thank you welcome again to the Mesa city council meeting for December the 8th of 2022. this will be our last city council meeting of this year so I want to wish everyone a happy holiday and also uh this is the last meeting for a couple of our council members council member Thompson and council member Luna we had a reception for them a couple of hours ago where we honored them and and said a lot of nice things about them but I don't want to let this opportunity go by without just reiterating how significant the contribution of these gentlemen has been to our community they've served us for eight and nine and a half years respectively which is a significant tenure and and during that amount of time there's been a significant amount of growth in our community and most of that growth the vast majority of that growth has occurred in in their districts so they've had a lot on their hands and they've managed it very well and I have to say that that our City generally but this District's five and six are great places to live and work and play and uh and that is due in large part to the the efforts of these gentlemen so I just want to say thank you again gentlemen for your service uh you will be missed but your impact will certainly be felt in our community for years to come thank you thank you we will begin this meeting with an invocation offered by Pastor Bernard Carl with First Lutheran Church followed by the Pledge of Allegiance so please stand for the prayer and remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance pastor let us pray almighty God our heavenly father bless the public servants in the government of the city of Mesa that they may do their work in a spirit of wisdom charity and justice help them to use their authority to serve faithfully and to promote our common life for the good of all in your name we pray amen amen thank you please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge allegiance of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you the first item on our agenda for this meeting is approval of the consent agenda Mr Christopher would you please come forward and read the consent agenda good evening mayor and council members these are the items in the consent agenda all items listed with an asterisk could be considered as a group by the city council and will be enacted with one motion there will be no separate discussion unless a council member or citizen request in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered as a separate item item two approval minutes of previous meetings is written item 3A act on liquor license application for Nello's Pizza 2950 South Alma School Road item 3B act on liquor license application for Papago by Huss Brewing 1033 North Dobson Road item 3C accident liquor license application for Crawfish Cafe 28 South Dobson Road item 3D act on liquor license application for El Pacifico 1911 West Broadway Road item 3E act on liquor license application for Georgia Leadership Foundation One Day event January 14th at Riverview Park 2100 West Rio Salado Parkway item 4A approving dollar limit increase to the term contract for Brigade driving and safety solution for the Solid Waste Department item 4B approving five-year term master a contract with five years of renewal options for recycling processing and marketing services for the Solid Waste Department item 4C approving three-year term contract with two years of renewal options for badging supplies for the police department item 4D approving use of a Cooperative contract for the purchase of Grappler and mobilization devices and related equipment and training for police vehicles for the Mesa Police Department item 4E approving three-year term contract with two years of renewal options for electric utility distribution Transformers for the materials and Supply Warehouse for the energy resources department item 4f app proving dollar limit increase the term contract for office supplies and products item 4G approving three-year term contract with two years of renewal options for commercial grade fitness equipment for the fire medical police and parks recreation and Community facilities departments item 4-H approving use of a Cooperative contract for Monument signage lighting replacement for the transportation department item 4i approving contract for Mesa City Hall project construction manager at risk guaranteed maximum price item 4J approving contract for intelligent Transportation Systems voice detection upgrades funding for the project includes a congestion mitigation and air quality Grant a local funding match and funding from a local Street sales tax item 5A approving resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a Fifth Amendment to the Mesa improving grounds pre-annexation and development agreement for property within the Eastmark development item 5B approving resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into an addendum and restated maintenance agreement for phase four of the East Mark grade Park item 5c approving resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the city of Phoenix and various partnering agencies within Maricopa County for distribution of funds from the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice assistance grant program for the police department item 5D approving resolution extinguishing a portion of a water and sewer line easement located at 4559 South Power Road to accommodate construction of a commercial industrial building for commercial and