thank you very much and again we'd like to welcome you to the Mesa city council meeting for the evening of December the 1st all of our Council are present at this meeting we will begin the meeting with a moment of silence followed by the Pledge of Allegiance so please stand for a moment of silence followed by the pledge thank you very much please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all thank you the first item on our agenda is our consent Agenda One by Mr Kevin Christopher forward to read that agenda and Kevin I believe you may have heard we've already received cards on 8A 8C and 11a I'm sorry 11a I'm sorry seven seven a seven I'm seven a eight a and eight C correct did I get that right Holly yes okay to go yes please right good evening mayor and council members these are the items of the consent agenda oh items listed with an asterisk will be considered as a group by the city council and will be enacted with one motion there'll be no separate discussion unless a council member or citizen request in which event the item will be removed from the consent agenda and considered as a separate item item two approval of minutes of previous meetings is written item 3A at the liquor license application for Hava Java 2849 North Power Road item 3B at the liquor license application for wings of flight Foundation One Day event December 17th 4626 East fighter Aces Drive item 3C act on liquor license application for eggs to see 5021 South Power Road item 4A approving one-year term contract of excess Workers Compensation Insurance and workers compensation self-insurance surety bond item 4B approving one-year term contract with four years of renewal options for GEA centrifuge separators equipment parts and services for the Water Resources Department item 4C approving contract to purchase upgrade convert 1 MD helicopter and Dr Lemon increase to the term contract for helicopter engine parts repair and overhaul services for the Mesa Police Department item four de-approving dollar limit increase to the term contract for moving services for various departments as requested by the business services and Engineering departments item 4E approving additional vendor award to the one-year term contract with four years of renewal options for pull and valve boxes for the materials and Supply Warehouse for the energy resources and transportation department item 4f approving contract for Northeast Public Safety facility project construction manager at risk guaranteed maximum price this Project's funded by 2018 authorized Public Safety and capital General funds item 5A approving resolution extinguishing two public utilities and Facilities easements and 101 East Pecos Road for temporary drainage basins to accommodate for the construction of a commercial development item 5B approving resolution extinguishing a 50-foot landscape easement and a 25-foot sidewalk easement located at 6147 East Main Street to accommodate a future Town Home Development item 5c approving resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the regional Public Transportation Authority for fixed route bus Paratransit and ride Choice Services item 5D approving resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a funding agreement with Valley Metro Rail for the current Light Rail operations in the city of Mesa item 5e approving resolution authorizing the city manager to enter into a conduit occupancy agreement with Google Fiber Arizona for use of a portion of the city's existing conduit duct bank system item 5f approving resolution adopting the Falcon Field rotor craft land use compatibility study to serve as a guiding document for future development around Falcon Field Airport item 5G approving resolution for zoning case 22-773 for property located north of Elliott Road and East of Signal Butte Road site plan review to allow for an expansion of The Signal Butte Water Treatment Plant item 5H approving resolution canvassing declaring and adopting the results of the special bond election Consolidated with the Statewide general election held on November 8 2022 item 6A through 6D pertain to action on resolutions and introducing ordinances regarding mesa city code Title 11 zoning ordinances zoning ordinance and setting December 8 2022 and as the public hearing day on these ordinances item 6A is for approving resolution regarding a temporary use permit item 6B is for introduction of an ordinance amending various chapters of Title 11 pertaining to Temporary uses outdoor displays site plans and special events item 6C is for approving resolution regarding outdoor eating areas item 6D is for introduction of an ordinance for amending various chapters of Title 11 pertaining to outdoor eating areas item 7A has been removed from the consent agenda item 8A has been removed the consent agenda item 8B approving ordinance for zoning case 22-265 for property generally located east of Greenfield Road and south of Southern Avenue rezone will planned area development overlay Insight plan review to allow for multiple residence development item Aid C's been removed from consent agenda item eight d for continuance to the January 9 2023 city council meeting this is an ordinance for zoning case 22-263 for property generally located east of Higley Road and or the Baseline Road again it's for continuance on the to the January 9th 2023 city council meeting mayor and council members these are the items on the consent agenda thank you Mr Christopher is Mosley if we received any other requests to have an item taken off the consent agenda no other request all right thank you we have a motion made by Ms Pillsbury seconded by Mr Thompson please vote thank you consent agenda passes unanimously first item off the consent agenda I believe is item 7A this is Introduction of an ordinance and sitting December 8th as the date of the public hearing on the ordinance having to do with a zoning case the Millennium Springs Superstition Springs zoning case we have a request to speak