HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - Minutes - City Council - Meeting Date: 1/24/2006 MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF GLENDALE, MARICOPA COUNTY, ARIZONA,
HELD TUESDAY, JANUARY 24, 2006, 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; Pam Kavanaugh, Assistant City
Manager; Craig Tindall, 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 one resolution and two
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.
Mayor Scruggs welcomed Jeremy Fulgham, a member of the Ironwood High
School Government class.
APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 10, 2006 CITY COUNCIL
MEETING
It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Frate, to dispense with the
reading of the minutes of the January 10, 2006 City Council meeting, as each
member of the Council had been provided copies in advance, and approve them
as amended. The motion carried unanimously.
PROCLAMATIONS AND AWARDS
DISTINGUISHED BUDGET PRESENTATION AWARD
This is a request for the City Council to accept the Distinguished Budget
Presentation Award for exemplary budget documentation as reflected in the city's Fiscal
Year 2005-06 Budget Book.
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada
(GFOA) recently issued the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award for the city's
Fiscal Year 2005-06 Budget Book.
This is the 17th time that the city has been presented this award for its annual
budget document.
1
Each year the annual budget book is prepared to provide complete, readily
available information to the City Council, citizens, the media, other public agencies and
New York based bond-rating agencies. Preparation of the annual budget book reflects
positively on a local government's financial management, as it relates to providing
complete public disclosure of its financial condition. It provides valuable information on
topics as diverse as revenue and expenditure plans for the current fiscal year's
operating and capital budgets, as well as the 10-year capital improvement plan and
performance measures for departments.
The recommendation was to accept the Distinguished Budget Presentation
award.
Ms. Sherry Schurhammer, Management and Budget Director, presented the
award to the Mayor and Council.
Mayor Scruggs thanked Ms. Schurhammer for all she does.
2005 STATE CHAMPIONS — CACTUS COBRA FOOTBALL TEAM
This is a request for the City Council to issue a Proclamation of Recognition to
the Cactus High School Cobra's Football team, who recently completed an undefeated
season with a victory in the Class 4A-I State Championship Game. We are recognizing
the significant accomplishments achieved by the Cactus Cobras Football team and their
coaches, and expressing our gratitude for the pride and recognition they have brought
to themselves, their school, and the community of Glendale.
The recommendation was to present a Proclamation of Recognition to Head
Coach Larry Fetkenhier and the members of the Cactus High School Cobras Football
team.
Mayor Scruggs presented a Proclamation of Recognition to Head Coach
Larry Fetkenhier and the members of the Cactus High School Cobras Football
team. Those present were Team Captains: Jordan Flores, Anthony Freeman, Mike
Schmitt and Jonathan Tobin. Team Coaches: Brian Belles, Casey Fetkenhier,
John Babinchak, Ed Simpson, Aaron Walls, Paul Williams and Head Coach Larry
Fetkenhier.
Coach Larry Fetkenhier thanked the Mayor and Council. He said he is extremely
proud of their team and the community they represent.
Team Captains, Mr. Jordan Flores, Mr. Anthony Freeman, Mr. Mike Schmitt, and
Mr. Jonathan Tobin commented on winning the State Championship.
2
2005 NJCAA FOOTBALL CHAMPIONS — GLENDALE COMMUNITY COLLEGE
GAUCHOS
This is a request for the City Council to issue a Proclamation of Recognition to
the Glendale Community College (GCC) Gauchos football team, who recently
completed a perfect season with a victory in the 2005 Valley of the Sun Bowl. We are
recognizing the significant accomplishments achieved by the GCC Gauchos and their
coaches, and expressing our gratitude for the pride and recognition they have brought
to themselves, Glendale Community College, and the community of Glendale.
The recommendation was to present a Proclamation of Recognition to Head
Coach Joe Kersting and the members of the GCC Gauchos Football team.
Mayor Scruggs presented a Proclamation of Recognition to Head Coach
Joe Kersting and the members of the GCC Gauchos Football team.
Head Coach Joe Kersting said he would have liked to bring members of his team
to the meeting, but 16 of them have already transferred on to another school. He
stated Glendale Community College has a very particular recruiting policy, recruiting
only the best players they can get from the north and west Phoenix areas. He noted
their team had four traits this year; they knew how to work, they liked each other, they
love the game, and they cared about each other. He said he took a lot of pride in
coaching the team. He thanked the Mayor and Council for their recognition.