indoor recreational uses item 5e approving resolution authorizing a city manager to enter into an intergovernment mental agreement with the city of Chandler town of Gilbert City of Tempe and town of Queen Creek for the sharing of law enforcement information between jurisdictions item 5f approving resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a lease agreement with the downtown Mesa Association for city-owned property and improvements located at 100 North Center Street item 6A introduction of ordinance for annexation case 22-1048 to de-annex the public right-of-way located within the 4200 The 4400 blocks of South Sussman road to Maricopa County this is subject to approval by the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors item 7A and 7B are for continuance to the January 9 2023 city council meeting this is for a zoning ordinance and resolution related to a proposed development on property generally located east of Higley Road on the south side of Thomas Road again this is for continuous the January 9 2023 city council meeting item 8A approving ordinance amending various chapters of Title 11 of the mesa city code pertaining to outdoor eating areas item 8B approving ordinance amending various chapters of Title 11 of the Mississippi code pertaining to Temporary uses outdoor displays site plans and special events item 9A approving subdivision plaid Metro Mesa phase two for property generally located north of Baseline Road and East of Mesa Drive and item 9B approving subdivision Platt Hopewell Mesa for property generally located west of Stapley Drive on the north side of Baseline Road mayor and council members these are the items of the consent agenda thank you Mr Christopher Ms Mosley do we have any requests to speak on an item on the consent agenda no mayor we do not thank you very much uh thank you Council there's been a motion made by Mr Luna seconded by Mr Thompson for approval of the consent agenda please vote thank you that passes unanimously next item on our agenda is item 10 this is to take action on the ordinance for zoning case 22-431 to rezone approximately 10 acres located west of record road on the north side of Baseline Road for the proposed Millennium Superstition Springs development for a multiple residence development I know we have the applicant president Mr Hugh mantle I'd invite you to come forward and tell us what we need to know about your zoning case thank you for the record Charles seamanel on behalf of the applicant I'm mindful that I am one of the few things separating you from Christmas which is an unenviable position and I I think the cinnamon roll energy will only go so long so I'll try to be somewhat brief and move forward by everyone's still happy I know you've had a lot of time to talk about this case and we've talked about it in different settings and in different pieces I'm going to go through a presentation I'm going to focus specifically on the issue that you raised downstairs mayor about parking I think that we have a very logical answer to it but I really want to talk about a number of things first and I think the basis of this case is what not only Mesa but Mesa has certainly spoken of but also most of the valley which is there's a housing crisis there aren't enough places for people to live this is particularly true around Believe It or Not colleges and hospitals and and it just so happens that this is a location where there are both colleges and hospitals and I believe you'll hear from at still later today and one of the things that's interesting about that is ties the two together it's education it's designed specifically to feed the medical campuses that are in the valley as we grow and as we age those two things are really critical having enough and have enough employees so that we can feed the hospitals and so the hospitals can operate successfully particularly as we've seen over the last few years with the Pandemic those jobs are really critical as we as we move and grow as a valley it's harder and harder for people who have those long shifts to drive further and further from where they have to work and so we see this as a great solution for providing housing to people who are in need of it uh We've proposed a building that we think is attractive and works well for Mesa and we went through the planning process to do that and and frankly it's not just us fortunately I receive great comments from the design review board the vice chair mentioned specifically that it looks really nice well thought through good articulation the chair said it's a good looking project it's a good fit board member Thompson said I think the project looks great board member Trexler said it's a testament to tasteful use of materials so as we move through our request we're glad that we have support from people like your boards notably we don't have it from your staff that's obvious it's been clear even here today but but frankly that's the only person in the community or only entity in the community that hasn't been supportive really in some way shape or form at still will be here I'll pass on this slide because I think it's better for them to speak for themselves we've you've seen a lot of multi-family cases in Mesa and one of the things that you usually find at accompany those cases are a stack of blue cards and you only have one today and it's in support and I think that's because this is exactly the right location for multi-family it's not next to single family it's in an