all right good afternoon welcome to the city of glendale council workshop session of april 12 2022 meeting this call to order i'm not going to call roll call all council members are present and accounted for so with that ms barr let's go right on into item number one would you announce that please fiscal year 2022-23 community development block grant public service funding recommendations good afternoon mayor members of the council here today to lead our staff report will be first jean marino our director of community services she'll be assisted by the very capable matthew hess who is our revitalization administrator i love that term that title of the job and it's certainly we have a lot of evidence of that happening and so gene you and matthew can take it away thank you mr phelps good afternoon mayor and council so today we'll be presenting the community development block grant public service grant award recommendations from the community development advisory committee and we'll be looking for consensus recommendation from council to move forward to adopt those in our action plan and we also wanted to get some feedback from the city council at the conclusion of your consensus regarding the process as you know we've made several improvements to our grant application process over the last couple of years and so we wanted to get some additional feedback from you on just the process in general so with that i will turn it over to mr huss thank you ms moreno um mayor members of the council before we uh discuss some of this the specific recommendations i'd like to give you a little background on this year's funding cycle some of the selection criteria that the cdx determined to make those uh make those recommendations so we did receive 22 applications this year which is a little bit above normal requesting just under 1.2 million which is about three times what we actually have available if you recall cdbg allows up to 15 of your total allocation towards public services which is generally in the 370 000 range we did receive a considerable range of requests from uh seven thousand to three hundred and seven thousand seventy thousand dollars uh in terms of the the request themselves um it did run the the vulnerable populations that were requested to be served did run the gamba but most were designed requested to serve the disabled seniors and youth with the services that you see here mostly for physical mental health and self-sufficiency education and food and nutrition so prior to reviewing the applications uh staff met with the cdac and the subcommittee to determine exactly what scoring criteria would be used um we have these six uh general themes at the cdac used to rate the applications and you'll see the actual ratings in your council packets one was administrative costs keeping those under 10 percent um additional cost sharing and what other resources the agencies would be bringing to the table in order to leverage the city's resources obviously the impact to glendale residents and the cost per unit of service if they had any additional partnerships or the organizations they were bringing to to supplement and provide a more more holistic service prior performance for those organizations that have received funding in the past and um and capacity of those agencies one one thing of note that was a little bit different you notice in the list of applications that we did receive there were a number of applications that were not recommended for funding because obviously we had not enough to fund everybody and so we did discuss with some of those recommended agencies or the agencies that were not recommended for funding to provide other sources of funding potentially for those so looking at the request the type of service the benefit to glendale the cdac felt that those were valuable services but given the amount of money that is available they thought it would be prudent to be able to try to pair those requests for funding to other agencies and so we did make some phone calls to those other agencies to see if they would be amenable to either getting funding through the master services agreement or some other funding sources and so that was a way that the cdac was able to not give a hard no to agencies because they did value those services but understanding that there was not enough money to fund all services in full and so here is the list of cdac recommendations you see that beyond those that you see other than those agencies right that you see in your council packets the cia did recommend to fund all other agencies in full with a couple of small sections and so we're asking today for consensus direction to fund these grant applications at the levels that the cdac has recommended so with that we would be open to any questions you may have about the applications or the recommendations good thank you mayor um i did have one question for the glenn croft uh the promoting food security what it what is that is that for the community or i thought the residents that were there got got meals so i just wanted to understand what that what that it means promoting food security so uh mayor councilmember tomas that is a food pantry for residents and low-income staff so residents are able to purchase residents and some of their staff are able to purchase subsidized food okay all right thank you anyone else yes ma'am yes i i'm just uncomfortable with one one grant that has been recommended and that's one step beyond and it targets disabled kids through the use of of hockey which is problematical for the city these days i would think that something that does nearly the same thing which is physical therapy for persons with severe disabilities might be a better way to add more money to them rather than supporting one step beyond in its program at this time that that's the only comment that i would make mayor council member clark um certainly it's the council's decision as to what um applications are funded i can say in the context of the the ask the the service that is being provided is it's creating teamwork and self-sufficiency among those disabled and also the athletic the benefits of participating in athletic program well then thank you mayor i would ask council to see if they're interested in consensus in moving that money from one step beyond to valley life mayor if i might mayor and councilmember clark um i did want to point out that the recommendation to fund valley life at 9 945 represents the their entire request so that that does it correct yes well then i would amend that request to the rest of council and say i would like to see the allocation one step beyond move another agency that of your choosing of staff's choosing mayor and council member were certainly welcome to entertain any recommendations from the council we are certainly looking for consensus today this particular request does meet and does target a specific population that is aligned with our consolidated plan focused on youth education and disabilities yeah i mean yeah um hold on a second uh the operation enduring gratitude i've actually dealt with that uh two or three times and i think as you have uh and that's one group that i i'm not sure was the 40 000 what they asked for or is that what was agreed to give to them yes mayor that's correct that's the full ask which is amazing to me because i i know that they can easily go through that they've got one one home build that they've got way more than that in just for one veteran already so if there was any money that was transferred from one and put somewhere else i'd certainly like to see it go to them because i know they have the ability to use it up so for whatever it's worth i i don't have any problem with any of these personally the operation enduring gratitude i've seen a lot of benefit come out of that to a lot of a lot of members so if that money did come out of that other one and went anywhere that's where i'd personally like to see it go who had the next question you did uh yeah i'm a strong supporter of one step beyond um they have a facility in my district and have operated there i've been to their peoria facility they do some pretty amazing things with handicapped children now i'm not sure exactly what this hockey teach life skills is but i doubt they're going to be using the arena or the the coyotes facilities um they're probably going to use the perhaps the uh the ice stand up in peoria and uh and perhaps you know other places where they can do that or even just a land hockey out on the tennis court so i would uh be in favor of leaving that there just because i think they do a great service for our handicapped teenagers and and kids anyone else mayor good thank you mayor um have we uh have we supported other programs at one step beyond um and is this that because i mean i've been i've been to plays there i know that they have a culinary department that um i've been to events where they're culinary and that's a young and who's not familiar with it it's a it's a one step beyond basically is for young adults once they graduate from high school um it's a bit that aren't aren't um going to be attending college um that that there's a place for them to go and learn skills and have social activities and they do a lot of a lot of neat stuff but i was just i can't remember whether i've seen them in there and is this hockey program something new that they're trying to launch uh mayor councilmember thomas this would be the second year of funding so fy 2122 they were funded at their full ask of ten thousand dollars uh mayor if i could for this hockey program correct oh i don't even recall that okay um i would say though i mean not i don't think all of these are actually located in um in glendale and and um one step beyond is in glendale so would be here yeah i mean i i know that they're over off of bell road over there by um you know across from arrowhead mall so um i don't know you know just sounds the fact that it's a glendale operation i feel like maybe we shouldn't take the money away from this especially if we funded this program in the past that's my feeling mayor yes i i have no problem with one step beyond it's just this particular offering and their request and i do like your idea of moving that money to the program to repair vets homes and you're right it doesn't you know 40 000 doesn't go very far when you're talking about repairing someone's home also i think the focus may be missed was with inflation the way it is what is it 8.5 was announced today if anything seniors and youth and other groups are going to have trouble getting food and if we were going to focus on anything it would be also food food safety for a lot of people these days thank you any other comments thank you mayor thank you again mayor i just want to say i'm comfortable with this uh proposal for one step beyond it was mentioned that hockey somehow has become problematic and i just want to say i don't have a problem with hockey or any other sport all i've ever had a problem with is taxpayer subsidy of professional sports this is clearly not that and this has been all of these proposals have been reviewed in depth by our our cdac and these are their recommendations personally unless i had a really solid reason not to support something i'm happy to go with their recommendation thank you sarah thank you i mean these are these all have other resources i mean um i mean it's not like boys and girls club i mean all of these people on this list have resources to fund programs outside of what we're doing they they apply at other cities they apply for other grants so i would imagine um you know everybody on this list has got you know the operation enduring freedom is that what it's called is not going to be existing just on the 40 000 on this sheet i mean they've got other other places where they can get funding so this is just for cdbg money only right marion councilmember told me trump that's correct this is just for the 15 that's dedicated to public services okay mayor and if i could follow up then will there be other opportunities to um uh and is there other uh opportunities that operation enduring freedom has applied through us for uh mayor and council member trump trump not specifically through community services but many of these organizations would also be eligible to apply for grants through the pass-through through the tribes as well as through from the heart as well okay thank you mayor good thank you mayor councilmember turner really took my comments i'm fine the way it is the way it's presented to us if we were going to move dollars operation during gratitude would be one that i would support i've worked with them quite a bit in the community here but i do want to just say that they don't have a continued and regular revenue stream what they do is they find people to help they get in there and get their hands dirty and then they go out and look for funds and sometimes they don't even get the funds they just people volunteer and give the material lows for one home depot for the other but they don't have a regular funding stream so coming to the city of glendale on this dollar amount may not even cover their needs because of the inflation and the material