Thank you, everyone, for your patience.

I'd like to call this regular council meeting in May 19, 2026 to order.

This time we'll have the invocation and pledge of allegiance.

Invocation will be offered by Pastor Thor Stranhol of Valor Christian Center.

Welcome, Pastor.

How's that?

That's good.

Okay.

Well, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Town Council, thank you so much for having me here tonight.

What an awesome time we are living in.

Excuse me.

This past Sunday, our nation celebrated a rededication of our country to the Lord.

This was at in the White House on the White House Mall.

But did you also know, pardon me, that on May 17th, 1776, our leaders at the time fell on their knees and dedicated our nation to God.

We now here we are 250 years down the road, and we are still one nation under God.

Amen.

Amen.

Hallelujah.

In Matthew 63, it tells us to seek ye first the kingdom of God.

That's God's way of doing things, and his righteousness, and then all these other things that pertain to life and godliness will be added unto us.

In Proverbs 1114, it says that where there is no council.

The people fall.

But in the multitude of counselors, there's safety and there's peace.

Let's pray.

Lord, that I ask that you bless our town council and give them wisdom to make all the right decisions concerning our great town, our great people, and our great businesses.

Lord, above all else, let your kingdom come and let your will be done this night.

In Jesus' name we pray, and everyone agreed by saying Amen.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Our pledge will be led by Councilmember Buckland tonight.

And to the Republic for which one nation with liberty and justice for all.

I'm here.

And Councilmember Jim Torgeson.

A quorum is present.

Thank you.

We have several several proclam a couple of proclamations and a recognition tonight.

Our first will be presented by Councilmember Kaprowski, uh declaring May 17th to the 23rd is National Public Works Week.

I could have all of the public works staff in the audience come join me up here.

Love to recognize you all.

Uh Jessica Marlowe, I am the public works director.

I'm Hondo Judd, the environmental compliance manager.

I'm in Solid Waste and Recycling.

I'm a programs and sustainability superintendent.

Isaiah Scarcia Romero, I'm the solid waste and recycling manager.

Renee Leva, uh collection superintendent, solid waste and recycling.

Ken Snow, Public Works Assistant Director.

Ryan Blair, CIP manager.

Casey Ambrose, CIP supervisor.

Well, thank you so much for being here and for all that you do for the community and this town.

It's my honor to recognize you all with National Public Works Week 2026, rooted in service powered by the community.

Whereas public works professionals focus on infrastructure, facilities, and service that are a vital importance to sustainable and resilient communities, and to public health, high quality of life and well-being of the people of Gilbert, Arizona.

And whereas these infrastructure facilities and services could not be provided without the dedicated efforts of public works professionals who are engineers, managers, and employees at all levels of government and the private sector, who are responsible for rebuilding, improving, and protecting our nation's transportation, water supply, water treatment, and solid waste systems, public buildings, and other structures and facilities essential for our citizens.

And whereas it is in the public interest for the citizens, civic leaders, and children in Gilbert, Arizona, to gain knowledge of and maintain an ongoing interest and understanding of the importance of public works and public works programs in their respective communities.

And whereas the year 2026 marks the 66th annual National Public Works Week sponsored by the American Public Works Association.

Now, therefore, I, Young Kaprowski, Councilmember, on behalf of Scott Anderson, mayor of the town of Gilbert, Arizona, do hereby designate the week of May 17th through 23rd, 2026 as National Public Works Week.

We urge all citizens to join the representatives of the American Public Works Association and the government agencies in activities, events, and ceremonies designed to pay tribute to our public works professionals, engineers, managers, and employees, and to recognize the substantial contributions they make to protecting our national health, safety, and advancing quality of life for all together.

Next up, Councilmember Bucklin will be presenting a proclamation declaring May as Mental Health Awareness Month.

Okay.

Stephanie and Letitia, you want to join?

Stephanie, Miss Awatuki.

Okay.

Letitia's from Gilbert.

So before I do the proclamation, um, I want to thank you for being here.

This uh topic is very near and dear to my heart after almost 24 years in law enforcement.

I've seen a lot of PTSD, I've seen suicides, seen first responders broken uh from all the trauma they've seen.

So love what you're doing.

We appreciate you coming to Gilbert to accept this proclamation.

Would you like to say a few words before I read it?

Yes, hi everyone.

My name is Stephanie Delion.

I'm Miss Abuki, so thank you, Gilbert, for having me today.

But I have been a mental advocate, mental health advocate for the past decade of my life.

My cousin died of suicide when he was 16, and coming from a traditional Filipino family, we weren't told of his cause of death until I was his age four years later.

So since then, in my ten years of advocacy, I actually just came back from Washington, D.C.

this past week and advocated for suicide prevention related bills to our senators and representatives here in Arizona in order to ensure that mental health care is provided specifically in the needs of our service members, stabilization services, and as well as physical barriers specifically.

But very grateful to have May recognizes Mental Health Awareness Month as it's been recognized since 1949 and grateful for Gilbert to be joining in this effort.

Thank you for sharing, Stephanie.

So my name is Letitia Gilmore.

I'm the community initiative coordinator here with the town of Gilbert.

And uh this evening, I want to uh recognize Mental Health Awareness Month, and I also want to highlight the mental health resources available in our Gilbert community.

For non-crisis support, Gilbert Youth and Adult Resources provides counseling, resource navigation, and referrals through licensed staff here at the Gilbert Police Department Counseling Center.

They can be reached at 480 635701.

Residents also have access to key crisis hotlines, including 988, the Suicide Hotline, the Arizona Statewide Crisis Hotline at 1844, 534 Hope, and the substance use and disorder hotline at 1800-662 help.

The town remains committed to strengthening mental health support through education, engagement, and community partnerships.

The QR codes on the slides up on the screens will connect residents to these resources and any additional information.

Thank you for helping us build a healthier and supportive community for all.

So let's do this.

So whereas Mental Health Awareness Month has been recognized nationally since 1949 to increase understanding of mental health conditions and highlight the importance of mental health uh mental wellness for all people and whereas mental health is an essential part of the overall health and mental illness affects millions of Americans each year, including individuals and families here in Gilbert across all ages, backgrounds, and walks of life.

And whereas Arizona continues to see mental health needs rise, with thousands of residents experience experiencing anxiety, depression, or crisis each year, reinforcing the importance of prevention, early intervention, and accessible community resources.

And whereas nearly one in five adults in Arizona experiences a mental health condition each year, illustrating the importance of community support, awareness, and access to care.

And whereas suicide remains a significant public health concern, including being a leading cause of death among young people nationwide, underscoring the need to reduce stigma, encourage open conversation, and ensure those who are struggling know they are not alone.

And whereas taking care of one own one's own mental health is a vital step in supporting our families, workplaces, and community, and resources such as 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifelines are available 24-7 for anyone in need.

And whereas education, awareness, coping skills, support network, and access to treatment all play important roles in helping individuals and families navigate their mental health journeys.

And whereas the town of Gilbert is committed to proactively supporting mental health and wellness through community engagement, education, and connections to local and national resources and encouraging residents to continue learning, supporting one another, and fostering a community where every person feels valued.

Now, therefore, I, Kenny Buckland, on behalf of Mayor Scott Anderson of the Town of Gilbert, do here guy hereby proclaim the month of May 2026 as drum roll.

And urge all Gilbert residents and employees to prioritize Mental Health Awareness Month and uh urge all Gilbert residents and employees to prioritize mental health, support those around them, help build a community where no one feels alone, and every life is recognized as valuable.

And witness whereof I hereby set my hand and affix the official seal of the office of mayor, town of Gilbert, Arizona, uh, on behalf of the mayor on this 19th day of May 2026, next, Councilmember Buckley has a presentation.

Recognition from Piece of Art from the Gilbert Visual Art League.

Right now, I'd like to begin by inviting our presenter from the Gilbert Visual Arts League, along with artist Jane Bradley to join me up front.

And anyone that's here from the the art league is welcome to come up.

Okay, come on.

And we can do you want to put it back a little bit further or yeah.

Yeah, just and maybe kind of in the middle.

Yeah, there you go.

Yeah.

Perfect.

Thank you.

Okay.

And where is Jane?

Yes.

Okay.

Do you want to step up here just a little bit?

You're you're the art.

Yes, yes.

So I have a PowerPoint to present to.

Oh, you do.

Would you uh well let me uh if you want, I'll uh introduce you guys and say a little bit about you.

Okay.

And then we can do that.

Okay, so um the Gilbert Visual Art League has played such an important role in our community, and this year marked their 23rd annual Jured uh fine art show.

I had the honor of serving as one of the judges, and the level of artistry and display made the experience both inspiring and incredibly challenging.

Jane's piece, the Hitchhiker, which you see here, um was selected as the very first recipient of the Gilbert Town Art Award, an honor that reflects not only her remarkable talent, but also the strength and vibrancy of our arts community here in Gilbert.

I wanted to extend heartfelt congratulations to Jane Bradley on this achievement and sincere appreciation to the Gilbert Visual Art League to all of you for its dedication to promise promoting the arts and supporting our local creators.

With that, I'm pleased to turn the floor over to our presenter from the Gilbert Visual Art League to share more about their work and recognize Jane's work.

I didn't know I was going to speak at this time, but I'm very honored to speak on Jane's behalf because she is one of the most talented artists I've ever met, and I think most of you would agree looking at her work.

And I'll be doing a presentation on the Gilbert Visual Art League next.

Did I say who I oh sorry?

I'm Donna Fenter, and I'm on the Gilbert Visual Art League board.

Thank you.

Um who's doing the presentation?

Are you guys doing that?

People have the full council can join you for a photo.

Is that sound good?

Thank you.

Uh no, are they they have a PowerPoint?

Yeah, sounds like they're gonna do that next.

Okay, okay.

This is the beautiful young lady that you're out of here.

Otherwise they're gonna you got this green then to get it started.

Oh, okay.

I see it's already on.

No, this is already on.

Okay.

Mayor Anderson and the Town Council.

I am so privileged to be able to speak tonight on behalf of the Gilbert Visual Art League.

My name is Donna Fenter.

I'm one of the board members for G-Val.

And we feel like our main purpose here is to explain who we are because many people, even artists in the city, do not know we exist.

So that's our purpose tonight.

The Gilbert Visual Art Lead is often called G-Val.

It began in 2003.

It's a nonprofit, 5013 CEO.

I mean C3, sorry, 5013C, and it has been recognized that way since 2006.

We're the only art league in Gilbert.

We'd like to have more members.

Right now we have 100.

And they are professional artists and they are hobbyists, and they're also art educators.

So we have various ages and various interests involved in our art league.

We have an elected board of 14 members, and we are about to have an election.

We hire professional artists to come and do presentations once a month for our group so that our artists can grow.

And once a month we have a voting that takes place anonymously, and we choose artist of the month.

Then we have Artist of the Year.

Some in Gilbert and some in outlying communities that receive art education and art activities through our volunteers.

We're very much a volunteer group.

At House of Refuge in Mesa, we teach children art every Wednesday.

We've been doing it for years, and we do it year-round.

Clarendale at Chandler, a retirement center.

We have taught, I think it's over 30 classes to independent living, assisted living, and even memory care.

This is why we volunteer.

If you look at those faces, you'll understand why we feel it's so important.

Thank you again for recognizing James.

Amazing art.

We invite you to come and explore our website, gval.org and communicate with us through that site.

Thank you so much for your time.

Thank you.

Move on to our consent calendar, Vice Mayor.

Or to communications.

Thank you, Mayor.

We value the participation of our community members and robust exchange of ideas.

However, it's essential that this discourse remains respectful and constructive, reflecting the professionalism expected in such forums.

Misinformation and personal attacks undermine our collective efforts and do not contribute to the productive dialogue necessary for our town's progress.

This is an opportunity for the public to address the town council directly about issues impacting the town.

Accordingly, the town will not allow for moments of silence for playing the music or other recorded material which could distract from the meeting decor and violate copyright laws.

While we understand and appreciate the passion of our community members bringing to this session, we remind everyone that clapping during the meeting is not acceptable.

This practice can disrupt the flow of discussion, potentially intimidate others, and distract from the respectful atmosphere we strive to maintain.

In accordance to state law, we are we are unable to respond to issues that have not been properly noticed.

Therefore, the town council may only listen to citizens who wish to address them, and at the conclusion of the open call to public responses limited, limited to individual members of the council responding to criticism made by those who have addressed the public body, asking the staff to review a matter or asking that a matter be put on a future agenda.

However, please be assured that your concerns and input are heard and valued.

In accordance to town code, speakers may not use this forum to advocate for or against any candidate for public office.

Town resources, including the public meeting, may not be used for campaign or election purposes.

Each speaker is limited to three minutes.

Priority will be given to Gilbert residents, business owners, and property owners.

Public comment will be limited to 30 minutes at the total at 30 minutes total at the beginning of the meeting.