CONSENT AGENDA
Mr. Ed Beasley, City Manager, read Consent Agenda Item Numbers 1 and 2 and
Ms. Pamela Hanna, City Clerk, read consent agenda resolution Number 3 by number
and title.
1. FINAL PLAT APPLICATION FP04-03: PROVENCE — 7249 NORTH 91ST
AVENUE
This is a request by Precision Developments, Inc. for the City Council to approve
the final plat for Provence, a PRD (Planned Residential Development) subdivision
located at 7249 North 91St Avenue.
The proposed final plat is consistent with the General Plan and the existing R1-4
PRD (Single Residence, Planned Residential Development) zoning district. The
proposed subdivision creates additional residential housing opportunities for the city.
This development incorporates sound growth management techniques by utilizing the
surrounding infrastructure.
3
The site is located on the east side of 91st Avenue, approximately 721 feet north
of Glendale Avenue. The 37.17-acre parcel is being subdivided into 215 lots at a
density of 5.78 dwelling units per gross acre. Lot sizes vary from 3,113 square feet to
10,007 square feet. The average lot size is 4,127 square feet. The final plat meets the
requirements of the Subdivision and Minor Land Division Ordinance.
On November 25, 2003 the Council approved the companion rezoning
application (ZONO3-01) for R1-4 PRD for this subdivision.
This project provides housing variety, opportunity and a range in housing unit
diversity for the city.
A neighborhood meeting was held on April 9, 2003. Of the 60 people invited by
mail to the meeting, eight area residents attended. Issues discussed included lot and
home sizes, number of stories, lot coverage, street design and street entrances. Since
that time the applicant has been working on the improvement plans associated with this
subdivision.
The recommendation was to approve Final Plat Application FP04-03.
2. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT: GLENDALE MUNCIPAL AIRPORT
SECURITY FENCE
This is a request for the City Council to approve a construction contract with
Phoenix Fence Company, for the replacement of the four-foot perimeter fence with six-
foot security fence in an amount not to exceed $312,441.
The existing perimeter fence along Glen Harbor Boulevard is only four feet high
and does not meet the new Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) security standards.
The project includes installing new six-foot perimeter fence, along with replacing several
auto access gates with card access-only automatic sliding security gates.
In November of 2005, only one bid was received for this project and it was below
the engineer's estimate. Staff is recommending the award of the base bid to Phoenix
Fence Company, a qualified licensed contractor, in the amount of$312,441.
In 2002 and 2003, the city accepted an FAA grant in the amount of $150,000,
and an Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT) grant in the amount of$7,363 for
the installation of new airport perimeter fencing.
The Glendale Airport plays a major role in meeting the increasing demand for
aviation services in the West Valley. With the arena operational, the multi-use stadium
opening in 2006, and the continued development of hotels, along with destination retail
and entertainment facilities, the airport has experienced, and will continue to
experience, a significant increase in corporate jet traffic. With increased airport activity
4
comes additional security issues. The new airport perimeter fencing will improve airport
security.
The total cost, including design, construction and administration, is $357,601.
The design and administration component cost is $45,160, and the cost of constructing
the fence is $312,441.
Funding for this project is available from multiple sources:
• $150,000 from the FAA grant;
• $7,363 from the ADOT grant; and
• The city's matching amount of $200,238 in the GO Transportation
Program.
The design and administration costs have been allocated from the grant funds,
leaving $112,203 available in grant funding for the construction costs. The city's match
amount is available in the GO Transportation Program capital fund (Fund 33). A
transfer is required from Runway Protection Zone Land Purchase Account, No. 33-
9476-8320, in the amount of $192,291, to Replace Fencing — Airport Account, No. 33-
9475-8300, to supplement the $7,947 currently available in this account.
Grants Capital Expense One-Time Cost Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
X X X $312,441
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number
Replace Fencing - Airport Account No. 33-9475-8300 ($200,238 City Match)
Replace Fencing - Airport Account No. 34-8071-8300 ($112,203 Grant Funds)
The recommendation was to approve the transfer of $192,291 and the
construction contract with Phoenix Fence Company in an amount not to exceed
$312,441.
CONSENT RESOLUTIONS
3. INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE TOLLESON UNION HIGH
SCHOOL DISTRICT
This is a request for the City Council to adopt a resolution to enter into an
intergovernmental agreement (IGA) with Tolleson Union High School District for city use
of the Copper Canyon High School parking lot located at 9126 West Camelback Road.