backlog and stuff like that but i just want to make sure everyone understands that they don't have a regular funding mechanism this would be very helpful to them and they have help a lot of people in the community but what's what's presented to me today i have no problem with i i know that previously there was an issue there was a item that came to us with regard to solar i didn't think that was appropriate but today i think everything here is appropriate thank you yeah and i'll finish up and i guess we'll move on the operation enduring gratitude again my point was if we're gonna move money that's where i'd like to see it go in the past my office has actually given uh amounts of money to them along with what vice mayor spoke of is donations from not only home depot lowe's folks like that but glendale business anti-glass they have literally saved veterans and spouses of veterans from from losing their homes and becoming homeless so all these people work they donate their time a large volunteer force shows up uh it's a it's a great effort and and they've gotten a lot of good news coverage on it as far as what they do so uh that one probably more than all of them i certainly support but if any money was going to be moved that's where i'd like to see it moved i don't have any problem with with the way this is laid out i'm not going to second guess the folks that made the recommendations but the operation enduring gratitude is is really i think that's one of the the really sweet spots that we have in our glendale court for our non-profits it does an amazing job so with that any other discussion so we have a consensus as this is laid out right now yes okay so then thank you mayor so the last thing that we wanted to talk to you about is just the overall process i mentioned early on that we've made some significant changes as to how we run our grant program on an annual basis and so thanks to the policy direction the previous policy direction of the council we've been able to really create a laser focus to ensure that the investments are aligned with council's priorities and that are thoroughly reviewed by our community development advisory committee which is appointed by the council and so you can see that we utilize a consistent matrix to rank these applications um cdx subcommittee meets and really vets all of these applications and makes recommendations to the full committee and then it comes to the council so what we wanted to talk to you about today is this actual workshop that we come to um and providing an option certainly at council's pleasure of whether or not you want us to come back with these recommendations at a workshop on an annual basis or if you would like because of the fact that we have instituted some significant and consistent changes as to how we run the grant application process what we would do is come back to you at the beginning of the grant cycle make sure that we're aligned with it so as an example if you decided that for next year's public services grants you wanted to focus on specific types of services or serving specific populations we could set that out on the front end and then go through the process utilizing the scoring matrix etc and then still provide that information to you via memorandum how you would still have an opportunity to ask us any questions but then rather than coming back to a workshop take that to a voting meeting because of the fact that this has become a routine business um and there's not um there's you know because of the policy decisions that council has already previously made and have been implemented so it's just an option but we are certainly happy to continue to bring this forward to the council for public discussion in terms of reviewing sedoc's recommendations yeah a question i have for you from the heart when are those decisions made from the heart marin county mayor and council members i would have to follow up with you on that because that does not follow under our department as far as the decisions i know the applications typically close in february but we can follow up with some information right now i'm asking if there was a way that we could synchronize that along with what we're doing right this minute it would be nice to know what's getting covered what isn't if some are getting double double grants it'd just be nice to be able to put a package together to where if somebody doesn't get funded we know the other one could cover that thank you barry i'd be happy to work with miss rios on that ma'am go ahead thank you mayor question um i heard from an organization and and rightfully so i that what they brought to me um so they i asked why this organization um hasn't applied for cbd and this is just too difficult now so back in maybe 1516 we changed the process i think you have to have some type of business plan do you know what that is that's preventing some from applying because they feel like they need to hire grant writers or other individuals they can really get this through the pipe and it's just too difficult i think it needs to be somewhat difficult but anything you know that's changed marin vice mayor if anything we've made it a lot easier since 1516 um so the you know the process improvements that we've made over the last two years have really been designed to make it easier for maybe less sophisticated or less experienced organizations to submit for those grant awards so i'd be happy to do some follow-up with them just to make sure that a we have them on our distribution list so they're receiving notifications because not only do we push out notifications about our grant process but when we receive notifications about rfps that the county or the state are doing we push those out to our nonprofit providers as well so we'd be happy to do some follow-up um and if the feedback that we're getting is that our process is still challenging for um for nonprofits to apply we would love to get that feedback so that we can continue to improve okay and this is one organization but a really important organization i'll get you the information you can speak with them thank you thank you actually mr milner uh thank you uh regarding the council feedback that you're talking about um i like the idea of getting us giving you some feedback early on so we can kind of give you some priorities where we think we should go but i i kind of like the idea of it still coming to council i know last year we had some changes we made we saw some things that we wanted changed and i think it still is valuable for council to have that brought back to a workshop where we can you know spend a few minutes to review it and discuss it okay thank you mayor um and i agree with council member milner and i mean i we would be able to get the information anyway but one of the other valuable things of coming to a workshop is it's it's it's presented in an understandable format to the public and it provides transparency on how we're you know how this money is being used in our community so um i i think there's i think there's value in that that's my opinion thank you thank you mayor i agree with the previous statements i would like to see as much made public and this is a public forum i like the idea of getting involved in the process early so that we can give direction in terms of our priorities i like the idea of having a workshop where we can re review the recommendations and it's a public process thank you mayor anyone else okay great thank you thank you mr item number two wigwam annexation and 237 annexation of 4.38 acres located south and west of the southwest corner of bethany home road and litchfield road mayor members of council here to provide staff report this afternoon will be tabitha perry our interim planning manager thank you mr phelps good afternoon mayor and council the wigwam property is a annexation proposal that is being presented before council during this workshop as we are seeking a consensus to move forward with the application and that is keeping in compliance with the annexation of policy that was adopted in 2019. the subject project the subject site is approximately 4.38 acres in size and it is located south and west of the southwest corner of bethany home roads and litchfield road the property is currently in the county with a zoning classification of ru-43 which allows for a single family residential upon annexation the city would apply the most compatible light zoning which would be rr45 which also would allow for a single family residential the property owner via applicant has submitted an application to rezone the property to pad as part of a larger larger industrial project here's the vicinity map that depicts the proposed location from city hall which is approximately 10 miles southwest of city hall the annexations map just to give you an idea of where this proposed application is located in comparison to other property for annexation that's in the process of being considered here's an annexation map that depicts surrounding the subject property it's property that is currently within the city limits and those surrounding properties are currently zoned in one for light industrial and by anything this property it was just removed what we would define as a donut hole property that is not within the city limits so it would just bring this particular property within the city limits to allow for a cohesive development moving forward here is an annexation area map just giving you a earth look of the subject site the subject side is not within the luke air force based noise contour so we do not have to worry about luke as it relates to the heights there's a conceptual site plan to the north that is a reason an application that would be forthcoming before city council at a future date and that is identified as air park 30 north and that is intended for a industrial pad the subject site that we are looking at for the proposed annexation will be part of a second pad towel entitled air park south pad which like so would be developed as the industrial development okay so there was a fiscal impact analysis completed on this project um the subject area for the south would total 66 000 square feet of industrial development and would generate a positive net fiscal impact to the city with the one-time fees being proposed estimated at 263 000 and a positive impact to the city of ten thousand dollars per year which excludes the one-time revenues so fiscal impact bar chart just showing you the revenues expenditures and the net gain to the city annually from a different perspective and once again staff is seeking a consensus from council to proceed forward with the annexation if council give directions to proceed for with the annexation the next steps would be for a blade petition doing a public hearing to hear any input from the citizens followed by a adoption date on the annexation with that mayor council i'll be happy to answer any questions thank you mayor um i'm i'm a little puzzled because this seems like an ideal site for commercial rather than industrial there's a quite a commercial corridor just south on litchfield road and there's few and far between opportunities for us out there with commercial where i mean at least for me i'd like to see somebody the economic analysis look at what if we zone at least the frontage on litchfield road for regular commercial because with the loot contours there's not a lot of places where we can do that out there and i mean if you go south once you get to camelback and all the way down it's quite a commercial corridor along litchfield road and there's a lot of residential all around there to support it so um i just you know i mean i know we're doing a lot of industrial but i still think i think the council clearly when we first started talking about this were we want cash registers where there's opportunities to put cash registers so i mean is there apparently there's already a uh somebody that wants to this is a this wouldn't be spec this is some a user already in mind for this industrial project mayor council to my understanding there is not an identifying end user at this time however we have the pad application that's just started the review process from a staff perspective we can take your comments and analyze the project and see if there's opportunities to incorporate commercial um as well as the industrial that's being proposed okay mayor and i have one other follow-up uh bethany home road does not go through would this put us in a position to have to participate in extending bethany home road west of uh i guess that goes on to the base so no right yeah so i just think that there's opportunity a real possibility for a commercial in that and that's and it's small enough that you know it's only four little over four acres that you could do you know put some sort of commercial use there that would generate ongoing revenue in excess of ten thousand a year thank you thank you um i think councilmember thomas suggestion is at least worth investigating and see if the applicant is interested in pursuing that at all but but my concern is and i don't know if you can answer this or not how was the donut allowed to be created to begin with i thought there was state