area that has significant capabilities on the streets you couldn't put enough development on this land to impact what happens on the major streets nearby and those people will either go directly to the places they work which are likely at still or go to school or the hospital or get on the freeway they're not moving through Mesa neighborhoods in fact if they go across the street they're not even in Mesa and so I think the location of this site is one of the things that in our mind makes great sense it's also why you don't have anyone here in opposition from the public this this is the site I think you're all familiar with it now and I'll move through some of the technical matters because we've had so much discussion and I think really what I hear is that one of the concerns is parking the parking code looks at things in a way that may have made more sense when the parking code was created and we talk about how many what the density of a project is all the time it's an interesting discussion but it sometimes loses context and I'd like to try to provide some of that context and why we think things make sense here and maybe they wouldn't in another case the mix of a project is as important as the density I could have 400 units and I had at 400 bedrooms or I could have 400 units and I could have 800 bedrooms or I could have 400 units and I could go on and on depending on how big the units are what I think is important is how many parking spaces there are bedroom not as a practical reasonable person that's kind of what I look at as maybe a better way to look at this than the zoning code and it's okay the zoning code is a guide and we should look at it and we should decide are there things that make more or less sense based on the practical application of the project in this case each bedroom has 0.99 or almost one full parking space for bedroom and if if we look into the community and look at projects that are in place we know that that that's overparked frankly that that's not everyone will have a car per bedroom and we'll have extra spaces and that's good we want Extra Spaces we're going to spend a lot of money to build this project and if we build it we don't want to be short on parking spaces easier either we're impacted at least as much as anyone else but frankly there isn't really a place for it to spill over again it's not like people are going to park in the neighborhood behind us because obviously they can't there isn't one there aren't single family homes behind us what is most likely to happen if that happens is you'd find for example people at at still who went to school and can also park there they would park there we don't believe that we're anywhere close to a parking dangerous situation we don't believe we're anywhere close to park at capacity we think we're parked over capacity that's intentional we think that's great and and we don't see that as an issue and I think that if you look at other projects in the community you would find exactly the same thing so you know I think our position is that we have designed a good project for a good location and so now in some ways the debate is well should it be you know should it be mr4 or mr5 and respectfully we disagree with staff we think it should be mr5 we think that there is a housing shortage and we should put as many units as we reasonably can into places where we can put them especially in places where there is no opposition to that except from your own staff and our position is that this project does that it's the right size for the right parcel and we would ask you to prove it you know at still wants to speak and certainly like an opportunity to respond after they do and you may have questions now particularly mayor I know you've expressed some concerns with our questions now I'm happy to answer them no thank you Mr human metal I might have some later uh you mentioned there are some speakers and so we'll call them up at this time thank you first we have Mr Joel Sands Joel welcome back Mary Giles vice mayor Dove members of the city council councilman Luna councilman Thompson thank you greatly for your service to the city greatly appreciated for the work that you've done last week we were here and we said at still is conditionally opposing this development we've had conversations with Mr hemantal and at still does support this case because it believes that housing is consistent with the educational campus specialty District as we noted last week that support should not be interpreted that any and all changes to the general plan specialty District designation are acceptable atsu does continue to maintain that the council's adoption of the amendment to the general plan at last week's meeting was improper because staff and pnz did not follow the procedures for mending the general plan uh we would also note in today's memo that was posted online today the memo from staff continues to oppose the case and cites as a reason and I'm quoting the development integration with the at still and the specialty District I think they meant the at still campus so it should have a sick there but I they're concerned with the integration with the at steel campus so we would hope that Council would not reject a development that at still supports because it is consistent with at Steel's mission of education but possibly and that it out of a concern that the development does not integrate with the at steel campus but may approve a development as we know that is coming before