from Joel Sands Mr Sands are you with us welcome you have three minutes thank you mayor Giles members of the city council and um my name is Joel sanus I'm from the law from Udall Shumway 1138 North Alma School Road in Mesa and I represent A.T still University has a mixed opposition to this rezoning request A.T still University generally supports housing in the area that is consistent with an educational Medical Campus and that supports uses consistent with the specialty districts as the council is aware this area is in an educational specialty District uh it's kind of a wobbler between an educational specialty district and educational medical specialty district and the Mesa 24 General plan character area designation on the property is specialty and per chapter 7 of the general plan the primary focus of the specialty character area designations provide for large areas with a single use such as an educational campus or medical facility the intent behind the specialty campus designations are for large areas with a single use the atsu previously supported housing generally I know that the applicant has said that it supports uh housing that atsu has supported this case it supported housing generally in this area but it wants to make a point that it can't support this case if its support is considered precedent for supporting a use that is inconsistent with the specialty District established in the area by the Mesa 2040 General plan atsu does consider housing to be consistent with support of an educational campus but it may not be consistent with the single use requirement in the general plan development could be consid could be beneficial to at steel University but it still may not be consistent with the single use requirement in the general plan so although at still considers housing to be consistent with the support of an educational campus to the extent that its prior support of the housing in this area is interpreted as support for a use that is acceptable in the specialty District even though it does not support the single use at still cannot support this case so if approval or consideration is based on the idea that any articulation of a use that might somehow be beneficial to an educational campus but isn't consistent with that single use at still would oppose this case thank you thank you Mr Sands uh again the item that's before us is not uh ruling on the merits of this zoning case this is setting the matter for a public hearing at our next uh meeting a week from today yes thank you of course Mr Sands I think Ms Pillsbury has a question for you well there is a letter of support from at still in this paperwork for this case yes so we're are we disregarding that letter of support well you know that letter there is another zoning case in front of the city council I think it's going to be here on January 9th and it's that support of housing in the area has been interpreted as inconsistent with its opposition to the other case and the fine point we're trying to make is that the educational medical campuses are supposed to be a single use and the general plan shouldn't be interpreted as if the use that is proposed can somehow in some way support that single use that it should be approved if it's not consistent with that single use then it is not consistent with the general plan and shouldn't be approved you're are talking like a lawyer I'm trying to wrap my brain around yeah it is a fine point yes okay okay part of the issue um council person spilsbury is that as we said in our opposition to the other case uh the fact that at still gave General support for housing in this area has been interpreted for as the idea that as long as a use can be articulated that supports education or that supports a medical facility that at still would be in support of it it is in support of housing because it thinks it's consistent with a campus-like setting but it's not support of any zoning approval that might have an articulated basis that could possibly support a medical or an educational campus okay so because um the other property near at still we're still in talking and it works with that and so they don't want to show support for this which would then imply that they would support the other exactly yes okay yes thank you any other questions for this for this job for Joel vice mayor I'm a little confused so maybe I need to understand better but I understood that as long as 80 percent of the area is used for you know the primary zoning District then a secondary use would be allowed or is that just in this text Amendment no wait education that's the next the next matter that we'll be discussing educational yes so it's different for education and um vice mayor Dove the A.T Still's position is that the general plan okay educational overrides the primary or secondary uses in the zoning code the general plan says that this area needs to be developed as an educational or Medical Campus and so any use whether it's a primary or a secondary use has to be consistent with that single use which is an educational or Medical Campus so some other use that might somehow tangentially support a medical or an educational campus isn't in compliance with the general plans requirement that these areas should be designated as a single use either an educational campus or Medical Campus so I think what you're addressing vice mayor is the zoning code has primary and secondary uses those primary and secondary uses might be something like light industrial planned employment Park those primary and secondary uses still have to in our opinion comply with the overriding requirement that the general plan is for a single use which is for a medical campus or an educational campus so if the primary or secondary uses under the zoning code are not consistent with an educational campus or a Medical Campus if it doesn't support that single use the general plan overrides the zoning codes definition of what a primary use or secondary use can be for example