HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 1/16/2001 * PLEASE NOTE: Since the Glendale City Council does not take formal action at
the Workshops, Workshop minutes are not approved by the City Council.
MINUTES
CITY OF GLENDALE
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP
January 16, 2001
1:30 p.m.
PRESENT: Mayor Scruggs, Vice Mayor Eggleston, and Councilmembers Clark,
Frate, Goulet, Lieberman, and Martinez.
ALSO PRESENT: Martin Vanacour, City Manager; Ed Beasley, Assistant City
Manager; Rick Flaaen, Acting City Attorney; and Pamela Oliveira,
City Clerk.
1. FISCAL YEAR 2002-2011 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN
CITY STAFF PRESENTING THIS ITEM: Mr. Charlie McClendon, Management and
Budget Director; and Ms. Sylvia Forry, Budget and Research Analyst.
As part of the annual budget process, the City Council adopts a capital improvement
budget, consisting of improvements such as City buildings, streets, water and sewer
lines, and parks. The Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) process has been revised to
provide the Mayor and City Council an earlier opportunity for input, discussion, and
prioritization of the projects within the plan. Due to growth in assessed valuation, there
is an estimated $8 million in additional capacity for capital projects in Fiscal Years 2001-
02 through 2004-05. In year five of the capital plan, Fiscal Year 2005-06, an additional
$13.5 million is available for new projects. The purpose of today's workshop was to
receive Council priorities for projects for Fiscal Years 2002-2011.
Budget staff presented the revised process schedule to the Mayor and City Council at
the November 16, 2000 Goal-Setting Session and the November 21, 2000 Council
Workshop.
Throughout the CIP public hearing process, public notices will be posted in accordance
with the Open Meeting Law and City policies.
The total Fiscal Year 2000-01 CIP budget is $96,640,498. The Fiscal Year 2001-02
CIP budget is currently in development.
The recommendation was to review the available capacity and priorities for CIP projects
and provide staff direction. Budget staff will work with the Management Team to
develop the Fiscal Year 2002-11 CIP, based on input received from the City Council.
1
In response to Councilmember Clark's question, Mr. McClendon reported a total
assessed valuation of $876 million.
Mayor Scruggs asked if any of the collections for the water and sewer service go to
General Obligation Bond debt for water and sewer projects. Mr. McClendon said
General Obligation Bonds were the financing source used on some outstanding debts
in the water and sewer fund. He explained that, in those cases, they do not use the
secondary property tax to repay the debt - they use water and sewer rates. Mayor
Scruggs asked if they would issue any more General Obligation Bonds for water and
sewer projects. Mr. McClendon said the plans do not call for any because they have
exhausted most of the General Obligation authority that existed in water and sewer.
Mayor Scruggs asked if revenue bonds are tracked the way other bonds are. Mr.
McClendon confirmed that they are tracked and that they plan exactly what future debt
payment will be. He said it is somewhat more difficult with regard to water and sewer
because the water and sewer rate structure is influenced not only by the debt payment,
but also by the capital projects they are paying for through cash and the systems
operating costs. He said the amount dedicated to retiring revenue bonds fluctuates
because they also have a fluctuating component in the cash capital component and the
amount of fund balance they are able to use each year. He said, however, they watch
it closely and it is an important part of analyzing where the fund needs to be and what
needs to happen in the future.
Councilmember Clark asked if staff predicates the City's ability to pay back bonds with
future rate increases when they plan major projects. Mr. McClendon stated that the
long-range projections allow them to put in assumptions in terms of what the capital
requirements will be and the way in which they finance it. He said they could then tell if
a rate adjustment would be necessary. Councilmember Clark asked if the Council is
told whether a rate increase is built in or not at the time they consider approval of major
water projects. Mr. McClendon said it is his intent to discuss with the Council not only
the capital requirements of the fund, but any possible implications. Mr. Lynch explained
that when they get ready to do the bond sales, they look at revenue and coverage
requirements at least one year into the future to make sure they have enough reserve
amounts available to cover any unanticipated items. Councilmember Clark noted their
CIP budget looks five years into the future. Mr. Lynch said they actually do projections
out through 2010 on debt service or however far out the bonds go. He noted they have
$8,175,000 in principal amount of the General Obligation water and sewer debt. He
said they look at the existing and projected revenues, as well as current and proposed
debt service when determining what the water entity can afford.