Council that AC at still does not support because it certainly does not integrate with the at steel campus integration with the at steel campus and the specialty education campus shouldn't change depending on the development if we're concerned about integration with the at steel campus we would encourage Council to consider that and be consistent and we also think that staff and pnz should also be consistent in their opposition it would be ironic if Council were to reject a development that at still supports out of a concern for protecting A.T Stills campus and the specialty education District but then made at a later date approve a case that at still opposes because it is not consistent with at Still's Mission or the specialty District thank you thank you Mr Sands we also have a card from Anna Macon Anna are you here welcome hello Council mayor uh I feel like uh this project adds a lot of density because I'm from a neighborhood near Red Mountain where the Longbow increases by several hundreds of apartments and traffic and everything else is going to be some more difficult so This Apartment project with changes it should go ahead if you take down the density it says it has 397 unit multi-family development and is an economically efficient use but um it's it's too much of a use in a small place I feel the neighborhood character for Baseline Road and for A.T still University needs needs to be redesigned so that it fits in with the character of the place the quality development guidelines should be looked at again and under conditions are of change you could uh probably look at it from a different perspective there is no other apartment building complex with four floors in that neighborhood so it would stick out and I think the developer designed it according to the height of the abrazo hospital next to it so I would feel like take the heights down leave more space to the roads to Inverness and to the intersection of Inverness uh and uh Sunview Road [Music] give it more space and don't let any thing built with be built without solar power throughout the roofs because I think that's what Mesa needs and increased solar power so take a look and see if you can work it into a concept that fits but this is just too much four floors and density and also this design is not the southwestern or adobe design that you find around here so if it's gonna be workable for students at at still University give it another thought and see how it can be worked out thank you thank you Ms Macon I know we asked staff a couple of questions downstairs but I'd like to maybe ask staff now to give us a presentation on its position on this zoning case okay good evening mayor and Council so as we are discussing this case I'll skip over some of these background slides as far as the location but as you are aware the general plan character area for for this is specialty with a Medical Campus subtype so this is really intended for a single use such as hospitals and medical offices but I may have supporting uses associated with it so last Thursday on December 1st city council approved a text Amendment to the general plan and with that recommendation with the adoption of planning and zoning's additional recommendation to add rm5 zoning this this project is now in compliance with the general plans character areas so the applicant had originally proposed to do a minor General plan text Amendment but it has since then withdrawn that because it is no longer needed so they are requesting to rezone this to the rm5 with the planned area development overlay to request some deviations from standards the rm5 zoning district is our highest density zoning District in the city as we have discussed last week and on the screen for you is a map of where those generally are located or where there are developments with similar similar densities in the city the difference with that would be in our downtown area we have different zoning designations that allow for similar density in the transect zoning with the form-based code and as you can see they're really intended to be more of urban environments where you are supported by transit or where they're developed in a comprehensive setting to really have an urban core such as where we have Haws Crossing where it's really meant to have that Urban core to it so their site plan that they're proposing it is for four-story buildings with 394 units so that's a density of 40.3 dwelling units per acre the deviations that they've requested through the planned area development overlays and increase at The Building height from 50 feet to 60 feet and also as we discussed earlier earlier a reduction in their parking so per code they're required to park their units at 2.1 spaces per unit and they are requesting to deviate from that and have a 1.66 space per unit so that is a 21 reduction in that equates to about 173 parking spots in addition they are requesting to reduce the landscape yard on the west portion of the site from 15 feet to 10 feet with their parking reduction they did provide a parking study to justify that the the two discussions in that parking study were Transit and comparable developments that were approved with similar reductions the first one Transit staff finds that this is not really applicable in our zoning code we consider reductions to parking when our development is within a quarter mile of a station area the nearest transit stop to this property is two miles south so it really is not in an area where people