The parking lot will be used for overflow parking during Cardinals football games,
mega events, and Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority events. In exchange for use of
the parking lot, the city will construct a lighting system for sports fields at the high
school.
5
This agreement furthers the Council strategic priorities of enhancing the quality
of life for Glendale residents, strengthening community relationship, and creating new
partnerships.
As part of the agreement with the Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority for the
development of the Cardinals Stadium, the city agreed to provide off-site, overflow
parking opportunities within a one-mile radius of the stadium. The IGA with the
Tolleson Union High School District/Copper Canyon High School provides for city use
of the school parking lot as overflow parking for Cardinals football games, mega events
and Arizona Sports and Tourism Authority events that will occur during non-school
hours.
In addition, both organizations will allow reciprocal uses of their recreation
facilities based upon availability and mutual agreement. The agreement establishes a
maintenance fund that both parties will contribute into for future repairs of the lighting
system. The school district will pay for electrical costs and the city will maintain the
lighting system.
Staff previously presented this agreement at the December 13, 2005 Council
meeting. This agenda item was tabled to address concerns regarding the scheduling of
each organization's facilities. The IGA has been changed to add language that requires
the joint development of an annual use calendar to assure that both parties are
receiving equitable benefit. The Tolleson Union High School District approved the
revised IGA at its January 10, 2006 school board meeting.
The lighted sports fields and reciprocal uses of school and city recreation facilities will
provide opportunities to offer expanded and joint recreation activities to the community.
Providing additional parking at the school will assist in reducing potential overflow
parking in adjacent neighborhoods during large events and football games.
The installation cost of the sports field lights will not exceed $350,000. The
installation cost is in the Fiscal Year 2005-06 Capital Improvement Budget. An
operating budget supplemental will be submitted for the Fiscal Year 2006-07 to fund
light replacement and parking lot cleaning.
Grants Capital Expense One-Time Cost Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
X X X $350,000
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number
Soccer Lights, 36-8941-8300, $350,000
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt a
resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into an intergovernmental agreement
with the Tolleson Union High School District.
6
Resolution No. 3921 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 AND DIRECTING THE ENTERING INTO OF AN
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE TOLLESON UNION HIGH
SCHOOL DISTRICT TO CONSTRUCT A LIGHTING SYSTEM FOR THE BALLFIELDS
AND USE OF PARKING FACILITIES AT COPPER CANYON HIGH SCHOOL
LOCATED AT 9126 WEST CAMELBACK ROAD IN GLENDALE.
It was moved by Clark and seconded by Lieberman, to approve the
recommended actions on Consent Agenda Item Nos. 1 through 3, including the
approval and adoption of Resolution No. 3921 New Series. The motion carried
unanimously.
PUBLIC HEARING — LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
4. REZONING APPLICATION ZON05-19: 6180 WEST UTOPIA ROAD
Mr. Jon Froke, Planning Director, presented this item.
This is a request for the City Council to approve the Planning Commission
initiated request to rezone the St. Thomas More Catholic Church Campus, from C-2
(General Commercial) to R1-7 (Single Residence), located at 6180 West Utopia Road.
The rezoning request is consistent with the General Plan.
The property is currently used as the St. Thomas More Church Campus. The
rezoning does not impact the present operation of the church or the future expansion
plans and ultimate full development of the St. Thomas More Campus. There are no
plans to close the church or develop the property for anything other than a church and
its related uses at this time.
The request is to rezone from C-2 (General Commercial) to R1-7 (Single
Residence). The requested rezoning would reduce the intensity of use for the property
should redevelopment occur in the future and would provide a zoning district that is
similar in character to the existing surrounding residential neighborhoods. The
requested rezoning would bring the property into conformance with the General Plan
designation of Medium Density Residential. (3.5 to 5 dwelling units per acre).
On December 15, 2005, the Planning Commission recommended approval of
the rezoning application.
The rezoning will reduce the intensity of use for the properties should
redevelopment occur in the future and would provide a zoning district that is similar to
the existing surrounding residential neighborhoods.
7
On November 4, 2005, notification letters were sent out to 230 neighbors and
interested parties informing them of this request. Staff received one phone call asking if
3.5 to 5 du/acre meant apartments or condominiums. Staff explained that it did not,
that the General Plan designation of 3.5 to 5 du/acre meant single-family residential like
the surrounding subdivisions.