law that said that when annexations occurred you couldn't fully encircle a property to create this kind of donut can you explain the history of that a little bit mayor councilmember clark i do not have all the historical information on that to the best of my knowledge from working with staff and the applicant is when the greater portion of the property came in for the annexation wigwam was using the subject site for some entertainment venue opportunities and at that particular time they were not ready to proceed forward with annexing that portion of the property into the city limits well but i thought that there was some law that prevented creating these donuts how come that wasn't invoked at that time i'm just curious mr bailey the councilman clark council uh the unique element of our strip annexation area is you're correct there's a lot that says you can't create basically holes in a donut but because we have a strip annexation any annexation that generally occurs within that strip annexation is starting to fill in the donut hole so we generally have looked at any annexation even if a subsequent annexation may create another donut hole what we're ultimately trying to do is fill in this enormous donut hole so the intent is to actually fill it in and so there generally has not been that issue that arises in the context of what you're speaking to well i know generally it's it doesn't happen i i realize that i just wondered what the circumstances were that made it occur on this occasion thank you i think the difference is we're making a city island not a county island yeah yeah just curious any other questions any other comments do you have what you need yes sir thank you all right miss power here aguafria annexation application a-n-236 for approximately 1.15 acres located south of glendale avenue and west of the 115th avenue alignment thank you mayor council once again this item is being presented to you as staff is seeking a consensus to proceed forward with the annexation request the subject property is approximately 1.5 acres in size and it's identified by being two segments of pieces of property that is city owned and the objective is to bring it within the city limits the subject properties are located south of glendale avenue and west of the 115th ave avenue alignment the subject parcels are currently within the county with a zoning classification of ru-43 in a pond which allows for that single-family residential upon annexation staff would apply the most light compatible zoning classification since we're basically talking about two separate parcels it will allow for two separate residential zonings upon annexation and the intent is at a future date a reason and application would come forward the property is approximately 7.5 miles west of city hall here's an annexation map as indicated it's actually two parcels that we're looking at uh for the sake of this presentation i'm only presenting it as one annexation if council gives the consensus to proceed forward for record keepings we will have two annexation applications one will remain as an236 and the second remnant piece of property will be identified as a n238 and that is necessary because there are separate legal descriptions okay here's your annexation map just giving a better view of the two remnant piece of properties that are in question before you here's the area map once again giving you an earth view of the remnant two pieces of properties excluding the two small segments of properties this exhibit depicts the approximately 133 acres that was annexed in 2009 the city's recharge facility is depicted in pink the area outlined in blue includes the two small properties before you for annexation totals approximately 48 acres staff is working on a rfp for interested parties and there is a fiscal impact report in your packet if council provides the consensus to proceed forward with the annexation request it will be followed by a blank petition for a public hearing for any opportunities for citizens to speak followed by a public hearing for the adoption once again staff is seeking a consensus on the application to proceed forward and with that i'll be happy to answer any questions any questions mayor uh thank you mayor miss perry you mentioned that when it comes into the city if it does that it would get the zoning that would allow for a large flat single family residential but this is city-owned property and and i don't believe is is that our intention for it you know for the public to know i don't believe that's what we intend to do with the property mayor and council turner if i understood your question you are correct it's not the intentions for the two remnant pieces of property to be developed as single family residents it would just be the most compatible like zoning upon the annexation with the intent at a future date that the entire 48 acres would be rezoned to most likely some level of industrial zoning district thank you miss perry thank you mayor any other comments what do you need a consensus to proceed forward consensus item of special interest facility maintenance in residential neighborhoods mayor members of the council uh here to provide staff report on this item today is michelle watenko director of field operations and she'll be assisted by charles thomas our field operations administrator thank you mr phelps uh good afternoon mayor and council as mr uh phelpson ms bauer just stated this is uh the council item special interest facility maintenance in neighborhoods this was brought up at a council workshop back in april 2021 yes a year ago the request was to draft a policy for facility maintenance for those facilities located within residential neighborhoods we did come back to you in june 22nd of 2021 that we did get council consensus to proceed with this so in today's presentation we're going to go through kind of an outline we're going to go back to our uh building asset philosophy we started this in september of 2017 so we want to just remind you of what we did so a summary of that philosophy go through the categories that we have for our buildings talk about a methodology for prioritization and then finally a funding mechanism because there's always a cost associated with this so as a reminder um what is our building asset philosophy we did this through council special workshops september 2017 through early 2020 and this is all focused on us planning for the future um our asset philosophy is to align us with our strategic goals and to cover things like deferred maintenance the city has been in catch-up mode for quite a while now and this is to give us a framework for doing that and it's also to focus on sustainability beyond environmental we also look at fiscal sustainability are we doing the right thing with our money our intended strategic results with this intentional asset improvements yield tangible results and we've always been focused on that the next thing and this is really important to us is that effective building design facilitates effective service delivery it can't improve the lives of the people we serve if our building impedes that so we're trying to fix that and finally buildings reflect the character and values of our community as we went through this we looked at not all buildings are equal and nor should they be treated equal so we created three categories we called them mission critical business critical and support and to do this really we created those attributes what would define a building and examples of these so a mission critical building is that is that water treatment plant did that water treatment plant goes down we can't provide water to our citizens and that's really critical to the water department's mission business critical is those that impacts your reputation where you transact and meet with the public and then finally support building the best example of a support building is you know the administration building that i sit in every day if that bill something happens that building we still pick up the trash we still take care of the facilities so that's kind of a support building it's needed to do some things but it can be done from elsewhere the building is not critical to it so just a little bit more on these examples so mission critical these tend not to be open to the public they tend to be higher high secure facilities we've got an example there shown that's fire station 154 so infrastructure in these and safety safety is always our top priority but aesthetics are a little bit lower and when we get into components we talk about that for the fire department to perform its mission that building needs to be up and ready to need to open the second they get that call the air conditioning needs to work the electricity needs to work to open the door for them but we may you know from a facility's perspective allow other aspects of that building to degrade slightly because it is we look at the components that are critical to its mission the second category we created was business critical um in in that building because this is where we transact with the public this is where we generate revenue and this is where our reputation is aesthetics are more important than that one think of it you're we always talk curb appeal in real estate this is the curb appeal of the city this is not just painting but things like doors awnings landscaping and our final category we created was the support building this is a building on the field operation or sorry the glendale operations campus this does house our facilities group you know an example here that we like to look at when we compare these two buildings is if you know funding is not unlimited and funding is never unlimited but if we've got two air conditioning systems that are aged we look at what type of building do they support first off and it's a planning tool it's a management tool of course after we determine this one's probably a higher priority we go in the field we look at them we assess them and so that's really what we're talking about is that planning tool we then went through and this is just explaining that again it's a risk-based approach we look at what's the risk of that happening to us and if a mission critical building goes down it's a high risk whereas if a support building goes down not as much of a risk and again you know we never have unlimited funding but even if we did we need to be fiscally responsible that's part of what we do the way we look at things in facilities we use a facility condition index an fci with an fci a low number is good and i know everybody's familiar with pavement condition index that transportation uses it's the inverse of that so in pavement a high number is good and facilities a low number is good so we created kind of three tiers five to ten percent is excellent condition we don't want a building in the zero to five percent range because we'll probably look at wasting money there's components of it we will keep very well maintained but other aspects that we may allow to defer when you look at that you look at if a air conditioner has a 15-year life you're not going to replace it year one but yet you've got some you know some things you've already depreciated on that and that's really what this five percent comes in is we've allowed components programmatically to depreciate to explain this you know let's go through an example sorry i just skipped the page so we we when we're doing the building asset philosophy we looked at fire station 152 and at that time it needed about 1.5 million in repairs and at that time and not today but it was 5.5 million of a replacement value that we looked at so when you take the 1.5 million divided by the 5.5 million it comes down to a number of 27.2 that's its facility condition index and that would put it in a poor category but after we did the repairs if we look at it today we probably still have about 500 repairs to it we've gone back to fire station 152 we didn't leave it alone we got it in great condition we've done things like the exhaust removal from the bays to kind of maintain it but we're still managing it so we've got about 500 000 now if you know everything being equal and i was looking where do i put 500 000 into i might go into the fire station just do some some minor upgrades to it but we're managing it and so currently today we could look at it has a little bit that we could put into it we're still maintaining it in that excellent condition range and that's that's really how we we manage our buildings so again just kind of in summary we look at the three tiers we look at tier one is our mission critical and we manage them to keep them in a a very good condition to an excellent condition we keep that where that fci our deferred maintenance or our depreciation is in that five to ten percent range our tier two are business critical we allow them to to depreciate a little bit more we look at that the 10 to 15 percent range and tier three is at 15 to 20 percent again just just a management tool of how we look at what we may want to do as kind of a priority list of what happens our summary of our philosophy is to always be fiscally responsible don't waste money don't replace things too soon but