if light industrial does not conform to the single use of an educational campus or Medical Campus the fact that it is a primer used in the zoning code does not override the general plan so you're saying that you don't feel that housing is a supportive use we think housing we think housing even in the general plan the general plan says that for an educational campaign campus in the general plan itself not in the zoning code in the general plan itself it says that housing is a legitimate is is an allowed secondary use for a educational campus but that's in the general plan that is not in the zoning code so the general plan says make this area a single-use educational campus or Medical Campus Medical Campus doesn't refer in the general plan to housing but educational campus does say that housing is a permissible secondary use but it doesn't say that other uses that might be consistent with the zoning code like light industrial or planned employment part are consistent with the general plans single campus requirement and it if if a something is approvable under the light industrial zoning or plant employment Park zoning but it is not consistent with the single use as a Medical Campus or an educational campus the general plan overrides that so even though it might be consistent with the zoning code if it's not consistent with the single use as a Medical Campus or a educational campus the then the general plan should take precedence over the more specific zoning code mayor council on the time's up so I don't know if you want to allow this person to speak there's there's one thing that was said that I think is that was said that the primary and secondary uses are in the zoning code they are they're in the general plan there is one sentence in the general plan that talks about uh the primary use but you have to read the general plan as an entire document this is really sort of trying to set up an argument that he wants to be able to make in January I think we spent more time on it that's necessary but the the concept of primary and secondary uses are in the general plan not in the zoning code so I think that was he misspoke a moment ago but we're going to have a well I suspect we're going to have this conversation again in January okay thank you uh Council again this the item before us is whether or not to hold a hearing on the zoning case next Thursday is there a motion to move this forward yes a motion made by Ms Pillsbury seconded by Mr Thompson please vote thank you item 7A passes unanimously so uh for everyone interested this case will be heard a week from today December 8th so if you're interested in this only case please come at that time next item on our agenda is item 8A this is uh amending title six of the mesa city called by repealing and replacing chapter 12 entitled offensive offensive excessive and prohibited noises we have two requests to speak first is Jan Barney followed by Travis Barney so Travis you'll follow Jan welcome home yeah but I'm sorry yeah three minutes yes so um we had a meeting recently um this is against the noise ordinance because we um are trying to figure out what the parameters are with the business that we hold a Community wall with that we feel is over the excesses enough excessive enough of the noise ordinance basically so I know you were going to change some things in that and we've been in correspondence with council members sisters uh sorry not sister Mrs spilsberry we had a meeting with her um on October 17th I'm regarding this and at that time we have had over 65 complaints from just our neighborhood for just the year of 2022 which they've been more excessive since then because of the reception area of gather Estates currently um we were told that um October 17th that we would be able to um there would be a general exemption to the noise ordinance um one of the changes to the North or noise Ordnance staff is probably proposing to remove that exemption um let's see here so basically the 6-12-6 there's a general exemption to the noise ordinance for activity including commercial activity which permit which is permitted under the zoning ordinance one of the changes to the noise learn and staff is proposing us to remove that exemption yet in reviewing your proposal it says in general exemptions um in section D activities provided by the city for a special event license special use permit or similar permit or permissions subject to any limitation or conditions in the license permit or permission those are the exemptions to your new noise ordinance which she has a special events permit so in my understanding that doesn't that exempts her from this we have readings off of our back porch which we live in almost we have an acre and three-fourths so we did not buy purchase a home next to our neighbor um and she's been easily 7.5 on the decibel meter from our back porch where most of the time in our home we can't even hardly hear our TV we have to bump it up we've for six years been trying to be reasonable with her and working with her on the noise she now has blocked us she's for her special use permit she's been violating that several times your time's up so if you just wrap it up we just summarize what if you have anything else so we just feel like there needs to be a better revision to the noise ordinance for that exclusion so that we can we can have some parameters on the noise ordinance um for one that currently is great thank you very much we appreciate it uh Travis Barney good evening my name is Travis Barney we live at 1127 South linary Square in Mesa we bought our property a little over 19 years ago and six years ago we literally had it ripped out from under us um you guys passed a special use permit for a Reception Center right behind us on Southern which is 2600 East Southern Avenue in Mesa and we were promised at that meeting I was here so far my neighbors were here we were promised by the owner's attorney that they'd keep the volume down where they promised