Councilmember Clark asked, when they flag a project, if they note a shortfall and
determine a rate increase will be necessary. She also asked if that information is given
to the Council when they are making their decision on a project. Mr. Lynch explained
that they note shortfalls and times when there is extra revenue. He stated that the rate
study would be brought to the Council separately. Councilmember Clark stated that
they need to see the totality of the picture when deciding whether to approve a project.
Mr. McClendon said they have a plan to bring that kind of comprehensive picture to the
Council. Councilmember Clark stated that she appreciated the fact that they will bring
information together, marrying both components.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if revenue projections on General Obligations funds
take into account fluctuations in the economy. He explained that a recession might
make it difficult to repay. Mr. McClendon stated that revenue projects are based on
assessed valuation, starting with the current assessed valuation and adding a projected
moderate growth each year. He said, over time, it has proven to be an accurate way of
2
calculating those projections. Councilmember Lieberman asked how they covered their
General Obligation debt during the last recession. Mr. Lynch explained that they not
only used the assessed valuation as a measure, but had a component of fund balance
maintained for emergency shortfalls.
Councilmember Martinez said he remembered hearing about projects that were
delayed during the last recession and asked if there would be an opportunity to make
necessary adjustments if a recession should occur again. Mr. McClendon agreed that
this happened during the early 1990's. He explained that they did not take on any new
debt and, instead, deferred and delayed existing projects until the economic indicators
started recovering.
Councilmember Goulet said it would be prohibitive to base a project of any size on what
might be perceived as a future raise in rates and emphasized that the City does not do
it that way.
Mayor Scruggs asked if the amount dedicated to debt service goes in as a constant
when the CIP projects are formulated. Mr. Lynch stated that the debt service on bonds
is based only on the current level of debt service and current rates being charged. He
said future projections allow the City time to react or respond to issues that may come
up. Mayor Scruggs explained that, if the Council knows ahead of time that a project
would lead to a rate increase, it might not let the project work its way through the CIP
process. Mr. McClendon said past rate calculations and planning processes have not
started with the assumption that a certain percentage of the rate would go towards
debt; however, that could be done in the future. He said they plan on building the
process so that this kind of information is brought to Council.
Councilmember Clark asked if the estimated assessed valuation of $8 million in
additional capacity was their moderate estimate. Mr. McClendon expressed his opinion
that it was a good estimate, based on what they think is logical and reasonable to
expect to happen in the economy. He said, however, that if the assessed valuation
growth again exceeded estimates, the plan would be revised next year.
Airport Projects
Councilmember Clark asked why the $2.9 million and $1 .4 million set aside for Airport
projects had been moved back to Fiscal Year 2007-11. Mr. Tim Ernster, Deputy City
Manager, explained that they have tentative approval for approximately $1 million in
grant funds for the next fiscal year which would be used towards strengthening and
widening the runway. He stated that the next step in the process would be to receive
funding to extend the runway on the west side of the runway to match the existing
runway. He said the eastside taxiway and the taxiway stubs and aprons should really
be in Fiscal Year 2004-05. He said they currently do not have funding secured for the
runway extension or the east taxiway. Councilmember Clark asked if they would have
better information when they bring the final CIP back to Council. Mr. Ernster stated that
they would.
CIP Grants Projects
Councilmember Clark asked for an explanation as to why the Congestion Mitigation &
Air Quality (CMAQ) grant amount for Fiscal Year 2001-02 had increased. Mr. Jim
Book, Transportation Director, explained that they apply for CMAQ grants on an annual
basis and have actually gotten a number of different projects. He stated that they had
3
asked them to aggregate for the City and, if possible, move the project forward.
Mayor Scruggs asked Mr. Book what signal computerization would allow the City to do.
Mr. Book explained that they are designing and building a backbone system that would
include Glendale Avenue from 43ru Avenue t9 the Freeway, 59`h Avenue from
Camelback to Bell Roads, and Bell Road from 83ru to 51st Avenues. He said one of the
million dollar grants is for a traffic management center and the City is co-locating t1.11
with the Emergency Operations Center located at Fire Station No. 157, 9658 North 59
Avenue. He said their initial program is to have cameras at intersections every two
miles. He noted that co-locating with the Emergency Operations Center would extend
camera capabilities to the Fire Department in emergency situations. He said, from the
backbone streets, they expect to extend and ultimately connect all signals. He noted
that the City has secured another CMAQ grant for Fiscal Year 2006 for approximately
$900,000. He said the purpose of that grant is to tie the north end of the freeway
system together.