The recommendation was to conduct a public hearing and approve Rezoning
Application ZON05-19.
Mayor Scruggs opened the public hearing on Agenda Item No. 4. As there
were no requests to speak, Mayor Scruggs closed the public hearing.
It was moved by Martinez, and seconded by Frate, to approve Rezoning
Application ZON05-19. The motion carried unanimously.
LAND DEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
5. DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION DR05-60: ARROWHEAD GATEWAY - 17700
NORTH 75'" AVENUE
Mr. Jim May, Deputy Director for Current Planning, presented this item.
This is a request by CTW-Arrowhead, LLC for the City Council to approve the
Design Review application for Arrowhead Gateway Shopping Center located at 17700
North 75th Avenue. The 9.9-acre site is located at the southwest corner of St. John
Road and 75th Avenue.
Council approval of this design review application is required as a stipulation of
the PAD (Planned Area Development) zoning on this property.
The proposed shopping center will promote economic development in the City of
Glendale. The development incorporates sound growth management techniques by
utilizing the surrounding infrastructure.
The applicant intends to construct approximately 65,359 square feet of retail
space on this site. Seven single-story buildings are proposed for the shopping center.
Thirty-five feet of landscaping is proposed along 75th Avenue to screen the residences
across the street. Two driveways are proposed on 75th Avenue. The project will use
muted earth-tone colors to complement the adjacent development.
The project promotes the development of vacant property and provides shopping
options that are compatible with the surrounding area.
8
A neighborhood meeting was held on August 29, 2005. A public meeting was
held and, of the 44 people invited, three attended. Some issues discussed were the
hours of operations for the restaurants and what types of establishments are being
proposed.
The recommendation was to approve Design Review Application DR05-60,
subject to the stipulations recommended by staff.
Councilmember Clark asked if the project would be phased. Kristi Kowalski,
Applicant, said they are not planning to phase the project.
Mr. Richard Leedv, a resident of the City of Glendale Cholla district, expressed
concern about additional traffic the development will bring to the area. He asked about
current and projected traffic counts in the area. He pointed out a new office building is
located west of the mall, stating it along with the subject project will bring 4,000 to 5,000
additional cars per day to 75th Avenue. He stated 75th Avenue already swings between
being a racetrack and a parking garage, depending on the time of day. He said the
street their home faces parallels 75th Avenue and is used by children and adults when
walking to the park. He stated accidents on 75th Avenue have resulted in cars hitting
the retaining wall that runs along their street and, if additional traffic will be placed on
75th Avenue, that wall needs to be reinforced. He referenced an article in the
Arrowhead Independent Newspaper wherein Ms. Kowalski is quoted as saying the
development could include a home improvement store, stating a home improvement
store is not part of the plan being presented to Council. He said he is opposed to
access to the site from 75th Avenue, explaining it will cause traffic to back up to Union
Hills.
Councilmember Goulet asked Mr. May if the applicant and staff ever discussed
installing a deceleration lane on 75th Avenue. Mr. May said the issue was discussed,
although he would have to check with the city's Traffic Engineer to know why it was
deemed unnecessary. He pointed out there will be four opportunities to turn right into
the project, one at St. Johns, two within the development and one on the mall access
road further south. Councilmember Goulet said he would like to hear from the Traffic
Engineer on the issue of a deceleration lane. Mr. Jamsheed Mehta, Traffic Engineer,
said the Traffic Engineering Department reviews traffic and other studies presented by
the applicant and makes its decisions based on that information. He stated he
assumes a traffic study was presented and it was concluded that a deceleration lane
was not warranted. Councilmember Goulet asked if the Traffic Engineering
representative who reviewed the subject project is present to comment. Mr. Mehta
responded no.
Councilmember Frate said 75th Avenue could handle the additional volume
because it and the other mall access roads were designed to accommodate the
maximum capacity of the mall. He said the two driveway cuts into the development
already exist and cannot be moved.
9
Councilmember Goulet explained he is not concerned about interior circulation,
but whether or not a deceleration lane should be installed for the northernmost or
central access points on 75th Avenue. He asked the applicant's representative if she
can confirm whether or not the issue was discussed. Ms. Liz Gasson, Applicant's
representative, said the project is part of the North Valley Specific Plan, which takes
into account the infrastructure, and ultimate use of all of the area parcels. She stated
they went through their pre-application meeting with the City's Engineering Department
and has fulfilled all of their requests. Councilmember Goulet again asked if they
discussed whether a deceleration lane on 75th Avenue was warranted. Ms. Gasson
stated a deceleration lane was never required. She offered to look at the issue with the
City's Engineering and Planning Departments.