could walk and use transit to offset that and then with the the quoting of other developments staff has found that our parking ratio is really sufficient for the needs of the development we don't see that they're that it is resulting in an over parking of developments we do see that it's appropriate in addition to planning staff Economic Development has also provided comments that they are not in support of this development their position is that they want to preserve this area for commercial and industrial areas for future job growth to improve the job to housing ratio and they believe that there are other viable locations in the area so staff's main issue with this is that the density we believe is just not appropriate for the area we we have tried to work with the applicant to do a reducer density to an rm4 zoning and that way we'd be able to address some of the parking concerns as well if there were fewer units there in addition to the lack of transit in the area as Mr humansel mentioned there is there's not much place for the offset of parking so there is no parking on Sunview at all and there's very limited parking on Inverness so they aren't allowed to have any overnight parking on those streets so they really wouldn't be able to offset with the local streets in the area um but with that I would be happy to answer any questions you have thank you Rachel uh I I I'm familiar with the criticism regarding parkings so I think we've touched on that I've also heard that staff had concerns about the traffic impacts but I didn't see that in your presentation is is that the case are you concerned about the how this the density of this project would impact local traffic in the area on their site plan they do have two access points one is off a Baseline and then they have a second one off of Inverness um so it it's really a matter of if there's a media in there and Baseline to a matter of being able to um to get in and out of that development easily it's going to require a lot of routing along Sunview and Inverness kind of indirect and on those internal streets there so we do have some concerns with the number of units number of cars that be in and out of this site but you wouldn't list that as one of the reasons why you're not supporting the project um I did not miss that list that as a main reason okay great thank you Council uh questions for staff on this project let's be clear it's not the city staff that oppose us there are three members to the planning zoning commission also oppose us I don't want to make it sound like we're isolated out there I think we did make some compelling arguments That Others May that certainly Council make whatever decision I just didn't appreciate the fact that we were being pointed out as the only ones that aren't opposed to this thank you Fair Point Mr Brady yeah so the the uh this is on our agenda not with a recommendation for approval from either staff or from Planning and Zoning it was a 3-3 tie with one zoning member being absent so it was a split vote at the Planning and Zoning Board thank you all right Council no additional questions correct thank you Mr Hugh mantle you said you wanted to opportunity to rebut go ahead I do I appreciate it um some of those questions some of the comments we just heard we've heard for the first time so so that's interesting but I'm glad to hear and I agree with staff that the traffic is not a major factor that the roads in place can handle pretty significant traffic again I want to get back to the point about um the bedroom count because I think that's really important looking at it purely from from a density standpoint I I think just just ignores the facts and in this case you only have 17 Studios you have 152 one bedroom units 183 two bedroom units and three 42 42 three bedroom units so in the end you end up with a unit per bed a parking space per bedroom and I think that that's really pretty significant and I think you'd find that that more than exceeds the demand in in our communities I do want to thank at steel for for coming in and I know this has been a challenging series of cases for them and they've been pretty upfront with me about their concerns I know they oppose the other case we're not here to talk about that case I appreciate that they've taken the time from the beginning and again today to support our case they've always said they do so because it helps for them deliver on the promise that they feel Mesa delivered from them many years ago with the heat initiative and I think most of you around then but one of the business development tools that basically used with the priorities of heat and one of those was education and particularly medical education and A.T still came here thinking they would be part of a larger campus and we have worked with them extensively to find ways to tie into their uses to that extent one of the things they have done is to tie their campus to the Y and the Y and at still have a long history and work closely together and they've asked us if there were things we could do to help them in that endeavor and we have agreed to do so and I was prepared to offer a stipulation today I understand that that's not something I can do but I'm going to read it into the record for the benefit of at still who again we appreciate and we will work with them in the future to provide a private letter between the parties if the case is approved and that stipulation is that the developer shall work with staff to provide a