thank you good afternoon and welcome to the glendale city council workshop session of march 23rd 2021 the meeting is called to order i will now conduct an attendance roll call please signify by saying president council member al dhamma president council member clark yeah council member malinor president council member thomas here council member turner i'm sure i'll be here any second not here yet the chair is here and mayor wires is excused we're going to postpone item number one but miss bowers could you introduce item two council item of special interest led light conversion vice mayor members of the council uh good afternoon welcome and here for today's first presentation will be presented by our director of field operations michelle watenko thank you mr phelps good afternoon uh vice mayor and council apologize for this i'm just getting my notes set up uh so today's presentation is a follow-up item the council item with special enterta interest on led lighting this item was introduced on february 2nd 2019 council member tomlichoff asked for an led plan for city facilities staff did come back to council and receive consensus for this item in uh may 14 2019 and from the initial request it did change somewhat the deliverables for this council item and special interest were for the first one was development of lighting standards this development is still ongoing we felt felt it prudent to get back to council and discuss this with with you this turned out to be much more arduous and involved than we thought so our initial review of lighting across the city has found out we have over 400 types of lights across the city and it's not an easy conversion type process as every light has a different need so a task light on your desk might be completely different to a light on a street or in a park that's required to do a coverage so this item is still outstanding and we'll come back to you with that item the second one is determination and evaluation of cost and benefits and potential cost savings for conversion of lighting to led we'll be covering this today third item evaluation of energy savings performance contracts this one we will also be covering today and the phased implementation of energy savings conversion projects this will follow based upon direction we receive from council today i do want to follow up staff did estimate approximately 80 hours to complete this council item of special interest this was a gross underestimate of effort we did completely underestimate the number of lights across the city and the different demands for each so i do apologize for the time it's taken to get back to council on this item but there was a lot of effort that has gone into that and i think you'll see that through this presentation so first off if we want to talk led conversion and the benefits led lights when you actually think of a light when you talk about incandescent light the old screw and light bulbs that we have those are a single light that provides light from that fixture an led are a series of multiple lights that comprise like one bulb and so when you look at our street lights today or the lights at intersections you can actually see there's approximately 100 of these tiny bulbs that make up one fixture and so what that does if one goes out the entire fixture doesn't need to be replaced in the entire lamp it still continues to provide light and so from that you get less maintenance with led the other as they have a lot less heat that they generate they do have a much longer life and because of the multiple light sources within each led there's definitely a much easier maintenance to them as you don't have to go replace them when each individual light burns out and they the way they're they've got a different driver with them a lot of the older lights have a ballast these actually have what's called a driver so it allows you to be much more adjustable and flexible with them so they're much more dimmable in an easier sense the lights are also changeable you get a better color spectrum with them and you can adjust them such they are very close to natural light so they can almost mimic sunlight so with that there's a cost savings numbers of different ways um straight off there's the energy usage uh with the old incandescent lights or the old fluorescent type lights the majority of energy that was used was actually converted to heat and so led lights don't do that they actually just create illumination off it and they generate a lot less heat with it but then there's other things that factor into the cost savings they provide a better spread of light because there are multiple points of light and so you can end up using fewer fixtures you can also go to a lower wattage to generate that same light and then you also have to look at when you want to generate the cost savings you have to look at the use of the lights how often are these lights used and how many hours they used and that all figures in to the cost savings and so it's not a simple calculation as it may be you know if you've got an always on light you can you can generate a cost savings and a factor much easily on that and the last part i really want to make when we were looking at the cost savings and energy usage this was really a moving target for us especially over this past year we had facilities close and then reopen and their hours of opening changed so to establish a baseline or determine any sort of potential for cost savings we really had to go back a prior year and look at that as well so this last year has really been a moving target for us so throughout this presentation when we talk about savings calculations i want to talk about a simple payback which is really going to be the cost of the conversion so what's the cost of the capital or maintenance cost that goes into it divided by the annual savings and that will get us a payback parade so for example in a very simple calculation if it costs us twelve thousand dollars to convert this room to led lights and we see a four thousand dollar savings that would give us a three-year payback uh so the reason i'm choosing to do this is it's quick and easy to use it's very easy to understand any investment decisions we make are very simple to do but some things it is is limiting it does not take into account any savings we receive after that payback period so in this example here if we're going to save 4 000 a year we may say it'll pay back in three years but that four thousand dollars in savings is going to be ongoing so it'll outlast that that three years and it also does not account for that time value of money so if it costs us twelve thousand dollars today and we defer it it could potentially cost us you know fifteen or twenty thousand dollars in the future so that that there's a value to spending money today the other thing we did not look at is life cycle cost savings or maintenance savings so what this means is you you look at how many times do you have to replace that light or that fixture over its its life and so if we look at some of our typical halogen lights across the city today they might have a half year life so if those are used on a regular basis eight hours a day we have to go replace them every six months where some of the other bulbs the fluorescent bulbs based upon their their life usage could be up to 4.3 years with led that life goes up to 10 to 20 years again based upon the hours per day or per year that we're using it so what we haven't factored into any of these savings that i'm going to talk to you about today is that maintenance saving that cost is sending that technician out to the building to go fix that light bulb and replace it and that cost that light bulb that's not been factored in and the reason we've chose to do this is that what we're going to provide you today is a conservative number that's achievable and that we we know is a minimum value um so again that the time to change we look at you know if you look at that number of half a year to 4.3 years it could be anywhere you know up to five times the current frequency so if you look at you know the cost of having that staff go out there that that could be significant as well but it also makes staff available for other preventative maintenance type activities and then there's the purchase price the bulb so i just wanted to make sure you you you saw this so when we talk about the simple payback that it is a very conservative estimate and it is easily achievable because we want to say when we want to recommend a project that these savings are real councilmember clark i don't yeah no i'm on um what is the cost of an led light bulb compared to a fluorescent and and i know they're all different types of fluorescents all different types of leds but generally does it cost two times more than a fluorescent bulb or what can you give me some idea vice mayor council members councilmember clark i i don't have that information readily available i think later on when we get into some of the examples when i can actually get into this bulb today cost this much and this one in the future cost this much i don't have it for the fluorescent because we don't or sorry for the incandescent we don't have many of them and fluorescent we also don't have many of them across the city but let me see if i can answer your question later on and if not let me get back to you with that okay because while we're saving manpower in the number of times we have to change a light bulb if if the light costs four or five times what what a fluorescent does i think that has to be factored in as to what the real cost savings is vice mayor and council members councilmember clark an excellent point and we have factored that in we've factored in the cost of the replacement and you'll see when we talk about other things if it's a 20-year payback and there's things in there that have to replace be replaced at 10 years we've got that factored into it as well thank you thank you so so again throughout this presentation i'll be using just simple payback and again it is it is very conservative in the estimates when we talk about office buildings because i know we did led conversion on street lights we looked at just an industry utilization standard of 2300 hours and we did this really because this last year has been that moving target for us and we just have not been able to get a good number of hours and when we looked at our city buildings this was a a good conservative estimate some of our buildings are open much longer than that and i believe this item may have come up because our street lights we did an led conversion on those so ref for reference our street lights do operate 4 380 hours annually and so the number of hours you run street lights being almost double your payback period should be almost double what it is in buildings and so as a reminder in 2017 at council request we did a contract to replace all the street lights that was just under 5 million the energy savings projected on that were just under 500 000 and they looked at maintenance and supplies annually being about 180 thousand dollars i i did ask our transportation department for for an update on that and the contract came in as stated um the aps did provide two rebates totaling 504 000 so in today's presentation we won't be talking rebates uh those are kind of hit or miss and we we will always be seeking rebates we just don't know if if they will be available michelle one second council member tom and shaw i have to interrupt her but could you you said something about the difference between the savings on street lights and on lighting in our buildings is that what did you do i just want you to re say that make sure i understood that okay so uh vice mayor councilmember absolutely so uh to go back a bit our buildings were estimating using them approximately 2 300 hours annually that's the number of hours this the lights would be on in the buildings and so street lights are on more than that they're on 4 380 hours a year and so our street light paybacking should be about half of what it is for buildings so if buildings could be eight years streetlights will be four because the lights are used more often on streets than they are in buildings and so your payback period really is tied to the usage amount okay so i do want to go back and when we look at the actual energy savings it was projected on the street lights again at just under five hundred thousand dollars transportation is actually seeing the savings at just under 800 000 for last fiscal year so they were conservative we're being conservative in our estimate today and uh the payback on these conversion to led is real they had estimated the payback at approximately uh nine and a half years when they presented this item to council they're now seeing it just under six years it'll pay for itself all right councilman thank you vice mayor so in your analysis did you include outdoor other outdoor lighting that the city has in this part of this conversion conversation for example parks and parking lots and other places where we have outdoor lighting uh vice marine council members councilman ortom shaft uh yes we did and we will we will cover all the different options that we have here shortly thank you so that just kind of covers you know what led lights are and the benefits of the conversion i really want to tie it together and before we get there just talk a little bit about energy savings performance contracts and what these are so an energy savings performance contract is when you you look at everything holistically you can look at a building you can look at its associated parking lot or an event of a park you can look at the amenities within the park the restrooms any sport corridor lighting that you may have the parking lot and all associated elect electrical with that and what what you do with these is it's a turnkey type service so the the contractor comes in he looks at everything you might have so if he walked through this building he would look at the number of lights we have how we provide cooling and heating they would also look at the landscape systems the outdoor lighting but the landscape systems in terms of water usage and opportunity to save water uh because every time you turn the tap on you you know there's a cost generated to that