the city council they'd keep the volume down and it passed and yet they haven't and the current noise ordinance doesn't give any decibel limits and so even from your compliance officer who I've talked with many times just shrugs his shoulders and when I text him sometimes when the decimal meter is really high he tells me just to have a good evening which is impossible it's even rattled the picture frames on our family room wall which our family was on the back of the house which faces this reception hall the noise ordinance in Mesa it's giving these special use permits out without any kind of compliance for them to follow the police won't give them any tickets we've called multiple times and so we're here to beg of you please do something please make it so that we can have our lives back our kids don't even come over on weekends anymore Friday or Saturday nights they used to call to see if there was an event going on now they don't even call because if there's an event going on we can't even use our backyard we haven't used our backyard in over six years since they opened up in the in the winter we can't open our Windows until they turn the music off at 10 o'clock we can't go to bed until they turn the music off because our bedroom's on the back of the house we'll have two fans on and earplugs in and we can still get the base still comes into our bedroom it's it's horrible and so I hope that it changes you guys make in the OR noise ordinance will include special use permits and that you will include decibel meter limits which you used to have until 2006 you had a decibel limit on the noise even at special use permits which was taken off I think around 2009 I believe and I don't know why that was because it just leaves special use permits unlimited volume and they do they abuse it there's there's an event going on tonight we'd love to invite all you guys over to sit in our family room and see what we have to put up with and we we want our property back we want to use our fire pit in our backyard we want to have a movie night with our grandkids and we can't do it not the only time to do that is in the winter and we can't do that because they're always having events three to four nights a week so just imagine having a hard day at work you want to come home and relax you sit down in your chair and this music kicks on I can't even start to tell you the PTSD we get when those lights come on over that wall it's horrible and I hope you'd look at the right house which is in North Mesa they can't use any modified noise unless they do it indoors whether they put up a tent or they do it inside their building and this is just down and it's it's horrible and even neighbors two streets North are willing to sign a petition with us to get her shut down I know we've had uh presentations on this in Prior study sessions uh but the council questions for staff on this or miss Mr Smith may you really I can respond and answer a few questions and while we did discuss some of those uh it doesn't sound like maybe they'd heard some of that discussion so I'd like them to have the benefit of that is and just going back a little bit we're updating the noise ordinance to be more consistent with some of the municipalities around us and uh some municipalities do have a decibel limit within their municipalities uh I I don't know the exact count but from our review most don't and many that do don't enforce it Mesa used to have a decimal number in it but also looking back at that Council report it wasn't beneficial because many times it's hard to apply a specific number to an entire city but as we talked in our study session we could look at that in the future and we'd probably need to hire a noise a console resultant to sound consultant to look at that as a possibility but we're trying to bring this change to become more consistent with some of our adjoining municipalities let me talk with the first Speaker I had a concern about a very particular exemption and let me address that because I think she's misreading it and and I think it I think it can answer her question in a way in which will please her so we changed that language specifically so if you read that whole that whole section it says activities approved by the city for a temporary use or limited duration that's the new language the idea being of Seattle concert for one particular evening in a park that might be a special use permit as opposed to the type of special use permit that is for a long long-term use but it even goes on to say that receives a special event license permit or similar permit but only to fix that extent such license permit or permission specifically exempts the activity from this chapter and then goes on subject to any limitations this this special use permit that they're talking about does not have out that type of language within it so it will not fall within this exemption so we've we've crafted this language very carefully on knowing their particular situation so they won't fall without an exemption but what we also did to sort of balance this with the businesses uh is we took something that we actually found from Chandler um and we added the concept back into the factors when you look at the factors in 6123a this is similar to other municipalities one of the factors that you look at is the zoning and permitted land uses of the property or area from which the sound or noises uh emanates and so it's a factor to consider but it's not it's not a carte blanche exception and so it can be considered like I said but is not an exemption so hopefully that answers their questions thank you sir so again I think that's good news for you miss Marty the your neighbor is not exempt MS spilsberry is permit not a council use permit correct that they got six years ago when very few of us were on Council and then um but that is not exempt it will not fall with you about that it will not fall within this exemption under 612-6. okay I would like to ask someone from