Mayor Scruggs asked if the traffic management system would alter the signal timing
when situations arise. Mr. Book explained that real time monitoring allows for signal
timing changes when incidents occur, as well as event planning, to assist with traffic
flow during major events. He stated that the system would also allow them to better
interface with the City of Phoenix. He explained that the City currently has to go out
and open the cabinets at each intersection to alter timing every time the City of Phoenix
makes a change to its timing from its computer console.
Cultural/Historic Projects
Councilmember Lieberman expressed his appreciation for the $13 million set aside for
Fiscal Year 2007-11 . He stated that he would like to see some money put into cultural
projects this year to build a stage for the Civic Center or to work on the church which
the City owns.
Councilmember Goulet asked if an inventory had been done, identifying homes or
properties deemed as historic. Mr. McClendon said no specific locations or properties
were identified when the Bond Committee worked on it. He stated that he did not know
if the Planning Department or anyone else has done an inventory since then.
Councilmember Martinez asked why project locations had not been identified. Mr.
McClendon stated that, in many cases, specific sites are not identified, particularly on
projects that are planned far out in the future. He stated that staff would work with the
Council during the interim to determine the appropriate location for a project.
Economic Development Projects
Councilmember Clark asked if they currently had any money available for economic
development and, if so, how much. Mr. McClendon stated that there was $1 million of
Economic Development bond money in the current year of the Capital Plan, as well as
the Opportunities Fund established by the City Council. Mr. Jim Colson, Economic
Development Director, stated that specific projects had not been identified for those
funds. He explained that their intent was to invest that money for use as an incentive in
getting companies to locate in the City of Glendale. Councilmember Clark asked what
form that incentive would take. Mr. Colson said they had not limited the form which the
incentive could take. He explained that it would be identified based on the needs of the
project.
4
Councilmember Clark asked if they were completing an infrastructure assessment of
the western area. She explained that it was her belief they may need to allocate some
CIP funds to implementing that assessment. Mr. Ernster said they had a number of
studies in place to evaluate the infrastructure of, not only the west side, but, the entire
community as well. Mr. Anderson noted that water and sewer infrastructure needs
were addressed in the memo which was presented to the Council by Mr. Ernster. He
said they would determine depth of sewer and adequacy of water resources to allow for
the intended growth.
Councilmember Clark asked if a telecommunications assessment had been done. Mr.
Colson said they had worked closely with fiber providers in the area to identify main
hubs and what would be available. He stated that specific decisions regarding the
location of fiber could not be done, but they had tried to identify where major hubs
would be needed. He said they had concluded that they could get fiber to a user within
90 days.
Councilmember Lieberman expressed his opinion that project 9607 should be moved
forward by at least five years to be able to manage and support the infrastructure that
will happen along the Loop 101 and Glendale Avenue. He suggested trading some of
the money reserved for the Field Operation Complex.
Mayor Scruggs agreed that the project should be moved up, although not necessarily
as early as Councilmember Lieberman had suggested.
Councilmember Clark also agreed. She explained her position that when the Council
approves the Western Area Plan this year, it would send a signal that the City is
encouraging development in the area and she wants to know that a minimum amount of
infrastructure is in place to accommodate that development. Mr. McClendon explained
that all projects for which they have not received specific direction from the Council
show up in the second five years. He said they would move it up, in whole or in part, if
directed to do so by the Council. Councilmember Clark stated that they did not know
how much should be moved forward because they did not know how much was
needed.
Councilmember Goulet stated that they would also have a recommendation from the
Citizen's Committee about the future downtown growth and redevelopment. He said
citizens have asked whether adequate funding would be available to support those
recommendations. He asked if the City was poised to respond to those
recommendations in a timely manner. Mr. Colson said technical advisory groups have
identified specific initiatives or potential projects, including costs and potential sources
of funds. He stated that no projects could go forward until a funding source and the
impact on the City budget have been identified.
Mayor Scruggs stated that some funds would be available. She noted that $4.2 million
which was set aside in last year's CIP had not been used. Mr. McClendon reported that
those funds are in a Streets and Parking fund, in an account labeled Downtown Urban
Design Plan. He noted that the use of this money would have to be compatible with the
Streets and Parking bond language.
Councilmember Lieberman expressed his opinion that the City should hire a consultant
to draw plans for developing the Loop 101 area.
5
Mayor Scruggs asked if a consultant was looking at the Loop 101 corridor. Mr. Colson
stated that they had hired a consultant, who looked at capacity for development in the
area. He said they had identified major uses and were working to determine the next
step.