permanent detached lighted Monument sign up to seven feet in height located at the northeast corner of Baseline and Sunview wrecker road for the YMCA and at steel University this sign shall replace the existing sign if approved the sign shall be installed at the cost of the developer within six months of approval excuse me within uh before the certificate of occupancy is issued it's one of the things they asked us to do to help tie our building our buildings with their campus and we've agreed to do that and so I want to be on record so that they know that we will stand true to what we've offered and we appreciate again their support I'm happy to answer questions or stop and allow you to get to Christmas faster okay any questions from Mr humantel all right thank you very much sir all right any Council discussion on this item mayor Charles I think you had one more comment for this item let me see I have I'm sorry I have two blue cards two for 10A 2 for 10A yes I think we only had one yeah two speakers we did you did yeah Ms Macon also spoke oh I'm sorry that's okay all right thank you you had me worried thank you very much thank you Council any discussion on the site yes Miss Pillsbury I was gonna see if any of you wanted to go first but I will go ahead and give my remarks um first of all I have to say a huge thank you to the staff for all of their hard work expertise professional opinion meeting with me multiple times more than I can count about this case and helping me understand all of the ins and outs of it and I really really respect and admire our staff and appreciate so much of what they do and I want to also just make a point that when we say a 3-3 for plan and Zoning three is denial but three also was approval so I just want to point that out that if this is hard I think when we have these split plan zoning cases it means that this this isn't an easy case moving forward so I just wanted to make that point as a council member I have to make decisions based on policy sometimes and not just what the staff recommendation is this is extremely extremely hard to go in a different direction than stuff but I wanted to explain why I am in support of this project um I have to say one of the biggest ones is that there is no neighborhood opposition and having said 7 controversial zoning cases this year in my district that is not the case of any of the other ones and so that's huge for me that there are not um neighbors right next to them or around them that are in opposition I also really when I first got on Council two years ago one of the first things I was told that was needed in my district was more housing for A.T still and for banner and um I I've been looking to find out how we can fill that need and I feel like this development fits that need Banner is in Gilbert but it's right there it's within a mile half a mile from where this project is and I know they could also use more housing as well I have six kids that are in from ages 16 to 24 and they're all in this time period of life where they're going to need a place to live and they're going to be starting their families and the housing crisis in Mesa is very very important to me and I take it seriously and we're always looking for the best places to put housing and I um we have about 50 acres to the north of this that will be used for employment in some way or another and so I don't feel like this is taking up a huge um a huge area for employment so I I also wanted to make sure I put that point in um I looked at this project extensively I think it's beautiful I love the four stories because there's elevators and I think that opens up a huge accessibility to our population people who would need that and three-story walk-ups don't have that and so a lot of people can't get up to flights of stairs or three flights of stairs and so I I loved that accessibility I loved the amenities I we talked at length about all of the parking and the streets around there and and setbacks and all the things that we would normally research on projects and I felt comfortable with all of the things that we discussed and I um so I do not have concerns about about some of those issues that been brought up I think I got all my points but those are my reasons why I will be in support of this project thank you Mr Pillsbury I have met with at still I think three different administrators and I asked their opinions on this case and each one of them told me that they were indifferent to it so I'm I'm not sure exactly where at still is on is at on this case I would but I wanted for the record to say that we certainly support AC still and the expansion of at steel and we'll do everything we can to assist with with the with that but I like I say I've had three direct conversations and and uh was told that that they they don't really that they're rather indifferent to this um I think this is a beautiful good looking project uh and I would like to support it it is a very close call but uh I I wish you would just have build some more parking spaces I I don't know why a product that's so well um designed and and so much effort has gone into making it a quality project and it is you're the projects you've done in Mesa are all high quality projects so I would love to see this developer continue to come to Mesa but that's why I'm a little baffled why we just uh why we don't have enough parking here so it's a close call for me but um I would love to see this this project I think you could have the parking