments to the various Boards and Commissions. It was moved by Martinez, and seconded by Eggleston, to appoint the applicants listed above, for the terms listed above, to the Commission on Persons with Disabilities, Parks and Recreation Advisory Commission and the Personnel Board. The motion carried unanimously. REQUEST FOR FUTURE WORKSHOP AND EXECUTIVE SESSION It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Frate, to hold a City Council Workshop at 1:30 p.m. in Room B-3 of the City Council Chambers on Tuesday, February 4, 2003, to be followed by an Executive Session pursuant to A.R.S. 38- 431.03. The motion carried unanimously. CITIZEN COMMENTS Mr. Marvin White, a resident of the City of Glendale Sahuaro District, said he and his neighbors are upset about the proliferation of motorized scooters in his neighborhood, expressing his opinion they are both a public nuisance and a safety hazard. He said the city recently set up a timing device on 63rd Avenue which clocked the scooters going in excess of 40 miles per hour. He stated the kids use the half-mile and quarter-mile streets as a circular race track and residents in his neighborhood can no longer enjoy their yards because of the incessant noise. Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Beasley to pass Mr. White's comments on to the Police Chief for follow-up. She said, given the speed at which the kids are traveling and their use of streets as a circular race track, at least two ordinances are being violated. She asked that they also find out if the kids are using safety gear and if any of them are out after curfew. Mr. Leonard Clark, a resident of the City of Glendale Barrel District, thanked the Council for the respect they show citizens. He also thanked veterans and those currently serving in the armed forces for their service, asking that the city do its best to help them and their families during these difficult economic times. He stressed the importance of the city continuing to provide services to those who are suffering. COUNCIL COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS 22 Councilmember Clark reported a charity known as "Food for Children" is using the Maricopa County logo to solicit funds for their organization, however, according to the Better Business Bureau, only 20 cents of every dollar actually is going to feed children. She said, conversely, 99 cents of every dollar collected by the Westside Food Bank goes to people who need assistance. She encouraged everyone who wants to help to donate to the Westside Food Bank. Councilmember Lieberman announced a fundraiser for the Westside Food Bank will be held this Saturday in Surprise, noting the annual steak fry costs $20.00 per person. With regard to Mr. White's comments, he said the city does not have a strict ordinance pertaining to motor scooters. He stated his neighborhood also has a problem with motor scooters and he agrees with Mr. White that the city needs to develop and enforce a stricter policy. Councilmember Frate said, with the number of military personnel being sent overseas, including some reservists who will be away from home for up to a year, a number of families will be looking for support from the city. He spoke about the number of drownings and near-drownings the city has suffered lately, urging everyone to watch children around water. Mayor Scruggs emphasized the need for people to take responsibility for their actions, to follow common-sense laws and to be respectful of their neighbors. She said it is never easy to discuss budgetary problems, however, the city and its residents are faced with very serious needs. She referred to a call she received from a person who was frustrated that the city's Housing Department does not accept applications for subsidized housing on a regular basis. She explained applications are accepted for a three to four hour period at various times throughout the year. She said the fact that 1,300 calls were received during the last acceptance period speaks to how many people are in need of the city's assistance. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:48 p.m. Pamela Hanna - City Clerk 23