Councilmember Martinez agreed that money needs to be moved up with regard to the
Loop 101 corridor.
Mayor Scruggs directed staff to work on moving up the Loop 101 corridor development.
Vice Mayor Eggleston asked staff to educate itself on fiber optic possibilities in the area.
Mr. Colson said they had identified a couple of factors that have a significant impact on
whether a company chooses to site in a geographic territory. He explained that the first
factor is the availability of labor and the second is the availability of infrastructure, with
fiber optics being one of the most important. He said they were comfortable that they
have the major hubs available to meet a company's needs.
Flood Control Projects
Mayor Scruggs asked for confirmation that flood control was only short $1 .1 million.
She stated that they had asked for the entire $8 million available in General Obligation
funds for Bethany outfall at the first budget retreat in November of 2000. Mr.
McClendon said, since then, Mr. Grant Anderson, City Engineer, was able to negotiate
with the Flood Control District and move money from other existing flood control
projects, to bring the amount needed down to $1.1 million.
Mr. Anderson explained that the Bethany Home Outfall project was the last of the
remaining major outfalls. He stated that the $1.1 million was necessary to match what
the Flood Control District would need to meet their Board of Supervisor's requirements
for an intergovernmental agreement. He stated that $1 .7 million was needed in the fifth
year for the repayment due at that tjme. He said the City of Glendale's total need for
the Bethany Home Outfall from 75t" Avenue to New River was slightly less than $10
million, spread over those five years. He said that represents less than one-third of the
total cost of the outfall itself. He said they have moved monies from other flood control
projects to ensure the outfall is built first, with the pipes to connect to the outfall being
built in future years.
Mayor Scruggs voiced Council's approval of allocating the additional $1 .1 million.
Government Facility Projects
Vice Mayor Eggleston said he was unaware of the operating impact of rebuilding the
Field Operations Center. Mr. McClendon explained that anything in the second five
years usually reflects five years of operating impacts, making the annual cost one-fifth
of that amount. He explained that later phases of the project involve bringing in
elements that have not previously existed or are much larger than what previously
existed; therefore operating costs are more significant.
Mayor Scruggs asked if decisions were based on departments that have the most
difficulty operating under their present environment. Mr. McClendon said it was his
understanding that they were.
6
In response to Vice Mayor Eggleston's question, Dr. Vanacour explained that the office
complex would house Public Works, Utilities, Parks and Recreation, and other
departments. He stated that the Financial Center would not accommodate those kinds
of needs.
Open Space Trails Projects
Councilmember Frate said he would like to see money set aside to implement
improvements identified in the Thunderbird Paseo study. Mr. McClendon explained
that the Thunderbird Paseo Soccer Field project would partially address some of the
issues because it would dqvelop some green space in the bottom of Paseo between
Thunderbird Road and 67t" Avenue. He said full landscaping might require bringing
water in, turning it into a more expensive project with possible water fund implications.
He said a lot would depend on what the study recommends.
Mayor Scruggs asked how water would be brought to the soccer fields. Mr. McClendon
stated they would use the same system that exists further down the field. He said the
best way to handle water implications would be to bring the recommendations forward
as part of the more comprehensive review of the water system. Mayor Scruggs noted
that this was the second year they have had improving Thunderbird Paseo as a Council
goal. She said she shared Councilmember Frate's concern that money needs to be
available to implement the recommendations made by the study. She suggested
setting aside $250,000. Dr. Vanacour said he would suggest that more be set aside
because they know that they will have to import water. He suggested setting aside a
minimum of $500,000.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if water was being provided to Thunderbird Paseo
from the Arrowhead Waste Water Treatment Plant. Mr. Anderson explained that all of
the Arrowhead affluent was currently used in the Arrowhead area. Councilmember
Lieberman asked if they had, at one time, considered watering the freeway, as well as
Thunderbird Paseo, with reclaimed water from that facility. Mr. Anderson said part of
the landscaping for the Loop 101 was included in the Master Plan; however none of the
Master Plans that the original developer took over included Thunderbird Paseo.
Councilmember Frate asked for confirmation that the $500,000 would be set aside this
year. Mayor Scruggs stated that it would be set aside in Fiscal Year 2001-02.