reductions if it were somewhere closer to the light rail or somewhere in a more urban environment I would love to see a four-story apartment complex in in a different part of town it it will it doesn't quite fit the character of this neighborhood in my opinion so it's a close call for me but I'll I will not be supporting the case any any other discussion Council all right uh let's see do we have a moment we have a motion this is a motion for approval correct a motion for approval made by council member Freeman is there a second oh I'm sorry let me let me thank you for correcting mayor it can be your motion however you want to make it right it's not on the consent agenda so if someone wants to make a motion to for approval or a motion for denial they can why don't they whoever councilmember Freeman if you want to clarify if you want it for approval or denial I was also going to make a motion but I was waiting to see if there were any comments but I guess we'll just vote the opposite way then all right yeah we might vote two or three times here to see how it all shakes out so uh it'll be interesting uh thank you we absolutely will uh depend on the outcome of this this motion will entertain additional motion so there's a motion made for denial is there a second all right that motion fails for lack of a second uh Miss Pillsbury thank you a motion has been made for approval seconded by Mr Thompson any additional discussion all right please cast your vote all right that motion passes with with uh that's a that's a 6-1 vote so congratulations Mr Humane till your case passes thank you we appreciate it also when he used just one moment of my time to thank council members Thompson and Luna for all their time in Mesa it will be uh sad to see you go but really appreciate everything you've done thank you thank you thank you everyone thank you next item on our agenda is items from citizens present uh normally our rule is we only allow for three of these I've been handed five cards but I'm in the holiday spirit so I think we're going to try to make it through five cards today but I just want the speakers to know that we will be strictly adhering to the three-minute limit for speakers first is the Anna Villanueva sacita good evening mayor council Deanna Villanueva Salcedo 1513 South case Circle councilmember Thompson congratulations on your service and best wishes on your next Endeavor council member Luna you know that we cannot let this meeting pass without notice on behalf of a grateful Community Mesa in general or Latino Community specifically we have to thank you for your service and your your decade of service on Council you've served all of Mesa with dignity and respect but for our Latino Community especially you must know how significant you have been and your role has been the first Latino to ever be elected to service in over a hundred and thirty years of being incorporated as a city is significant you have been a champion for inclusivity for Progress for education for so many important issues the non-discrimination ordinance Hispanic Leadership Institute East Valley Latino Town Hall Dia de los Muertos or Chavez the list goes on and on and that is a powerful Legacy indeed council member is the second Latino ever elected no pressure we look forward to working with you as you continue your service on Council but David please know on behalf of a very grateful Community a very grateful Latino Community our hearts go with you as you move into the next area of service we know that your term may be ending but you will always remain an active member gracias thank you Dan I can't I can't not say thank you for your service in our community as well uh Peter armelo welcome Mr armillo you have three minutes welcome mayor and Council my name is Peter anello I'm a taxpayer in Mesa and I understand that the city of Mesa and lure of property tax is taxing us at about 92 cents per uh one dollar of every nav that puts the tax at about 39 million if the city charged the primary property tax of one percent that would net us around 40 million also the city of Mesa collects from the Utility Fund instead of a primary property tax this year's budget show is about 120 million from this fund it looks like the utility front transfer of 120 million is overcharging rape payers by about 80 million we currently are dealing with high inflation I have to cut my budget to make it work I hope you don't balance your personal budgets the way you handle the city's budget it's time the council makes hard decisions to tighten your belt and stop spending money we don't have on things that we don't need thank you thank you Mr ernello uh Cheryl thank you council members and mayor Giles my name is Sherry anello I live at 10246 East Tiburon in Encore at Eastmark my concern is Mesa is operating a budget in a deficit at a time when costs are skyrocketing and not likely to go down I've learned that you are overcharging residents for utilities by approximately 80 million more than a one percent property tax would be yet you're still in a deficit on top of this one of my big concerns is that I've learned you are in the process of perching a hotel for the homeless really you operate in a deficit you charge residents 80 million more than we should probably be charged and you are um purchasing property for people that will not add anything to our economy you are committing my future or excuse me committing to Future maintenance Insurance costs possible lawsuits for this