The town clerk will notify the council once 30-minute limit has been reached.

If additional comments remain, they will be heard after the conclusion of the public hearing items with the same three minute three minute per speaker.

When you come up to the podium, please state your name and city of residence.

Council, we only have one uh tonight.

Uh Barbara Colby at the May 5th town hall.

I asked you some specific some specific.

Barbara, can you can you claim your name, please in your name is Barbara, and I live in Gilbert.

And at the May 5th town hall, I asked you some specific questions.

I was testing you to see if you would take the initiative from residents asking specific questions that you might actually reply to them in an email.

Since we do provide you with our email, you failed again.

So my take on that is that you don't care about anything we say.

You didn't when you had the water listening sessions, and you didn't when you had the water open houses, and you obviously don't regard regarding questions posed here.

So once again, why do you even put this dog and pony show on?

Does it meet some little article in your bylaws that you allowed us to speak for three minutes?

So I will take the initiative to contact you again by email and wait for Taylor Porter's response.

Revisiting the water debacle.

I, for one, do not believe you when you said you exhausted all avenues before victimizing the homeowners of Gilbert by increasing our utility bills so outrageously.

What happened to the money that has been being collected from the whole resident field for the past 10 years?

Why was 12.5 million dismissed by Kelly Forrest for what unknown reason?

There are so many financial questions that have yet to be answered.

The fact that Arizona has always been in a drought situation, water should have always been on the planning table.

And many council members and town managers that cannot efficiently project repairs and replacement of pipes, facilities, and vehicles shouldn't hold those positions.

You cannot sit up there and continuously blame the previous council members.

This sounds a lot like the federal government blaming the previous incumbent there.

Scott Anderson's been involved with the council since 2016.

Bobby Bouchley since 2023, Chuck Bon Giovanni 2022, Kenny Buckland, 2025, Monty Lyons 2022, Young Kim Prosky 2020.

Jim, I didn't get you, I'm sorry.

So many of you were aware, and there was the town manager and the assistant town managers and the assistance to the assistant town managers.

All these people aware and don't do anything until they say the sky is falling, the sky is falling.

We have to raise the flat fees.

We have to double the sewer fees.

We have to raise the environmental fees.

And we have to raise the water fees so that a lot of our residents can't afford their own town of Gilbert utility bill.

And now their water has been shut off because the whole lot of you, town staff included.

You did not do your jobs.

It was because they didn't want, it wasn't because they didn't want to pay their bill, but most people cannot afford to have one, only one of their bills double or triple or more due to the incompetence, ignorance, or just plain lack of doing what needed to be faced instead of shoving it down the throats of almost every resident, because we are not buying the company line that all these apartments are paying what homeowners pays.

You have thrown the original good people of this town under the bus, the people who lived here when it actually was a town.

See you in two weeks.

Thank you, Barbara.

All right.

So now I'm going to pass the meeting along to interim to manager downprints for the consent calendar.

Good evening, mayor and members of the council.

I'm going to go through a summary of the consent agenda items tonight.

So this slide talks about our pillars, which we have three of them: strong economy, prosperous community, and exceptional built environment, and they each and all continue provide a continued focus on preparing for Gilbert's future and ensuring our resilience.

Agenda item number four is a contract with advanced chemical transport household hazardous waste disposal.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar, and this is a motion to approve the contract with Advanced Chemical Transport Incorporated in the amount of 160,000 per year, not to exceed 480,000 over three years for the proper disposal of household household hazardous waste.

This contract is rate supported through the Household Hazardous Waste Fund.

Agenda item number five is a contract with DBC Cleaning Company, bus shelter cleaning and trash services.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar.

This is a motion to approve a contract for bus shelter cleaning and trash services with DBC Cleaning Company LLC in the amount of $36,780 and 36 cents annually for a total not to exceed 183,902 over the term of the contract, which is five years.

This contract is funded by the highway and streets budget through HERF.

Agenda item number six are agreements with Edge Building Services, Biogenitorial, and Master Corp Town for Townwide Custodial Services.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar, and this is a motion to approve agreements with Edge Building Services, Bioganitorial Services, and Master Corp commercial services for townwide custodial services and a combined annual amount not to exceed 1,273,084 with four one-year renewals through June 30th, 2031.

This contract is funded with the facilities division operating budget as part of the general fund.

Agenda item number seven is a contract with waterfluence LLC, which is a landscape moder for landscape moderating monitoring services.

This is under our Prosperous Community Pillar.

This is a motion to approve contract number 32600350 with waterfluence LLC for landscape model monitoring services and amount not to exceed 27,380 per year with a total contract amount not to exceed 136,900 over the full five-year term.

This agreement supports the town's water conservation efforts by providing cloud-based landscape monitoring and irrigation efficiency analysis for large commercial HOA and municipal customers.

This contract is funded by the rate supported water fund.

Agenda item number eight is a cooperative contract with Creative Planning LLC, which is a deferred compensation fiduciary service.

This is under our Prosperous Community Pillar.

This is a motion to approve a cooperative contract with Creative Planning LLC and amount not to exceed $34,000 for the first year with two one-year renewals for a total contract term of up to three years for fiduciary and consulting services related to the town's sponsored deferred compensation plans.

Fees are paid by planned participants through payroll deduction.

Agenda item number nine is task order with CS construction, and that is for Wrecker Road and Galveston Street Traffic Signal, which is under CIP project TS 1440.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar.

This is a motion to approve task order 64 for job order contract with CS construction for CIP project TS 1440, which is Recor Road and Galveston Street Traffic Signal Project in an amount not to exceed $1,151,902.

This project will enhance safety and improve congestion at this intersection and is funded by the roadway and maintenance fund and signal SDFs.

Agenda item number 10 is a job order with Felix Construction Reservoir 3 control repair and replacement.

This is under CIP project WW 1286.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar.

This is a motion to approve job order number eight with Felix Construction for CIP project number WW1286, which is the Reservoir 3 Control Systems RR and an amount not to exceed 447,361 dollars.

This project includes the design and construction for the replacement of the existing remote telemetry unit, associated control systems, and electrical breakers at the existing Reservoir 3 reclaimed water facility.

This facility operates 24-7 and is responsible for reuse water delivery to customers throughout the distribution network and to recovery facilities.

This project is funded by the rate supported wastewater replacement fund.

Agenda item number 11 is a job order with NESBIT contracting for trail system repairs, CIP project PR 1329.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar.

This is a motion to approve job order number one for contract number 3240244 with NESBIT Contracting Company Incorporated in the not-to-exceed amount of 254,883 for CIP project PR 1329.

That is for trail system repairs, which provide for the repair and replacement of concrete multi-use pathways throughout the town trail system.

This project is funded by the general fund and the general replacement fund.

Agenda item number 12 is a task order with CS construction at Elliott and William Dillett Traffic Signal.

This is CIP Project TS 1961.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar.

This is a motion to approve task order number 70 with CS Construction Incorporated for CIP Project TS 1961, which is a Elliott and William Dillard traffic signal and an amount not to exceed 201,095.

This project includes the construction of a signal, adding right turn lanes to Elliott Road, and updating sidewalk ramps to current standards.

Funding for this project is supported by the roadway and maintenance fund via vehicle license tax funding.

Agenda item number 13 is a CIP contingency and CMAR phase approvals for Hunter contracting for Freestone Park and Urban Lakes Reservate renovations.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar.

This is a motion to approve general replacement fund contingency for CIP project PR 0570 in the amount of 1.35 million to pull forward funding from FY27 to FY26 and phase approvals for CMAR master agreement for the CMAR master agreement contract with Hunter Contracting.

GMP number two, not to exceed $8,680 $688,6445 for PR 1160, irrigation replacements at Freestone Park and Crossroads Park, and GMP number three, not to exceed $2,134,007.

And for PR570, which is Urban Lakes at Freestone Lakes.

These projects presented share significant schedule location and scope synergies, presenting an opportunity to maximize construction efficiency.

Advancing these funding authorization will enable the contractor to mobilize for construction and complete project phases in alignment with the parks department's planned sequencing, reducing overall park closure impacts, and supporting the most efficient delivery of the projects.

These projects are funded by the general placement fund.

Agenda item number 14 is a contract change order with Metro Fire and Security and Facility Fire Mainance, equipment maintenance.

Sorry, my screen went black there for a second.

And it is under our exceptional built environment pillar and is a motion to approve contract change order to contract number 324000207 with the Metro Fire Equipment, which is DBA, Metro Fire and Security, increasing the annual contract amount by $250,000 for a total amount of $340,000 to cover all town facility fire equipment maintenance repair needs for the remainder of the contract through December 31st, 2026.

This item is funded through existing building maintenance budgets for each facility that requires fire protection replacement and repair services.

Agenda item number 15 is a change order with Tri-Star Engineering for Fire Flow Improvements Phase 1, which is CIP project WA 1640.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar.

This is a motion to approve change order number one with Tri-Star Engineering and Management for Project Management / Construction Management Services in an amount not to exceed $46,725 for CIP project WA 1640, which is fire flow improvements phase one.

This change order extends the contract for this project by 45 days and accommodates unforeseen field conditions, including additional shoring for a bore pit due to a utility conflict and addressing a water line break and weather delays.

This item is funded by the rate supported water fund and a water infrastructure finance authority or WIFA grant.

Agenda item numbers 16 and 17 are change orders with Brightview Landscape Services and Artistic Land Management for Landscape Mainance.

These are under our exceptional built environment pillar.

These are first a motion to approve change order number two and the amount of $16,909 with Brightview Landscape Services Incorporated for landscape maintenance services in the right-of-way, zone A, increasing the total contract not to ins not to exceed $580,535.81 cents for FY27.

Changes to the contract are necessary to support inflationary increases.

And it is also a motion to approve change order number two in the amount of $13,628 with artistic land management incorporated for landscape maintenance maintenance services in the right-of-way zone D, increasing the total contract not to exceed $467,893 for FY27.

These agreements provide for landscape maintenance services for both irrigated and non-irrigated landscaping within the right-of-way.

These items are funded from the street landscape maintenance budget via her funding.

Agenda item number 18 is a CIP contingency for claim settlements, Q1 2026.

This is under our strong economy pillar.

This is a motion to approve a contingency in the amount of $304,600 for the claim settlements incurred within the period January 1st, 2026 to March 31st, 2026.

During the fiscal year, the risk department received and processes claims against Gilbert.

Given the uncertainty of these claims, funds are not budgeted in advance for these settlements, and they are supported via contingency across the various funds.

This quarter's settlements reflect the following general fund $176,330, streets fund $53,760, CIP $1,330, water fund, $1,090, Wastewater Fund, $8,630, solid waste residential, $53,190, solid waste commercial $9,010, and environmental compliance $1,260.

Agenda item number 19 is a water fund contingency for temporary customer service representatives.

This is under our environmental uh in under our exceptional built environment pillar, and this is a motion to approve a water fund contingency and the amount of twelve thousand two hundred and forty dollars for FY26 and $27,760 for FY27 to extend the temporary services contract for two customer service representatives for the call center from June 1st, 2026 to September 4th, 2026.

Due to increased demand on the customer service team, three LTA part-time employees were hired to provide additional support in both call center and front counter customer service provision positions for over 93,000 uh utility accounts.

These positions are anticipated to continue to be needed through September 4th, 2026.

This item is rate supported via the water fund contingency.

Agenda item number 20 is a grant uh for AZ Prop 2302 tourism promotion.

This is under our strong economy pillar.

This is a motion to approve applying for and accepting AZ Prop 302 grant funds for tourism promotion by the Gilbert Office of Economic Development and approved grant fund contingency in the amount of 270,000 for FY 2027.

This agreement enables the town to strategically promote tourism initiatives in Gilbert and invest in targeted campaigns that enhance the community's economic growth.

Gilbert has participated in this program since FY 2017, and during that time has reached over 80 million people through campaigns throughout Arizona, the U.S.

and Canada.

Agenda item number 21 is a grant application for Safe Streets and Roads for All, SS4A for a town wide uh transportation safety action plan.

This is under our exceptional built environment pillar.

This is a motion to approve a resolution for the application of the FY26 Safe Streets and Roads for All or SS4A grant for a townwide transportation safety action plan.

This grant supports initiatives designed to prevent serious injuries and fatalities for all roadway users and will enable the town to develop a data-driven strategic roadmap to reduce such incidents across our local network.

Key objectives of Gilbert's TSAP include statistical identification of the town's most severe roadway incidents, obtaining eligibility for additional funding grants of up to $25 million, and strategic alignment with national safety policies and standards.

This grant requires a 20% local match, which would be about $220,000, which staff will return to council for approval of acceptance and contingency funding if the grant is awarded.

Agenda item number 22A is the appointment of Mario Paniagua as town manager.