Mayor Scruggs pointed out the Council is not considering rezoning the property
for commercial uses, stating that rezoning occurred in 1989. She stated the only issue
before Council is the design of the buildings. Mr. Froke agreed explaining projects in
the Arrowhead Town Center area are required to go through a Design Review exercise.
He assured Councilmember Goulet, if the Traffic Engineering Department felt a
deceleration lane was warranted, one would have been included on the site plan.
Councilmember Goulet explained his question was intended to allay Mr. Leedy's
concerns about the increase in traffic.
With regard to Mr. Leedy's concern about a home improvement store being
made part of the project, Councilmember Lieberman pointed out they are only
approving 65,359 square feet for all of the buildings combined. He said it would be
impossible for one of the large home improvement stores to locate in that small of a
space. Mr. Froke agreed, stating the applicant was speaking of a smaller scale home
furnishings retail establishment.
Councilmember Clark said the area was master planned many years ago. She
said she hopes Mr. Leedy is not the victim of assurances given at that time that certain
parcels would be developed in particular ways. She stated, while she is certain an
original traffic study was done in the area, she would like to know when the most recent
traffic study was done and if it corroborated the findings of the original traffic study. Mr.
Froke said he is not certain of the date of the most recent amendment to the original
traffic study. Councilmember Clark stated Arrowhead Mall has been far more
successful than anyone originally anticipated and her assumption would be that traffic
has far exceeded the original traffic study's assumptions. She suggested conducting
another traffic study if one has not been done in recent years.
Councilmember Frate reiterated the streets were designed to accommodate the
mall at full build out. He said the project has a good mix of uses and a lot of thought
appears to have gone into the plan. He stated the applicant provided opportunities for
citizen input and worked to address the concerns of those who commented.
10
Councilmember Lieberman noted the "topping out" ceremony for the mall
occurred in November 1992, stating he believes the layout of the mall area has worked
very well.
It was moved by Frate, and seconded by Lieberman, to approve Design
Review Application DR05-60, subject to the stipulations recommended by staff.
The motion carried unanimously.
BIDS AND CONTRACTS
6. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT - DOWNTOWN PEDESTRIAN
ENHANCEMENTS
Mr. Terry Johnson, Deputy Transportation Director, presented this item.
This is a request for the City Council to approve a professional services
agreement in an amount not to exceed $1,495,871 with Kimley-Horn and Associates for
design and construction management services for downtown pedestrian
enhancements.
This project supports Council goals of public safety, creating transportation
options, and enhancing the quality of life for Glendale residents.
This proposed project includes the design and construction management of the
Downtown Pedestrian Enhancements.
Principal projects will include:
• Rehabilitation of existing pedestrian facilities;
• Extension of downtown improvements, including sidewalks, lighting,
landscaping, street furniture, and under grounding utility lines;
• Alleyway improvements;
• Completion of planned improvements along Glendale Avenue from 51st to
67th avenues; and
• Pedestrian-related intersection improvements.
These improvements are defined in a Design Concept Report (DCR) dated
November 2005 and follow the Glendale Downtown Streetscape Design Guidelines as
adopted by Council in December of 1994. Construction will be staged to minimize
impact on downtown events. The proposed schedule for construction to be completed
is October 31, 2007.
In December of 1994, the city adopted the Glendale Downtown Streetscape
Design Guidelines.
11
The proposed pedestrian improvements will continue to provide an attractive and
harmonious appearance for this important part of the city, further enhance the pride of
ownership that Glendale residents have in their downtown, and contribute to the overall
long-term commercial redevelopment of the area.
In November of 2001, Glendale voters approved the half-cent transportation
sales tax package, including a ballot map of bicycle and pedestrian projects that
identified pedestrian circulation improvements in the downtown area. The Citizens
Transportation Oversight Commission has been involved in developing the design
concept report, and downtown business interests have been supportive through the
Downtown Development Corporation. This project was presented at public meetings
that were held as part of the Glendale Onboard Transportation Program. Project-
specific public meetings are planned for the citizens and businesses in the project area.