police to come up Jeff I don't know if you want to or I don't know whoever you think to explain what would be required for them to actually get a citation because they've had police out there so many times without issuing a citation and so what would be the factors that would make them get cited that's right good evening mayor council members um you know really it comes down to what the officers see when they are are on scene every situation is different every fact scenario is different if they see factors such as when you look at the list that is in the proposed ordinance uh you know the volume and intensity of the sound or noise the proximity of the noise to any residential structure as a regional property the zoning such as what's in the special use permit which by the way I believe in that particular special use permit it says that they have to adhere to the noise ordin so it was never that they could play music as loud as they wanted to they always had to adhere to this to the noise ordinance um whether the sound is recurrent intermittent or constant the time of day so whether this is 1am or 11 p.m or 5 p.m makes a difference the volume and intensity of the sound whether the sound or noise is enhanced by say loudspeakers or amplifiers and whether the sound is subject to being controlled with unreasonable effort or expense to the creator of the of the person who's making the sound so what the officers do when they get these calls is they go out there and they they have to obviously talk to the reporting party but they have to observe uh the noise and and document it and ultimately come up with a determination whether it's unreasonable and I know we've talked about that in the past about what is the reasonable person's standard that's a concept that is is used throughout Officers Training experience and I'll use an example for example disorderly conduct that's a different type of offense that officers routinely are called to and say there's an argument between two people I'll just use Jim Smith and I as we typically don't argue but to say we do um and you know I'm really getting close to him in his face and I'm getting agitated okay now that might be the start of disorderly conduct but then let's say I elevate my voice and I start pointing my finger and that goes on for longer and longer and Jim says hey can you please stop and I don't stop and I get closer and closer yelling and screaming in his face and I couldn't tell you exactly or I don't know if an officer would be able to tell you exactly when disorderly conduct is committed when I'm shaking my finger in his face how many uh you know unpleasant things I don't have an exact number that's almost impossible to really say but the officers are trained to use their judgment and used their discretion to based on handling these calls day in and day out and ultimately make a decision determination what the point of being unreasonable really is compared to what you know they think would hold up in court and and even if they do a citation or a long form to the prosecutor's office or or it goes to a civil hearing officer you know ultimately there's a finder of fact the judge the judge gets to weigh these factors and determine and those that are accused of violating this ordinance would ultimately have their day in court as well and and to present their argument as to why they were not so it's not that the officers are the end-all be-all of making these decisions they have to go off of what facts they have at the scene based on the best information as well as the reporting party as and and the potential violator to hear their side of the story and and do what they can so that's to answer your question it's hard to say I can't point exactly just like that disorderly conduct scenario I gave I can't tell you exactly when disorderly conduct becomes committed but they just have to consider the facts and make judgments like they do every day changes are needed in our current ordinance and that they do clean up the language and they make things a lot clearer um it's still super subjective to me and so I do I mean there's just so much that could go that could factor into whether the officer makes actually makes a citation so I have no idea how my colleagues feel but I would um I want to go ahead with passing these changes to the noise ordinance but I also would like to ask that we maybe do look into getting a noise consultant and looking at what some options would be for an objective noise ordinance and look at what other cities do all right thank you Mr speaker so that there were maybe possible decibel levels or or distance levels or something because otherwise they the cops are going to just keep going out and they're going to keep not citing them and they don't have any way to move this forward all right thank you Mr Freeman thank you mayor I think Mr Barney brought up a good point on the decibel meter and just I I have no clue what constitutes a really loud noise and what they're experiencing it at their home but I think some type of standard in the future could be modified in our noise ordinance and looking there because all of us have different decibels of noise that we can tolerate or cannot so with that said I just maybe moving forward with that because I think it's a good idea thanks Mr Luna um you know I I feel bad for these people they've been living in there for 20 years and then all of a sudden this business comes in and disrupts our life that is just not fair so I I agree I think we need to have some language that talks about decibel levels and how we measure that because to disrupt their lives is is inappropriate you know I respect businesses but also respect peace and quiet and you've lived in your house for 20 years this is this is horrible so if we can include that language I would support it all right thank you any other discussion on this I I'm in favor of moving forward with it with this as well the the changes we've made to this ordinance