Park Projects
Councilmember Clark asked what the $500,000 which was budgeted for the Western
Area Regional Park would accomplish. Mr. Warren Smith, Parks and Recreation
Director, explained that the $500,000, together with an additional $400,000 in carry over
from bonds and an additional $400,000 in carryover from Development Impact Fees
(DIF), would be used for improvements to the 88-acre park. Councilmember Clark
asked if, after the $1.3 million in improvements were made, the park would begin to
look like a park. Mr. Smith stated that it would. He noted that they were in the process
of hiring a consultant to design the site. He said they would determine what exactly
could be done with the $1.3 million once the site plan has been developed.
Councilmember Clark noted that the park at 79th and Missouri Avenues has been
dropped. Mr. Srrath explainpd that they acquired 22.6 acres from developers in thq
area between 75 and 83ru Avenues, with a nine-acre neighborhood park at 75t"
Avenue and Camelback Road and 2.5 acres of a developed parkland at 79th and
7
Missouri Avenues. He said they hoped to purchase an additional three acres from the
Berry property. He said they betleved those acquisitions would satisfy the
neighborhood park development for 79t" and Missouri Avenues. Councilmember Clark
asked if there were any plans to install park equipment to satisfy the concept of a
neighborhood park. Mr. Smith said Flood Control will hold public meetings and
determine what the neighborhood would like to see at the parks. He confirmed that
money had been set aside for the Grand Canal/Regional Park development.
Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Smith if he was comfortable with the fact that the
amount of. funds available for the Western Regional Park Development/Grand Canal
Linear/79t and Missouri Avenues park infrastructure would allow the City to move
toward developing it as usable space. Mr. Smith said they had sufficient funds to make
a significant statement in terms of the Grand Canal/Linear Park project.
Councilmember Lieberman asked where the north area pool would go. Mr. Smith said
it would go at the Foothills Park Phase II site at 57" Avenueand Union Hills Drive.
Councilmember Martinez asked if the $5 million originally set aside for the north multi-
generational facility was still sufficient. Mr. Smith stated that he had been directed to do
a value engineering of that project to ensure that the amount was still adequate.
Mayor Scruggs said the west multi-generational facility needs to have its operating
impact raised to at least equal the north facility, if not exceed it.
Councilmember Goulet asked what money was currently available for renovations to
the community center. Mr. Smith said approximately $75,000 was awarded in a
community development block grant fund and they were in the process of completing a
feasibility study to determine opportunities for improvement of the building.
Councilmember Goulet asked when the feasibility study would be completed. Mr. Smith
said it had been taken to the Parks and Recreation Commission for input.
Councilmember Goulet asked if it was possible that they would need to have monies
available to do some improvements this year. Mr. Smith said the Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds have to be used within two years. He stated
that, once they receive the actual costs from the feasibility study, they need to identify
the additional amount of money required.
Mayor Scruggs suggested that they put money aside in Fiscal Year 2001-02 as a
placeholder. Mr. Smith said the feasibility study initially showed it would cost from
$462,000 to $520,000. Mayor Scruggs asked to have $500,000 set aside in Fiscal Year
2001-02.
Councilmember Clark asked if money could be moved up for development of the soccer
complex at 71st and Orangewood Avenues. Mr. Smith noted that there was a total of
$750,000 for that site in Development Impact Fees (DIF) in Fiscal Year 2003-04. He
said those funds would be sufficient to develop a plan and possibly implement some
improvements.
Vice Mayor Eggleston mentioned the soccer field at 63rd and Northern Avenues.
Councilmember Clark said this was the soccer field she had meant. Mr. Smith said
they considered soccer fields at that location when the plan was first put together. He
stated that, since that time, they had worked with the grant office and believed they may
be able to develop that site as an outdoor adventure center.
8
Mr. Smith confirmed for Councilmember Goulet that the property had not yet been
turned over to the City. He estimated that the time for it to be turned over to the City
would be within the next couple months.
Mayor Scruggs said the Sahuaro Ranch guest house needs to be renovated. He noted
that the Historical Society utilizes the house, as well wedding parties and other visitors.
She suggested that they build an actual visitors center, which would allow the Historical
Society to move out of the guest house into a formal office, thus providing wedding
parties with a place to get ready. She asked staff to determine the cost of a true
visitor's center. The Council expressed their support of Mayor Scruggs' suggestion.
Ms. Pam Kavanaugh, Deputy City Manager, updated the Council on the status of the
Adult Center. She stated that, depending on the options chosen by the Council, it could
result in a cost increase of $2 to $4 million.