Funds for this professional services agreement in the amount of $1,495,871 are
available in Fiscal Year 2005-06 and Fiscal Year 2006-07 of the Glendale Onboard
Transportation Program.
Grants Capital Expense One-Time Cost Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
X X $1,495,871
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number
Downtown Pedestrian Circulation, Account No. 33-9467-8330
The recommendation was to approve the professional services agreement with
Kimley-Horn Associates, Inc. in an amount not to exceed $1,495,871.
Councilmember Clark referenced Exhibit A, Scope Items Not Included in the
DCR, asking if Items 7 through 11 indicate they will not be designed or constructed at
this time. Mr. Johnson explained some of the design concepts were not included in the
original Design Concept Report because they are still being developed. He said those
concepts would be completed in the next couple weeks and given to the consultants.
Councilmember Lieberman pointed out they still need to see a. bid for
construction since the subject contract only calls for design and construction
management. Mr. Johnson agreed stating bids for construction would go out once the
design has been completed. He said they anticipate the design being completed in
October and that construction will take as long as one year.
Councilmember Martinez asked what alleys have been identified for
improvements. Mr. Johnson was unable to recall the specific alleys, but offered to
provide an answer to Councilmember Martinez at a later time.
12
Councilmember Goulet said, in the past, when the Council has considered
construction contracts that could impact various parts of the city, they have always
looked at the special events calendar year. He asked if consideration was given to
special events scheduled in the downtown at various times throughout the calendar
year. Mr. Johnson said language would be put into the contract setting forth-particular
dates when construction activities will not be allowed.
It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to approve the
professional services agreement with Kimley-Horn Associates, Inc. in an amount
not to exceed $1,495,871. The motion carried unanimously.
7. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT - MASTER PLAN UPDATE FOR
THE GLENDALE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT
Mr. Jamsheed Mehta, Transportation Director, presented this item.
This is a request for the City Council to approve a professional services
agreement with Coffman Associates to perform a master plan update for the Glendale
Municipal Airport.
This project addresses the Council's strategic priority of creating transportation
options.
On September 10, 2002, the Council accepted an Arizona Department of
Transportation (ADOT) grant to fund an airport master plan update and eastside
drainage study. The most recent master plan update was completed in 1997, and both
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and ADOT recommend that master plans be
updated every five to seven years. The ADOT grant is for$135,000.
In May of 2004, a Request for Proposal (RFP) process was initiated to select a
consultant to perform both the master plan update and eastside drainage study. Five
proposals were submitted to the Engineering Department on May 19, 2004 and the
review panel, with representatives from the city's Transportation and Engineering
Departments, Phoenix Aviation, and the Aviation Advisory Commission met on May 27,
2004. The panel evaluators scored and ranked all of the proposals. Coffman
Associates was recommended by the panel with the highest ranked proposal.
The City Attorney's Office, the FAA and ADOT reviewed the proposed contract
and submitted comments. These comments were incorporated into the final contract
document and, in March of 2005, the FAA approved the contract.
The master plan update will include a continuous public input process, managed
by a Planning Advisory Committee (PAC). The PAC will be composed of the following
stakeholders: officials from Luke Air Force Base, representatives of local, regional,
state, and federal agencies, local community representatives, and airport users and
tenants. The master plan update will take an inventory of current infrastructure at the
13
airport, do an aviation demand forecast, and project the aviation facility requirements.
The master plan update will also look at different development alternatives for the
airport, complete an updated airport layout plan and come up with a financial plan to
help accomplish all of the designated projects.
The Glendale Aviation Advisory Commission Chairman was on the review panel
that evaluated and scored the proposals.
The total cost of the project is $161,750. The city's matching share of$26,750 is
available in the GO Transportation Program (Fund 33). A transfer is required from the
Airport Pavement Preservation, Account No. 33-8592-8330 in the amount of $21,750 to
Airport Master Plan Update, Account No. 33-9471-8330. FAA and State grants are
administered through Account No. 34-8072-8330.
Grants Capital Expense One-Time Cost Budgeted Unbudgeted Total
X X X $161,750
Account Name, Fund, Account and Line Item Number:
Airport Master Plan Update, Account No. 33-9471-8330 ($26,750)
Eastside Drainage and Master Plan, Account No. 34-8072-8330 ($135,000)
The recommendation was to approve the transfer and professional services
agreement with Coffman Associates in an amount not to exceed $161,750.
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Frate to approve the transfer and
professional services agreement with Coffman Associates in an amount not to
exceed $161,750.