to make it a lot more enforceable and so it a lot I think that uh prior to this it was difficult to issue any type of citation uh and I do think you know this situation is a very subjective situation you know what is a reasonable amount of noise for one person is different for another so so there is absolutely judgment calls that are that that's what the tax we're taking and maybe we'll decide that that's and then you know not good enough but I think this is a good Improvement on our existing noise ordinance and I agree that we need to be open uh to maybe strengthening it in the future but I support the proposed changes right now all right Council we have uh I'm sorry I can't say on the screen if anyone's filed it we this is item 8A is there a motion to approve in a second it was a motion made by Freeman seconded by spilsbury okay thank you we have a motion in a second please vote thank you that passage unanimously uh next is item 8C I believe we have someone on the phone but before we go to that I I wanted to I neglected to make a comment I wanted to make on our consent agenda item which is there were a couple of items on the consent agenda that were significant and I didn't want to let them pass without just making note of that one of them is that we canvassed the election uh that was just completed in November and I just wanted to uh point out that the voters of Mesa supported uh us on four important questions including uh Public Safety Bonds home rule and amendments to our Charter and I just wanted to acknowledge that and express our appreciation to uh to the voters for that also congratulations uh to vice mayor Duff for her election and uh council members elect Alicia go forth and Scott Summers so that was a significant thing that was on our consent agenda that I neglected to to highlight uh similarly on the consent agenda was item six uh we uh put in we made some changes to our city ordinances having to do with outdoor dining these were lessons learned during covid and we were we've kind of gone back and and institutionalized them now in response to I think some making life a little bit more easy for some of our business owners so before we move on I just wanted to to make note that we had made those changes and that those were voted on on the consent agenda all right having said that the next item off of our consent agenda is item 8C this was taken off because the gentleman indicated that he wanted to appear over the telephone uh do we have Mr King on the line we do mayor Mr King welcome to the meeting uh you have three minutes to share with us uh any thoughts you have on this item unmuted yeah Mr King you have to unmute yourself on your end hello council members mayor uh can you hear me we can now please go ahead okay well thank you very much for uh listening to me today uh our company owns the or is the declarant for the Mesa Ridge Business Center which is directly to the east of the uh proposed development um and I originally on the document that I had sent over I had uh expressed that I was not in favor of this however after speaking with um the Transportation uh Department with the city of Mesa and council member Freeman it sounds like uh this will not impact our business Parks so I would respectfully like to remove uh my comments that I had made all right thank you Mr King we pre we're glad you got your uh got answers to your questions yes thank you all thank you bye-bye council is there a motion to proceed with the agenda item 8C motion made by Mr Freeman seconded by Miss Pillsbury please vote thank you that passes unanimously next item on our agenda is agenda items 9A through 9g these involve the terms rates fees and charges for the electric gas the the electric natural gas water Wastewater and solid waste Utility Services I'll first call a public hearing on all of these items and then we can vote on the items so I declare the public hearing open MS Mosley do you have any questions to speak from the public on this item no request mayor thank you do any council members wish to address these items all right thank you I declare the public 9f will be voted on separately all right so I'm sorry let me repeat any Council discussion on these items all right I then declare the public hearing close we can vote on all of these items excluding Wastewater first and then we can vote on the Wastewater items separately so is there a motion to approve items 9B 9C 9d 9e and 9g relating to the electric natural gas water and solid waste utility items I see that Mr Thomas has made a motion seconded by Mr Luna please vote thank you those passed unanimously uh Council will now address agenda item 9f is there any comment related to that item Mr Mr Freeman thank you mayor you know I just when we were in the audit and finance committee meeting I made the recommendation that we could lower our Wastewater by one percent to a proposed 3.25 and I base that on some of the information that we have over the last five years we've made some pretty major adjustments in 1718 a four percent adjustment and then moving forward to 2021 we had a zero percent interest rate or adjustment for our Wastewater and so with the economy away it is recently in the 2122 was a three percent adjustment and now we're at 4.25 and I think it just behooves I've had a lot of constituents reach out to me asking that their Wastewater be considered a little bit less than what it is and I know it's not a whole lot of money out of somebody's monthly bill but I think the principle is is if we can offer a lower percentage of 3.25 that's what I would like to support thank you Mr Freeman Miss Pillsbury is this the com conversation we previously had at study session the same one right this isn't I wasn't at the meeting before this so I just wanted to make sure that I was on the same page right so because I I still I'm gonna stick to what I think is that it's better to not have a bigger increase next time so I think we should keep it more consistent