don't allow them to degrade so much that you have to put additional money into it so if we don't watch our roofs and make sure that they're kept in good condition we have leaks or other things which actually degrade the structure we always want to look at reliability you know water services talks about making sure that when you turn the tap on you've always got good clean water we want that of both our our community and our internal staff when they walk into a building that expects certain things to be operational it needs to be operational and finally public confidence this is really what what we do in facilities to help the rest of the city to help brian and his group with economic development is we need to give them a sense of confidence and we know what we do and we do it well so that's really what our building asset philosophy was today what we want to discuss now is you know should we modify that philosophy really to go through what we went through to determine this i'm going to turn this now over to charles so based on our studies um changing the program doesn't come without small challenges this is an aerial view of our city-owned and operated cemetery in the red square and the green rectangles are the residential areas that are surrounding the cemetery so part of the challenge becomes if we would modify the program how do we determine should the the structures around the cemetery the historic building at the cemetery the fencing the block walls and so on and so forth should that get moved up then a building such as city hall or or that nature so just potential challenges this is a view of our support uh one of our support buildings uh this is spring city and our field operations campus same general idea where there's a residential area right across the street if the program was modified we would then need to come to council and kind of determine should these type of facilities move higher on the list versus a fire house or mission critter as we studied we discovered their potential other challenges that could come with this as well this is a view of city hall one of three uh large buildings on our glendale municipal office complex campus this building is business critical and is very public facing but not in a residential area next slide is courts same thing this is a business critical facility very public facing open to the public every day also not in a residential neighborhood um but finally this is our fire support building on 55th and orangewood this is a mission critical building very secure not generally open to the public this building is in a residential neighborhood and so you can see the challenge becomes you know with this building become a higher priority than quartz or city hall or some of those other mission mission or business critical buildings that also need some of our attention so those are just challenges there's also a benefit to modifying or funding the program this is fire station 156 before it was painted last summer and this is after it was painted last summer as you can see it does improve the look of that building it does not impact the mission of that building but as people drive by on deer valley and they go home and they see that you can imagine that the the confidence in what glendale does for them and their community they feel that and they see that um i wanted to point out um something that council member clark mentioned last week about uh the broken window theory and uh that broken window theory is a theory that came from an article in 1982 by two criminologists and they basically wrote that uh signs of disorder uh lead to more disorder is basically what the premise of that theory was um that a building with broken windows that were not repaired would cause more broken windows essentially that's not where the city of glendale is today and i want to be clear on that that's not where the city of glendale is today but we're here talking about it today because we want to prevent the city from getting there so based on our studies um we went out and used the current framework that michelle uh mr watenko talked about earlier and we went out and studied these buildings as we do on a regular basis and just have some project examples for you guys to see this is the lattice at the main library there is a residential neighborhood nearby but this site is not in a residential neighborhood backs up to saguaro ranch park the lattice at the library you can see is chipping and peeling in order for us to rectify that we would have to sandblast it we would have to prime it we would have to power wash there might be some scaffolding involved a lift involved and protection to protect from over spraying and all that that would be rolled into that project this is saguaro ranch park this is an example of a visible roof but there's also railings involved there are door frames windows that could be painted but taking a deeper look into that building there's also window glazing on that historic building that would need to be taken care of before the painting to make sure that water and weather doesn't impact the interior of that building and a lot of the building asset philosophy that michelle was talking about was sometimes we have to take care of those infrastructure things first before we get into the aesthetics of that this is our picture of our glendale 11 building across the street from state farm stadium on maryland avenue just it's just aged over time um and a lot of the buildings could use a refresh um as you know you know we have super bowl coming soon we have final four coming after that and some of these things show wear and tear and we want to kind of get in front of that before those events come to town yeah but before you go on and i'm glad that you brought this up because i just noticed that actually saturday night uh i i was looking at that uh and i and i thought number one is i wonder why this this hasn't been brought up so you guys are really good mind readers uh but but number two you had already mentioned with the super bowl coming up we're going to have opportunities for people wanting to pay us to advertise on our windows and rather than and this is something i'm sure the city manager is probably already on top of but rather than us redoing this ourselves we have an opportunity for somebody to pay us to do it and advertise with it so i i'm sure you you already got that in the plan as far as what you're doing but uh this in pretty bad shape right now that all the corners are peeling um so i'm i'm happy that you guys were on top of this um kind of like normal right all the time so yeah and maybe members of the council just want to just expand on that that we're not just talking about the window cover and we're talking about the railing on the patio we're talking about the paint on the facade of the building we're we're talking about all of it right right well i do know that there's a lot of money available to the city with the super bowl coming up as far as advertiser and that that big area for for windows so uh it's just something that i was thinking and again you know i noticed it saturday night and you guys are bringing it up on tuesday so great mind readers thank you i i guess were you guys finished i can wait till they're not i'll wait till they're finished there mayor if i might thank you before you transition um these last few slides um bring to my mind our philosophy of taking care of what we have before we move on and and build and expand and i think that's something we've always dealt with with our cip and other things the uh you know for instance we you know we take care of our racquet center we put money into that to make sure it's in good repair um so that it you know we don't have an increase in problems it's kind of like our streets you know it wasn't our fault but the fact that they deteriorated expanded the cost of getting them back into good repair so you know i look at these things like the and just only coincidentally in my district but you know the the lattice work at the main library or the um the condition of the historic buildings at sorora ranch park you know that's if we take care of these things you know now and an ongoing basis with a lot of cost avoidance down the road and it also is more enjoyable to our community and more useful and more pleasurable um a contrary example would be how not to beat a dead horse because we've moved on but just as an example years of neglect out at glen lake's golf course not only drove away the income to some degree that it was gaining but it also increased the cost of doing of getting it back into good condition all of that so i would hate to see that happen to any anything in in any district you know because our residents deserve better than that so i'd like to say that we're you know we're in a unique position perhaps now financially to take care of all of these things and get us back in good stead thank you thank you mayor so based on our studies we'd like to provide a little bit of background and then a staff recommendation as we summarize towards the end so as you know there was a tremendous impact to the economy around 2008 and the city had to make several adjustments in order to sustain through that economic downturn some of those adjustments impacted areas such as field operations and facilities i believe around that time there was a there was a request to focus on infrastructure and making sure that the the buildings and the facilities operated for the business need of the city of glendale and for the citizens and now as mr tanko mentioned we're in catch-up mode um overall we do agree that the buildings in residential neighborhoods do need need attention as uh council member tommy choff mentioned previously we also agree that all other buildings should be reviewed and addressed as needed as vice mayor adama mentioned previously so what we're going to what we're going to ask towards the end is we are we are going to ask to keep the program the same and we're going to ask to create a facility enhancement and maintenance program and create an extra or a separate funding source for that program so there is a way for us to do both uh with a programmatic approach with our current program we've identified some projects that'll start to get us caught up uh keeping in mind that we're fast approaching uh some of those major events that we discussed earlier um we put this list that you're going to see together to coincide with our cip there are some projects that are coming in our cip and we don't want to be on top of that or paint a building that we might be painting during cip project anyway so i'll move on and show you a lot of these um projects that we've identified under the current program marin kells i think the point he's trying to get to some of these items like painting a building may not be capital may not be allowed to be in the cip because we can't bond for some of these projects so we really have to work with budget and finance on is this a capital project or is this an o m project and that's why we're recommending this separate program versus having larger the many of these being in a capital project thank you miss wutenko i won't bore you with all the gory details of every single project but i i do want to highlight that um these are projects that are identified under our current program um the the uh the sections highlighted in yellow are buildings that are nearby or in residential neighborhoods so this first year projects would be roughly 1.3 million dollars with 605 000 in or around uh residential neighborhoods um next slide is more of the same um around about 1.3 million dollars with about 735 000 in or around uh residential neighborhoods um and in year three again more the same except the residential neighbor buildings in in or around residential neighborhoods are about 930 000 so in summary all of the city buildings are important to us and our current program clearly identifies deficiencies if appropriately funded the program will work as designed a dedicated funding source is needed to create an exterior enhancement maintenance program for all buildings in the end everyone wins all buildings get touched over time as long as the funding source is there and and the citizens of glendale see our brand maintained and improved across the city so with that staff recommendation is to keep the building asset philosophy the same and fund an exterior enhancement and maintenance program with that mayor we'd open up to any questions you may have but we are looking for consensus on these items thank you mayor um and thank you for bringing this forward i and i wasn't only concerned about buildings and neighborhoods although i the the issue that brought this to the front was it was a station 156 which is surrounded by homes in my district and the the paint the schedule to paint it was when it in in and once every 20 years when it gets remodeled and we wouldn't paint our houses once every 20 years i don't that's you know and i'm glad you used the word curb appeal because it it it tells people who we are the curb appeal of our city tells not just our residents but prospective residents neighboring communities businesses everyone