This is under our Prosperous Community Pillar, and this is a motion to approve appointing Mario Paniagua as town manager effective June 1st, 2026, and approving the corresponding employment agreement following a national recruitment focused on Gilbert's needs, challenges, opportunities, and values.

And with that, we'd be happy to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you, Don.

I have one question and one request for poll for discussion.

Any other questions and any of the other items from any other council members?

No.

Okay.

Councilmember Torgison, number six, I believe you had a question.

We'll be number six and number fourteen, but number six, uh granted this is a little late in the in this in the game for me to bring this up, but I believe it would be time with this large a contract for us to consider going in-house with this.

That's a lot of money to be going out and to examine whether or not it's worth bringing in-house or if it's still a neutral or a positive to send it out.

Would that be something we could talk about?

That's definitely something we could look at.

Okay, fantastic.

And on number 14, I really just want to understand the change orders several times the initial order.

So I'm really wanting to know the scope of work, unless I just flipped my math numbers around, which is entirely possible because I've been up since Lord knows when.

I'm sorry, which number is that again?

14.

Originally it was a $90,000 contract, and we're adding $250,000 to it.

Is that what I'm to understand?

Eric Bron is coming down to provide some information on this item.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

Um, yes, the original contract was a cooperative contract from another city for uh $90,000 roughly.

We've increased it on this uh is covering more of our town facilities.

It is um fire protection system, um annual inspections and repairs as well as emergency response for those facilities.

The cost has increased as well as our scope.

And this is nothing that our in-house fire that does inspections should be doing?

No, they should not.

All right, thank you.

You had a question on 21 also.

Right.

I I know this has been said to me, but I have such grave trepidations about anything that says SS4A on it.

I met with staff a few days ago.

And SS4A as it started, uh it was a Pete Budaj under the Biden administration started the program, and it inserted into the original language was that if we didn't achieve certain goals, the b basically we turn over the control of our streets to the federal government.

If we did not eliminate within five years all traffic fatalities.

Now I know that that's supposed to have been removed, but with such a horrific initial statement, it's like putting a thief in charge.

I don't care if he's been out of jail and supposedly rehabilitated, I'm putting him in charge of the cash drawer.

My trust level is so little with anything with SS4A on it.

Can anybody give me a lifeline to support it?

Because right now I just see I see those those four SS and 4A, and I just I I can't support it just because of that.

Uh thank you for the comments.

Um Councilmember Torgeson, I have Susanna and Jason Hafner um to come up and maybe speak to that.

Uh they have reviewed the documents and can speak to what those documents include and also what this grant would require as a part of it.

Mayor, council member.

Uh there is a requirement as part of the SS4A for the town to commit to a zero fatality goal.

But from a staff level, we believe there is no other acceptable goal.

I still want to pulled for a separate vote.

We don't hit that goal.

If we don't hit it, uh I think for the most part, council member, that is an uh aspirational goal.

Uh we would love to achieve it.

We'll try everything we can to achieve it.

If we don't achieve it, there is no requirement to pay the federal government back the money that they give us for the study.

Okay.

Councilmember Buckley.

Uh I number nine.

Let's let's let's stay on this one first.

Let's see if anyone um I'm sorry.

Uh Councilmember Lyons, you have a question on this?

Yeah, just some clarification there.

Um Councilmember Torgenson said that if we failed to meet that objective, then we'd have to turn over the control of our streets to the federal government.

Is that correct?

Mayor, council member, that is not correct.

But it was under the initial terms of SS4A.

It was in their the actual look wording from them.

It was a five-year five-year window to achieve the goal.

I know that's not in the wording of this, but my point is is that you're putting we're trusting that somehow it's not stuck in there just because I can't find it doesn't mean it's not there.

It is such an overreaching stretch in the beginning.

I'm just I I can't personally I can't digest it, and I have to vote no.

I just have to vote no.

I can't digest it.

They've changed that much just since last year.

And that was last year we examined it.

So you're saying that the goal of zero is just something to look nice.

I mean I was confused on on this when we had the briefing to begin with.

You know, what what nothing happens if we don't hit zero?

So the goal that we're required to actually do is one that you as a council would set.

It is not necessarily just zero, but it can be a reduction moving towards zero over a certain amount of time.

Councilmember or vice mayor.

I'm waiting for our traffic expert over here to I will clarify that the document does have to state that there's an eventual goal of zero fatalities and serious injuries.

That is the aspirational goal that they all have to state.

Um it has to have a target um which would be a percent reduction by a certain year, and the agency can set that if the agency, if the statistics don't, if the metrics don't hit that percent reduction by a certain year, there is no negative repercussions for that, but it is a method of having a roadmap for getting to that point and um strategies to implement.

If the agency, if the statistics don't, if the metrics don't hit that percent reduction by a certain year, there is no negative repercussions for that, but it is a method of having a roadmap for getting to that point and strategies to implement.

Thank you.

Um Councilmember Torgus, do you want do you want to pull that for a separate vote?

Okay.

Councilmember uh Buckley, you had a question on a different one.

Uh just on number nine.

And uh I'm not sure who would probably answer that.

Uh I want I just wanted to clarify because I I think this is probably gonna be like the other one where it's uh it's a street project or a corner project or whatever, but is that price a million one fifty-one nine oh two?

It says for record and record and galveston signal.

I'm assuming that's for the whole maybe the corner there.

It's a bigger project than just the signal.

Mayor council, yes, that it's not just for it's the traffic signal plus um additional, I believe there's um turn lanes, handicap ramps, up uh new traffic signal.

So there's concrete work, there's asphalt work, there is the actual traffic signal work, there's fiber, um conduits, it's all encompassing uh the scope for that entire intersection.

Okay.

I just wanted to make sure I couldn't imagine we were paying that kind of money for one signal, although I do know they're extremely expensive.

So yeah, it's not not just signal work, it's actually the entire intersection improvement.

Okay, that makes me feel a lot better.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Any other questions for anyone?

Okay.

So with that, um I put a motion to approve number four, five, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, twelve, thirteen, fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen, eighteen, nineteen, twenty one, twenty-two, a and b.

Can I get a second?

Vice Mayor 11 pulled.

I pulled 21 out.

You said 21.

I did, I'm sorry.

And you didn't say six.

I know.

Six.

You skip twenty.

Six, we are holding on is going to get some more information on us with that one.

Okay.

So let me get my brain back.

So everything but number six and twenty-one.

Correct.

Can I get a second on that?

Second.

Gone, did you?

Um Vice Mayor, that one is going to take some research.

What was asked of the of the staff was that we look at uh potentially looking at internals for that.

So if we're pulling it for looking at it later, then um uh I will work with the staff on that.

I'm not sure when our existing contract expires as well, so I'll follow up with the contract on uh follow up with the council on on what that looks like.

So I'm I'm pretty sure Eric, if you want to jump in, I think the existing custodial contract expires on June 30th.

So if we don't have someone in place by July 1, I believe that's correct, but Eric and Mayor and Council, yes.

The our existing contract does um expire at the end of next month.

We brought this uh with a few extra weeks ahead of time so that we could onboard our new contractor because it is not a continuation of existing contract.

Um we do have renewals on our contract.

Um the new one, and so if over the over the course of the next couple of months we did we do determine through that um that process that it would be cheaper for us to in-house in source that we could include that um in potentially in the next budget cycle next year and cancel this contract.

Do we have any renewals on this contract?

I mean month to month on the current one, no.

Okay.

One year.

Um Councilmember Torgeson, do you want to rule include it?

Okay.

Thank you, sir.

So it looks like we're going four five four to twenty, uh separate vote for twenty-one and all twenty.

I'm sorry, all of twenty-two A and B.

Can I get a second?

Second.

Second by Councilmember Bucklin, please vote.

Vote passes seven zero.

Okay.

Um Jimmy, you want to make a motion for what is it, twenty-one.

I'll make a motion to approve item 21.

I will second that motion.

Please vote.

Vote passes four to three.

Okay.

Umor, you have the public hearing.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Public hearing, we have several items on the agenda.

I'd like to ask for the council to consider item 23, 25, 26, 27, and 28.

As a motion at this time.

Oh if they're comfortable you're comfortable with those.

Yes.

Okay, I'll open the public hearing and close the public hearing on items 23, 25, 26, 27, and 28.

I'll ask for a motion in a second.

I move that we approve item 23, 25, 26, 27, and 28.

I'll suck it that.

Please vote.

Motion carries unanimously.

Thank you.

We'll go back to item 24.

Item 24 is a zoning case Z2513, Higley and Aquillo Retail Center.

We'll conduct a hearing and consider approval of the findings and adoption of ordinance.

I'll open the public hearing at this time and ask the staff to come up for presentation.

Good evening, council.

The case we'll be taking a look at tonight is rezoning case Z25-13, the southeast corner of Higley and Aquateo Retail Center.

The subject site outlined in blue is roughly 16.14 gross acres and roughly 13.17 net acres and is located at the southeast corner of Higley Road and Aquateo Road.

The 16 acres is part of the overall 243-acre Marbella Vineyards planned area development overlay.

And also the site is directly adjacent to Higley Road just to the west.

I'm sorry, a zoning category.

Taking a look here at the zoning map, uh it just helps paint a better picture as to what zoning is currently on site and what the adjacent zoning categories are.

So currently the shopping center zoning category is what is on the site, but prior to the 2005 update of the LDC and zoning categories of the town, the parcel did carry a C2 zoning designation.

That C2 zoning designation was established in the original uh PAD for Marbella Vineyards, but there was no associated development plan.

At that time, the C2 zoning district did not have a 75,000 square foot uh footprint cap, which is seen on the shopping center zoning district today.

Thus the applicant is requesting the rezoning from shopping center to general commercial to accommodate a single user that would be more than 75,000 square feet, uh which would be that target anchor, which would be roughly 128,000 square feet.

Okay.

Mayor Council, if I can step in just for one second too, and give a little bit more history about the zoning of this site in question.

The C2 is as Sal had mentioned was done in early 2000.

About the same time there was a voter-approved general plan that was approved.

It was the every 10 years the town of Gilbert does a general plan update.

So early 2000s, that general plan that was adopted by the council and subsequently by the voters showed this site as a shopping center.

So with the new general plan came a rewrite directed by council of the entire land development code at the time.

At the time it was the unified land development code, the town was switching to the land development code.

So in order to rewrite that code, the entire town was rezoned to be in conformance with the voter approved general plan.

So this process had been going on through the town for several years before it hit the 2005 change.

And that's when planning commission recommended approval, then council recommended approval, or then council approved the change, adopting the new zoning categories and the new land development code.

So a little bit of history on that.

And then in 2006, the state passed the proposition 207, which was the uh basically the property rights and the taking statutes that came in.

So that happened after the 2005 election by mayor and council to rezone the entire property and then do the um uh the land development code.

So just a little context as to how this started, how we've kind of walked through it and to where we're at.

Again, all of the um uh all of the changes to this site and every other site were publicly noticed, followed the process, followed the statutes.

It was a very open and and um transparent process.

So just wanted to mention that as we go through this because I know there's been some questions as to the history of of the C2 to the SC and kind of that change.

So I'll give it back to Sal now.

Thanks, Cal.

Alrighty.

And then uh taking a look at the zoning exhibit, uh, we can see here that the site is carrying that proposed uh general commercial zoning category, and in the town of Gilbert, the zoning categories do go to the center of the streets, and that's why you may see some differences in the acreage when compared to either design or the zoning of the property itself.

So another part of this rezoning is not only to adjust the zoning category on site, but it's also to establish new conditions of approval or development related to the commercial site uh within the Marbella Vineyards PAD, and the other portion of it is also to establish a development plan for the commercial corner within the Marbella Vineyards PAD as there has not been a development plan established through a PAD or rezoning process.

And just um a bit more information with that is once a development plan is established through a rezoning or a PAD, that development plan is essentially locked in, and if a design review came in, it would need to be in substantial conformance with that development plan tied to the rezoning.

So if a plan is not consistent with that design, it would need to come back to council for a decision for that updated site plan or development plan.

Another thing I just wanted to uh clarify and show on the screen here is just some of the key differences between the shopping center zoning designation and the general commercial zoning designation.

Uh the sections highlighted in yellow are going to be those key differences between the categories.

Uh, the first being uh what is the main kicker behind this rezoning is the max on a footprint to a single user or building.

Uh, you can see there that shopping center does have that 75,000 foot max where general commercial does not have a max.

Uh another difference you can see is that the shopping center uh building height is 35 feet and held to two stories, where the general commercial does have an increase height to 45 feet.

Uh another difference between the two is just the minimum building setback uh when adjacent to non-residential uses.

In the shopping center category, we have 15-foot setback for sides and rears adjacent to non-residential, and those jump up to 20 feet uh for the general commercial designation.

The setbacks adjacent to residential do remain the same at 75 feet.

And then the other key differences here are just related to landscape setbacks.