water and so it's not just energy it's also potential water savings as well but the contractor does an initial review and then they'll come back and tell you every potential way that you could save energy in that building or in that location they'll provide you with design and installation services and possibly ongoing maintenance the next step after they do that initial review is to do some comprehensive energy savings programs and during this stage what the contractor does is they look at all those potential energy savings measures and there's certain things that you may want to implement and others you may not want to implement and that you know a good example that is let's say today the city has a standard we cool buildings to 72 degrees in the summertime they may recommend that if we only cool them to 80 degrees in the summertime we could save some energy and that just may not be palatable to us so we may not choose to do that and so we've always got the option as we go through this to say that doesn't work for us and we don't want to consider that further but it's up to the city at this stage to determine what measures to proceed with if any and if we choose to proceed the next step we go into is any sort of project financing an energy savings performance contract can be self financing and i'll talk about that here in a second but then we've also got the option where we can finance this through alternative methods and this can be partial financing where we add some capital funds or it could be complete financing where we choose to to pay for it on our own and again this could be through any sort of variety of city funding that we want to but the big thing on this energy savings performance contracts is that the project savings are guaranteed and what i mean by this is they are put in the contract and we have independent auditors monitor this on an ongoing basis and audit to confirm it and so your contract will say this project will save you for example two hundred thousand dollars annually if it only saves you a hundred ninety five thousand dollars the contractor pulls that five thousand dollars from their profit and the city does not pay them that amount so it is a true guarantee on savings and what the city has to do though is we have to maintain those hours of operation so if we say today the civic center operates twenty three hundred dollar twenty three hundred hours annually and we do this building and this building is part of the project and then we change its use and it's now operated four thousand hours a year that's a change in use and the city would be responsible for those change in hours of operations same with that temperature set point that i just talked about let's say we currently only cool to 80 degrees and we choose 72 is much more reasonable that would be on the city to pay for that change ice mayor remember clark um that sounds very nice that if if the savings is under what is guaranteed we get made whole what happens if the savings over performs do we have to split it with the contractor or does the city reap the reward of over performance vice mayor council members council member clark if we over perform and we are being a little bit conservative that money is the and it can be put into savings or really what it is is it's you don't spend that amount in your in your electric contract so they tend to be conservative to make sure they can hit these numbers and anything uh above that is the cities to save this energy savings performance contracts is part of the arizona revised statutes it is legally allowed in arizona and is heavily regulated to make sure that these savings are guaranteed which is why the companies we work with are you know so able to offer the guarantee is it is regulated that way so how the energy savings performance contract works is the first bar there the orange bar talks about it would essentially be today and you'll see our energy annual utility and operational costs and i want you to consider this to be our utility costs only because we are not factoring in operational costs to it and it does show a box on the top being the potential savings if we go through this project what they identify is that potential savings and they determine what amount they would actually guarantee is annually guaranteed savings and then during the period you want to finance this so if we say our our project payback is 10 years we would finance this over 10 years and how we would do it is a portion of that annual utility costs we continue to pay to the utility but that difference the difference in the amount that we don't pay the utility but we were paying in the past is used to finance the project and so that's paid from our energy savings and that last bar there shows if we have a 10-year payback project well we spend the 10 years of utility savings to pay off the project that savings continues and so it doesn't end at the end of the 10 years the city will see that on an ongoing type basis so essentially it reduces your utility bill on an ongoing type basis because you've completed these these energy performance measures so some of the conversions we looked at or the energy conservation measures we looked at are lighting we looked at interior lights within within a building ramada and those type areas as well as any sort of exterior lights and these can be parking lot lights they can be lights attached to the building that are used for walkways or entrances to the building we looked at your air conditioning and heating equipment and controls we looked at water conservation measures and this is the amount of water that may come out of a tap or every time you flush a toilet and the flush valves we looked at electrical upgrades and each of these first four measures you the city we do these today we do these kind of incrementally so if a light burns out in the city we will address it in terms of should it be converted to led or is it just better for us to just replace that bulb for bulb type thing so we've already been doing this somewhat what we're now doing is looking at as a programmatic approach versus doing that as kind of a one-off it's now can we go in make large wholesale changes and improve it the other two measures that we'll talk a little bit about are solar really we we don't have a lot of solar across the city today and we'll talk about the benefits of that and then it's also some of these controls the hvac equipment and controls if you look at those right now if somebody calls and says my office is hot a hvac technician from facilities typically has to go to that location and check the thermostat to make sure it's operating appropriately and then go check the actual air conditioning system be it a chiller or package unit to determine what the issues are a proper hvac control allows a technician through their computer to look and see if it's a simple set point adjustment if they can you manipulate the controls from there and fix it so there is that time factor that we have not factored into any of these measures it's allowing people to be more efficient at their jobs and if you think of this you know facilities do operate 24 7 and so you know between the hours of like 4 30 p.m and 6 am somebody may be dispatched from their house to go fix one of these things whereas now they could probably do it across their computers there is there's a lot of savings that we're not capturing when we talk about some of these projects so to get into some of the details on these projects we looked at you know interior lighting conversion so we looked at three locations and the way we selected these locations was we looked at locations that are not going to go under a major renovation in the future so while we included the foothills library in the main library we looked at their their footprint is going to remain largely the same the areas that contain books today will continue to contain books but we did not look at locations like city hall where we may completely change that that footprint of the of the floor and we may change it so when we looked at the interior lighting at paseo foothills and the main library so today just for example foothills library has 447 fluorescent lights sorry 447 lights some of which are fluorescent some are which are compact fluorescent some incandescent some halogen and what we're doing is looking at replacing those with led light fixtures a retrofit fixture or just a retrofit lamp same with the main library and paseo racket center so the cost of all the lighting cost for a contractor to go do this work is 336 144 they are saying the annual energy saving off this and again being conservative is just under 50 000 so the payback the simple payback so taking the 336 000 divided by the 49 000 is 6.7 years so by implementing this project it would pay for itself in under seven years then we looked at you know some of the exterior lighting and and i do know i've combined a lot of information on this slide so we looked at a bunch of the different parks we looked at foothills park grand linear grand canal linear park saguaro ranch park and then some of the community parks foothills sports park through rose lane and then we looked at the parking lots the parking lots were easier to do under the exterior type lighting so paseo racket center again foot hills library and main library and we came back with a total cost of doing this project at 1 million about 1 million 50 000 uh annual energy savings of 125 000 and a payback of 8.3 years and i do want to stay say right now that you know we are talking about doing a lighting retrofit at soil ranch park using fun balance or the az cares money this project looks at a simple light for like light for light type replacement assumes the poles all work your lights all in the right place and the other project we're looking at includes rewiring and replacing some of the poles and adding lights in other areas so when i look at saguaro ranch park alone the cost here today out of that 1.1 just over 1 million dollars it's under 300 000 and the payback on that project alone is six years the reason i'm saying that is we can fund part of this project through the money we've got set aside for saguaro ranch park through the other capital project and i'll talk a little bit more about that later on when we talk hvac projects so we're talking on this slide foothills branch library so foothills library and main library both of the hvac systems in those locations are original to the building they have not been retrofit nor replaced in the life of the building so the plan would be with foothills branch libraries to replace the existing chiller and the cooling tower and then upgrade a constant speed fan and just and same thing the main library would be looking at replacing two chillers so the conversion cost the cap capital cost of these projects is just under seven hundred thousand dollars and if we look at it just on a straight basis uh energy savings is twenty five thousand a year and the payback would be 28 years if you remember back to our recent cip conversations there is capital money programmed we actually have recommended money in fiscal year 22 which is next year for foothills library to do this exact work on the chiller that's 225 000 and then main library we have 455 000 for the chiller work the actual capital project is around a million dollars for the main library of which 455 000 is directly applicable so that second table shows just that our conversion cost this project would take us 680 000 in the capital the cip recommended to to council we have 680 000 programmed in for this and so while the annual energy savings would be about 25 000 we could pay this off immediately through that other funding mechanism and see that twenty five thousand dollars of annual energy savings and the other thing to note on these projects is that we have not factored in the rebates if we did this project today and we said let's go ahead and do that there are it's a small amount but there are three thousand dollars in rebates available for each of these locations so that would be an additional six thousand dollars that the city would see in in revenue off this we did not include that in any calculation because we don't know from day to day if that rebate of opportunity is still going to be available or if grant opportunities are but as always we would we would apply for it and if we did receive it it would would return to the city as revenue the other projects or some of the other types of projects we could do are water conservation and really what the what the vendor does for the city here is they do a billing analysis and so they'll find any leaks that you may have and these could be small leaks that you wouldn't normally detect but they're also recommending uh rebuilding of flush valves recommissioning to a low flow toilet and then looking at the the flow of the faucet as these did not uh really realize much savings to the city and as we have staff members that do this we would recommend that we will continue to incrementally upgrade these as maintenance or if we are going in to remodel a location we'll do it that way but we're not seeing the cost savings off these type projects to help fund this we're not recommending we continue with these water conservation as part of this do you have a question no vice mayor councilmember clark um i just heard on the news today that the federal government is planning on a massive four trillion dollar infrastructure proposal part of that will include green new deal whatever that means but i would think that some of these projects could be funded perhaps by next year dependent upon the type of bill the federal government finally passes and what's included in it are we keeping track of that information so that we can apply where necessary to do some of these projects as part of a federal program councilmember do you have an answer are you down there i i would appreciate any comment available okay then councilmember thomas vice mayor and council members council member clark i am aware of a conversation we had about a week and a half ago regarding potential future um as what came out you know nine ten years ago as part of the america recovery act there was federal money available for energy conservation type projects we would be