Mayor Scruggs asked if that would be part of the $8 million. Mr. McClendon stated that
it would be. Dr. Vanacour said it might come in closer to the $2 million estimate. He
stated that he had asked Mr. Art Lynch, Finance Director, to research what it would cost
if it was financed over 15 or 17 years.
Ms. Kavanaugh stated that she would bring the item back in February of 2001 .
Councilmember Martinez asked if any progress had been made on acquiring land
around the Foothills Park. Mr. Smith said he had attempted to contact the owner on
several occasions and had asked Ms. Kris Luna, Property Manager, to do the same.
He said they were told that the owner was in the process of discussing it with someone
in the area who had a hold on the property. Councilmember Martinez said the property
owner contacted him some time ago, indicating that he was interested in selling the
property to the City.
Councilmember Goulet said he would be supportive of spending more money for the
Sands Park improvement and asked if additional land was available. Mr. Smith stated
that a portion of the land would house the Sensory Park, with the required
improvements coming out of the remainder of that land.
Public Safety Prolects
Mayor Scruggs expressed her opinion that the money set aside for purchasing land for
the Court building in Fiscal Year 2002-03 was premature and should be moved back.
Councilmember Martinez said the Council needs to consider that the land will be
needed and prices will continue to go up.
Councilmember Clark asked to hear from a judge on the issue. Ms. Jean Baxter, City
Judge, said the purchase of land is not really a court issue. She stated that the Court's
current facility is fully occupied and her position has been that it was her responsibility
to plan for future needs.
Councilmember Clark said she would support Mayor Scruggs' suggestion to move the
money back.
9
Councilmember Lieberman asked why they did not use the two courtrooms in the
Justice Court office building. Mr. Ken Reedy, Deputy City Manager, said their space
study analysis concluded that the Information Systems (IS) Department needed to be
moved outside of the building, yet be close enough to the Public Safety building to have
access to the significant infrastructure located there. He said the Council had approved
the design for the Information Systems building in December of 2000. He said it was
more urgent to move Information Systems staff out of the building to accommodate
growth. Councilmember Lieberman questioned whether that was the best usage of the
building. He explained that very little money would have to be spent to use it as
additional courtroom space.
Mayor Scruggs asked if a professional had ever done a space study regarding
expanding the court in the Public Safety building. Mr. Reedy said they had not done a
complete space analysis of that facility. He stated that they should probably look at the
entire public safety facility in the next year or two to figure out where they go next.
Mayor Scruggs suggested that they could make better use of the space if it was
redesigned. Dr. Vanacour stated that they could have an architect look at the Public
Safety building.
Vice Mayor Eggleston agreed that the land acquisition money for the court should be
moved back.
Councilmember Lieberman said he would like Project 8022 moved forward to this year
or next because it is something that is needed immediately.
Mayor Scruggs agreed.
Councilmember Clark also agreed.
Councilmember Goulet asked if the fiber optics were intended to aid solely in training
staff or in facilitating notification of calls for service. Mr. Brooke Edwards, Fire Chief,
stated that they were not ready to go online because some fire stations were not yet
capable of receiving fiber optics. He said it was his understanding that it would be for
the entire communications package.
Mayor Scruggs asked if they had remodeled Fire Station 153. Mr. Edwards stated that
they did. Mayor Scruggs noted that last year's Project 8556 had $1.1 million to
accommodate expanded services, including the replacement of a ladder truck and
increased staffing at Fire Station 153. She said they now have Project 8021 to remodel
and upgrade three stations and purchase a ladder truck for the same $1.1 million. She
asked how that worked. Mr. Mike Harrington, Acting Assistant Fire Chief for
Essential/External Resources, said Project 8556 never occurred and they were trying to
reallocate those funds to remodel several fire stations. Mr. Edwards said the project
was placed in the budget and should be moved forward if the Council believed it was a
worthy project. He acknowledged that the $1.1 million was probably inadequate to
remodel all of the stations identified and purchase a new ladder truck. Mayor Scruggs
asked for an indication as to the urgency in terms of the ladder truck. Mr. Edwards
explained that the Insurance Service Organization (ISO) recommended that the City
have three ladder trucks. He said they do not have a good facility to take care of the
central area and have discussed different ways of accommodating ISO's
recommendation, including the purchase of a quint or remodeling a station to
accommodate a ladder truck.
10
Councilmember Lieberman asked for confirmation that the $1 .1 million set aside last
year had not been spent. Mr. Edwards explained that the projects were moved forward.
Mr. McClendon said that money had been reallocated to a different project this year.