ORDINANCES
8. CITY CODE SEC. 13-9 AMENDMENT: CITY COURT WARRANT FEE
Presiding Judge Elizabeth Finn presented this item.
This is a request for the City Council to adopt an amendment to the ordinance
Section 13-9 City Court Fees, authorizing the assessment of a warrant fee.
This request addresses the Council's strategic priority of providing financial
stability.
The court, detention, prosecutor's office, public defenders and police are
required to perform substantial efforts when defendants fail to appear for their
scheduled court date or fail to pay their fine. Yet, with the exception of a civil default
fee, there is no added penalty for these defendants who are charged with more serious
criminal offenses. The city does not currently attempt to recoup the costs associated
with generating the warrant and its related activities. As a court of limited jurisdiction,
14
Glendale City Court does not have the inherent authority to recover some of these
costs. A statute or city ordinance is required. The existing ordinance allows for a court
improvement fee, default fee and collection fee.
After surveying many courts throughout Arizona, most courts assess warrant
fees ranging from $45 to $239 per case.
Execution of warrants can occur by either a police officer arresting the defendant
or the defendant appearing in court. Either method produces additional steps for both
the court system and police agencies. If established, this fee would be a way for the
city to recoup some of the costs for labor extended by more than one department. The
court issues approximately 600 warrants per month.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and amend
ordinance Section 13-9 to authorize the assessment of a City Court warrant fee in the
amount of$75 per case.
Ordinance No. 2480 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 GLENDALE CITY CODE CHAPTER 13, ARTICLE I,
BY AMENDING SEC. 13-9 RELATING TO CITY COURT FEES.
It was moved by Goulet, and seconded by Clark, to approve Ordinance No.
2480 New Series.
Councilmember Frate referred to a memorandum authored by Judge Finn
wherein she says, "As a court of limited jurisdiction, the Court does not have the inherit
authority to recover court costs. In order to recover these costs, a statute or city
ordinance is required. He said the action being taken by Council is intended solely to
recover the cost of doing business.
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. Members voting "nay": none.
9. WATER AND SEWER REVENUE OBLIGATIONS
Mr. Ray Shuey, Chief Financial Officer, presented this item.
This is a request for the City Council to approve an ordinance authorizing the
sale of up to $80,000,000 of water and sewer revenue obligations. An emergency
clause is needed so that the ordinance will become effective immediately to address
interest rate fluctuations in financial markets. The proposed February 7, 2006 sale
funds projects approved in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2005-06 Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP).
15
Proceeds will fund budgeted FY 2005-06 CIP projects that meet goals of
providing financial stability, managing growth, preserving neighborhoods, and
enhancing the quality of life for residents.
A team from the Budget, Engineering, and Finance departments met to review
available funds for projects in FY 2005-06. They consulted with the city's bond counsel,
Greenberg Traurig, LLP, and financial advisor, Johnson Consulting Group, LLC. The
team determined that sale of water and sewer obligations are prudent based on market
conditions and projected cash flow. The city would receive funds from the sale around
February 28, 2006.
Council adopted the FY 2005-06 budget, including water and sewer CIP projects
in June 2005. The adopted budget anticipated financing of projects. In October of
2003, the Council adopted Ordinance No. 2530 New Series, which authorized issuance
of revenue obligations that are junior and subordinate to previously issued city water
and sewer revenue bonds. In September of 1993, the Council adopted Ordinance No.
1784 New Series, which amended the city's master water and sewer ordinance with
respect to rate covenants applicable to the sale of additional bonds and covenants
applicable to operation of the systems. In December of 1984, the Council adopted
water and sewer master Ordinance No. 1323 New Series. The proposed sale of the
2006 obligations is consistent with the previous Council actions.
Financing proceeds will fund a variety of approved water and sewer CIP projects,
including construction of the Oasis Water Campus, improvements to the Cholla and
Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plants, construction of the stadium water line, 83rd
Avenue and Bell Road Lift Stations, 91St Avenue waste water treatment plant
improvements, and other related projects.
The obligations will be paid from water and sewer fund pledged revenues.
Estimated revenues in the current and future fiscal years are anticipated to adequately
fund repayment of the outstanding and proposed obligations. The city continues to
covenant to maintain water and sewer rates, fees and charges at a level sufficient to
pay the existing and proposed water and sewer system obligations.