it tells everyone who we are and i understand how we got here with the financial and economics of how we ended up here but we're in a position at least for right now to be able to address some of this backlog of um not being able to pay attention to details but you know it does matter so i'm really really happy i'm absolutely supportive of moving forward with this and we'll these will be brought back to us on a year-to-year basis so we can if we want to um re-evaluate priorities i just like to know how moving forward or are you asking us to approve a three-year plan or what was the idea of the one two three year one to your two year three um mayor and council members councilmember tom schaff we we went through kind of our assessment of buildings and this is what we came back with as what we saw we needed and we also knew we got an internal capacity problem where we couldn't get all this done in one year so we said why don't we do a three-year program this is what we came back with year one would be our priority and we'd be welcome to listen to council and what their priorities might be and adjust them and there may be other things that we haven't seen i knew when we initially discussed this the mayor brought up a bridge and we just did not get a response back from that department but we could look at painting that bridge i think the railings on the bridge on 67th avenue don't look good around thunderbird or something but we could we could look at adding other projects as well okay mayor if i could just one more thing um i was a little surprised to only see one parking lot resurfacing on here in the first three years i know we've got a lot of work to do on parking lots citywide so i was just curious how that one how that one made the cut and and um you know if we haven't i don't know it is cosmetic but it's also i mean you know the parking lots in all of our parks and in a lot of our facilities are in need of attention mayor and councilman tomlinshot as we discussed in the cip kind of as a reminder we had a parking lot program in there year one we had projects identified but we're in the middle of doing an assessment of all parking lots so once we we looked at it we did this in conjunction with transportation and parks the list of parking lots kept growing and growing and growing so we've actually got an assessment of them i know the facility staff is going through them right now with transportation with engineering we're trying to put a priority to them and some numbers to that we look at bringing that program to you in the next year mayor so i'm just curious then would we would it be better to move the food bank i mean it's not till next year but parking lot into that project and and move something else up onto the list that's more of a uh cosmetic thing marin council we could do that the food bank hit this list because it did not make the other one when we were looking at we were looking at city-owned properties and for some reason that one got missed because we leased that out to the food bank it is city-owned so somewhat was missed and wasn't part of the other assessment so between the two of them we just don't want to forget about that parking lot all right we can have that conversation later but that's that's a suggestion thank you mayor thank you mayor i support continuing the philosophy that that you have been using and are reiterating today i support the idea of creating a separate funding source but i want to get back to to something that you said about the broken window theory we know the super bowl is coming in february of next year is there any going to be any attention given to for example identified the media center which is front facing it's right across the street from the stadium 70 000 plus people are going to see that media center and whatever condition it's in i would think excuse me things like the media center or the convention center or the civic center that may be rented out for events super bowl events or tourist attractions like saguaro ranch park manistee ranch perhaps paseo racket center places like that that we know may very well be used by visitors who are here for the super bowl have you focused in on those items and and maybe it's an aberration from your philosophy which i i approve of but i would think that there would be some special attention paid to those front-facing buildings that that the general public especially the visitor public will see around super bowl time thank you mayor mayor councilmember we did we we looked specifically at the media center and it was when we were standing back looking from a distance we saw you know there was some uh as mr thomas pointed out there was some railing damage that was done by a tree and we had the tree removed and we were standing there talking we looked closely and then saw there was a much bigger issue with with covering on the window we we do have some other projects in for civic center we could look then because what we gave you was a three-year program of how we developed it we could look at those that might be even more public-facing in light of the events coming up and re-prioritize those mayor if i could i think that's important that we put our best foot forward in february of next year and i have no problem with the program you identified and perhaps that could be adopted after we attend to those front-facing buildings that that are most likely to be identified during the super bowl season um so i i hope that you will at least consider that thank you and i'm again i'm going to go back to what i said earlier the media center the windows is is one of the very few things that we have the opportunity to have somebody pay us to fix that problem so i really hope that you focus on that i i don't remember what the dollars were seven years ago but it was pretty substantial as far as what they paid to to do the windows for advertising out there mr milner uh thank you i too agree with your philosophy i think it's a great program i think uh you've put a lot of effort into it i support moving forward along with councilmember clark i would suggest the same concept and i'll point out the one that i'm most interested in which is paseo rocket club of course the only a city facility in my district it's not a park and it it attracts organizations from around the country literally on an ongoing basis and so this facility does see a lot of outside traffic perhaps more so than many of our other buildings it's not just a one-time thing it's an ongoing and the the concern that i've heard from the operators of that facility is is that it's harder to attract the the high dollar hotel spending you know consumers to come to tournaments there if the facility isn't looking the best that it can and so i would uh recommend we we move it up in priority thank you mayor thank you mayor mr thomas thank you for uh your presentation was great i thoroughly enjoyed it i'm happy to know that that we're going to continue in the philosophy and the methodology that you guys have put in place years ago that just tells me that we have the right leadership and we have the right facilities team to facilitate the needs of the citizens buildings that they own and i just want to say thank you so much have a lot of confidence in your work and i look forward to seeing some of the aesthetic pleasing repairs you're going to do to other buildings other than just this one but thank you great team and good work today miss wotenko thank you anyone else the mayor um i i i agree with the media center that's going to be not just probably the people who actually attend the super bowl but it's probably going to be highly visible by the television viewing audience as well um so i don't know i mean i see that there's 150 000 in year two um and i would be supportive of uh you know switching some things around to move that uh i'm trying to find it again now i'm the repair that repairing the plaster painting the exterior moving that in up in priority and finding identifying 150 000 uh worth of things that could be moved down into the second year i would be i would be fine with that i think that's probably a good idea with the windows we can wait and see i think the mayor's right i think there's going to be plenty of opportunity hopefully and i'm sure ian agrees that they're not going to be using glendale's got game anymore anyway so that probably needs to come down anyway but i mean i think we could identify um you know the um the city court ramadas maybe could be moved into year two that frees up 100 we could figure it out but i do think that it's important that the media center is looking good because it's probably going to be highly visible for the people watching on television also i'm sorry i couldn't what uh marion councilmember stalin schaaf there's money for the media center year one if you go back a slide uh we put into two phases okay i saw that but i mean it didn't include the painting and um and i mean it wasn't just the window if you look at the picture of the media center you can see that especially the orange paint is pretty faded i mean the building hasn't hasn't i don't know when the last time the exterior that building was touched probably when it was finished whatever year that was so um i for me for one i mean the courts obviously it's important um but it's not in a neighborhood it's not going to affect any residential i'd be fine with rearranging some of this to move the 150 000 that we would need to paint the building and really make it look nice into year one and sliding some of that other stuff down into year two okay mr phillips uh mayor members of council thank you for the uh the conversation um first with regards to the civic center um the timing is going to be uh somewhat important um in discussions with the leadership from the renaissance hotel uh they're uh they're working on a fairly aggressive plan for a renovation of the hotel i've asked them to kind of coordinate with us regarding any exterior changes because if you look at the way the media center and our convention center it integrates into the renaissance hotel what i wouldn't want to do is necessarily go out and paint it next year only to find that they're gonna they're gonna propose a kind of a different cosmetic look that now it's not compatible i think we can address for sure the wind issue and some of the maybe more straightforward things like trim on the fixing of the railings and things like that but i am trying to coordinate their their remodeling plans so we can kind of coordinate with that we'll keep you uh certainly up to speed in that and i agree with however the general premise that as we welcome the world and literally a super bowl is welcoming the world uh to our footsteps that we want to make sure that our most visible areas um you know have been updated uh recently just signed off on over 300 000 in new way finding signage for that area and again that was being anticipated for this if you're driving down glendale avenue major remodeling going on on our glendale avenue trying to get that road ready so we are we are focused on that and uh but that was just one nuance on the painting of the media center we'll see what we can do to get it looking really sharp at the same time we don't want to invest money the only maybe have to turn around and redo it i just want to compliment the staff on the work as you say put a lot of effort into this policy now here's the good news we didn't really mention this during the budget rollout but our proposed budget has the 1.3 million dollars that of these projects already in the proposed budget that's come that you're now considering so we were we're obviously hoping that you would that you would be excited about this approach to maintaining our facilities and as michelle said we can always re-evaluate the projects that are on that list things will happen things can get damaged or deteriorate so it can be a very fluid process we'll talk internally about how we bring that forward each year and it doesn't mean that we don't increase that amount you know we make we may get to the point that maybe the 1.3 million over the each year is maybe not getting to the goal that the council wants to have but we wanted to start one place we uh they put together i think a really thoughtful look at it with the assessment so we appreciate the feedback and uh and we'll move forward then based on your recommendation thank you and item number five boards and commissions ordinance good afternoon mayor and council the item for you today is dealing with boards commissions and ordinances and primarily the challenges that we've faced with boards and commissions and let me just see if this is working from oh thank you the glendale city charter provides that the council can form any committee board or commission that they see fit it also recognizes that in some instances there's statutory requirements that you have boards and commissions and over time as boards and commissions have been formed there's been different rules different bylaws different operating procedures that they may have adopted over time and what we have found working with the clerk's office is that there is a need for consistency and clarity