Councilmember Clark suggested that they move the $1.1 million up to Fiscal Year
2005-06.
Mayor Scruggs and the Council agreed with Councilmember Clark.
Vice Mayor Eggleston asked about the ongoing operating impact of the new fire station.
Mr. Mcglendon stated his belief that, based on what he had seen being requested by
the 83r Avenue and Bethany Home Road station for next year, they would have to
increase that amount. He said the biggest cost for a fire station is the firefighters,
engineers, and captains required to staff the station. He said maintenance costs,
electricity, and other sundry items make up the rest of the costs.
Street Projects
Councilmember Clark asked if the sound wall project listed under Highway Users
Revenue Funds (HURF) and the sound wall project under the General Fund were
related. Mr. McClendon explained that, initially, the freeway sound walls and
landscaping were a HURF project and were much smaller. He said, last year, the
Council had asked them to look at ways to fully fund that project, so it was set up as a
General Fund project funded through lease purchase financing. He said it no longer
shows up as a HURF project because the elements that were part of that project are
being completed as part of Phase I.
Councilmember Martinez said he thought Project 8812 was underway. Mr. Anderson
said the project currently underway goes from 71st to 73rd Avenues. He stated that they
still have the complqtion of a collector frontage road and storm drain from 67th Avenue
to approximately 701 Avenue. He said they hoped that development in the area would
reduce that amount in the near term.
Councilmember Clark asked if some money could be moved up to start Project 9568
this year. She explained that the road is dangerous to pedestrians because the curb,
gutter and sidewalk are not in good condition. Mr. Anderson said they had been
awaiting direction on those sections that do not have any curb, gutter or sidewalks.
Mayor Scruggs noted that those funds would have to be moved from another project.
Mayor Scruggs asked how they would widen 59th Avenue from Wescott Drive to
Beardsley Road. Mr. Anderson explained that incomplete roads in that area need curb
and gutter replacements. He said 59th Avenue also needs additional right turn lanes,
full sidewalks, and landscaping improvements. He noted that there are many times of
the day that the road does not handle the traffic load. Mayor Scruggs asked Mr.
Anderson if he was comfortable with where that project had been placed in the budget.
Mr. Anderson said the timeframe seems to work. Mayor Scruggs asked if they foresaw
any improvements to the road coming from development. Mr. Anderson said he hoped
so, but it would depend on the timing of development in the area. Mayor Scruggs
expressed her opinion that the traffic situation near the Foothills post office has reached
a hazardous level.
11
Councilmember Martinez said improvements to 59th Avenue from Westcott Drive to
Beardsley Road need to be moved up because development of the Foothills Park is
scheduled to start this year. Mr. Anderson said they would look at what could be done
to provide safer pedestrian access to the new park.
Mayor Scruggs asked about Project 9557. Mr. Anderson explained that last year's CIP
indicated a project from Williams Drive to Pinnacle Peak Road; however, it was
determined to be HURF Fund eligible and made to include Isabell Lane. He said the
project is currently scheduled for Fiscal Year 2004-05. He noted that some
development north of Williams Drive actually paid for some of the improvements that
were originally in the capital plan.
Mayor Scruggs said she was told by Mr. Anderson that Project 9570 should be
removed. Mr. Anderson said this was correct. He explained that the Budget
Department discovered they had submitted two projects.
Mr. Book noted the Post Office switched its drop-off approach. Mayor Scruggs said
people still cannot get into the parking lot causing traffic to back up onto 59th Avenue.
Mr. Book stated they reviewed that site prior to construction and told the Post Office
that was exactly what would happen. He said the Post Office accepted their comments,
but chose not to take heed.
Transit Projects
Councilmember Clark asked why the Park and Ride facility was listed at $6 million last
year and increased to $8 million this year. Mr. Book explained that they had used a ball
park number when the project was originally placed in the budget. He said the budget
was increased as the project became more site specific and the size was determined.
He said the study originally called for the parking of 400 vehicles, which was increased
to 800. Councilmember Clark asked if the increase was necessary. Mr. Book agreed
that the increase might be optimistic. He said they could possibly use the same
approach used by the Dreamy Draw facility. He explained that they chose to only
implement the first half of the parking, with the second half contingent on use.
Councilmember Clark asked if the facility would be designed to serve people in the
northwest valley rather than all Glendale residents. Mr. Book stated that it would be.
Councilmember Clark asked if there was any support from surrounding communities.