In the shopping center category, you can see the 30-foot setback is applied to properties that have sides abutting residential, uh, 15 sides not abutting residential, uh, 35 foot landscape setback in the rear to residential, and then 15 foot arrear to non-residential.

Again, in the general commercial category, those jump up five feet.

So you'll see side residential 40, side non-residential 20, rear residential 40, and rear 20.

Here on the development plan, we can see the orientation and design of the proposed site plan.

The major tenant, which is anticipated to be the target, is that one story building located closer towards that eastern property line, but still fairly centralized on site, and then we have those two outer parcels up in the northeast corner and in the northwest corner.

Uh, pad one in the northeast corner is projected to be a uh sit-down restaurant and some retail uses, while the pad two in the northwest corner is anticipated to be a financial institution.

A couple other things to showcase on the updated development pan development plan are just a couple of the requested deviations through the PAD process.

The first piece that is being requested by the applicant is a reduction in that southern landscape setback, which would be the landscape setback uh side adjacent to residential, and that would be that southern property line.

As I mentioned, the general commercial zoning category has a 40-foot setback, and the applicant is requesting to reduce that to 25 feet.

And I just wanted to make note that while the landscape setback is requested to be reduced, it really only impacts those parking spaces located in the southeast corner where the property line is a roughly 25 feet to those parking stalls.

But the more we move west, that landscape buffer does get quite quite large, and at its furthest point west, we do have a roughly 127-foot landscape setback.

Um so just as we move uh east, it does shorten quite a bit, but really just impacting those spaces in the southeast corner.

The other requested deviation uh with the PAD is a stretch of 12 continuous parking spaces without a landscape island.

And those spaces would just be located just north of the building under the drive-up parking canopy.

Um other parking areas on site will follow the uh ratio of town code of eight parking stalls before any landscape island, and this we're okay with the 12 continuous just because it helps safer operations on site for the unloading and delivery of goods.

Uh parking on site has also been uh centrally located to the major tenant, and we also have parking stalls up along the north east, I'm sorry, north, west, and south property lines as well.

As for access to the site, there is two proposed off of Higley.

One is a full access, the other being a right in right out.

Uh Tio Road does also provide an access point, and then there is one additional access point off of Wilson Way on that eastern property line.

As for the phasing plan, the applicant has proposed a four-phase approach.

Uh, that first phase being all of the horizontal infrastructure, on-site and off-site improvements, uh, parking areas, landscaping, internal drive aisles, um, and then moving on to phase two is when we start to see the vertical development, which would be the major tenant, uh, phase three being pad one in that northeast corner, and then that final phase being the financial institution in the northwest corner.

As for public participation, um, we did hold a neighborhood meeting back in May 15th of 2025, and there were approximately 150 to over 200 residents that did attend that um that neighborhood meeting.

Uh to this point too, staff has also received uh 60 plus emails from the public and opposition, and roughly 17 emails in support of the proposed project.

Um the last bit is that a legal protest was filed with the clerk's office on March 14th, 2026.

Building off of the legal protest information, there is a few criteria that needs to be met before illegal protest can be granted.

So here in ARS 9-462.04H, uh, we have our language related to the legal protest.

And it states that if owners of 20% or more of the property by area in number of lots, tracks, and condominium units within the zoning area of the affected property, excluding government owned property, filed protest in writing against a proposed amendment.

The change shall not become effective except by a favorable vote of three fourths.

We did receive this information and we had it reviewed by town staff from planning to legal to our GIS departments to ensure that this information here is accurate.

Based on the provided properties and the 150 foot uh zoning area, they were able to meet the number of lots for the 20 percent, but unfortunately it looks like we fell short of the area calculation.

So it doesn't look like that 20 percent of the surrounding area um meets that requirement, just the 3.5%.

So it would not fall into uh the parameters of a legal protest.

Um looking at the findings effect for all rezoning uh applications, we look at these four items.

Uh that the proposed zoning amendment conforms to the general plan as amended.

All required public notice has been conducted in accordance with applicable state and local laws.

All required public meetings and hearings have been held in accordance with applicable state and local laws, and the proposal rezoning to support the town strategic initiative for community livability.

And based off the findings and from our hearing with the planning commission, uh the planning commission staff recommend um approval to the town council to approve case Z25-13, southeast corner of Higley and Aquatilla, subject to conditions.

And these conditions are here on the screen for your review, and there has not been any additional conditions added to the report since the previous uh council hearing.

And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions you all may have.

And I know the uh applicant does have a presentation that may be geared more to some of those questions from the previous council hearing.

Uh but I am happy to answer any questions you all may have.

Thank you.

Questions for staff.

I do.

Councilmember Buckley.

Okay.

I would would you can you go back to I think uh the top it said maybe development plan.

Um and when you were speaking, is that the only one is that said development plan on it?

I I think it it may be um I believe so, yes.

Okay, well you were you were covering um the maximum square footage, like the um one was 75, and then the and I think on general commercial.

I just want to clarify that and and it looks like you did say that, there's no maximum height on general commercial.

Am I right in that?

Uh Mayor Anderson, Councilmember Buckley.

Um with your question in regards to height, there is a max on height for the general commercial zoning district.

Uh it would be 45 feet where shopping center is held to um 35 feet.

Um, but the footprint of the 75,000 square feet uh is only in the SC zoning category, but is not within the general commercial category.

Okay, so the square footage can be they could use the whole 200 square feet if they are or whatever that square footage is up.

75,000, so it would be um well, there's no maximum on there.

So they could build that as large as they want, right?

I mean, as long as it fits in the plot.

Uh councilmember Buckley, uh Mayor Anderson, that is correct.

Okay, without in the general commercial zoning category, they are not limited to a square footage or footprint.

Okay.

So they can go higher that bigger than 128,000 square feet if they want.

Correct.

Okay.

I I just wanted to clarify that.

Um there was one other question that I had on here.

Um when and we didn't really talk about the traffic in and out.

I mean, we know where it's going to come in and out, but where will the trucks that are coming in, you know, with the the semis that are coming in to load and unload, where are they going to come in at and where are they going to exit?

So what's the egress and and ingress of uh those trucks and where are they putting the base for them to empty out in?

Okay.

Uh Councilmember Buckley, Mayor Anderson.

Um as for access to the site, egress, ingress, um, the applicant may have some more information related to their um their operations on site, but it sounds like um trucks could either enter off Higley, Aquateo, or Wilson.

Um more likely it may happen off of Wilson just due to its adjacency to those loading bays.

And to your second question, Councilmember Buckley, those uh loading bays for uh deliveries would be in the northeast corner of the building there.

I don't know if right in in that pocket right there.

And Wilson Way is that's the ingress to egress to the subdivision that's next to that, correct?

Uh councilmember Buckley, Mayor Anderson, that is correct.

To access uh Marbella Vineyards, you can utilize Wilson Way.

Okay, so so there's a possibility that we have kids walking home from school and a semi could possibly no no no no no clapping, please.

But uh so there is that possibility that that the a truck driver from New York is delivering goods and it would have no idea that could go down a residential street.

And uh I I find a huge problem with that.

But I mean just saying I and that's why I wanted to go back to this and just really you know dig a little deeper into that and see what that plan is.

Um you answered by questions and and I thank you for that.

Thank you, Councilmember.

I I personally well, and you know, and professionally I don't know if there's some way to block that off, but you can't block off the I I think that's gonna be a real problem.

Okay.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Torgeson.

This might be more of a Kyle question.

Okay.

All right.

So Kyle, it was C2 tooth and then recommended under a far gone uh town manager with a new land development code to make it an SC.

I understand you say that it was a very uh transparent process, but do we really know?

Because at the time I understand there was 21 properties that were rezoned to SC that may not have known they were rezoned.

Do we know they know they were rezoned?

Um Mayor Anderson, Councilmember Torgeson.

Um the let me take one step back to your first the your first statement.

Um in 2000, the council directed staff to begin the process to rewrite the land development code and move forward with uh the general plan, which changed it to SC.

Um from all of the research that we've done, um combing through former staff files and ordinances and staff reports.

I haven't seen anything that that has told me that there were any property owners there were not aware that they were being rezoned.

Um again, the information that we found there was over 67,000 letters that were mailed to every single property owner in the town.

There was public hearings, there were notifications.

I if if somebody didn't know, I I'm I don't know how they wouldn't have known, but uh to your point I it could possibly have happened that way.

Right.

I mean there's 67,000 water bills and people didn't know it was coming.

We're all in boiling hot water over it, so not everybody sees everything.

So that's my first question.

Then 2005 it becomes SC.

If it was without their knowledge, that would be a taking because they could have been something else more akin to the original C2.

Um if they were unaware.

Mayor Anderson, Councilmember Torgerson, I don't believe it would be considered a taking at that time because that was prior to Prop 207.

Okay, then in 10 years later, there was a text amendment to SC, correct?

Uh, believe there were some text amendments.

What was the original square footage on SC?

It's I believe it's always been 75,000 square feet.

I think it was brought down to 75,000, wasn't it?

Phony number.

It could be wrong.

I'm asking.

Mayor and Councilmember Torgison, there were no changes to the SC zoning district in the 2021 refresh.

Uh that was largely a reorganization of the code.

Okay.

And then so without substantial changes from that.

Uh if they knew in 2005, let's call it that they were rezoned there, they accepted their rezoning?

Uh Mayor, council member, that would have been correct, yeah.

Because there wouldn't have been the time to come forward and basically appeal it would have been through the public hearings at the planning commission and council level.

Okay.

And there were some that did that.

There were some.

There were some.

All right.

And this property owner who is fairly savvy, I would think.

Didn't come forward at all, correct?

To your knowledge?

To my knowledge now.

And they still don't want to build an ages, even though they own AJs, correct?

That is correct.

Councilmember Kaprowski.

I have a question about the permitted land uses under each zoning category.

Could you describe if there are major differences?

Councilmember Kropowski, Mayor Anderson.

When comparing the two zoning categories and their associated uses, uh shopping center and general commercial are very similar.

While general commercial does allow for a bit more intensive uses on site, many of the uses are the same.

Vehicle services are permitted in both categories, daycares are permitted in both categories, uh, various forms of medical uses, medical office, uh urgent care, um, indoor or outdoor recreation is available in both zoning categories.

You really just start to see the difference when it comes to intensive uses.

So for the vehicle services, vehicle services light is permitted in both categories, but vehicle services heavy is only permitted in general commercial.

Uh same thing with fueling facilities.

The typical fueling facility is allowed in both, but if there is a fleet fueling facility, that would only be permitted in the general commercial category, not the shopping center.

Thank you.

Vice Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor.

Can you go back to the map again?

Okay.

Um truck is coming off Octeel, turning down Wilson Way, making a right hand turn into this property.

How are they backing up into that bay?

Uh Vice Mayor Bon Giovanni, uh, Mayor Anderson.

That may be a better question for the applicant and just in their their operations.

Uh okay, thank you.

Any other questions of staff?

Mayor Thank you, Saul.

Thank you.

Oh, wait a minute.

Uh, when you were talking about the differences in land uses, um like mixed-use loft apartments.

Can that go on either of those?

Uh Councilmember Buckland, uh Mayor Anderson.

I believe loft units are permitted in both SC and GC.

Thank you, Saul.

Thank you.

We'll ask the applicant to come up at this time.

Mayor Anderson, uh Vice Mayor Bongiovanny, members of the council, good evening.

My name is Reese Anderson.

I'm with the law firm of Pew and Lake.

It's always a pleasure to be with you, and it's a pleasure to be representing Simon CRE this evening on this project.

We believe it's one that's uh worthy of your support.

Um I'm gonna go through uh presentation.

We it's got a lot of detailed information in it.

I'll plan to go as quickly as possible, but I want to be thorough so that we talk about the facts.

Unfortunately, on this case, there's been a lot of misinformation that's been put out by some.

Um I want to believe that it was unintentional, but still that misinformation is out there, so I want to be able to be able to be clear on what's actually happening.

I won't spend a lot of time on the slide.

Everyone I think is well aware now of its location close to the regional park and the water recharge facility.

Let's be clear tonight with that the sole reason for this zoning change is simply to allow for a single user over 75,000 square feet.

This is not about traffic, it's not about the actual size of the building, it's not about the setbacks, it's not about parking.

It's not even about the design of the building.

Ask yourself this question this evening as you hear both myself speak and whether you hear anyone from the public speak in opposition.

Is this a concern or a question that exists today in the shopping center district?

And if it does, then you can give it the appropriate weight on whether or not this change really matters.

And when we get to the end, I will share some thoughts and ideas on some mitigation to answer questions to make sure that we're doing the best we can to not negatively affect any adjacent neighborhood.

The staff has already gone through this, but I'll but I'll go quickly.

This is a copy of the rezoning ordinance from 2002 when the Basha family created Marbella Vineyards.