watching that and that would be another way to fund these type projects and we would always be working with budget and finance on what's the best funding mechanism for these so are are you in the light of potential federal funding opportunities are you recommending that all of these projects or whatever projects council approves be started immediately or are we we willing to wait and give it a little bit of time and and see if there is a possibility of federal funding vice mayor and council members councilmember clark i think we'll end the presentation on what what the next steps are and what we're recommending we do to make sure that we've got shovel ready projects and things ready to go whatever the funding source may be thank you vice mayor hugh um i'm a little confused because the consulate of special interest was on an led lighting conversion and this seems to be sort of an endorsement for using a contractor such as mckinstry and i know some people have had the opportunity to meet and and understand exactly what the benefits of that type of endeavor are um i know you've met with them mr phelps has met with them and know people there and this is kind of looks to me like it's pivoting into a whole nother direction of other than what i went back and read the council out of special interest it was basically a plan to implement led lighting city-wide and i i understand the concept of combining this with a bunch of other things it's not really what the council of special interest was and i'm speaking for myself but i don't believe any of the rest of us have any any information other than what we've been told today about how these kind of contracts benefit the city so before we start moving in that direction i'd like to know more about literally like is this is this better for us than saying let's do led lights let's get the contractors let's do the led light conversion and then we'll do these projects rather than saying we're gonna we're gonna you know engage all these contractors that are going to handle all of this for us basically as a one-stop shop type of a thing but i don't know anything about doing it that way so i i feel like that's where the presentation is pivoted to is to a i know there's other contractors but i believe we have a uh an initial contract with mckinstry for i think a hundred thousand dollars but i don't understand the the economics and the efficiency of doing it that way so before we get too far down the road i just like to put it out there that i think we need more information and this is kind of pivoted completely away from in february of 2019 what i was taught was what i was asking about thank you vice mayor members of the council so today we're there's several things in play we're obviously talking about the the conversion to led we're also introducing the concept to the council of using performance-based contracts as one method of project delivery the so we're trying to get the council understanding what is involved in a contract energy performance based contract but we'll do each project we will analyze and come back to the council with the appropriate action based on what we feel makes the most amount of sense and it could be everything we self-perform uh it could be that we partner with uh in a in a type of contract like this all the way to this have them do it no decisions are being made here on the project it's really to try to roll out the concept because the city has not used these types of contracts at least during my tenure here and so we thought it would be valuable to the council understand how these performance-based contracts work and really i would look at it as being this is jet just a tool that we will have and it could be that we continue to do led conversion internally and funded internally could be we use federal grants but it also may be that it makes sense under certain circumstances uh to come in and use a performance-based uh contracting method uh to achieve the savings sooner rather than later so there's no this is not designed to force the discussion in one area other other than to really to let the council know what how these work and then down the road six months from now if facilities comes forward with a project they'll identify what's what they think is the best way to convert that because all these projects will take funding and it may just be that we want to do a conversion project for six hundred thousand dollars to convert the library or it might be facilities come back and says we'd like to do the library and we think doing an energy based performance contract makes the most amount of sense we would then roll it out in the staff presentation allow council to get comfortable with it and then ultimately the decision will be up to the council there if i could respond thank you so my point is is that at this point i don't understand the efficiency you i haven't had the benefit of the information that you and ms montanko got from your meetings so i'm saying before we get to that point i would like for somebody to walk and if nobody else is interested that's fine somebody walked me through the efficiencies and the economics of doing it that way that's all i'm saying i understand completely that we're not making decisions today but i don't understand the efficiencies in the economics of these performance-based contracts so before you guys spend six months or however long you're going to be spending on moving and possibly in that direction i would like to understand that i don't know whether the rest of the council's with me or not but i don't know and anything about doing it that way so and the decisions ultimately going to be ours so i'd like to be uh enlightened there thank you councilmember i'm sorry do you want to again we were hoping that this would be to start giving you a baseline information of how these work obviously if we haven't uh if we haven't hit that for all the council members we'll be more than glad to do some additional follow-up detail but that was really our purpose was to start rolling out the concept and show you where the efficiencies lie by using that so we haven't done that we'll certainly come back and be glad to brief you additionally thank you because this is in response to a counselor i'm a special interest and i didn't ask about performance-based contracts i asked them about converting led lighting down some urban mountainer yes thank you vice mayor i'm i'm familiar with with these types of contracts i think they're very effective mainly what they do for us as a city i think is is they provide uh basically an instant relief of a problem without a lot of cash output by the city and i think that's really what the benefit of this is so i understand the concept i've seen it before in some of my other roles um and so i i'm very much in in support of it as far as moving forward and just having further discussions on how we can utilize these type of vendors because i think they are a valuable source for us to use that will provide us like as i stated you get basically an instant service with no cost uh by doing some of these contracts sometimes there is a cost but as some of these examples showed uh there's no cost to it and to me it makes a lot of economic sense to continue to discuss it on the led light uh aspect of the presentation you know i i do believe that um uh council member tom chaff really this was her item and and we've done some great things with leds and i think we need to continue to push that forward but i would also be in favor if there are contracts available for led i think we should take advantage of those if there are contractors out there that will put in at their cost and then take the savings in that we generate as a result of that as their payment over a period of eight or ten years again it's a win-win for the city and i think uh that we should move forward and and not delay on getting these uh implemented thank you it's going to be councilmember turner then aldoma then clark thank you vice mayor um yeah i was confused as i was trying to do the my studying for today's meeting too it was clear that the special interest item was about led light conversion the staff report was thin and then the the slideshow the powerpoint presentation quickly took off in a completely different direction i think it would have been better to have separated these dealt with the item of interest that was presented and made the performance contracts a completely different subject that we could delve into over a number of meetings still a skeptic on the energy savings contracts i think it merits a lot of looking into so i in part because i think that the particular industries involved can provide on a competitive bidding basis a lot of information to the city about where the bank for the buck is rather than bringing in a middleman company to do that you know if it's whether it's hvacs or other systems they can predict energy savings and they can look at they can look at the city and give us advice on where we might save the most because they have the ability to do that and they want to be able along with others to to get the job so that is where i'm at on that i've learned precious little today about led light uh conversion which is what i thought we would do so in the future i'd like to be more clear about what's being presented to the council i mentioned it a few workshops ago to take a look at this from the council member point of view and i didn't feel like doing it this way serves me you know to be able to be clear what the discussion is going to be on thank you councilman baldwin thank you vice mayor um i got a couple things to say first i'll speak straight to the um performance contract and so i'm at a significant advantage just as the council member next to me here mentioned i'm very familiar with performance contracting extremely familiar and experienced i also sat on a board where i approved um as part of a majority consensus to approve some of those contracts for a board i was on and so i i'm very familiar with them i know they work they are very good my only concern would be and nice and i'm pretty happy to see what i read in here except for the cost is in here anytime you put a performance contract together what is lost along the way is monitoring the savings but you have here that you're going to monitor it through a independent auditor my question would be what is that cost but i've sat on boards where you approve them and then never ever come back with the cost savings so we just don't ever see that you have that built in happy to see that an analogy i'll give you an example would be is trading in your clunker car that you spend tons of money on on gas repairs and oil changes go buy a brand new one and you take that savings and you make your payment because you don't have the mechanical repairs anymore so they do work i've seen them work i'm very familiar with them so i'm very supportive in the city going forward with the building as old as these it makes a lot of sense i would say continue going on that route as far as the councilmember item of interest i have been one that has not been really happy with those coming back to us at ample time so i would be supportive of the city going or city manager going back to the council member and re-drafting the scope of work because i think that's what's at question here for the council member is i asked for led we probably scoped it out together and then this whole different scope comes out so i would just say to the city manager's office that just make sure that those additional scopes get back to the council member who asked for it but i'm very supportive of this going forward like i said i'm at an advantage here and i'd like to continue today and then continue moving forward and progress to starting such a program projects thank you vice mayor councilmember clark thank you vice mayor i'm no genius when it comes to any of his stuff i have no experience in performance contracts as councilmember malnor and aldama do so i don't i don't have any first-hand experience of the benefit or lack thereof i would like more information therefore on how a performance contract such as these would work but i i am not at all disturbed by expanding the scope of work to not only led lights but other other means of cost savings it makes a lot of sense to look holistically at a building and see what can be done with that building to make it more cost efficient because it's to our benefit and the benefit of the taxpayers in the long run so i am not concerned about today's presentation straying in other areas i think that was probably a prudent decision i i just am so confused about performance contracting and and would like follow up more information on that even if it's on an individual basis thank you thank you councilmember tom and john thank you i just i mean i understand the the the scope widening but this is a two-year-old council might have a special interest and nobody had the courtesy even to send an email saying we're moving in this direction on your council item a special interest you know i mean it's not like it just came up six months ago it's from february of 2019 is when the council and i haven't received an email and i had it up here where the last time somebody's even talked to me about this but just you know i mean i i think it's a stretch to call this my counselor that have a special interest at this point anyway that's my point i i asked about having a con a plan moving forward with a plan to convert to led lights city wide that's what i and like i said i understand the mission creep and i understand the reason that it probably made sense but somebody should have said we're going to kind of pivot on your counsel item of special interest and that didn't happen so mr vice mayor yes go ahead uh so again let's i want to step back to what michelle said in the beginning is one we had to understand that just the total scope of how many fixtures we had we we didn't have a database here in the city that said we have 4 900 of these fixtures and 21 000 of these so as they were getting into it the the time came is that one we had to identify the type of fixtures what their use was then as part of that look we always can do an led conversion the the council approves five million dollars