thank you Miss Pillsbury Mr Luna and then Mr Thompson uh I I've been here nine years ten years and I would rather keep it consistent than get a bigger hit next year so I'm gonna be I agree with the councilmember spilsberry thank you Mr Thompson did I see your finger up yes sir um I actually agree with uh council's member frame and I think with inflation the way it is and I brought this up when we had the conversation about our rates that um with with the inflation not the way it is I would really like to see a reduction across the board but I didn't win that vote but I would certainly like to see a reduction in our Wastewater and give the give our residents a breath to be able to put some money back all right I know this was discussed in in our study session Mr Brady can you remind me that the The Proposal from staff is what and uh as Mr Freeman was I'm gonna need some help but it's a one percent increase and I I would I think councilman said it when we did the zero percent council's request that's why the next year was four percent because we had to make up for it so I think the difference in the percentage on a monthly basis is how much Ryan so the difference from the proposed 4.25 percent to the 3.25 percent is 24 cents a month is the difference and if we don't do if we do the lower amount what is it going to have to be the following year so if we do the lower amount we are looking at an estimated five percent for the next two years adjustment to Wastewater that's what we're that goes to councilman Brothers Point okay thank you but again in all fairness Mr Brady and Ryan we evaluate this every year so we we determine our increases based on you know the the utilities that we have so you may say five today it may be less and one year based on Council suggestion we had zero percent and there have been small increases of no higher than four percent three point five and three so I'm I'm still gonna stick to my guns and you know I'm probably know I'm out voted but that's okay too thanks thank you uh I'll repeat my comments uh from from the previous meeting as well I think we have it over the last couple years been a very sensitive to our rate payers and so much so that we've subsidized our electric utility to this to the tune of 20 million plus dollars we've we've Frozen rates as has been indicated uh the rate adjustments that we're proposing now are significantly less than the rate of inflation so I think we have gone made extraordinary efforts to uh to be mindful of of the fact that we are in the middle of a lot of inflation and it is difficult for for families right now uh but I think the proposal um at 24 cents a month obviously is not significant but I think the the more it's not significant either way frankly you know whether we do it or we don't but I think that the broader point is that if we can if the more that we freeze our rates the more it increases the chance that we're going to have a spike in in rates uh to compensate for that now I I do agree and uh my wife who pays the bills in our house you know constantly is is chiting me for how expensive utilities are and how the water and wastewater are expensive so I I'm very mindful of that but and I think we as a community need to really get a lot better uh and and we need to change our Behavior with regard to the efficient use of water outside our our waste water rates are based on our water usage particularly exactly during the winter months so for example if you succumb to the social pressure to do a to put down rye grass into a winter lawn that's going to spike your water usage during exactly the two or three months that we're measuring your water usage and setting your Wastewater rates so I think we all need to just we're going to have to as a community get more aggressive in helping each other get over the idea that that grass is to be used as a decorative part of our community there's a time there's a place for grass I want my grandkids playing on grass when they go to their soccer games but I think we have to get over uh putting you know watering excessive use of outdoor water outside so having said that I we do need to work on changing our Behavior we do need to work on being more efficient with our water but uh for the reasons I said previously I will support this motion Council any any other comments on this item I'm not going to make just a quick comment that one of the reasons I wanted to keep it as the recommendation is of all the utilities we have when you look at the bottom line on an operationals of our our revenues and expenses waste water is the most upside down by far of any other utility and our projected to operational costs are expected to increase 5.7 million over the next year so of any utility especially when it comes to water I don't think we can afford to not take some kind of increase we're not even begin to get cover our operational costs and capital cost where we are so I think it's important even at 24 cents but with all our users and such over time it will make a difference thank you all right thank you again we're on uh considering item 9f any additional discussion Council all right if there's a motion made by council member spilsbury seconded by council member Luna for approval please vote uh motion passes 5 yes and two no with Mr Freeman and Mr Thompson voting no uh next item on our agenda is item 10A this is to conduct a public hearing and take action on the minor General plan Amendment and amending the existing chapter 7 Community chat character uh of this of the this is my Mesa 2040 General plan I'm sorry let me say that again the 2040 Mesa General plan this is my Mesa this is to a men's chapter 7 of that document pertaining to the educational campus subtype and the Medical Campus subtype of specialty districts I declare the public hearing open MS Mosley do we have any requests to speak on this item number questionnaire uh Joel you've requested to speak on agenda items 11a and 11b it's essentially