They were the owners of the property at the time.

Circled in red is the site.

You can see that it's zoned, C2.

There was no square foot limitation.

It is my understanding that the Basha family did just not aware that a they might have been aware that this shopping center change was happening, but not aware that a single user square foot limitation was being placed on that property.

This is the language from that.

I won't, you heard the staff already addressed that, so I'm not gonna bore you with those details, but there was no square foot limitation.

The uses that were allowed in 2002, we're consistent with those.

This is the chart of showing those development standards.

I simply lay it here out to say that we're consistent even with the development standards from 2002.

Interestingly, when that zoning code update happened in 2005, there were rules of transition put in place.

On the left side, you can see the 2005 rules of transition on the right, the 2021.

They talk about if there is an existing PAD.

We believe we meet those criteria.

But rather than talk about a legal fight between us and the staff, we made a conscious decision from the very beginning just to deal straight up with this case, to be transparent, and when the staff recommended that we needed to rezone the GC, we did.

But respectfully, we reserve those rights to raise those issues again if the case is not approved this evening.

I just wanted to share this chart.

It's just a quick summary of the key things that are at issue this evening.

Building height, building setbacks, and landscape area.

I raise these issues because lots of people have made the argument that it's just not compatible with the area.

Compatibility can be both subjective and objective.

The development standards set forth in the zoning code provide those objective criteria when something is compatible.

And in every instance here, we we meet or exceed those objective development criteria, and we'll go through those in more detail.

This language here talks about just our thoughts on this old C2 zoning, but simply put, the key sentence is the bolded one.

Granting the rezoning to general commercial isn't expanding rights beyond what the property historically had.

Again, our belief is that this property started with C2, there was no square foot limitation, and today all we're asking for is to be able to build larger than 75,000 square for a single user.

We are not talking about building more square footage than what would be allowed on that site.

This is a letter that we asked the Basha family to provide as signed by David Basha.

This was submitted to you as part of your packet.

Here's some of the key takeaways from it.

The Basha family purchased 240 acres in 1978.

They created the Marville Marbella Vineyards Master Plan and reserved this corner for C2 uses.

The original intent was a bash's store, but that didn't make sense at the time due to the limited trade area.

Unable to wait and unwilling to engage in cannibalization of other stores, Bash is built at Power and Chandler Heights.

Bashes sold at stores to Rayleigh's in 2021, who was offered this property but passed because they viewed it as a non-viable commercial site.

The Bashis family over the years, over these recent years, has explored smaller grocers and multifamily users, with the first being rejected by the market and multifamily uses being rejected by the town.

The Bashis family fully supports and requests support from the town council.

That's that's a summary of the letter.

This is just some pictures of the site.

You've been well oriented to it with knowing that the fire station exists there in the corner.

We'll talk about that in a second, and in a large landscaping area.

You can see this site here where additional right-of-way and dedications have already been made in coordination with your CIP and transportation folks planning for this project.

This is the is a source of concern.

And this is the driveway that's shown on Wilson Way.

And I'll explain in just a bit through a combination of slides why this issue deserves support and why it there's ish examples of this existing throughout the town today.

But please know that if a truck came in here, it would only go this far south.

Now, with me this evening are not only representatives of Simon CRE, but Dane Jaster from Target, and I'll invite him up in a second to talk about how their operations deal with these exact type of issues.

Last time we were here, there was a little bit of a question about this southern landscaping buffer that's HOA property.

We highlighted it here in blue.

You can see the ranges in width, but there's two areas 40 and 75 feet.

Now, what's interesting and why I say that there's some misinformation out here.

This is the quote from one of the residents made at this podium on March 4th of this year.

I highlighted in yellow their arguments that are being put forth to a lot of the residents.

And it says this proposed change would allow higher intensity commercial development with reduced zoning standards.

That's not true.

Including narrower building setbacks, not true.

Increased parking allowances, not true.

Less stringent landscaping, not true.

These changes deviate significantly from the original SC zoning and are incompatible with adjacent adjacent residential neighborhoods.

Not true.

If approved, the rezoning would lead to increased traffic, noise, lighting, and building massing near residential property lines on the south and east.

Again, all not true.

Importantly, it may contribute to diminished property values in the proximity by eroding and residential buffer replacement.

Again, I asked council members just to consider the simple question.

What are the standards allowed in SC today?

Those are what sets this sets the tone, the rules for what is compatible with the adjacent neighborhood.

Mayor, on April 21st, you asked us to reach out to uh residents to reach out to opposition leaders.

We did so, and the response I got back was thank you much, thank you much for reaching out.

But we have nothing new to add at this time, so unless you have new thoughts and information, doesn't make sense to me.

So we tried.

After that council meeting on April 21st, this petition was circulated.

Again, item one, again, this is this is some of the misinformation.

Not compatible with the site of the neighborhood.

Again, let's start with just what did the SC rules say?

That's what determines whether we're compatible.

Not a subjective standard, but an objective standards.

Limit future oversight.

That's not true either.

What you heard tonight from your planning staff was that the development plan will lock this down, and that if significant changes come back, they come back to the council.

It's in number three in conflict with the adopted general plan.

That's not true either.

The staff already showed you how this general plan shows that it's general commercial.

Market demands will fill the shopping center zoning.

That's not accurate, and the letter from David Bash explains that.

Shopping center still delivers economic value.

That might be true, but it doesn't deliver the same economic value that a target will generate the tax revenue that it does.

The last one is shopping center zoning is the balanced outcome.

I respectfully disagree with that.

I think what proposed today is the balanced outcome.

That is a win-win-win for everyone.

So what are the design standards show?

Staff showed you these two charts.

I put it just in a simple uh thing you can look at.

So today, when you look at the objective standards, whether it's compatible, 35 feet or two stories is what's allowed.

We're proposing a single-story building.

I want to call out that the very tallest architectural element on the west side of the building at the entry is 35 feet.

That meets the code today, but that's not actually how we measure building heights, and I'll explain that in a second.

When you talk about the building setbacks, we we meet or exceed every one of them.

You talk about the landscaping setbacks, we meet or exceed.

Let me review each of those, including the open space, which is 15% required in both districts, but we're providing 29.

I think that's a significant increase.

Let me show you just some examples.

This is Fries at the southwest corner of Higley and Chandler Heights.

This store is zoned SC, and it's actually around 110,000 square feet.

How did that happen?

It was approved as C2 and then built under that district, and then got a subsequent rezoning to SC.

But note the setback on the west, it's 75 feet.

Noted on the on the south, 160 feet.

Very similar to what we're talking about today.

This is the Fries in Cooley Station, one of the gems of Gilbert.

Notice directly to the south, that the building setback there is 75 feet.

We're bigger here.

Notice to the east, that's 135 feet.

By the way, uh last time there were some allegations made that targets don't fit on size property this size.

The area highlighted in blue is 13.78.

Let me go back to this one.

The area highlighted in blue is 11 acres.

This is the bashes at Morrison Ranch, another great neighborhood in the town of Gilbert.

And we just wanted to call out that the delivery areas and the dumpsters are all accessed from the local street on the east side.

By the way, let me back up to this one at Cooley Station.

And if you notice where Dennis Port Avenue is in the upper right corner, that is a local street that connects to that shopping center.

These are actually good planning principles.

Again, here you can get to this, you can get to this store through the local streets.

Again, we're not out of context for the area.

We're just showing some other buildings that are nearby that are over 75,000 square feet.

So when we talk about building setbacks, I highlighted those in red just to draw your attention to them.

You can see what the SC standard is, the GC standard, and what we're proposing.

But let's talk about what the actual real distances are.

They're in the northeast corner.

We're actually 193 plus feet away from building the building.

170, 240, 280.

So the East side can be simply said it's two times greater, and on the south time, three times greater.

So up here you could fit two full-size basketball courts, an Olympic swimming pool.

Here you could fit a 747 and almost an entire football field.

So when you talk about actual distances between buildings, and we talk about compatibility, these are the objective standards.

When we talk about landscaping standards, again, drawing your attention to the red 30, 35, 40, 40.

We're complying with 40 and 40 plus everywhere, except for that one area where straight parking spaces meet a curved property line, and I want to add that that's behind an eight-foot solid wall that's already landscaped.

What is that?

What are those landscaping lines look like?

We showed them there in red and blue, and you can see where those parking spaces barely dip into that one corner.

Sal already reviewed these things, but these are just the PAD deviations.

These are separate from, these are separate from the rezoning request to GC.

I don't think that there's an issue on them.

If there is, please ask me more.

Building heights, I mentioned that I would come back to these.

Remember, today in the SC district, 35 feet and two stories allowed.

We're proposing a single story building.

Here's what those look like.

The top picture is what the view would be from Higley Road looking east.

You can see the tallest element is 35.

Those other walls are parapet walls.

They're meant to hide the HVAC equipment, and I'll explain just a second why those are not the actual building heights measured under the LDC.

The picture on the bottom is what you would see if you were on Wilson Way.

So the picture I've shown now is how building height is measured.

If you look at the far left building, it says measured to the surface of the roof.

That's how flat roofs, building height are measured under the Gilbert Land Development Code.

So the colored elevation is what we would see if we were south of the site, and then the dotted line represents the flat roof.

On the west side, a little bit over 22 feet.

On the east side, which is next to Wilson Way, the actual building height is 19 feet seven and a half inches.

So again, when we talk about objective versus subjective standards, this is meeting all and exceeding the standards that are in the SC district today.

Here's some renderings of what neighbors will actually see.

This is the shop building up on the corner.

This is again when we talk about objective, subjective compatibility.

This is the uh approval letter from the design review board dated April 14th of this year.

Now it's contingent upon your approval, Council, but if you just look at the findings of fact and read what the planning commission unanimously voted for, number two, the project conforms to the general plan and specifically the land use, community design, and environmental planning elements.

Number three, the project is consistent with all applicable provisions of the zoning code.

The project is compatible with adjacent nearby development.

The project design provides for safe and efficient provision of public services.

So these same issues were raised, asked, and answered at the planning commission as far as the design of the site goes.

So even the issue, I want to be very clear, even the issue of this driveway onto Wilson Way, that's an allowed right today under the shopping center district.

That's an allowed right today.

Part of our efforts here when went after that first neighborhood meeting in May, about a year ago, was we we the brokers were asked to go out and see who has interest in this site.

They were they got interest from car washes, gas stations, secondhand stores, and gyms.

So we just decided to create a conceptual site plan that might show what that would look like.

The building layout, the sizes, those are still the same.

Changing keeping this SC does not lead to a better or a different site plan.

Just note that building one is 74,500, building two is 55,000.

None of these require design or require a rezone, only a design review, and a council vote's not required.

So we just tried to show a comparison.

On the left is what we're proposing.

On the right is a conceptual hypothetical one.

Now the question might be well, I'd rather just take my risk and see what can get done with SC.

But the truth of the matter is our client is planning to close on this property no matter what, and then it'll build whatever uses it can fit under the SC district.

Would we love to keep target?

Yes.

And we're going to work like the Dickens to make sure that happens because we think that's the better solution for everyone.

I'm going to talk a little bit about traffic here, which again we call the counterintuitive story.

Again, based on the users that were interested in this site, we had green light, our traffic engineers do a traffic engineering or traffic study.

Here's the key takeaway from it from the proposed project on the left or the hypothetical project on the right.

Here's the key factors.

The proposed project actually generates 52% fewer AM peak hour trips, 26% fewer PM peak hour trips, and 16% fewer daily total trips compared to the potential development under the existing zoning today.

Similarly, when you account for pass by reduction, the proposed project generates 17% fewer AM trips, 17% fewer PM trips, and 12% fewer daily trips.

I get it that it might be counterintuitive, but again, traffic, while maybe a valid concern, is still the same whether it's SC or GC, and the project we're proposing actually generates a lesser traffic impact than what we're getting the intended users looking for.

Here's the total trips.

The top is what our hypothetical project would look at, again, based on interest on the site, versus what we're proposing.

It's a significant difference.

After the last council meeting, we did a traffic study on April 9th, it was a Thursday school was in.

At the top red line for that 24 hour period, 647 vehicles cross that measuring strip.

That's a very low amount for this street.

On the southern one there, 344 total vehicles cross the street.

Again, if if if a delivery truck happened to come in that way, and we and we can instruct them not to, but if they did, they they would turn right there at that driveway that matches up with the fire station, which let's be clear that is how the fire station and every fire truck gets access to that site today.

What we're what we're we'd like to suggest and offer up a condition of approval and additional stipulation, if you will, is that we're happy to put a sign there, both on-site and off-site, and agreed that all of our operational manuals will include that trucks cannot go right.

If a truck happens to leave there, they cannot go south.

They can only go north.

In my heart of hearts, it may happen, but it probably won't because anyone leaving that site's gonna want to go north on Higley Road.