for conversion tomorrow we can go out and do a five million dollar led conversion what we wanted to do is to show you a how we calculate savings uh so you get comfortable with the notion of that if you invest money into a conversion plan that it will provide a reasonable rate of return back to the city and then two because i think the council recognizes that we have constrained resources for doing capital investment that we wanted to do is say in addition to be able to fund these with cash there may be other mechanisms for how we could do an led conversion that doesn't require an upfront capital cost by the city and yet can have a cost benefit back to the taxpayers so we felt having a discussion not only of the conversion itself but allowing the council to understand ways you could fund that would be of value you know to the council so that's that's how those kind of got connected together was we could always do a cash led conversion um and i think again what michelle has said we are starting to identify projects and we have a quite a bit more data to go through here in the presentation that i think will move kind of that direction um and so i that i think would be great to go ahead and let michelle if at all if we have questions answered to go forward i think you'll you'll start seeing some of the project work they've been investing in the last two years start taking shape as a project councilman turner oh thank you vice mayor the before we leave this slide that's up right now um and uh the idea regarding the water conservation um if our city is anything like our homes and i suspect it is we probably use a whole lot more water outdoors than we do indoors and it seems to me that that's where we're having some serious water misuse issues we've got i just witnessed this weekend a long-running what i think is a long-running leak right here on this property in front of the bead museum sent that into glendale one so we'll see how that pans out we've got other places in the city where too little water is costing us trees we've got places where i think too much water and unattended leaks has cost us foundation and basement and mold issues and i know that there are places in the city where the automated drip irrigation system has failed on trees and caused them to die and other places where the water distribution is so close to the trunk that the trees don't develop a root zone and a windstorm comes through and takes them out and every tree we lose represents dollars to our taxpayers as well as an impact on the quality of life and the scenery of our downtown or our parks and things like that so as you go forward i would like that you actually keep outside water use in mind and we may deal with the leaky toilets and drippy faucets on a case-by-case basis but we're losing and misusing a lot of water outside and i think that that's worth looking into thank you council member thomas thank you i do have one more question so since we're kind of and i'm looking you know the next slide down is solar evaluation like how solar is going to work at different city facilities so i mean this is definitely moving in the direction of a performance uh contract and i don't even know the basics of how i mean we we have i know for sure we have a contract with mckinstry for a hundred thousand dollars does these go out for rfp or because we already have that initial i don't even know like what exactly what we're even talking about if like this you basically put together an rfp and put it out and people bid on it or because we already have the consultant sort of a contract with and that's the only one that i'm aware of because it was very public um did we go out for an rfp or how does that even work uh vice mayor council members councilmember tom wilshoff i think that's one of the last few slides is is how it works what status we're at and then what what the next steps would be so if if you if you don't mind if we could wait till we get to that point in the presentation i think we could explain it there i have one more question so anywhere in here is there an analysis of what it would take for us just to do an led light conversion i mean was there any time spent doing that just that piece of it or was it all rolled into this performance based i'm just curious if we're going to be able to look at that side by side uh vice mayor the council members council member tom wilshoff if i go back a couple slides we looked at just interior lighting and exterior lighting at those locations and and what i showed you already was not all the locations um so if you and council gives us the direction to reduce the scope go led and led only we have that information we could come back fairly quickly with just that so as councilmember thomas just said the next slide is on in solar evaluation and really when we look at why solar really solar panels today provide 30 years of saving so the current technology today has a 30-year life on it it really it does provide you a nice hedge against utility rate increases so you reduce your electric bill uh by so much usage that you really are hedging and so rate increases aren't impacting you that much and then there's the other you know non-actual monetary where you're looking at you you're contributing to your carbon reduction and so there's the environmental impacts of it as well and then it's also very highly visible so if glendale wants to make the statement that we are converting to a much more green source of energy it is a highly visible type project for us so the other things it does for us is it could provide a shade value and these could be parking structures so you get shade covered parking and this could be for public or for city employees and it's also an opportunity for us to look at public education tools via kiosks or any sort of displays in public buildings on what solar is and why it might be good for the environment so some of the proposed layouts that you see there we've got three locations at gripstic we want to just kind of show you guys a mix of what we could do so we looked at the firing range north of the main building and then kind of west of the main building and then here at the civic center we looked at a mix of rooftop as well as parking lot and so this would provide shade to any patrons of the civic center and or city staff that used it we looked at foothills recreation and aquatic center what we could do for solar generation up there and this is by providing solar covered parking and then again at the adult center so this is just kind of some proposed layouts that may work and then when we actually get into the evaluation um i wanted to show you the size of the system so there was a fair bit of work that went into this so how much actual systems could we put in and what our savings were by location so uh 210 dollars of savings annually at these four locations it would cost 3.2 million dollars to do just the solar and that's a 15.5 year simple payback when we looked at this conversion though what we did want to make sure we included was the inverters while the panels have a 30-year life the inverters are only guaranteed for a 10-year life so we factored into the 3.2 million conversion cost replacement of those inverters on a 10-year so this is a whole in cost what it would cost to maintain the system for that 30 years and so after that first 15 years we've paid it back your energy savings are true then and you continue to see those savings because you've factored in the maintenance of that and it is not just that replacement of the inverters factored into this would be an annual inspection and performance verification i'm a i was a skeptic on solar but seeing the details on this and how it would pay off they did convert me to this and i'm i was looking for the green type source and we want to continue to look at solar because it has over the last 10 years become a lot less expensive the life of these systems is getting a lot more reliable and longer and the inverters are getting better so we want to continue and our recommendation is to continue to look at solar options covered parking is a true benefit for the the visitors and citizens that we serve at city buildings and public locations and so we do want to continue to look at them and the offset to the electricity costs is a benefit mr vice mayor members of council i think this is a good slide maybe to help i think bring some clarity to what you know but included in this presentation so what this here is not based on a performance contract what this is the analysis of the amount of what the capital costs are to to put the infrastructure in and then what the projected anticipated savings are one of our options would be of course is we could fund this tomorrow the council could say we want to invest 3.25 million and we know that we would achieve that kind of the 210 000 a year savings but you know we don't always have an unlimited amount of money to invest so let's just say that we really don't think within our cip that we could make this project go for three more years so let's just say we really can't find a way to finance this for three more years well what it's really saying is is that we're going to kind of let go of six hundred and thirty thousand dollars of savings because we didn't achieve the two hundred and ten thousand dollars of savings for those three years so in this particular case there might be and actually might be because we didn't base this on an energy performance contract we might have a partner out there that says we'll be glad to come in and put in the 3.25 million and then you can start achieving your savings sooner it just becomes really another financing mechanism they bring to the table one additional benefit when we do the project we're going to use our best guess for what our savings will be as councilmember dahmer mentioned when you do a performance based contract you specify what the savings are and if they underperform we're protected and then we're still covered on the upside so again when you think about the energy performance contracts we can sell perform this but because of our limited resources we may not have an opportunity to capture all of these savings today and we just want to be able to show you there's multiple ways that we could come in and perhaps accelerate these projects so we can start capturing the savings sooner rather than later but just the work that's done here of itself but it's really doesn't matter whether it's we we funded ourselves or somebody else does it's basically we anticipate 3.255 million of capital cost with an annual savings of 210 000 and so i hope that helps a little bit we're not making a recommendation today on any kind of a contract to use what we want to show you is there may be alternative ways to go out and to capture savings that we currently aren't able to take advantage of thank you mr phelps so really can i interrupt mclaren thank you vice mayor i i think what the city manager said makes a lot of sense and you know just as we looked at the fire stations and we took a fire station or two a year i would like to approach this rather than led for the whole city at one time or solar savings for the city at one time all at one time building by building so we take a holistic look at gripstic for for instance or the main library and we say what kinds of energy projects that will result in cost savings can we do at this facility and we try it out and we see how it works and if it works well then we schedule other city buildings over a specified period of time i'd rather approach it that way building by building rather than trying to eat the whole pizza in one bite let's take it a little at a time show that it works and then plan for the future with the rest of the city buildings thank you vice mayor thank you vice mayor thank you councilmember clark because it kind of leads into this slide here where we look at combining some of these type projects and i've walked you through some lighting projects and some hvac a little bit of solar so if we look at lighting alone it is one of those lower capital costs but a very high return item so typically you don't pay a lot for it you see a high energy savings off it and its payback is zero to six years and you look at some of those other larger capital improvements that you may do that have a much smaller energy savings and the way we may want to look at it is combine these projects together so your lighting improvement helps pay for some of your hvac improvements and that's why i kind of wanted to come together and show you how we could use some of the lighting savings to maybe pay for that hvac project and so really that shorter term project would fund some of those much more capital intensive type projects and again this is just it's a funding mechanism if we choose that we want to do lighting only we can do lighting only but this is just another mechanism that we can fund these things so if we look at that and we look at at these locations here and i've this is foothills library main library velmatigue and then some of the parking lighting so some of the measures i'm going to talk about is taking foothills library the exterior led the interior led the mechanical so i just talked about that hvac equipment that we need to repair in the next year and some of the control systems the same with the main library look at velma teague it's interior led lighting and then the parks interior and exterior lighting so we take this and we combine it all together and again you know foothills library we have the next fiscal year programmed 225 thousand dollars in for the hvac main library 455 000 i have not included in these calculations any money from that uh park uh soir ranch park project we currently have ongoing with the cares funding but if we look at that and i combine all these projects together the total cost list is just over two million dollars the annual energy savings is 200 000 and we could pay for this project in just over 10 years if we do take that capital money we already have programmed in the cip and put it towards this project that two million dollars is reduced and you still get that 200 000 in annual energy savings and so the payback comes down to 4.2 years so again council can make the decision that they want to do lighting