in the bylaws and to give you some ideas one of the greatest challenges i think we face over time is that at times boards and commissions will create subcommittees with an express purpose that the council's unaware of our staff isn't aware of and what we're trying to do is make sure that when there is a question that's being considered by a boarding commission that the council is aware of it and staff is aware of it keeping in mind that boards and commissions our advisory their 100 advisory in nature and so before they run out and create a a question and then answer the question and present us with the answer we want to make sure that there's some consistency there also over time boards and commissions had changed or modified their own practices which sometimes conflicted with council desires as a reminder you may recall when we um with the judicial selection advisory board there was the council has the authority with regards to the decision making and with regards to having the board review the candidates that had applied for a job but somewhere in their formation of bylaws the the board said that they wanted to review all applicants which there's a distinction between an applicant and a candidate and so there is again that example of a clarity so noting this um what i'm going to be briefly speaking about is the the proposal for uniform bylaws and this has been studied by the government services committee with support from the city clerk's office and in my office so thank you to the government services committee for taking the time and there's been a fair amount of time taken reviewing this and thank you to the clerk's office um and i i should uh magnify that with the clerk's office because the clerk's office is usually the one that receives the question when there's a challenge with the board commission and uh put in the situation of providing um a response so noting that what's been what's being proposed is a unifor is uniform bylaws uh and what i've put up on on the screen is just some examples of what's going to be included in those um we're first going to start out with kind of definite definitional sections which generally occurs in an ordinance we're also going to speak about how the border commission is formed and from a practical standpoint nothing is really changing from the current practice with the council they'll go through the government services commission the council will have the opportunity to speak about that an executive session and then they will be appointed by the council as a matter of practice qualifications one question that came up and i have a follow-up on this because i've been given some feedback and i'm going to ask this question because i'll direction at the end of the presentation qualifications the the bylaws set out clearly what the qualifications are to be a member of the board the primary change that would occur is that to be a member of a board commissioner committee in the city of glendale is that you need to be a a resident of the city noting of course that the council has the flexibility to amend that on a per board or poor per board per commission or committee basis keeping in mind what we're doing right now is we're creating just a uniform set of bylaws so once you adopt these you'll be able to amend them on a case-by-case basis also it speaks to the chair and the vice chair again that will be a similar process the recommendation by the board comes to the gsc the gsc will recognize that and that will be an adoption by the council where this really comes into play is down towards the end of the government services committee there's always been some questions about what is the role of the government services committee and that has been incorporated now into the bylaws it speaks clearly to what that role is it also speaks clearly how the government services will be engaged when there is a proposal for a subcommittee if there is a subcommittee it must come to the government services committee and they will consider whether or not they would like to give that authority to that border commission then that will come before the council also with regards to the bylaws if a border commission would like to amend the uniform bylaws it needs to come back to the government services commission and or they need to notify the clerk so we all know what we're doing in that regard so because there's the proposal of a uniform bylaws we also had to change the original establishment ordinances of all the boards and commissions and so we did that as well that's why it's so so thick what i needed to know is that when we made the changes to those establishment ordinances there were no substantive changes we didn't change the authority that the council had already granted we did not change their powers or authorities what we all we tried to do is we would try to incorporate the new bylaws so in in the event that there was a conflict we adopted uh what the uniform by-laws were proposing and made those changes we also in all of the boards and commissions adopted a consistent format so you'll see now when you pull up a an ordinance for a board or a commission you will see that there's four sections the first is the mission what is the mission uh that the council is granted this border commission the second is whether they're bylaws all of them currently state that they will follow the adopted bylaws that are you'll be adopting if in fact you do that to the uniform bylaws noting that in the event if there's ever a change or there's a proposal for a change we would come back to the council and that's where we would make that amendment to deviate from the uniform bylaws so everybody knows where to go the third section would be the composition and that's the membership of the board and then the last would be the powers duties and responsibilities and my final comment is that what we have found one of the challenges in the clerk's office i think can attest to this is that at times boards and commissions start adopting practices that nobody's really understanding those were not adopted into ordinance those were not adopted when we made the changes to the establishment ordinance what the boards and commissions will be notified and educated on is that in the event they want to make changes that they will actually come back to the clerk's office and to the gsc and discuss those changes before they actually make those uh changes so again these are your boards and commissions we're clarifying the uniform bylaws we're clarifying and creating a cleaner formative formation ordinance and hopefully create some clarity with that if you have any questions of me i can pause otherwise i have two comments that have been provided to me and and i wanted to bring those to your attention as a fighting final closing statement on that noting that we are not considering this tonight this is being presented to you and we will consider it in two weeks so if you have a lot of questions if you'd like to i will make myself available and then i'll make sure that julie makes herself available make herself both available jointly if that's the case so you can understand why those occurred and we will sit down with you and go through those um if there aren't any questions i do want to ask two questions i would like direction on good thank you i did receive some feedback um one of the questions that has arisen the proposal for membership is that all members must be residents of the city of glenville one proposal that i received was that there would be a deviation from that uniform bylaw on the planning and zoning commission and for the planning and zoning commission only that that members may be owners of businesses operating in the city of glendale and so noting that if there's some opinion or direction on that that would be great to get that direction i can go ahead and incorporate that change otherwise we'll leave it the way that it currently is and that is is that you must be a resident of the city of glendale to be in the planning and zoning commission i well i guess i'll go ahead and start off i i do like that because i know that we're having some some issues with some of these commissions you know my thought if it's a business owner that owns property and holds a current business license in the city of glendale that shows they're active in the city of glendale i don't know why we would preclude them when a lot of businesses actually are much more involved than just just residents so i would definitely support that myself mayor what uh i would agree with that proposition as well um when not not just anybody outside the city but somebody that is engaged in the city someone that has an active business for example in the city i think it would be appropriate to allow them to re be on a commission and i know there's been times where i've gone to appoint someone who's very active in the chamber or some other organization and oh i don't i don't live in the city yet they're engaged very heavily in the city and i think there are k occasions and i would extend that to nearly all the commissions if it is that situation only i would not want to see it just carte blanc you can appoint anyone whether the planning commission or any other commission that don't live in the city but rather they have to have a connection and a tie to the city whether they have an ownership in the business or they have some other reason why they're very much engaged in the city of glendale thank you mayor does would that meet i mean is there some proportion of the and you said this at least what you were proposing was just the planning commission so this is my my question does some portion of the planning commission statutorily because i think there's state statute about planning commissions and does some number of those people like could i mean not that it would happen but what if everybody on the planning commission was a business owner but not a resident does that meet the statutory requirements for the planning commission mayor and council yes okay um and then if i could how would those appointments just like any any i mean anyone could appoint someone that was a business owner i mean would we have to establish set criteria of you know it has to be like the mayor said somebody with a bit that owns a business owns property or owns a business or both or i just want to make sure i understand what's being proposed what my suggestion was is that a business owner licensed business owner in the city of glendale that has an operating business not just a property owner not somebody owns an acre but somebody has a thriving business under a license from glendale right mayor i understood that but what i'm saying is do you want also to be a business owner and a property owner like some a lot of people have businesses in glendale but they're leasing a building or they're but so are we going to require that you in addition to having an active business license you are also a property owner in glendale that that was my suggestion okay that was my suggestion okay i just want to make sure i understood it thank you yeah i would be more comfortable if it were someone with an active business license and a property owner and i would add one third criteria demonstrated involvement or activism within the community because there are there are a lot of people that will meet the criteria for having a license and owning property that we've never heard of seen of and have never been involved in the life of this community so i think it's important that there be demonstrated a previous interest and activity within the city of glendale and that'll be demonstrated thank you mr bailey and mayor and council uh just to a quick point with councilmember clark um just as a reminder you do not absolve yourself of any authority in this this is just the the the qualification for somebody to be recommended or applied so to the extent that that question of demonstrated involvement that question will still be a question of the council and determining whether or not to appoint somebody so you will still have that power it's just that the as a as a in my recommendation would be to have objective criteria such as you must have an active business license which is an objective criterion and owning property the challenge becomes from a staff perspective of what's demonstrated involvement and that's really more so in an appointment authority that's kind of a discussion you may have well we can vote to approve mayor if i could continue could it be phrased in such a way as to just say that we expect the applicant to demonstrate involvement within the community and not outline what that activity or involvement entails but simply that it is expected is that would that be all right or no mayor councilmember i think that's fine i think there's al that is already incorporated somewhat in in in in our code but we i think probably from this point i think as a concept i think it can work if there's consensus i think it's probably you and i can then work on language that would satisfy your desire if the council in fact wants to move in that direction all right thank you mr hughes thank you mayor yeah i'm in agreement with our ability to appoint