the same thing would you like to be heard during the public hearing sure thank you please come forward thank you have three minutes yeah uh mayor Giles council members Joel sanus from Udall Shumway 1138 North Alma School Road Suite 101. I'm here representing A.T steel University again the um the the the resolution of the city council is a resolution to amend the general plan uh specifically regard to the educational and Medical Campus subtype uh that means the specialty District that we discussed previously that includes the area where A.T still university is located A.T steel university is in the educational campus subtype that includes the broader subtype of an educational campus and a Medical Campus subtype as the council knows it's section 11-75-1 of the code establishes the procedures for making changes to the general plan section 711-75-1 2 provides that application for Amendment of the Mesa General plan designation applicable to a piece of property shell may be made in the office of the planning division on an application form provided by the city we do not believe there's been any application to amend the general plan this is a resolution I believe that has been supported by staff that is a matter that should be more properly handled through an annual review of the general plan instead of having staff making resolutions to amend the general plan in addition under Section 11-75-3 B1 all General plan amendments shall be shall be subject to two public hearings by the Planning and Zoning Board if council is likely aware of the procedures for the this proposed amendment to the general plan it was initially noticed for a hearing on Wednesday November 16 2022 that was the regular meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board the minutes or the agenda excuse me of that Planning and Zoning Board the minute say that it was continued to the never 22 November 22 2022 Planning and Zoning Board special meeting and then a special meeting was held on November 22nd 2022 on behalf of at still University we do not think that a uh a public hearing that was continued to another hearing constitutes an initial public hearing so we don't think Planning and Zoning is conducted to public hearings on this amendment in addition to the procedural argument that this is not an application made to Planning and Zoning but as the staff's own resolution substantively the language of the amendment is is very difficult for A.T still University to accept the general idea that that the secondary uses can include housing isn't necessarily objectionable what is objectionable is this language with regard to the general plan Amendment says when an anchor is educational establishment is already built and operate in a character area that time in a development proposal meaning at study University then they can then an applicant can default to the secondary uses under the general plan so as we discussed before this opens the possibility that at steel University which is supposed to be in a campus setting that has a single use can now be surrounded by uses that are not educational or medical and for that substantive reason A.T still University opposes this amendment to the general plan thank you all right thank you Mr Sands that concludes the any other Edition any other public comment before we move on do any council members wish to address this item hearing none I declare the public hearing closed we now will move on to agenda item 11 which is to take action on a resolution relating to a minor General plan Amendment Amendment amending the existing chapter 7 of the general plan pertaining to the educational campus subtype and the Medical Campus subtype of specialty districts so Council we're to the point where we discussed downstairs that we have two options before us one that the recommendation from staff the other uh that recommendation plus an additional recommendation from the Planning and Zoning Board so we need to decide if we're going to if we like either of those options Ms spilsbury so I would like to make a motion to approve 11b which is the plan and Zoning board's recommendation and as I said downstairs I think the argument of why rm5 is okay and the educational subtype is also why I feel like it would be perfectly fine and reasonable to have it in the medical subtype as well so I think it makes more sense to do the planning and zoning boards recommendation 11b all right thank Mr Thompson has seconded that motion before we vote I would like to hear any discussion as I indicated I I will support that motion if uh the consensus of counsel is is B over a although my personal preference would be a so is there any uh Council any preference on Council for to move forward with a rather than b before we vote on the motion all right Mr Mr Freeman you know mayor I support a because it allows staff to look at the applicant's application and determine if four or five RM zoning is appropriate for the for that special whether it's medical or educational campus but it then allows them to obviously have a five zoning if they get approved from staff so that's where I'm leaning I understand what Miss Pillsbury is and Mr Thompson have asked for so that's where I'm at but I think we might be in the minority Mr Freeman yeah unless I hear anything any other anybody else speak up all right we have a motion and a second uh to approve uh this item and it it's to follow the uh rather than 11a it's 11b uh all right we have a motion in a second please cast your vote thank you that passes uh six votes yes and one no with Mr Freeman voting no um all right thank you I think that concludes all of the items on our agenda with the exception of agenda item 12 which is items from citizens present Ms Mosley do we have any requests to speak under the site we do not have any requests mayor thank you very much is there a motion to adjourn this meeting thank you Mr Luna seconded by Mr Freeman all in favor please say aye aye thank you foreign [Music]