and lighting alone and at one location or they can combine it together but this is one way we could have the higher energy saving projects with low capital cost pay for some of the other projects another example of this would be the other locations we looked at this is the advocacy center the bead museum here at the civic center fire station 152 the adult center foothills recreation and aquatic center and gripstic and we also again looked at any hvac system needs that we might have to do any capital costs we'd have to put into those locations in the future could we include that in energy saving performance um and here at the civic center there sorry at the roof there is at the advocacy center bead museum we know over the next couple years we are having to do some rooftop units here at the civic center uh there is a need also for some hvac and then at the adult center we do have programmed in cooling tower replacement and some chilled water pumping between fiscal year 22 next year and 25 we have almost a million dollars in the cip plan for those projects the lighting is rather extensive so this is way too much detail but it does show you that we've looked at it and so that top line there shows or sorry the first column after the location is those locations we've already and the number of fixtures we've already converted to led like i said we've already been doing some of this through ongoing maintenance but now we're looking at a much more programmatic way the sex co the next column is no retrofit because it's not cost effective and these are those lights that are used very infrequently so we have some lights here in the civic center that have very few hours of operation and to put into a large cost to convert it would be much better to do them on a maintenance type basis when that light burns out then you do the capital replacement and convert to led versus doing it on a regular one the next column just looks at replacement fixtures where we'd have to go in and just replace the fixture the next column is where we need a retrofit kit and this is where you take the existing fixture and you convert the ballast to a driver and change the actual bulb i know way too much information but i do want to show you that you know we have gone into the detail and if council gives us the direction lighting and lighting only we can look at just that so when we look at all these locations and again it's the advocacy center bead museum civic center park and ride the adult center foothills recreation aquatic center gripstic fire station 151 and we look at the hvac controls the lighting interior and exterior the solar that i just showed you that had the 15-year payback alone and on this slide again we're not factoring in the lighting from these projects that we introduced to council the council approved in october through the az cares funding so the total conversion cost the total capital cost for this entire project at all these locations is 5.9 million energy savings at 327 000 so payback for 18 years but if we do put in that 950 000 that we've got programmed in the capital improvement program for the next couple years it drops it down to a 15.1 year payback so vice mayor councilmember's customer tomoshop i think this is where i wanted to get to with you what what is the process for energy savings performance contracts so this slide shows we are where we are today we've just done a preliminary assessment we've had several companies come in look at different locations for us we didn't want to put everything with one company we have this is a combination of of several companies we initially invited three to come in and work with us we looked at different locations we excluded those locations where we're going to go through and recommend a complete retro or sorry [Music] remodel so we're changing city hall and so we're not recommending that building we're changing the main police station same with we didn't include the prosecutor because we know we're doing major work there so we excluded those we identified locations systems and measures and this is where we are today and so if if council wants to give us a consensus that they want us to continue then we would look at that investment grade audit and this is where they go in and they actually do that guaranteed performance savings and they put in writing your actual quantified savings that you're going to get off each measure and based upon that there would be a council contract that would come back and council approval would be required before we would then go into that and enter into that performance contract which would include the guaranteed savings and do the work so vice mayor council that that ends the presentation today and be happy to you'll follow up in the future with um the direction that council gives us council members uh thank you i just wanted to make sure i understand on this combined project too on page 23. you don't know what the performance contract would be i i mean the numbers you're putting on here are just what your estimated costs are do you have any uh would this be eligible for like a a full funded uh contract uh vice mayor and council members councilmember melanar going back to this slide so based upon our preliminary assessment the capital cost to replace this would be 5.9 million dollars if we choose to go ahead and ask the company to put this in writing and develop a contract off it to give us a guaranteed savings that that would be the next step but based upon what we've seen and assuming we've made no major changes for this the conversion cost the capital cost for this project is the 5.9 million dollars and the next step would be to refine those numbers and make sure the guarantees are in the in the contract and what would be the uh city's cash output requirement would that be the 950 vice mayor council members councilmember malnar the city would have the option of paying upfront nothing and paying for it over the 18 years the 327 000 that they would guarantee in the savings we could also then have the option of putting in the 950 000 that we've got programmed in the cip or we would have the option if as councilmember clark was saying there's a potential for federal funding for energy renewable projects we could have the option to submitting this as a shovel-ready project and using the entire 5.9 million hopefully of federal money and the city paying nothing of it so it's it's a funding mechanism at that point okay thank you very much um uh with that uh i would be very much in favor of of providing consensus to move forward on not only the led but other projects that could be tied into it that would make sense and then bringing that back to council for additional approval of any kind of contract thank you any other comment councilmember thomas thank you i'm still a little confused about how this works so um i mean you said you've been working with three uh performance contractors so do they do you do and let's say we say okay go ahead and engage with somebody on this hvac do you give them do they all submit a proposal to us on how i just i still don't really understand how this works uh vice mayor and council members council member tom lashof we selected three firms based upon the state contract so the state of arizona went out for forbid did rfps and selected three vendors based upon their their qualifications we entered contracts with all three one has failed to perform we have not got results out of them yet the other two we've presented here is kind of their their um projects the combined projects we could break it apart into individual aspects of it um but if council chooses to we would then take and we wouldn't with the professional services you can't bid one company against another these are professional services you select the best company and then you negotiate pricing with them this is how procurement and engineering work on these projects the other option would be for us to select an architect and do a full design on these and go to bid on them it's just not it's not a performance contract that would just be a different capital type contract vice mayor who are the two that we have the contract with mayor councilman's councilman tom schaff we have a contract with with mckinstry and we have a contract with mid-state energy um vice mayor if i could continue the mid-state energy contract expires october 2021 is the intention to renew that or leave mckinstry the lone standing contract uh vice mayor councilmember shop i believe both expire this fall the city could extend those contracts they could extend one of the contracts it was always our intent to continue if if a company for example mckinstry has worked on one location of council gives us direction to continue with that location we would continue with that company the same with mid-state if they've provided us uh the initial preliminary assessment of a location we would continue on with that company so okay that's so that so basically they're giving direction to do an assessment on a facility or something and then basically that ensures that if we move forward with that they get that contract is that what you're saying because they can't compete against each other let's say you had one company let's say give us an assessment of the of the hvac if somebody's already done the analysis of that only one of those companies was directed to do that analysis is that right vice mayor councilmember councilmember tom schaaf um you're correct but at this stage before we hit that investment grade audit we have the option and we can go with whatever company we want to once we start down that path you're somewhat committed to that company because they've now invested significant amount of their money to guarantee you these these savings off that we have not yet hit that point today we're set the preliminary assessment we've identified locations systems and measures that are potential that would be the next step and if we do want to enter into that investment grade audit that would come back to council is a council contract to be approved so our will who determines which count contract gets brought back to us vice mayor councilman responsible i i believe that i would have to check with engineering and procurement on as well as advice from the legal department i don't believe it's under my purview or my department's purview to select one contractor and say we'd go forward with that so you said but that one of them would be brought back to council so i'm just as for for the council to approve so who who determines which contract is brought back would that be the city manager i'm just curious i don't literally i don't know how this works so who who makes you don't bring you just said you're not going to bring back two contracts you're going to pick the best one and bring it back to the council so who picks the best one and then what is the what's the evaluation process to determine which one is the best one um yeah apologize vice mayor uh council members customer tomoshop we have we selected the three off the state contract to do this with we would then look at as part of this in conjunction with procurement to make sure we're following procurement requirements engineering with title 34 and the attorney's office i believe this would be a recommendation from the group to determine which of these companies we would move forward with based upon the information they've given us the city's now had an ability to see through the preliminary assessment which each company has offered but i think it would be an internal evaluation committee to come back with that recommendation and then we would run it through procurement engineering the attorney's office to make that recommendation okay thank you that's all for now council member clark thank you i'm so confused at this point why can't we do something like this we've got foothills branch library in the upcoming cip we've programmed 225 000 fertilizer replacement in fiscal year 22. glendale maine library we've got same thing uh chiller replacement for 455 000 so both of those projects are kind of pre-funded in one aspect of the project what just from an ignorant point of view why can't we say to sun state you give us an assessment of foothills branch library and mckinstry you give us an assessment of glendale maine library and use both contractors on different projects at the end of those projects we'll know which one works the best has delivered the best and and we are comfortable with what why can't we do something like that is that totally outside the realm of possibility question vice mayor and council members councilmember clark i believe that's that's exactly what we could do uh i just would need to to confirm with procurement and engineering because engineering you know does help us with title 34 in the attorney's office but that's that's why we initially start off with three companies was to determine you know who's looking at it holistically who's working with the city and through this entire process we started with three one has failed to meet our requirements they've had a huge staff turnover and we have not been able to get anything reliable out of them to date so we're currently working with two we could easily give two very small projects one each and see what works out what doesn't work and and manage it that way that's that's an option as well advice may or if i could follow up i'd like to do something like that it's almost like a pilot project it's like a run through to see who performs the best and meets our needs the best while getting some work done and both of them would look at each building holistically correct so they wouldn't look just at the hvac but they would look at the interior lighting solar the whole ball of wax would that be correct uh vice mayor council members councilmember clark that would be correct if we directed them look at this building holistically they would do that we could also direct them that we wanted to look at lighting and lighting alone that that's that's a city recommendation and we've got complete authority on that until we actually get into the performance contract we can we can deny any of those measures so if if if a company comes back and says here's what we could do for you when we find that there's one measure that