whom we want as a business owner to serve on the planning commission they probably have a little bit more invested than others in our community who work outside the city this person lives outside of the city but he's supporting us by running a business and i think it's a good idea thank you mr old i'm good i can give consensus for that mr turner uh thank you mayor i'm curious as to whether other communities have non-residents on their commissions and then specifically planning and zoning and i realize you may not have that answer today but it could be provided in the future it occurs for me at least that planning our planning commission hasn't been one that's been difficult to find residents that would be willing to serve some of our other commissions have more trouble with us being able to have you know find residents interested in them um the planning commission is you know i think for many is thought of as a plum you know it's a it's a significant and important appointment all of our commissions i think serve as our bench in the community it's a place where people get uh more experience and and more insight into the workings of the community and then then it's then it's it's a grooming location particularly on planning for individuals who might be interested in running for office here in the city which one resident wouldn't be eligible for so i'm i'm not saying heck no i'm just saying i've i've got some questions and some concerns about it um i know i had proposed having non-residents on a culturally related commission that we were doing a while back and you know where it would be interfacing with you know the school districts and other things that transcend our boundaries but so in a situation like that it seems to make sense to me where you might want a representative from a school that might be an individual that doesn't live you know hold a position in a school district that doesn't actually live in the city i've got reservations but i'm interested i'm willing to consider so on this idea do we have a consensus to move forward on this item yes sir and mayor right and i work with the city attorney on the language about interest right and just for clarity sake would you like that change to just planning and zoning or do you want it in the uniform bylaws what do you think i was just planning to just play generous planning i'm not planning now you want to do all mayor well that's what they're that's what they're saying what if what if we approved it for planning now see how it goes and if it works fine maybe we can change it to everything later okay does that sound like a plan um well i mean i'm fine with changing it to everything now i mean well i know i a couple times i've struggled to find somebody for the aviation advisory commission in particular where it's a pretty specialized commission it's an important commission but somebody has to know something about aviation so um you know other other um you know a board of adjustment requires some a specific skill set also um sort of like the planning commission but maybe not quite to that level so i'd be fine with opening it up now citywide it's up to the council member to make the appointment um and then it's up to the council to approve it so mr bailey um mayor and councilmember and councilmember thomas my second item goes to your question actually in your comments and that is is that one of the greatest challenges we experience from a staff perspective is that while people may have the best intentions to serve on a border commission attendance becomes a challenge and so we wanted to bring that to your attention and see if the council was comfortable with that question possibly um as this is developed to take that question back to the gsc and speak to the gsc about what boards and commissions there may be the opportunity to uh look at what the membership number is recognizing and this is why i want to make sure the entire council is aware of this recognizing that at some point in time the recommendation may be less than seven members which means a recommendation may come back that it's less than seven members without large appointments and i'm not saying that we're doing it i'm just asking is the council comfortable with staff bringing that question back to the gsc and then we can report back to council at a later date i well i would ask you to rephrase the question but but with that i'd like to throw in one other thought uh something that i uh actually was thinking is is there any objection to where if we just had everybody at large so if you're having a tough time and somebody else has two members that we can all we still have to prove them but but we're all struggling i mean you know everybody honest we're all struggling to find appointees so if we had it at large then i think it opens up a lot more opportunities for us we still have to approve it mayor um for me i i think i do a pretty good job of keeping my my appointments full and i've got a lot of applications on files so i would like to reserve an opportunity for the residents in my district and i wouldn't want them to not have an opportunity because their the commission's full of that large appointment so i don't know i'm not i'm not sure i have a i mean i'm willing to have the conversation in gsc um and see if gsc's willing to take that back to the full council i mean i'm open to the conversation but um [Music] i know that we had talked about letting um council members appoint people from like saying hey i can't find anybody from the aviation advisory commission do you have any applications on file for residents in your district that i may want to appoint but rather than just saying they're all at large and then you're not you may not have an opening for somebody on your in your district that wants to serve so we can have the conversation but i don't know whether i'd be in favor of that or not good i i agree with council member tomlin chaff let's take one baby step and go ahead and approve a change for planning commission and i would like to see gsc revisit the other issues that are being brought up and then brought to council in e-session for further discussion i'm not ready to move and change everything right now but i am supportive of the change for planning commission mayor thank you um i support what councilman clark just mentioned however are we talking about business owners only in the district of the council member or i can choose any business owner in any part of the glendale in any part of glendale well that sort of comes back to the earlier question that i had in mayor council i think those are two separate questions one i think there's a direction on that we will for planning and zoning and understand planning and zoning is is and let me give you the the practical reality planning and zoning is not a commission that we generally have a challenge with in terms of fine appointments and attendance but some of the other commissions we will struggle with attendance we'll struggle with quorum and and just the question becomes in just speaking about those specific boards or commissions in some instances that seven we struggle with getting seven if we had five we may be able to meet on a regular basis if that was the case the challenge becomes now as we've created a system or the proposal would be creating a system that there's not at large a point there's not at large recommendations the appointment is still a council appointment with the recommendations the council's actually operated into the practice of seven members each individual will have the right to appoint somebody there and again there's no proposal on the table it's really i just wanted to make sure if this is something that staff wants to talk to the gsc about the entire council's aware that we're having that conversation it will have to come back to the council though mr bailey i want to be clear what you're saying so if we had if we didn't go at large if we kept our district system along with one at large for myself uh seven people could be appointed to a committee but they would not be able to operate unless they had at least five with a quorum of three is that correct is that what you're saying no no he's saying what i'm saying is right now there are boards and commissions that have seven members they need four people to show up we only get three who show up on a regular basis if the membership number was five three is sufficient to conduct business every time so part of this may even be the question that when we come back to the council that we redefine what quorum is the challenge becomes is that you want to be cautious about having a membership of uh of a size where quorum is less than a simple majority because then you can find that a minority will dictate the outcome of all decisions in the event that people don't attend yeah let me just finish um and the reason why i asked that question and i believe you are correct take it back to the government services commission they can bring us back some information um but what could what could happen if it was that large is i could select someone from the yucca district business owner as could councilman clark as councilmember turner now we're weighed only one side of the community is why we don't one of the reasons why we have districts not at large for council members so i'd hate for that to be a byproduct i think the best is to send it to the gsc and have them bring us back to proposals so we need more discussion thank you mayor i have a question are we offering um hybrid type meetings for boards and commissions because if we're having trouble getting quorums especially you know as gas prices and everything else i mean do we allow people to participate remotely that may be a way to resolve the quorum issue if somebody doesn't have to try to you know rush over here after work mayor and council and the clerk can speak to this if you'd like as well but we offer alternatives for attendance and still struggle at times to have attendance okay so we are offering virtual as an uh whatever way you can come or you can log in okay thank you i'm here thank you mayor um a couple of things under our under the way we do business currently um council members my impression is a council member can appoint any resident to a commission if it's a resident that's not in their district they show the other council member the courtesy of of consulting or communicating about it but we have a number of appointees who are from other districts it's because from the council member it's only a recommendation it's the entire council that actually makes the appointment and so so is that correct we're not restricted to only people in our district mayor and councilman were correct unless in some governing ordinance it requires that be it be a district but generally no you can select somebody it's just it's your selection that that district has a selection thank you and except that maybe somewhere in some enabling one of these of the 20 there was something different um and then also in my experience and having served as of as gsc chair i think twice now the quorum attendance issues generally correspond with vacancies on the commission i think it's very rare that we have a fully appointed commission have trouble meeting quorum and is it rare that we have so i i guess it's rare that we have that so therefore it appears to me that the is really what we have is a duty here for the members of the council to make their appointments and with a city of 250 plus thousand residents and a good portion of those being adults i find it hard to believe that you know given some attention to it that we can't find residents to serve on our on our commissions some of us have no trouble thank you mr milner uh thank you mayor um i would agree with many of the sentiments that i've expressed today in particular i do not wish to change it to an at-large system i believe the district system works i believe it gives us the flexibility to appoint and i think this is something that as a council we need to be a little more diligent if we've been struggling to find an appointment for a specific commission that we do look to other districts and ask if there are some folks on those in those other districts that we could appoint uh until we get the uh nominations or the the applications within our own district um so i think uh leaving it that way works i i believe um that uh if we the the issue with attendance i think you addressed it in this new ordinance uh and we have a process uh that maybe was already being used but it's now written and it talks to how we deal with the attendance issues and that we need to be diligent as council members uh once those issues are brought forward and taking care of that we find the proper appointments to fill those vacancies i think that's the key uh you know i have perhaps been a little lacks at times uh in getting my vacancies filled and so i think if you're all just a little bit more diligent that we can take care of that within the guidelines of district boundaries thank you mayor you'll see it in two weeks and i'll be following up with councilmember clark okay ms bower item number six if you would request for city council to amend