The point here, this are some questions raised by some of our friends, which was are the roads meant to carry these heavy loads.

We asked what kind of fire trucks are at that station.

We found out that ladder 259 is a pierced velocity 7,000.

It weighs depending on how it's fitted, between 76,000 and 84,000 pounds.

These roads are engineered over 85,000 pounds.

Target in its largest trucks, which I'll talk about in just a second, some more detail, use a WB67 style.

Their empty weight is 30 to 35,000.

They can't be loaded over 80, and most loads are much less than that when they get delivered to the store.

So again, we we were sensitive to the concern and willing to be part of the solution that no vehicles would go, no delivery vehicles.

But connected neighborhoods are better neighborhoods.

And I showed you two examples already of very respected and like neighborhoods that have these connections.

We believe that residents that live in Marbella actually want this type of connection, and it makes the streets safer because cars from Marbella don't have to go onto the arterial streets to access the site.

This is the pedestrian and vehicular circulation plan.

Again, all driveways are available for deliveries, but here again, we would put place signage so that nobody would ever go south on Wilson Way.

Let me talk a little bit more about deliveries for a second.

All driveways would be available for deliveries, but again, I think most of them will come through Higgly and Acateo.

But the right to have that driveway on Wilson is one that exists today.

Target, most deliveries come in the the night or early morning.

They enforce a no-idling policy.

Those trucks that I talked about, the big ones, WB67, they anticipate five to seven.

Let's just call it seven, one a day.

Food deliveries, three to seven, depending on the season.

Let's call it one per day.

There will be other smaller vendors that you and I would see that drive much smaller trucks and they anticipate eight to sixteen.

But those would come, I would anticipate again off of Higley and Acateo.

Earlier I mentioned in the David Bashel letter about power and Chandler Heights.

This is actually uh aerial photo of that site.

You can see there's multiple loading areas, multiple dumpsters.

So when someone raises a concern about noise, I say to them, yes, a valid concern, but the concern still exists today in SC.

And oh, by the way, we're making significant improvements, which I'll explain more in just a second.

Here, Target uses a single 30 cubic yard internally loaded self-contained compactor.

There are no external dumpsters operated by Target.

Any recycling, the bales, the bailers are all located inside the store.

The compactor is only emptied one to two times a month.

As you know, dumpsters are emptied at least once per week and sometimes twice per week, depending on the use that's happening there.

Recycled materials picked up once per week.

Pushed as far north as possible.

There's no dumpsters back there.

These are the only loading bays which will be screened according to town code.

This is a much quieter, better use.

People have raised the concern that this will be noisier.

But noisier again is not relevant to whether it's an SC or GC district.

It's the same whether it's a commercial, residential, or industrial.

That's how you apply the rules.

Of course, Target is a well-respected national retailer, they're gonna follow the rules.

Again, the allegation was made that this is gonna be brighter and have light pollution.

The answer to that is that's not true.

And those standards are the same whether it's SC or GC.

This is what we call the light lighting map, and it shows that we're point one, which is what the code requires, or zero at every property line.

Again, this would not have been approved conditionally, but not approved by the planning commission unless it met these standards.

Let me talk a little bit about parking for a second.

We asked, again, this is not an issue that is before the council.

This is an administrative use permit approved by the staff.

And it would be the same whether we were an SC or GC.

But what we did is looked at this site and determined what are the appropriate number of parking spaces.

We could go back and remove some green space, we don't think that's right.

Remember, we had 29% versus 15.

But when you look at this the study that did it, let me just give you the highlights, which have been reviewed by your staff, the transportation, and the planning department.

But let me draw your attention to number three.

If you apply the code, the the standards in the ITE parking general manual, 325 total spaces are what's needed.

We're prov we're providing 515.

Six talks about a comparison to other to the IT manual, and then also seven talks about just comparison to comparable sites in the valley.

And when you look at seven, there's actually an excess of 265 spaces.

Now, this is a letter that was written by Dane Jaster of Target who's here.

And Mayor, with your permission, I'd like him to come up and just share some thoughts about how Target operates their stores.

But simply put, Target is the person that cares the most about parking because they want their customers to have a positive experience.

They would not agree to any reduction that would hurt or sacrifice or diminish a customer experience.

So, Mayor, with your permission, can I invite Dane Jaster to come up and just share a few thoughts with you about parking?

Yep.

Stay right here.

Okay.

Hey, good evening, um, Mayor and Council.

Appreciate it.

Dane Jaster here, Minneapolis, Minnesota, senior development manager with Target.

Um Reese took the words out of my mouth, great presentation here, and just want to touch base on a couple of the items you're talking about, you know, truck circulation and things like that along Wilson Way.

Um of the recommendations we said was the no-right term.

You know, our truck drivers are professionals, you know, we drive in very urban environments at other stores across the country.

You know, we have targets in Manhattan, very, very urban sites where they're used to driving with you know, people, pedestrians, and things around them.

So they're some of the safest drivers probably out there.

You know, Target does a great job with that.

Um, another item with just um like deliveries as well.

So I think there was a concern with how they can move maneuver into the loading dock space.

So, you know, we do expect you know the traffic to you know, those trucks to come from Wilson Way or a majority of them, at least the the heavier loads that'll use the loading dock.

Um but and and we've done multiple truck turning radiuses, you know, movements, turns, etc.

Like that's the lifeline to the target is getting goods into the loading dock, you know, into the store, you know, ready to you know sell to the community.

So, you know, we've absolutely vetted out, you know, how that could work, and I'm very confident that you know that we have a solution there.

Some of the other smaller vendors, you know, they will use Akateo and Higley, you know, the the mailman, you know, is one of those eight to sixteen extra vehicles, you know, that will arrive on a daily basis.

You know, the mailman parks in the men, you know, the general parking lot and walks in through the front door.

So, you know, not all of those traffic, you know, the larger trucks will use Wilson, but you know, the the smaller vendors will definitely use the other access points.

Um, well, anyway, I just wanted to kind of just say my appreciation for the town staff and working through the the numerous um reviews that we've had with them through the the complicated like ordinances, um, you know, the building heights, the traffic, you know, just all of that, they've been very supportive and you know, very helpful in kind of guiding us into the direction here, and just want to make sure that you know, Target, you know, is looking forward to having a store here.

You know, Target does great things for the community, you know.

We're you know, here to support and provide um you know those services, so you know, including our drive up.

So if you don't have drive up, you know, I want to kind of put a shout out to that too.

It's a really fun service here.

So anyway, um, just kind of want to say thanks again, and I'll give it back to Reese.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

So while Dane didn't mention it, you can see it on the screen.

What Dane put in his letter was for their store to be successful, they think they need about 350 stalls.

Again, total site we're providing 515.

We've heard some allegations that overflow parking is going to go on to Wilson Way.

We just don't think that's the gonna be the case.

I tried to measure out the red line represents if somebody parked on Wilson Way, how far they would have to walk, it's approximately 700 feet.

The blue arrows represent 350 375 on the north and about 350 on the south.

So just logically speaking, ask yourself would you really want to go over there and park?

A question was asked, I think a few count council member uh meetings ago about is Gilbert's code too much, and the answer simply is yes.

And when we compare it with other sites or other cities, you can see that everybody has a slightly lower amount.

And in my experience, we work in all of these cities.

We are routinely asking and getting parking reductions because there is a recognition that seasonal oper uh seasonal shopping has lengthened.

The amount of square footage for the store is actually less because there's a showroom in the back, I'm sorry, storage room, and the new delivery and pickup areas are significantly reducing the amount of required parking.

As far as support goes, there are a lot of people here this evening in support.

Mayor, I believe you have some of those cards.

Not all of them want to speak, but they did come down to show their support, and they also wanted to be respectful of your time.

Of importance here is the support from the Gilbert Chamber of Commerce who looked at this site and urges your support.

Finally, these are some physical and economic impact.

These are numbers produced by your staff.

If you have questions about it that I can answer, I would suggest and welcome that you ask your interim economic development director, Jennifer Graves to come up and shed some more light on it.

But what the Gilbert uh economic development department did was look at this over 10-year period, and you can see the direct impact of revenues generated by the store are over 12 million dollars.

The expenditures line is what does that cost to the town and services that it provides?

And they calculate that at 1.7.

The net benefits 10.3 million.

So this is a net positive to the town.

Now, why do I raise that issue?

It's not to say you should approve this because you get tax revenue for it and you will hurt residents that live nearby.

That is not the case.

In our heart of hearts, we believe this store, this project meets the criteria of the existing zoning district, and it's it should be supported just on that alone.

But on top of that, the icing on the cake is you're getting a wonderful tax revenue that's gonna help with the other financial challenges that the town has.

Again, prepared by your staff, but when they look at the total output of this store and the benefit to the town, they're calculating it at 198 million.

Jobs created 235, payroll at 73 million, household spending.

This is a included induced spending by households, 66 million, almost 67.

Construction output, the cost to build is 57 million, and construction jobs are 358.

These are all significant issues that are lean lean themselves and lend themselves to supporting this project.

So why does this rezoning deserve approval?

We again we talk about compatibility, we look at objective standards, our actual separation is two and three times greater.

Where there's a a land difference in landscaping setbacks, we're meeting the greater standard.

Where there's a more onerous building height, we're actually meeting that and limiting it to one story.

Our open space is almost two times greater.

Our traffic study shows that we're actually less than what could be from an anticipated shopping center site.

We're happy to mitigate deliveries through a variety of measures.

We meet the noise rules, we meet the lighting rules.

We're better on the number of dumpsters, we'd have zero, so we're quieter, and the parking reduction that we're talking about is supported by the planning staff, it's supported by a parking study, target zone internal analysis, and shopping trends in the Phoenix area.

So let me add one thing, which is there's concerns now about the uses between SC and GC.

What we would suggest is that a the council add an additional condition of approval or stipulation that says the uses of this site are limited to the shopping center uses in place on the date of this hearing.

I think that would alleviate a lot of concerns, and we we put that forward in good faith because we're we're putting our money where our mouth is.

We want to build something that's consistent with the SC, with the only difference being that a single user is over 75,000 square feet.

So we want to make sure that someone's not concerned, it's a valid concern.

We want to recognize that and address it head up.

So we would suggest to the council that they include a condition of approval that uses on the site are limited to the SC uses.

So, Mayor, that that's the end of it.

I tried to move quickly.

I hope I was clear, but I'm happy to answer questions that you or anyone might have.

Questions for uh the applicant.

I I just have one, I think.

Can we go back to the traffic report?

I just have a quick something I want to kind of confirm.

Um is it this page, Councilmember Buckley?

No, it's one with a photo, I think.

Well, I can just ask my question, then maybe we can find it.

But um, you know, you had given uh the traffic numbers, like the number of cars coming off Wilson Way, and then the number going south.

Uh I think going.

Was this a slide?

So yeah, 647 vehicles going, you're saying across what street is that there?

Is that Higley?

So that's Wilson Way.

Oh, that's what I think.

And the red roof is the fire station.

Okay.

And so on the day that that was that that the traffic counts were taken, that little strip, and you've seen them on the road, little black line, it was triggered six hundred and forty-seven times.

In one twenty-four-hour period.

In one day.

Is that because of the fire department there?

I my the conclusion that I draw from it is that a lot of traffic is turning at that same entrance that uses the fire station.

And that and it makes logical sense to me because employees go there, fire trucks come and go, and they all enter on Wilson Way.

Right.

And then all the residents that are using that street as well.

Right, which is why you would anticipate that traffic would drop tremendously.

Now, what's important to note is that a local street has the capacity of around 3,000 cars a day.

And this is the street's nowhere close to that.

Okay.

Well, I I myself I can't see that dropping if there's a target there.

I mean, I would see that probably going up.

But my my question, I don't see anything about the traffic uh going north and south on Higley.

So uh Mayor Anderson, Councilman Buckley, this traffic study here was done, and this is counting all of the cars on Higley and Ocateo.

And what it's showing is that our proposed shopping center there would have about 7,238 visitors per day.

Cars on the streets.

The one above it, which is our hypothetical project based on users that were interested in the site, shows a greater traffic amount.

But let me be clear again, that concern about traffic, in my humble opinion, is irrelevant because you will have traffic no matter what, because this is a commercially designated site.

And so when the staff and the including your transportation evaluate this, they don't look at it whether it's SC or GC, they look at the site and what's happening.

Um we we probably differ on that just a little bit, but um the is that what I'd like to know is what the existing is right now, how much is that gonna increase?

And is are you saying it's gonna increase by 8,568?

Because that that street is massively busy.

Yep, Mary.

North and south on Higley in this particular area.

So I would suggest that we invite up your trap transportation staff and have them answer that question.

You'll remember that right now there's a CIP project, adding a third lane to Higley Road.

That's why it's a road of regional significance in your transportation plan.

It's meant to be a busy road, and it's only gonna get busier.