just doesn't make sense to us we could exclude that from the contract okay i i'd like to do that i'd like to issue each company one one project one final project to begin with and in a holistic sense and see which which performs the best gives us the best bang for our buck and that meets our expectations other than that i i have no further comments and thank you mr phelps uh vice mayor members of the council so again kind of going through the process this is the reason we wanted to kind of at least have the discussion about what performance-based contracts are um we didn't want to come back um you know and go through the work of creating an investment great audit and all the things that have to be as part of a performance-based contract if the council just kind of fundamentally said we don't really want to use performance-based contracts as a as a funding mechanism so this one this is kind of designed to one is there enough interest by the council for us at least to take it to the next step i'd like to define just really quickly when you see investment grade audit obviously we're used to audits here in government world so what an investment grade audit is and there's a lot of work to create that in industry so let's take tesla and they want to build a new factory line what they will that will be more efficient what they'll do is you can do an audit on the savings and then that audit is of high enough quality and meets so specific standards that a financial institution would loan money based on it so when you when you see the word investment grade it's not just a a an audit they do kind of randomly it is the type of audit that a large financial institution would require a demonstration of the savings before they would fund a 60 or 70 million dollar uh say let's say it's red bull improving their their their manufacturing line and so that's so there's a lot of work to be able to create that so what we want to do today was give you kind of the general concept and if there seems to be at least some interest we can very easily slide into this casually or slowly and get and get familiar with it and then if it's successful for us we can kind of ramp that up so what councilmember clark kind of just mentioned i think we can very easily look to see what makes sense now we probably will still continue to look to add on other performance-based firms out there because not all are expert in every area there will be certain companies that are expert for example on hvac controls in just the complexity of doing that i'm thinking of a johnson controls for example as being an industry leader there that maybe mid-state energy isn't real familiar with but there may be other things that mid-state do that's in an area of expertise that can look for other types of savings so we could certainly if there's general consensus to at least consider the use of performance-based contracts we could then go back and and do kind of two pilot projects and and get the comfortable comfortable with what it looks like bring those back monitor it measure it and then if it looks like it's worked well we can start ramping up the use if it doesn't meet our expectation obviously we can try to find a different way to fund the conversions and the energy efficiencies that we're trying to achieve thank you vice mayor go ahead councilman turner i may thank you well i'm concerned that we're being asked for a consensus on something here right now that the agenda didn't say we'd be asked for a consensus on the staff background report didn't say we were going to be asked for a consensus on this the slide presentation didn't indicate that we'd be being asked for a consensus on this and i'm not ready to give my consensus nice man councilmember i am ready to give my consensus i'm ready to to start as a city manager phrased it with two pilot projects on a performance-based basis and i want to see how well this works for the city and and if it does work well then we can consider other projects so i'm ready to move forward and i say do it yeah let me go i yeah i too would like to move forward to the next step and see how it all works then councilmember tom shaw i'm curious what are you talking about moving forward with with the as councilmember clark suggested basically a pilot project with both of the companies or what are we what are we i just want to make sure i understand i'm willing to do that i'm not willing to get to just to pick a pick a contractor right now and i honestly have serious concerns about one of them moving forward with one of them i'm not going to say the name again i've mentioned it already enough times but because of the history and what transpired uh before um but if we are going to do a side by side comparison based on performance i'm willing to move forward with that thank you vice mayor um so mr rios would could answer all these questions it's they're different buildings different spaces of a building so they can all be different contracts or different projects as the councilwoman over here uh councilmember clark mentioned so they can all be separate projects it's not a problem and then the the the vendors you mentioned have already been vetted through the state if they're state contracts we've that's already done for us where we don't have to do anything um and then if there are rfps that went through the city they've already been vetted so i use contracts all the time rather than go out to bid and create scopes of work and try to get the best detail and best cost you just go to a contract much easier for the city so i'm comfortable moving forward i i really am sounds like there's one contractor who's maybe a question but again they're vetted they're if there's a state contract and again i'm really comfortable in this area but if it's a state contract they've been vetted it's a done deal they can be used they're used by colleges they're used by cities they're used by many many public entities so i'm comfortable moving forward and i'm comfortable doing it with many projects rather than just one or two with different contractors anyone else mr friedling you have a comment but vice very if i just for clarity uh what and i'm glad to have uh our city manager michelle correct me but i think as a presentation flowed there's two contractors these are professional uh contracts professional services i i'm not sure that we can have them compete in the sense that take a look at one project and compete with each other and try to show me what you can do what i think in the context of this presentation was two projects one project would be given to one of the firms and the other project the other so that they would both be working concurrently on different different areas i think we tried to cover a lot of different things whether that was correct and absolutely focused on the cios i i you know probably not but i think when we delved in and tried to frame this we saw some some real good advantages in trying to pull these together so i think the the initial ask was we have two projects we have two contractors we would like one of the contractors to take a look and do the audit on project one the other one would do on project two we would do a lot of work and we would certainly work with engineering to ensure that we're working vis-a-vis title 34 with reference to professional services and also reviewing the investment grade audit bringing finance involved especially and trying to confirm how the contract would actually work and how it could be guaranteed that anything that would suggest that we have specific savings be sure that we can or there's a some type of contingency that ensures that the contractor would make the difference up if you will so i i think you know again michelle can correct me but i think and i don't know which firm is for project one i don't know which firm's project two michelle might know that but that i think that was in the context of what we were trying to present um vice mayor i would like to make one correction i never suggested one contract go for project one in one project go for project two uh i suggested specifically two separate buildings and i chose foothills branch library and glendale main library both because we're about to expend money for chillers and that is already programmed in the cip so i thought that these two projects that are upcoming could very well benefit from each having one of these two contractors or consultants or whatever they're called each handle one of each of these projects so there would be no competition between these two companies they're both not bidding on one project one library each would be given a separate library and that was my original proposal so i just wanted to make that correction that project one encompasses in the slides a great deal more than what i had envisioned as does project two i would rather just focus on buildings and focus on the two buildings that that we are currently programming uh the expenditure of of funds for chillers for very smear thanks for mr phelps yeah and i think it's how we interpreted what you said so um so now let me be clear then what you're kind of giving consensus to there still is a process that they have to come up with the performance-based contract identifying the savings and what how it will work that will still be brought back to the council and the council still has the ability to say no at that time so today's you know kind of consensus moving forward is really to move forward to the next step of developing a performance-based contract you then have the opportunity still to say if you don't like one of the two projects you can eliminate one of them you can eliminate both of them you're not making an obligation today to approve the contract a couple other quick things of why we think the performance based contracts work to date michelle's team has been working a lot in consulting with the private sector to identify technologies and potential savings we don't have that type of expertise internal to glendale to date with our two companies that we're talking about potentially entering into performance based contract that being the mckinstry company and that being mid-state energy to date they have received a total of zero dollars from the city of glendale so one of the advantages is they invest their time on the front end recognizing that it may not lead to any type of business with the city it's only then when when we say all right we're now ready to kind of take it to the next stage is when when they start really things start uh changing uh that's there just as a reminder um um my son who lives approximately two thousand miles in the seattle area works for the mckinstry company he works in a division that is not associated with the arizona project which does performance-based contracts but but i want to make sure the council was aware that he still is employed in the city of seattle but he has nothing to do with management oversight or decision making on these contracts and we'll make sure that in our if we bring forth any contract with mckinstry in the future we'll make sure the staff report clearly identifies the relationship to the city manager and to make sure that the cut the council's comfortable is not a conflict thank you thank you so i think we have consensus to go and move forward thank you why are you starting up councilmember turner we postponed the parks you wonder if you missed it no it's postponed to the next meeting well fortunately these meetings are broadcast on facebook live so i was able to catch that on thank you on my way in presentation regarding a mending city code to address vehicle noise penalties vice mayor members of council here to provide staff report is deputy city manager rick st john good afternoon our vice mayor members council this is a recommendation from our code committee i'm seeking consensus today from council to amend section 2567 subsection e making a first offense of this provision a civil offense and setting a mandatory fight amount this section of the noise ordinance deals with engine noise and radio noise coming from vehicles and it prohibits that noise between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am so an example would be somebody working on their vehicle in their garage at two in the morning revving an engine creating a disturbance in the neighborhood that would be in violation of this section currently it is a class one misdemeanor to violate this section there is no provision in this section for an officer to issue a civil citation the code review committee is recommending that a first offense be a civil violation with a set fine amount as you can see i've just included a 100 fine but this council can set the fine at whatever you would deem reasonable and any subsequent violation of the section by the same offender in a 12-month period would be classified as a class one misdemeanor and punishable in accordance with arizona state law and with that i'm happy to answer any questions you might have any questions council member um thank you mr st john you mentioned the as an example the situation of somebody working on their vehicle on their own property late at night would this uh ordinance also apply to vehicles that are being driven on public streets regardless of the time of day and would it also apply to vehicles perhaps on shopping center properties or you know other public spaces that may not be publicly owned but are open to the public thank you vice mayor councilmember turner would apply to vehicles on any public roadway on any other types of public or private properties when it comes to vehicle noise when the vehicle is being driven we have to be careful to ensure that there's been a modification to the vehicle that makes it louder than it was manufactured to be some vehicles are manufactured to make noise when they're driven and those muscle car types of vehicles and so we wouldn't want to cite someone even civilly for driving a vehicle that was manufactured to make that noise unless they were doing something unreasonable and that would be racing up and down a roadway at two in the morning in my mind and we would probably deal with the racing more than the vehicle noise at that point but yes if if someone was in a parking lot creating an unreasonable amount of noise with their vehicle