The recommendation was to waive reading beyond the title and adopt an
ordinance approving the issuance and sale of water and sewer revenue obligations.
Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Shuey to identify the specific CIP projects
covered under the bond sale. Mr. Shuey said projects include the Oasis Water
Campus; improvements to the Cholla and Pyramid Peak Water Treatment Plants,
construction of the stadium water line, 83rd Avenue and Bell Road lift stations, 91st
Avenue Wastewater Treatment Plant improvements, and other related projects.
Councilmember Clark asked if some of the projects involve substantial costs. Mr.
Shuey responded yes.
16
Councilmember Lieberman asked if the tentative water treatment plant north of
Northern at Grand Avenue is included in the list of projects. Mr. Shuey answered yes,
explaining it is referred to as the Oasis Water Campus. Councilmember Lieberman
asked if there is a limit on the number of bonds the city can sell at this point in time. Mr.
Shuey stated it is their intention to sell the entire $80 million on February 7. He
explained the covenants are based on net water and sewer revenues multiplied by the
number of payments that need to be made, noting the city meets those covenants. He
said the money is needed to pay for previously approved water and sewer Capital
Improvement Plan projects. Councilmember Lieberman asked how much of the $80
million will go towards the Oasis Water Campus. Mr. Bailey, Utilities Director, said the
guaranteed maximum price for the Oasis Water Campus project is about $56 million,
staged over 2.5 years. He noted the $80 million bond sale would cover only a portion of
the project.
Councilmember Clark asked Mr. Bailey what the Oasis Water Campus would do.
Mr. Bailey said the campus represents the city's newest water treatment plant and the
first phase includes construction of a 10 million gallon surface water treatment plant.
Councilmember Martinez asked if the $80 million uses all of the city's bonding
capacity. Mr. Shuey explained the $80 million represents obligations, not bonds;
therefore it does not fall under the city's bonding capacity.
Ordinance No. 2481 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 THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF A
PURCHASE AGREEMENT, A SUPPLEMENT TO THE TRUST AGREEMENT, A
CONTINUING DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT, AND, IF REQUIRED, AN OBLIGATION
PURCHASE CONTRACT; APPROVING A PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT;
APPROVING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF NOT TO EXCEED $80,000,000
SUBORDINATE LIEN WATER AND SEWER REVENUE OBLIGATIONS, SERIES
2006, EVIDENCING A PROPORTIONATE INTEREST OF THE OWNERS THEREOF
IN THE PURCHASE AGREEMENT; DELEGATING THE DETERMINATION OF
CERTAIN PROVISIONS; AUTHORIZING THE TAKING OF ALL OTHER ACTIONS
NECESSARY TO THE CONSUMMATION OF THE TRANSACTION CONTEMPLATED
BY THIS ORDINANCE; AND DECLARING AN EMERGENCY.
It was moved by Clark, and seconded by Lieberman, to approve Ordinance
No. 2481 New Series. Motion carried on a roll call vote, with the following
Councilmembers voting "aye": Clark, Goulet, Lieberman, Eggleston, Martinez,
Frate, and Scruggs. Members voting "nay": none.
17
REQUEST FOR FUTURE WORKSHOP AND EXECUTIVE SESSION
It was moved by Eggleston, and seconded by Martinez, to hold a City
Council Workshop at 1:30 p.m. in Room B-3 of the City Council Chambers on
Tuesday, February 7, 2006, to be followed by an Executive Session pursuant to
A.R.S. 38-431.03. The motion carried unanimously.
CITIZEN COMMENTS
Ms. Jessica MacQueen, a resident of the City of Glendale, said she is new to the
valley and when she went to the Police Department to file a report she was harassed by
an officer who claimed she assaulted someone. She said the officer took her arm,
twisted it, and put her into handcuffs. She asked the city to ensure the Police
Department is tolerant of people who ask for assistance, explaining she was victimized
when her wallet was stolen and she feels she was victimized again when she tried to
file a police report.
Mayor Scruggs assured Ms. MacQueen that her comments would be noted,
pointing out several members of the Police Department were present in the audience.
COUNCIL COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS
Councilmember Goulet congratulated Glendale Community College for having
won the National Championship.
Councilmember Frate said it is always exciting when local students are able to
play in and win national games. He stated the city should be proud of the students who
came before Council, stating they do a great job representing the city. He urged
everyone to watch children around water and learn CPR.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Aes
Pamela Hanna - City Clerk
18