property with my future tax dollars I moved here from the Northwest I've seen Seattle Tacoma Puyallup Portland and Eugene all grow slums by these kinds of decisions my nephew owns a business in Puyallup Washington and his entire office had to recently move because of trash feces and bodies around his building when living in Eugene the neighboring town of Springfield found an almost overnight solution to homelessness they simply designed a fee of fine excuse me that um would be given in the amount of a significant traffic ticket to anyone found giving handouts to homeless well the Beggars simply moved on to more hospitable territory which happened to be Eugene where I lived so my message is very simple don't charge residents who keep this town running and livable by taking money not needed from us the cost of living will go down you will have less homelessness and two don't destroy my newfound home that I love with homeless programs that attract more homeless drugs and crime by spending money we simply don't have thank you next is Mr Carrie Davis welcome Mr Davis good to have you back you have three minutes thank you good evening mayor and city council my name is Carrie Davis and I'm concerned about mesa's financial condition I believe number one the city is overstaffed according to the city's current year budget expenditures for personnel are approximately 67 percent higher than 10 years ago the current year budget reflects an increase in personal expenditures of 59.7 million and 11.7 percent increase over the prior year budget by comparison the City of Tucson reduced employees by seven percent from 2012 through 2021. number two I believe the city is top heavy with management Personnel the organization chart for Mesa list one city manager and five Deputy city managers by comparison the City of Tucson lists one city manager and three Deputy city managers number three I believe the city's debt is high as of June 30th 2021 the city's total outstanding Bond and obligation debt was 1.7 billion dollars to with this number in perspective and Arizona Department of Revenue revenue report Compares Gilbert Glendale Chandler Scottsdale Tempe and Mesa and Phoenix Total Bond and obligation debt per capita and shows Mesa is the second highest among these Seven Cities fiscal year 2021 total liabilities were 2.58 billion dollars or 91.2 percent of total assets number four I believe the city is overspending and not keeping faith with keeping taxes and fees low in 1946 the city of Mesa adopted the policy of not charging the primary property tax it seems to me that the intent would most likely have been to keep taxes low for residents if the city charged a primary property tax of one percent similar to the secondary property tax rate it would collect approximately 40 million dollars as stated in the current budget another resource for the general fund governmental funds is the contribution from the Utility Fund Mesa uses the contribution in lieu of a prop primary property tax the current year budget reflects a transfer from the Utility Fund of 120 million dollars if as stated the Utility Fund Surplus is intended to subsidize the general fund in lieu of primary property tax then the city should only transfer approximately 40 million not 120 million in other words I estimate the city's overcharging utility rate payers approximately 80 million dollars finally the current Year's budget for General governmental projects revenues of 452 million dollars and expenditures of 591 million for a deficit of 139 million in expanded teachers over revenues the budget reflects the transfer of 120 million from the Utility Fund to offset this deficit so as I stated earlier I believe the city is overstaffed top heavy has too much debt and overspends general fund general fund revenues I respectfully request the city council adopt a more fiscally conservative budget during the next budgetary cycle thank you for your time and attention I also like to thank you mayor Giles for the opportunity to meet with you and the CFO and thank Kevin Thompson and councilman Luna for for your service to our community thank you thank you Mr Davis all right thank you we have one more speaker thank you we have one more speaker Mr Neil Carter welcome representative Carter congratulations on thank you uh honorable mayor distinguished Council people and guests my name is Neil Carter I reside at 2197 West School District Avenue in Pinal County although I reside in Pinal County I am a customer of Mesa gas but it was not my intent to use up one of the Public's comments so thank you for allowing me just to introduce myself I'm one of the two state representatives for district 15. because of redistricting our district now goes into Mesa to the corners power and baseline which includes of course the airport all of East Mark as well as the ASU power knowledge Corridor and some other areas in Mesa so I just wanted to read into the record my name and my telephone number 480-628-1037 so I'm available to anybody the citizenry or yourselves that may need anything at the state level thank you sir thank you Mr Carter this is a first we haven't had a legislator come and do this yet so our compliments and again congratulations on your election thank you sir thanks uh thank you and that concludes our agenda for this meeting is our motion to adjourn thank you Mr Luna and Mr Thompson for the last time we appreciate that all in favor please say aye aye thank you we are adjourned [Music] [Music]