engine or a radio from their vehicle this could be enforced say at arrowhead country club at arrowhead mall or westgate provided we had people that were willing to be victims of that disturbance thank you sir i appreciate the additional information vice mayor councilmember clark one one question did you specify a time constraint in this ordinance vice mayor council member clark the ordinance does say that unreasonable noise between the hours of 10 pm and 7 am however unreasonable noise that again disturbs the peace and quiet of a neighborhood can be enforced at any time of the day clarification thank you vice mayor go ahead um as i've thought about this after the code committee recommended it um and and given the example that councilmember turner brought up regarding say loud cars that are and again i i envision more the type that are doing wheelies in the parking lot late at night and disturbing our residents the 100 is to some of these folks isn't that much of a deterrent it's like whoa you know look what i got away with you know i i only got a hundred dollar fine there's no other consequence just a fine of a hundred dollars but i was able to show off to all my friends and do a video or do whatever they do when they make those kind of noises so my question to the council would be would we want to either raise that initial fine or perhaps uh put a an additional fine in there that if you have any subsequent uh like uh offenses within the first 12 month that it goes up to 500 per offense and then maybe after that then it becomes a civil or a misdemeanor again as we discussed in our code meeting you know an officer going out and you know somebody that is uh making noise on the street they're they were luck reluctant to give them a criminal uh offense for having done that uh this is what kind of that it's like you know it's just making noise it's not a major issue uh though for and i don't want to mean that it's not major it is a real concern but um so we put it into a civil violation and that's why we recommended doing the civil violation because it does lessen the impact on somebody for the first time having gone out and done a wheelie or made noise in their garage with the radio or whatever they did that it does it's not so such a big uh impact on their lives but if they continue to do it um rather than go just straight to a misdemeanor i would like to to see maybe that we have a second fine of 500 because then that starts to bite in a little bit you know if you want to play your radio late at night in your garage uh and you want to pay 500 every time you do that go for it you know we're just providing uh tax money for the city of glendale but uh i just wanted to throw that out and see what the council thought vice mayor else remember clark i concur with councilmember malnar rather than turning it after the first offense into a misdemeanor i would much rather bump up the fines and i like the idea of something more punitive like 500 so i would support your suggestion vice mayor if i made or would you because right now it's written as a 100 civil fine so would you want to add for the second offense to go to a higher amount or have that first offense be more uh be a higher amount the 100 is like a warning it's like giving somebody a warning the first time i think the second one i like the idea of a 500 dollar fine you know i i agree with staying with the hundred i know it's maybe an example and then the second offense oh what's the 500 yeah yeah go ahead um question it may have already been answered the question um that that's remember clark mentioned uh mr st john so an example if because this is specific to vehicle radio noise so if someone is working in the garage and the vehicle is make not making any noise but their sound system in the garage is that's also covered among correct with a regular noise ordinance vice mayor council member aldama that is correct it's a separate section of the same okay so if you show up and say well it wasn't my automobile radio it was my home it's the same okay and then so i i would support a second offense to be a lot higher so i think it's the 500 i would be comfortable with it councilmember thomas off thank you um a second offense in forever or a second offense in a in a certain pacific specific time frame 12 month i think okay but that's what i mean i'm just saying i mean it's really i don't think it's really fair to say a second offense in in forever all right yeah in a 12-month period i would i would i would be fine with that and then i would add to that if i may um that i still would like to go to the next offense if there's another offense within that 12-month period that it would become a misdemeanor that it would become more punitive that's why i understand it yes so that language would stay there we would just add an additional 500 fine uh for the second offense and then go to the third offense would be the class one misdemeanor that would be the language council member turner oh thank you i have two concerns that are coming up with this change the reason this has come before us is because through outside channels not up through the chain of command but through outside channels where it came to some council members that our police department was or police officers were reluctant to enforce the code that the city council had adopted because they felt it was too strict now i'm not particularly thrilled about that but we took it under advisement we came up with something different i wonder whether or not 500 is going to get enforced on the second offense or if that is also now too strict it's too big a fine so there needs to be some resolution of that aspect of it you know is it you know what are we going to see in the way of enforcement then my other concern is is that so if somebody's working on their car that example two o'clock in the morning and their sound system is making the noise not their automobile you know what their their home stereo is then they don't have the same fine and that doesn't count as a first offense and also if somebody is you know having a party and it has one set of penalties that i don't even know what are but they could have another loud party two weeks later and wouldn't necessarily align with the penalty that they would have got had they've been working on their car instead of you know having friends over so we're doing this on the fly and we don't really see how it fits together and i think it ought to fit together i think we should have some consistency and reasonableness to this and some logic behind it and i just think we're you know kind of getting a little away from that at this point the concern that i felt residents had wasn't and maybe we just got off on a bad tangent because you know the one example but the concern that i think residents have had and what this is really intended to apply to is vehicles while they're driving on our city streets and to some degree while they're in other public places such as parking public parking lots and that sort of thing and i think that's the angle we ought to look at it from i do believe that for lots and lots of my residents a hundred dollar fine is significant and and a 500 fine would would be a heck of a large burden on them that might not be felt the same across the city perhaps so i'm more inclined to let's do today what the code committee recommended not legislate on the fly but just move forward with what's been presented thank you vice mayor councilmember malnour i i i can understand those those sentiments um i just had some questions i want to make sure that that this particular thing only applies to vehicle noise and i think councilmember dom i don't if that was clarified it was and now that the council member councilman turner mentioned his i don't think i was very clear and i don't think it was so mr st john is what we're doing today only apply to vehicular noise vice mayor council member melnar it applies to noise coming from a vehicle either made by the engine or by the radio inside the vehicle okay so just vehicle then um and i guess um uh you know that the concern that council member turner mentioned regarding uh reluctance of a police officer again i the reluctance i believe was coming from turning it into a criminal offense that was the reluctance i believe if if we we do need to make it stiff and harsh so that this type of activity ceases i think the 100 is very reasonable and i think 500 for a second offense being caught is is very reasonable and i'd just like to point out i don't think any of the residents you were talking about councilmember turner would be the ones that would be violating this particular offense but i i still i still believe that making it a very stiff fine for the second offense i mean having it a misdemeanor is i i think a little bit too stiff for the second one so i'm just suggesting instead of going directly to a misdemeanor uh and the fines and the court and everything else to go along with that because it could end up i don't know what the fine would be the court would determine that that we we put it at 500 so that we get the message out you know if you want to go out in your car make loud noise late at night and disturb our residents we'll give you a chance the first time it'd just be a hundred dollars but if you do it again and do it several times again within 12 months it's going to be 500 each and i think that message needs to get across to those who are violating this because those who are violating it are the ones that need to get that message and i don't think it's the average resident that's been the long-term resident in glendale the they are not are not the ones that are out there doing this it's other people that are with doing it vice mayor thank you if i may offer suggestion the conversation the code review committee really dealt with engine noise and the committee member that brought it forward said that officers in her experience were reluctant to cite criminally for engine noise it had nothing the conversation had nothing to do with radio noise coming from a vehicle radio noise is covered in other sections of the noise ordinance and it is a class one misdemeanor in other sections of the noise ordinance and to my knowledge officers do not have a problem citing class one misdemeanor and seizing radio equipment when sufficient warnings have been given and ignored by a homeowner or somebody making the noise if i may offer this rewrite says any provision of this section shall be deemed a public nuisance and punishable under one set of standards we could separate the standards so that subsection one which deals with engine noise is a civil offense punishable by a hundred dollar fine on a first offense five hundred dollar fine second offense misdemeanor uh for third or any future offense in a 12-month period and then leave the radio noise in line with the rest of the of the section on noise that says it's a class 1 misdemeanor on a first offense because how we enforce multiple warnings are given before we issue a citation for noise and then seize equipment so essentially we'd be separating even this section so that certain provisions are a civil offense other are a criminal offense in line with the rest of our code the comments i would be in favor of that i think we have consensus thank you what do you introduce the next item the cubes at glendale and 224 annexation located on the southeast corner of reams road and northern avenue vice mayor members of the council here to provide staff report on items four and five is interim planning director david record thank you for the opportunity today to explain these annexations the cubes at glendale is getting to be quite an icon for the community so let me move through this reasonably quickly this is a map that actually shows you the vicinity of where downtown is on the right and then on the west side of the airport being luke air force base is the cube's the second annexation is what this is actually about 76 acre 76 acres approximately south and northern east of reams road north of the luke air force base and they're planning on approximately 1.2 million square feet of industrial and manufacturing within the city a proper land use next to luke we're looking for your direction today to move forward with the annexation process and on september 24 2019 this was some time ago the the council at that point approved the pre-annexation agreement to allow the property owner address the infrastructure needs with staff what has been found is that there's a net annual increase of 250 000 and a one-time construction sales tax and 4.9 million dollars here is a map that i'm going to have to try to get revised because it shows 12 other annexations working at this point this is exciting for glendale for all that's happening because the land use and the proper use of the property again will meet with today's standards not something that was done 15 20 years ago the noise contours again comply this type of use will be within the 65 70 and 75 noise contours and with that in mind the type of use proposed is something that luke has supported along with the city of glendale surrounding land uses today are still the county applications the residential low-density things further to the west and the reems ranch industrials south of this site which will be tied together and then the luke air force base directly to the east you have a general plan designation for the luke compatibility land use area and this fits squarely within it and i think everybody supports that uh the conversion of the zoning is re r u 43 in the county and it would be rr 45 royal residential in the city they ultimately will go for rezoning and so what we're looking for at this point today is the state statute requires the blank petition to be requiring a public hearing and is tentatively scheduled for april 13th the property owner's signatures then can be obtained on the petition and we are scheduling hopefully on the 27th of april 2021 your adoption of the annexation if everything goes well and the annexation then if approved would become part of the city's boundary within 30 days that concludes the comments i had on this if you have any questions um on this or a consensus to move forward with it i'd be greatly appreciated thank you thank you