glendale city code chapter 25 regarding grass and weeds over six feet tall mayor members of council here provide staff report on our last night this afternoon number six is deputy city manager rick st john good afternoon mayor members of council it is six inches uh i think that there's a misprint in the uh my apology i i took that as long as it's between six inches and six feet well we're all good right so uh from the code review committee there was a recommendation to change the language in chapter 25 that's the nuisance code specifically subsection 21 for land maintenance subsection g that's that deals with weeds essentially what the code review committee wanted was for us to deal with blight issues rodent infestations and health and safety issues so in the past we had the standard six inch so if you had grass or weeds taller than six inches in your yard that was considered violation and if you had grass or weeds less than six inches growing out of your sidewalk for example that created a hazard it was not a violation because the code said six inches and so we made that amendment council adopted that amendment in august of 21 we are now enforcing because of the season we are in against grass and weeds we have a number of cases that are coming through proactively and by complaint and we've realized that we really do need the six inch standard for people that have a yard so whether they have a grass front yard or desert landscape in the court process particularly the civil process it's better for us to have an objective standard now we can still have the subjective standard more subjective standard if you will for the sidewalks and the tripping hazards or or things that cause health and safety issues so essentially the amendment that's before you today adds that language back in that on any property that you own or that you have control or responsibility over you cannot have grass or weeds in excess of six inches in height in addition you can't create health and safety issues you can't have grass or weeds that lend to rodent infestations or any other language that lighting conditions any other language that we've considered in the past and so with that i'm happy to answer any questions or maybe on this minor amendment uh thank you mayor um the only question or concern i have is that if i i don't want the six inch to then become the standard as you stated it gives us the opportunity to use a i guess a a subjective standard and i would like to make sure that the public is aware that it isn't six inches only in the area of the the the desert landscape uh and the property fronting the street that kind of thing and i'd like to add some language in there that clarifies that that the six inch nevertheless uh something like regardless of whether it is less than six inch height regardless of whether it is less than the six inch height restriction listed here in at the very end in other words as it addressed here it says furthermore no person owning or occupying any property fronting on any street alley or public place shall allow grass or weeds to grow in the sidewalk cracks curb line opening or other area adjacent to the property including parking lots that may create a tripping hazard comma regardless of whether it is less than six inches uh a height restriction previously mentioned adding that language so that it clarifies that it's not just six inches it could be less than six inches because in many times six inch grass in a sidewalk is dangerous at three inches not just six inches yeah my my question is do you even need to state that if it's a tripping hazard it's a tripping hazard no matter what the height may i answer your question um yes because what can happen is the resident can read it and say six they re they read six inch and that's all they see and we need to make sure that they understand it's not just six inch in these particular cases you do have to spell it out otherwise all they'll see is six inch thank you um you said something when you read the very first part no person owning or occupying any property but you also said somebody responsible for so do you think we should include that or like that would include property managers as well or do we do because then normally do we work with the property managers not the property owner on commercial properties good point there's a separate chapter that deals with rental properties where we not only address or not only have the ability to address the owner occupant or i should say occupant because it's a rental property we can also address the owner of the property or the management company that's responsible for the property so this that that's uh chapter 29 okay if i'm not mistaken all right then i'm fine with it and i agree with councilmember melner i mean if you tell somebody six inches i mean we're kind of going for you know the fewer weeds the better we don't want people to say well my weeds are only five and a half inches so i'll wait till they get to six inches and then i'll do something about it so i what we want is compliance for spraying and maintaining and that's what we're looking for yeah and i'm not arguing the six inches what my point was if it's a tripping hazard it could be a quarter of an inch if it's a tripping hazard it's a tripping hazard so i don't i don't know how you write that you know maybe in your if it's private property in a yard not on a sidewalk then six inches is not an issue right if it's on a sidewalk or in a right-of-way area that's that's not normally considered a yard then that's what makes me concerned if you try to put down a a particular height if it's a tripping hazard it's a tripping hazard and that could be a tree root on top of that it doesn't have to be grass or weeds mayor i i think that's what council members malnar's language rectifies when he puts in regardless of the height with regard to sidewalk issues or public right-of-way issues my concern is both residents and the department if if it is six inches only that is recognized within the code all parties will use that as a fallback position that's why i like the language that council member malnar has suggested which clearly states that on sidewalks and public right-of-way regardless of the height if it provides a safety issue then it needs to be corrected so i would support council member malnourished suggestion mayor may had some clarity please the first line of the amended ordinance deals with all property the second sentence of the same subsection deals with desert landscaping and so on desert landscaped property if it's a blight condition or could harbor infestation we can address that even if it's five inches in height four and a half inches in height because the ordinance allows for that the six inch is really for is really the catch-all for all other types of front yards that exist within our community and so if somebody has a grass front yard and they've allowed their grass to grow beyond six inches without this language in the code it's hard for us to say that that's a blight condition mayor again i understand what you're saying but i do believe that council member malnar addresses a specific concern which is that of not front yards so much as sidewalks and other public rights of way where we don't want to encourage six inches as being the magno line if you wish that becomes a fallback position for all parties involved so that's why i like his language because it says regardless of the height if it's a safety issue or an infestation issue it needs to be addressed so i i really don't have any problem with his suggestion mayor i didn't mayor councilmember clark i didn't mean to suggest that i did either i don't think the suggestion detracts from what we're trying to do i think it does provide a little more clarity if that's the direction of the council we're happy to do that mayor go ahead mr st john just uh probably down in the weeds no point intended question but so when grass grows from the yard into the sidewalk it doesn't say how you have to remove it you just have to prevent it or remove it but so because city property can a can a homeowner spray like a weed killer and is that okay or does it you have to get rid of it may remember the council vice mayor you can get rid of it by any means okay so you can spray it and then once it's dead remove it and the reason why i'm asking is people walk their dogs on the sidewalk and are we are we causing an issue if somebody wants to sue somebody because they got poisoned their dog i know that's down in the weeds but are we protected against that or as a homeowner i would think that we were we would be protected against an issue like that um i think the only and i won't speak um as an attorney or the homeowner right but if we order or mandate that the resident use a chemical spray i think we would maybe encounter some problems then but we would never do that okay thank you mayor all right thank you um i'm supportive of your proposed language change i believe to the extent that i understand it without reading it i'm also supportive of council member mulliner's contribution to that um this is one of the higher priority or higher quantity i should say of complaints that i get in my office and i think it's the number one it's at the top of the code compliance chart this month and last month and the month before so i think it's it's important that we have clear language that we can educate our population on and and then enforce as necessary but and i understand that our code i think it specifically calls out any person and uh you know i would say that i understand the need for that but i think that as a city we ought to be setting the good example and that i had a resident bring to my attention weeds that were at least knee-high if not taller on some city controlled property and when i submitted that on glendale one the response back was we only deal with that on a quarterly basis and i don't think that that's an excuse we would accept from a resident i only mow my lawn on a quarterly basis so i think that the city ought to uh uh be leading the way and uh controlling our own weeds and our own property thank you anyone else you have what you need yes sir thank you okay next item city manager report mr phelps thank you mayor members of council i've got uh two quick items uh as you know this past february the city received an upgrade bond rating for its general obligation debt well the good news continues we have been notified by s p global ratings that the city excise bond rating and are for our transfer transportation excise tax and municipal property corporation tax has been upgraded from double a minus to double a now while it's always fun to celebrate these increases this one is a particular noteworthy that i'd bring to your attention as your reminder during glendale's financial crisis over 10 years ago these are the bonds specifically that were downgraded to triple b minus which is just one step above being rated as junk bonds and as most on this council was you were taking office for the first time you inherited the with one of the lowest bond ratings in the nation today's rating increase follows a series of upgrades that began in 2016. they are an independent validation of the tremendous work that this council and our staff have done to restore glendale's financial health and what the same time while we're strategically accomplishing all of our economic development goals so good news again continues also we got some good news again earlier this morning in that we were notified that asda has announced that the state farm stadium will host the 2022 mex tour with a marquee match-up of the mexican national soccer team in urgaway this match will be on thursday june 2nd and as part of the fifa world cup which will be held in qatar this november each time the mexican national team has played here at state farm stadium they have set attendance records each time um and not only do they draw significantly from uh from the country of mexico but they draw from states throughout the southwest so we're really excited about that as they can continue to come in and stay in our glendale hotels and shop in our stores and eat in our restaurants and bars so again this is just another series of continuing events being programmed in our sports entertainment district that really demonstrate that glendale is a premier destination for the biggest events and concerts here in the state of arizona and that concludes my report good report city attorney no report thank you okay counseling special interest councilmember clark none at this time mayor thank you councilmember hugh then mayor thank you councilmember milner nothing today mayor thank you councilmember thomas nothing today mayor councilmember turner not today mayor vice mayor nothing matter you guys are awesome i don't have anything either so with that i just can go back have the city manager tell us more good stuff we have executive session motion to go into executive session second i have a motion council member milner or sentence number tom shop any discussion hearing none all in favor of what i i any opposed voting appears you guys have it do you have it this council is recessed for example you