And along with ACATIO with the bridge opening over, it's only gonna get busier.

I say that with the utmost of respect because traffic in the area is gonna change dramatically and it's only gonna get busier.

But that's the same whether it's SC or GC.

Yeah, well, I agree with you on that, but it it will get busier or not busier, depending on how you know how big you build and what you put there.

Um I I just yeah, I I'm I'm just trying to stress on how already overloaded in that area that street is, and I'm trying to find out is this eight 8568, is that a daily um a daily increased number?

The answer is yes.

And that's and but those again that's already baked into the formulas by and again your your staff has looked at these, they've approved them, they know this amount of traffic's gonna happen.

And again, it's whether it's SC or GC.

I think we should ask them what the total amount of cars per day are on those roads.

I don't have that right in front of me, and I don't want to guess.

Okay.

Well, would staff have that number by any chance?

I just th I'd like to know just because inquiring minds want to know, you know.

It doesn't need to be major in detail.

I just would like to know if you have that number.

Oh, yeah, of course I am.

Yeah.

So I go to the slide.

I don't know which slide I've got.

It's probably near the sorry, Councilmember Buckley.

We're looking through a slide that shows that just a minute, please.

Okay.

Yeah, I can only do it that way.

It's a hidden slide probably.

Did you want to say something?

Oh no, it should be a thing.

Councilmember Buckley, I'm gonna Councilmember Torreson wants to say something while they're searching.

I wanted to make a point here.

There's one thing about your slide earlier, it showed 687 trips, I think it was.

There's two things I wanted to point out.

Can you bring that up where it shows the number?

Okay.

I'm happy to bring it up as soon as they put it back up, but the slide was 647 trips opposite the fire station.

Right, and just beneath it.

344.

So that's what's really going through the neighborhood right now.

Correct.

Okay, so there's 344 going through the neighborhood.

One thing I want to point out.

Okay, I'm not sure what you're doing in the leaving now.

Please, please, please.

You'll have your time, please.

I want to point that out.

But the other thing I want to point out is that Higley is going to be is considered a street of s regional significance.

One thing, no matter what happens here tonight.

You're gonna face a lot more traffic.

We could leave this thing blank.

And you're gonna get a lot more traffic.

So let's don't anybody think things are gonna stay the same, because they are not, no matter what happens here.

No matter what happens here, it's not gonna be different.

It's gonna be or it's gonna be different.

It's gonna be more traffic no matter what going up Higley.

I want to make that point real clear.

Yeah, I I think that we probably all realize that.

We just don't want to, well, me anyway.

I don't I I live out there.

You know, and and I'm a mile away.

And and Councilmember Torgeson's correct, you know, that it and it is, and for everyone listening, you know, we we live in an ever-changing world.

And um, so things are gonna change.

We can do our very best to try and keep a family community, a family community and not intruded by certain things.

But you know, eventually there'll be a shopping center maybe on the other side, I don't know.

But it's not gonna change my opinion, probably on my decision, but uh, but we do have to realize that we're in an ever-changing world.

And as much as we don't want, I remember when Gilbert had dirt roads, and uh, you know, it was nothing but but a few ranchers out here.

And so I've seen the growth and I've watched it all, and um I haven't liked a lot of it, but for the most part, it's made things better and easier and more accessible.

But uh, but I understand what what you're saying, Councilmember Torgeson is uh, but that doesn't mean that all of a sudden we have to jump in and increase our traffic and stuff by uh a huge amount.

So that I just but I'm still waiting for that that number that started all this.

Yeah, I think the staff has found what you need.

Yeah.

Sorry, Councilmember Buckley.

Um so um the applicant is correct in the fact that the amount of traffic that that will be happening here with the revised zoning or the change zoning is going to be less than what was going to happen with any other development in that area.

Now keep in mind we're doing improvements right now in this intersection with the Ocateo and Higley Road.

Yes, you are with Higley Road, we are adding an additional lane which would be right adjacent to this.

Plus, they are making some additional improvements.

Um I believe it was uh inclusive of a right turn lane.

So yeah, I've seen I've seen that.

And I'm aware of all that.

I mean I've studied this pretty well.

I just wanted to know what the traffic numbers are today on Higley going north and south.

Oh, on Higley, so that would be if you look at if you look at the number two, so you would have um so those existing counts.

So that would be uh 907 in the AM, and it looks like 738 in the PM going northbound, and then southbound you have uh 500 in the AM, and then um I can't read the I don't can you uh unzoom, I guess.

So yeah.

So in the PM you have over a it looks like a thousand trips in the PM.

Okay, so we have a thousand in the PM.

Going southbound.

Yeah.

And then that would this project would add another 8,000.

Oh and and I apologize.

Um that's the same.

So us a traffic engineers, we look at peak hours, we kind of look at the worst case scenario.

So if it works during the worst case scenario, um then we kind of assume that it's fine the rest of the day.

So um typically um when we look at peak hours, that's 10% of the traffic for the day.

And so um, so like so for the for the peak hour where it's like 8,000, we're we're looking at 800 during the peak hour, if that makes sense.

So adding another eight.

We're adding another 800, yeah.

So 1800 cars.

Okay.

Well, that's that's all right.

I just wanted to know what those numbers were, and I don't want to keep you guys in or anyone else, but sorry for trying to to read this in in um in uh small print.

So sorry.

Yeah, that's okay.

All right, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

This time before we uh question begin to oh count vice mayor.

Yeah, sorry, it's thanks, Mayor.

Reese.

Um of it, ton of it.

I'm kind of overloaded right now.

But um number of trucks per day.

So trucks would be those are WB67, two per day at max, depending on the busyness of the season.

Remember though, I want to be transparent.

We always have been.

Additional smaller trucks would come, and they're targeting those between, sorry, those I wasn't an intended pun.

Eight to sixteen.

Those are the the mailman, Amazon, et cetera.

But you have small trucks that actually use the docks.

I mean you have to do that.

Trucks that actually use the docks.

You have some smaller ones too, right?

Two.

Just two per day.

What time of day?

Usually they come early in the morning, late at night.

Okay.

And and we can and and Dane can speak to this too, but under their operational procedures, which every driver is given those notes, specifics of where to enter, where to exit, they they can specify those, but they usually happen early in the morning or late at night when we're not hitting the peak hours.

And what is the furthest away you guys are from a residence?

So to the south to the south, the furthest away, building separation 280.

Okay.

And um the closest, which would be the east, 130, 150.

Can I go back to that slide real quick?

Yep.

So are those legible on the screen at the top, 193, 170, 240, 280, 271.

Okay, that's what I was looking for.

Okay, go forward a couple of slides where you had the uh gym on there, please.

The the gym.

Oh, yes.

Yeah.

Yep.

This is where we had comparison.

Yeah.

Okay.

Is that this slide, council?

Yeah, that one.

Okay.

Um goodwill you said here was what 28,000, 21,000 square feet.

No, they're gonna be around 70, 74 is I think what we showed them.

Whether or not they're that big, the point is that you could you could today, and again, I don't want to play games, but you could today take this target building and run a wall right down the middle, add a second set of loading docks and call it two stores, but operate it as one.

You could also take those two stores, put a 10-foot landscaping strip between them, have grocery on one side, retail on the other, and call it a day.

You because you would fit under that rule of set of max single user, not maximum overall, but max single user.

So again, what we're showing on the right side of the picture is just some conceptual thoughts on what might happen there again based on users.

So that would fit under the rules, and you can see it's a similar layout.

Okay.

Two trucks a day.

Exactly right.

But that's exactly what Target told me.

One again, one for food, one for general merchandise.

Okay, thanks.

Councilmember Torgus.

When you're saying six hundred and forty-three or whatever it was on that thing we spoke about earlier, and the rest being three.

So on the screen, Councilmember Torges and we put those, we put those counts.

This is a quiet neighborhood.

Exactly right.

And what we would anticipate is that if someone used Wilson Way to enter this site and they came off of Acateo, they would turn at the same driveway as the fire station.

And they would not go further south.

If somebody did, they're going to live in that neighborhood.

And the street south of the fire station driveway is going to continue to be just as quiet.

And people that come up the to shop in the store are going to be Marbella residents who just use that driveway and then go back home.

So the um, but I think the numbers give a good conclusion that it's not a highly traveled road.

And also that, you know, that by the time traffic goes past the fire station, it's quieting down tremendously.

We that's what we recognize.

And I anticipate it'll stay that way.

But that right exists today under the SC.

Remember my overarching question.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Before we get dive into the request to speak cars, we're going to take a five-minute bio break.

Yeah, I just want to make one comment for clarity.

Sure.

Um you talk about the WB sixty-seven truck.

That's a tractor with a fifty-three-foot trailer, correct.

So, Councilmember Lyons, I believe so.

I'd have to look real quick.

I'm not an expert on this.

I can ask Dane, but if you just do a quick internet search for WD sixty seven, it'll tell you exactly what that yeah, it's a fifty-three.

It the sixty-seven is a total wheelbase.

So just for point of fact for everybody, that's the largest truck you can technically run.

So just when we're talking about what's going in and out of there, that's what we're hitting with.

That's all I wanted to clarify.

Thank you.

Thanks, Rhys.

Thank you.

So take a five-minute bio break, and then we'll dive into the uh comment cards.

Okay, let's uh take a seat and start again.

Okay.

I have some uh requests to speak cards, uh some in favor, some opposed.

We'll go through these and each one of you as you're called up, please uh let us know who you are and uh you have three minutes to uh address the the council with your concerns about this uh item or or your support for it.

First up tonight is Kim your guess.

Is that that right?

Can you hear me?

Very good.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor and Vice Mayor and Council members.

My name is Kim Drogas.

As a resident of Marbella Vineyards for more than twenty years, I see the value in rezoning this project and the positive impact it can bring to our community.

One thing that gives me comfort is knowing exactly what is proposed for this corner and having transparency about what will be built.

In many situations, residents do not have the level of clarity and are left guessing about future development.

I appreciate the builder taking the time to engage with the community and explain the vision for this site.

Next up, Kegan Salah.

Um good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council members.

Uh first, I want to acknowledge how difficult it is to make the right decision on this proposal with a nine hundred page agenda packet tonight.

Residents opposing this project recognize that challenge, which is why many of us spent months doing the due diligence to understand why this rezone should not be approved.

I also want to acknowledge that Attorney Reese Anderson was correct in prior meetings when he stated some earlier opposition arguments could also apply under the existing SC zoning.

Residents listened to that feedback and are here tonight presenting concerns specific to the requested G Z rezone project, not the SE zoning already adopted by the town.

Any property owner position of financially benefit from a project of this scale would likely support it.

Financial interest and community interests are not always the same thing.

We continue hearing that this project meets or exceeds SC zoning standards while leaving out why a GC rezone is needed in the first place.

Because the project does not naturally fit this site.

The proposal overburdens a constrained parcel as shown by the variances and accommodations required to make it work.

The developer also references zoning compliance why strategically overlooking Gilbert's design guidelines, which exist to ensure developments respect neighborhood character.

Meeting numerical zoning standards alone does not make a project compatible with the surrounding community.

Another major concern is traffic.

When asked how southbound traffic exiting Wilson Way directly into a neighborhood would be mitigated, we were told signage would solve the issue.

As someone with experience in process control, I can tell you visual warnings are among the weakest form of control because they rely entirely on human behavior.

We already know how well speed limits are followed on Higley Road today.

Signage alone is not a meaningful mitigation strategy.

Neighborhood traffic will be very apparent, and this will be specific to the project being proposed.

Just because it is allowed under SC zoning does not mean it will under a non-compromise design.

Finally, there are now 246 additional petition signatures opposing this rezone on top of the original 500 submitted back in 2025.

We can pick apart the reasons why, but the point here is that you've got over 700 residents formally opposing this proposal, far greater than the population in support.

Just read the room.

This is not opposition to growth or the much needed revenue.

It is opposition to the wrong project on the wrong parcel under the wrong zoning designation.

Please oppose Z25-13.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Please, please refrain from clapping.

Please don't clap.

David Basha.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and Council.

Really appreciate the opportunity to come speak on behalf of my family, the owners of this property.

Now, my family does not have a vested interest with Target, only with Simon Real Estate.

But I can tell you, and I was gonna go into the history of this site, but Mr.

Reese or Reese Anderson did a fabulous job, but I don't need to regurgitate that.

The council members and mayor equivocally said no.

This site is a retail site and it needs to stay retail to generate retail sales tax dollars for the community.

You have one of the finest retailers in the country who wants to land here.

And I would assume since tw this is 2026 and not 2000, the city is not opening up their coffers and doing infrastructure deals, tax abatement, road improvements.

So Target on their own dime is entering this market and putting up their own money, not the taxpayers' money.

So, yes, I am in favor of the retail use only because our family couldn't find other retailers who wanted to be here.