councilmember malnour uh thank you just had one quick question the um the cubes at glendale you said it was it's within the uh luke uh contours is is that contour that it is within is it eligible for any kind of housing residential housing actually vice mayor councilman councilman melnar no we would not suggest any housing anywhere near that location we work with luke on a week weekly monthly yearly basis to try to encourage the industrial warehousing and those types of employment uses adjacent to luke to better serve them and us at the same time i think i just wanted to clarify that so what they will be rezoning that to commercial is what you stated so it comes in as residential but it's going to be converted to the vice mayor councilman and councilman malnar we believe it'll be for industrial use and warehouse wholesaling and those types of uses to tie to the piece that was already annexed further to the south all right thank you very much vice mayor yes councilman mclaren i support this project it meets council goal of continuing to develop exactly this kind of project in the area and is compatible with luke so i would like to see it move forward thank you any other comments this time i'd like to see it move forward we have consensus thank you thank you go ahead thank you julie falcon park a-n-222 annexation north of the 152nd avenue and camelback road intersection excuse me i was just getting out something i have to correct on this presentation because it already had been uploaded but as it has been stated falcon park annexation 222 again location map downtown city hall on the right and this is on the south side if you will of luke air force base at about 152nd avenue it's a 78 acre parcel north of camelback road as i said west of 152nd and south of the airport base about 595 000 square feet is going to be proposed on this particular property for industrial and manufacturing use the close proximity to the 303 is really making a lot of these projects come forward right now and we're actually very busy with most of them on this afternoon at the workshop this was to be discussed as part of your city council pre-annexation agreement with the company that one or the property owner wants to move forward and we believe the infrastructure will support this request but we had to kind of take them out of order today we're looking again for your direction to move forward with the annexation again the analysis that was accomplished here the annual review is 440 000 repeating benefits to the city and about a 4.8 million again in terms of sales tax and construction permitting and you can see the charts and how they lay out but staff feels pretty comfortable with this site as well again this is the location with all the other annexations going on and we one of the efforts i'm going to try to do is get more of these people to talk together and get more of the annexations being cumulative instead of small pieces at a time and that just takes some outreach from the staff and the planning division the contours again are within the 65 70 75 noise contours and again would not support residential the location as you can see is south of the luke air force base and goodyear is further to the south maricopa county is to the east we have maricopa county to the west and to north the airport as it sits there in the graphic again you can see its location within the luke land use compatibility areas their zoning again is ru 43 but we are converting this to the zoning in glendale to pad to allow for a mix of resident and not residential but retail and commercial development if possible and again a blank petition on this particular case would be scheduled for april 13th and that allows the petitioners to move forward with the petition to get signatures city council agenda i guess did get corrected it was previously for may 11th we're trying to speed this up a little bit to april 27th and if approved again 30 days following that date it will become part of the city i'd be happy to answer any questions council member tom choi thank you vice mayor i'm a little confused because on the previous presentation you said existing maricopa zoning maricopa county zoning was ru-43 and like zoning would be coming into glendale at r r 45 and then on this presentation it's going to be a p-a-d so i'm just curious why the difference there are vice mayor council persons and councilwoman togochak the rezoning of the property to the pad is a more restrictive but allows some flexibility that the property once or the property owner would like to have we're not giving them anything more than what they had in the county it's just some flexibility with the types of uses and some of the standards if that is an issue it can the zoning process has not been taken through yet so we can certainly develop you a listing of both and bring that forward with the zoning case that would come forward here in the near future vice mayor if i could i just i mean i would like to see some consistency i know rru 43 is strictly i believe residential isn't it it doesn't allow for any commercial or industrial that's correct so i'm just i mean i understand the but to me i mean literally we just had a presentation right before this that's exactly the same zoning and i believe our annexation policy requires that they be annexed in under the zoning that the existing zoning or as close to the existing zonings as we can get them so just confused why why one's re-43 and coming in as our and the other one's coming in as a pad so it's a little confusing for me vice mayor councilman and councilwoman thomachof we will clarify that for you and make sure that it is not exceeding any levels and it takes it i believe uh to a level in the industrial classification that gives them some flexibility here and we're not trying to um grant them anything beyond what they have in the county but i can i'll clarify that for you okay but vice mayor so they're not going to be doing residential and that's what they're zoned for so obvious so would the pad be coming through through the approval process or they're being annexed in as a with a with an agreement that's already being put together a pad that's already being put together and that's going to be their zoning when they are annexed in vice mayor counts people and councilwoman kobach it's supposed to go through a zoning process similar to the zoning that you normally do as part of the annexation and the information that was provided on the pud is something that i need more detail on myself now to answer your questions so okay we're going we're not going to do anything more and it will come through the same process so that you will see it and make that determination and that we don't upzone the property for example and we're not encouraging the residential and that may have been what happened in the county is that they were in the process of rezoning to pad and we're trying to avoid that with the relationship with luke so i i understand that vice mayor if i could i just want to make sure that there's a public that there's an opportunity for public you know to be notified and all of that for the change and i know some of that property out there has been zoned residential for years and years and years before there were even loot contours out there so i understand that they're not really eligible for residential development but the surrounding community i just want to make sure that we're you know that we're being fair with the residents that already live out there and like i said i mean to see one coming in under still residential being being annexed in and it's also going to be an industrial development and then the very next project you present is zoned exactly the same way and coming in as a pad it's just a little confusing i'd just like to see it be consistent so it's not so confusing i agreed explaining well just a second city manager did you have a comment no fine councilmember clark for the very same reasons that i stated on the previous project this supports the goals of the city council on the direction that's been given and i would like to see this project move forward and i do have one question today we received an announcement about a major locate in that area and i wondered who would be speaking to that because i wasn't led to believe that it would be announced during workshop so i can someone answer that mr i'm planning on providing an update on my council manager report on that item thank you any other comments vice mayor yes i just think i mean if we're gonna if we we need to amend our annexation policy then i'm i mean maybe we should have that discussion but our policy does say that it's supposed to be brought into the city under the same and that's what the policy says so that's why why it's confusing so if we need to take a look at our policy then i'm willing to have that conversation that's all i think do we have consensus to move forward with this we do thank you next item on our agenda is the city manager's report mr phelps mayor vice mayor members of the council um i have three items to brief you on uh the first on behalf of mayor wires who wanted me to share this information for him on his behalf as as councilmember clark just said we had uh today uh amazon announced that they're building a 270 000 square foot facility here in glendale uh in the um in the west part of our uh growth area and obviously we're very excited to welcome one of the most recognizable companies in the world uh into the city of glendale um the the location is going to really allow them to provide better service to to a growing customer base and we'll be joining two other announced facilities here within the greater the greater valley um they'll be bringing all total about a thousand uh full and part-time jobs to uh to this to the metro area on we have an upcoming groundbreaking at glen 91 so this project is at the the intersection of glendale avenue and 91st this is the southeast quadrant that has been vacant farmland for for forever i guess would probably be the best way to say that and um so on march 30th hcw uh the developers they brought us the loft hotel uh in um in westgate they're developing a 296 unit uh complex we've had a chance to review obviously their architectural design uh it will be four stories uh which we're very happy about with the density and they have some of the probably the most robust uh amenities they'll be offering their residents there and so this is going to be really a quality project and we think will be value added to the westgate area and then probably the most exciting news positive news uh even beyond those two is that working with our deputy city manager rick st john who's handling our covid implementation is that we are happy to announce that we're going to have our second point of distribution for our city of glendale employees and we'll be doing that [Music] issuing the johnson and johnson single-dose vaccines so we have to only have to do it one time for the employees to come down we were we've been told we'll be receiving 200 doses um and so we'll be providing that for our um for our employees and we're gonna even though and this will be done on april 1st we recognize that there still will be a need by our employees and so we're continuing to work with our different authorities to continue to get more and more vaccinations assigned to us but we are excited about the the next pod opening on april 1st for 200 people and mr vice mayor it's my report thank you our next time the city attorney's report anything today nothing at this time vice mayor thank you council items is special interest the next item agenda is council items a special interest each council member will have the opportunity to indicate topics they would like to have discussed by the council at a future workshop council member al domini done at this time thank you councilmember clark nothing at this time thank you council member malnour nothing today thank you councilmember thomas vice mayor i do have something today i'd like to have staff bring us back a discussion about general maintenance policy about facilities and neighborhoods recently had an issue with fire station 156 that was last painted in 2006 um the hoa and some of the other communities uh other neighbors in the in the community the started asking about it and i found out that it wasn't scheduled to be painted until 2026 which is when it's scheduled for remodel and painting the exterior once every 20 years especially when you're basically plopped down in the middle of a neighborhood is a long time to wait in between painting the exterior so i'd like to have staff bring us back a discussion about whether we have a different policy about just general i believe that that's o m that we shouldn't just paint exteriors when we do remodeling that we probably should have a better policy about that so thank you thank you councilmember turner thank you vice mayor i actually have two items today as we all are aware the recent sale of glenn lakes golf course left behind is a parcel on the corner of the northeast corner of 55th avenue and northern that still is the parking lot plus the buildings that were the restaurant and the pro shop area i would like for the council to consider putting that parcel on the market perhaps even checking with for any input from the neighborhood as to what use they might like to have there but certainly let's get that parcel active and also that the council needs to determine how we're going to deal with the buildings that are left behind with the lack of maintenance they're becoming a blight on the neighborhood and code violations and we have trees dying and quite a bit of other stuff there so let's see if we can't put that on a track to be taken care of sooner rather than later and the other item i have is it seems to me that it's time that the council start uh considering how we're going to be reopening some of the facilities and and reinstating some of the services now that it appears we're on a track to have coveted under control so i would like staff to bring back a presentation for us on that thank you thank you is there a motion to go into an executive session i have a motion by councilman or dominant second by councilman malnour all in favor wrote i all right any opposed thank you you