Mr. Beasley reported that the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) had asked
that the project be suspended until further information could be obtained regarding the
best location for traffic. Councilmember Clark asked if that $500,000 had been freed
up.
Mayor Scruggs pointed out that the funds do not fully belong to the City of Glendale.
Mr. McClendon explained that the City of Glendale has 20%, or $100,000, of that
project. Dr. Vanacour said they might want to hold that money until they determine
exactly what they will do. He explained that, if they turned the money back, they would
not be able to show the matching funds required for the project. Councilmember Clark
asked if they could look at reducing the number of parking spaces. Mr. Beasley said
there would be an opportunity to talk about the location and additional capacity for
parking.
Councilmember Clark requested that MAG-related items be more fully narrated,
especially those related to the City's budget. Councilmember Clark suggested having
two 400-space parking lots rather than one 800-space parking lot.
12
Civic Center Protects
Councilmember Clark asked why renovations and maintenance remain in Capital
Improvements. Mr. McClendon said, by definition, Capital Improvement projects
generally include major renovations and improvements to existing facilities. He said
their other option would be to fund them through Government Facilities bonds; however,
they are fully allocated at this time.
Councilmember Clark said they had originally programmed $500,000 in Fiscal Year
2001-02 and $500,000 in Fiscal Year 2002-03. She stated that they reprogrammed the
first $500,000, with $200,000 going to additional storage space and $300,000 going to
landscaping and lighting. She asked if they would put an additional $500,000 in Fiscal
Year 2003-04 for plaza enhancements or if they would be done with the remaining
$500,000. Ms. Paula Ilardo, Marketing Director, explained that the $1 million original
amount was optimistic and could not happen with the current number of structures in
the downtown area. She said the $500,000 allotted for Fiscal Year 2004-05 would not
be necessary because there would be no room left for storage facilities.
Mayor Scruggs said they could use other funds if circulation could be improved to allow
for additional improvements to the Civic Center.
Mayor Scruggs stated that she was uncomfortable with waiting until Fiscal Year 2007-
2010 to include the maintenance reserve. She asked how they would fund routine
maintenance of the facility prior to that time. Ms. Ilardo said they were currently using
warranty money. She acknowledged that there was no long-term money for major
repairs or changes in equipment.
Councilmember Clark suggested that they reprogram the enhancement money from
Fiscal Year 2002-03 into maintenance to start a maintenance reserve. Ms. Ilardo
stated that the only reason they would need the enhancement money was if the
courtyard and fountains project exceeded the $300,000 budgeted. Councilmember
Clark recommended that they put $300,000 into maintenance reserve, keeping the
remaining $200,000 programmed for enhancements should the courtyard and fountain
project bids come in higher than expected.
Mayor Scruggs asked Ms. Ilardo if there was any plan to start a maintenance reserve
and preservation plan account. Ms. Ilardo said they were currently investigating what
maintenance issues are covered by warranty and how much would be needed in a
supplemental account. She acknowledged the need for a maintenance reserve of
some amount.
Councilmember Lieberman asked if they had set up $400,000 for facility maintenance a
few years ago. Mr. McClendon explained that the General Fund includes general
maintenance funds and a building maintenance reserve; however, the amounts were
established prior to the time that the City had a Civic Center.
Councilmember Clark asked if funds brought in by the Civic Center could be used for
maintenance. Ms. Ilardo said it would be quite a while before they break even and
would have money available for other uses.
Councilmember Lieberman said he would like to see an annual fee included in the
budget and suggested that $100,000 is set aside. Ms. Ilardo said they were
researching ongoing costs at other facilities.
13
Mayor Scruggs revisited Councilmember Clark's suggestion of moving $300,000 from
enhancements to create a maintenance reserve.
Mr. McClendon said the suggestions made by both Councilmembers Clark and
Lieberman for an annual appropriation would have to come through the annual
budgeting process.
General Fund Projects
Councilmember Martinez pointed out no monies had been set aside past Fiscal Year
2003-04 for sound walls. Mr. McClendon explained that they have monies set aside in
the operating budget to repay the amounts borrowed, but those projects represent the
completion of the planned sound walls.
Councilmember Clark said they would see more than $119 million appropriated over the
next five years for water and sewer. She said it makes a good case for the re-
establishment of the Council Committee on Utilities. She noted that water and sewer
consumes 42% of the CIP over the next five years. She asked the Council to consider
setting caps or specific percentages for funds in following fiscal years.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 p.m.
14