The trade area is saturated, and this will never be a regional site like Santan Mall or the Queen Creek Marketplace.

Everybody is in place.

What I take what I think is you have three users for the entire site.

If this was a commercially developed grocery center, you would probably have 25 different users coming and going over time.

You have a stable national retailer with a phenomenal reputation.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Ryan Day.

My name is Ryan Dye.

I live in Marbella Vineyards, and I've been here 10 years.

First off, I want to say thank you for all that you do.

Having served on HOA in many capacities in many places.

Uh and I would equip your jobs to kind of what the HOA is.

You're gonna make some people upset, some people are gonna be happy, but it's a thankless job.

So I will first want to say thank you.

Um I want to first start off by saying I'm in full support of this project.

Um like many others, I'm sure that I had a very similar reaction as all of them.

No, no target, it's gonna look like a giant spaceship, it's gonna be out of place.

I don't want that.

In my mind, I had a vision of these fun little shops.

We can go shopping, we can bring our dog, our family, we can eat, and it's gonna be this perfect place in my mind.

That was until I met with a developer.

A neighbor of mine reached out to me and asked if I'd like to attend a meeting.

So I did.

After that meeting, I learned the facts that the perfect utopia that I had in mind is not a reality.

As Minister Bosch just said, they've shopped it out.

It's not real for us to have the perfect little zoning property.

So I decided to go to Facebook.

I'm not one that uh will stand here and take opinions and their own biased and force it down my throat.

So I stood up, I posted facts, I posted what I learned from the developer, mainly the summary page.

Uh as you can imagine, uh, was faced with a lot of resistance.

Uh I was accused of being uh someone that works for the town.

I was accused of taking money under the table, uh, and personally attacked.

So I only bring this up because some of these people that you may uh hear from are people that live along that road.

They're the ones that are gonna have to see the target all the time.

And I do feel bad, but I don't feel bad because they chose to buy that property.

That was in their own decision.

Uh during a meeting last night that we had, there was a lot of immature comments made and a lot of actions, such as dropping emojis during a meeting.

Um, I think that just shows a little bit of their character.

No matter what is going to be built, they're gonna oppose it because they're not gonna have their dirt land in front of them.

So no matter what goes up, they're gonna be upset.

So it's my opinion that I follow the facts, and I think most of the people are ignoring the facts, and as a result, I fully support this project.

And just as a little bonus, I know that there are um people within the community within a neighborhood that participate in construction one way or another.

I'm not one of those, but I think it'd be a really cool story to involve some of those in the building of this target.

Thank you so much.

Thank you.

Kevin Sproul.

Sorry, it's been a minute.

Uh good evening, Mayor and Council.

Thank you for your time.

Uh, my name is Kevin Sproul.

I live at uh 6165 uh Bridleville Drive.

It's about one minute from the proposed site.

Sorry.

Uh the one word that keeps coming to my mind for this project is inappropriate.

It just doesn't fit.

Uh I want to I want to start by saying the developer has done some very fine work.

Uh the Gilbert Steel Yard is a nice, well-designed project.

Frankly, something on that scale, uh, smaller, neighborhood-friendly retail would actually be welcome at the southeast corner of Higley Nakteo, but a massive big box target is not.

Forcing a hundred and twenty thousand square foot big box store here is like trying to pound a square peg into a round hole.

Even if you rezone from SE to GC, the scale and character still don't fit this neighborhood.

This is a quiet family area surrounded by homes, don't park, a church, the water treatment reservoir.

A store of that size with heavy truffic truck traffic and overflow parking, will overwhelm residential streets that were never designed for it.

We already have two convenient targets, one about 10 minutes that way and another 15 minutes that way.

Um, I'm asking you to keep the existing SC neighborhood shopping center zoning that actually complements our community, protect our property values, honor the general plan, and respect the established precedent.

Sorry.

Please don't be the hammer that tries to force this square peg into the round hole.

Please deny Z2025 13.

Thank you.

Thank you.

John Gherkin.

Oh, geez.

Excuse me.

Just lost my place here.

Well, let me get started here.

Before I before I read my testimony, I'd like to enter something into the record, please.

May I do that?

It'll be verbal.

Sure.

Okay.

Um we were just told our petitions submitted on 14 May 2026, in accordance with Arizona Statute Section 9-462.04, subparagraph H requiring three-fourths vote with the town council for rezoning application Z 25-13, item 24 on the town of Gilbert agenda, May 19th, was invalid right before tonight's meeting.

However, we found that uh we meet all those standards that they say we don't based upon if I can find this now.

That's what happens when you get old.

Well, here we go.

You're gonna lose your time here pretty quick.

Well, well, three minutes now.

Yes.

Uh uh This is off the record, and this is counting toward my three minutes.

It's not off the record.

Well, on the record, on the record for something that's being denied to us tonight.

Yes.

Well, let me read this then because it's pretty important.

And this is this is your own uh zoning section 5.703, uh paragraph H states.

Oh Lord.

Protest procedures if the owners of 20 percent or more either of the area of the lots included in a proposed zoning change or of those immediately adjacent to in the rear of any side thereof, extending 150 feet there from, or of those directly the popsic opposite, there too, extending 150 feet from the street frontage of the opposite lots, file a protest in writing against the proposed amendment.

It shall not become effective except by the favorable vote of three-fourths of the members of the town council.

The protest shall be filed in writing with the town clerk at least five days prior to the public hearing or any continued public hearing of the town council to allow time to verify the signatures on the protest, which we did.

So Gilbert statute says or 20 percent of homes within 150 feet, therefore our petition should not be denied, which we met.

So I do not get to have my other presentation, apparently, huh?

No one will permit me that, please.

No, you can get three minutes, that's what everybody gets.

And the uh applicant gets a power.

We've already done an analysis of the protest, so I don't know why we're talking about it.

Thank you very much.

Next is Christine Zimmerman.

Hi, my name's Christine, and I'm a Gilbert resident.

I over 25 years ago moved to South Gilbert, and as someone who has been here for quite a while, we had to travel quite a bit north all the time to get to any larger stores.

So I speak in favor of the target going in for a larger store and a good store being put in South Gilbert.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor and Vice Mayor, um, as well as council members.

I'm a mom and a health care provider that works in this area.

I live in the bridges right next to Marbella.

I have to cut through Marbella to get to my neighborhood in the bridges because traffic on Higley is so poor.

I understand we are a very busy street.

It's gonna keep getting busier with the bridge going in.

I look forward to the expansion.

I'm excited for the bridge.

I'm excited for something to go into that dirt lot.

I can't stand looking at it, but I don't need a target.

I was at Target before I came here tonight.

I'm in favor of Target, just not in this location.

We need smaller stores.

We need restaurants.

We don't have enough restaurants in this part of the town.

We need something that our families can feel safe in.

I drive through that town or through that street to get to my neighborhood.

There are people walking their dogs, kids on their e-bike that are going way too fast without helmets on.

I used to work for a trauma center.

Half of the stuff that we would get, trauma came from Chandler Heights, sorry, from Chandler Heights and Higley, Queen Creek and Higley.

It is a huge busy inner roadway, and this is gonna add so many more cars that we don't need.

We need cars for shopping, but for not for a target in this area.

Please vote no.

We need smaller stores.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Chad Brossman.

Thank you, Chad Brossman.

20 20 year Gilbert resident, registered architect for 30 years experience.

Documents provide the town council clearly demonstrating the precedent and historical findings not to approve this zoning change.

Included in this documentation are 48 similarly sized retailers targets in GC zoning that were analyzed with an average net site development acres of 50.54 with 98% on sites of 19 acres or more.

That information has been provided to you.

Uh I'll stand by that.

Umly one in all those in Maricopa County is a grand upstandalone.

Of those, 93%, 93.75% have five or more total vehicle access points.

Additionally, all 133 fire stations in Phoenix, Scottsville, Mesa Tempe, Chandler Gilbert, and Apache Junction were reviewed.

There is not a single fire station that shares a common ingress egress point like this with a GC development.

89.8%, 115 stations were also not located directly adjacent or within about 600 feet of a GC development zoning.

Only five stations, 3.9%, were within that distance.

Only one station even shares an entrance with a retailer, which is Tempe Fire Station 271 that closed.

The proposed the proposed development requires not only change in zoning from SC to GC, but deviation from nearly 80 items outlined in the commercial development criteria, including those for sites over 10 acres, amenities and et cetera.

Submittal checklist in the town of Going zoning requirements that were either not met or addressed.

Many of these criteria are not being met because the site is too small to support this large of a project adequately, efficiently, and safely.

Section 5.403 findings required for approval for the AUP makes this statement.

Which is this document that I'll show here that should have that I emailed to everyone, which actually the developer shows truck traffic on Wilson Way, taking up nearly all of Wilson Way and blocking the main egress point.

Additionally, coming in the opposite direction doesn't help much either.

So I believe I've made those points.

Thank you.

Robert Gerlock.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council.

I live in Marbella Vineyards for approximately 10 years.

I am against the target.

First of all, this target, uh, what they're doing reminds me of an old adage.

They're trying to make a silk purse out of a sales ear.

Traffic is one of the big big problems, as we know, the bridge is gonna be completed for Acateo.

This is gonna increase the traffic as you guys know at least tenfold, if not more.

I think the commission is thinking of revenue over the effect of the residents of Marbella Vineyards and Shamrock.

This also includes the church in the southwest corner.

This project will affect the aesthetics of the community and the quiet family neighborhood.

The project will not improve life and well-being of the affected neighborhoods.

We already know that there's a target close up in the Ellsworth Loop shopping area, which is only five to ten minutes away.

Target was also trying to push about selling groceries.

You go up Ocatea to Power, you go south, there's a bash is very close.

You go north, there's a safe way.

But no gas station.

I don't think any other location in Gilbert has a large big box business that it intrudes on a quiet residential neighborhood.

So I would be hopeful that you will make careful considerations of us residents of Marbella and Shamrock, the people that attend the church in the area.

Thank you.

Thank you.

David Anderson.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

My name is David Anderson.

I have been a resident of Gilbert for 25 plus years.

I have seen our great town grow substantially over that time, and we have a lot more ahead of us with that as we go.

As an entrepreneur and business owner, I also know firsthand that growth is really, really, really hard.

And I applaud all of you for the work that you do to ensure that our town grows smart and in the best way possible.

I rise in support of this project tonight because I do know what it takes to grow as a town.

And I also know that a growth partner like Target is the exact type of uh partners that we need.

They provide so much to communities around the country.

They provide the economic benefits that we saw today.

They also employ people, they employ our younger kids, high school people and college students who desperately are looking for work in this uh the this current time here.

I do believe that they would make a strong partner for us to grow.

Um again, I understand these decisions are not um easy.

You all have to take in many different points of view, but I urge you to look for passage of this project, add another great great growth partner to our community, and let's um build something on this lot um that has been vacant for so long.

Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

Uh Lon Ray.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

My name is Lari, and I've recently moved to the um to Gilbert to um South Gilbert, actually.

I live very close to this area, and I understand um the feelings behind many of these residents, but I want to thank you for letting me speak in support of this um project tonight.

I'm not a planner and I'm not a developer.

I'm a mom, and I want to share what that looks like.

From my house, the closest target is nearly 15 minutes away.

I can go to Gilbert or Germaine, or I can go to Queen Creek Marketplace or out near Power Road with kids in the car 15 minutes, a half an hour each way.

Um traffic if there's traffic, um, those precious minutes can add up.

The map says that we're close, but busy family life says that we are not.

I would welcome a target near my home in South Gilbert.

It would allow me to avoid the more congested areas of Gilbert traveling north towards the 202.

Um, I also want to address something that um the opposition has not talked about, and um what the cost is to South Gilbert to leave this corner empty, and what it will continue to cost the town as we continually hear reports about the dire financial state the town is approaching.

Twenty-three years of property debt tax revenue that we did not collect, 23 years of sales tax that could have funded parks and police, 23 years of families driving past dirt to reach the stores and restaurants they need.

Gilbert's own assessment puts this direct revenue impact of this development over 13 million dollars.

We finally have a reputable retail company willing to make this site their home.

It's a great opportunity for the nearby Gilbert residences, and as someone who lives just off Higley Road, I can tell you I would access this store from Higley or Okatio.

I would never drive around the back of the store to get in there.

So I think it would be likely for those of us traveling to this site, we would access it through Higley, which has been in my it's been a grey road that we've lived on.

It works well, it's six lanes, it's big.

Anyway, um I urge you not to pass up this opportunity for something good that can go on this site today, and um I respectfully ask you to support this zoning.

Thank you, Lori.

Tracy Pagano.

Thank you, um, Mayor Anderson and Council members.

Uh I don't know if you can answer my questions if I propose a show of hands, but I'm going to ask anyway.

As a show of hands, how many people live within a mile of this proposed big box retailer site in this room?

How many people live within a half a mile of this proposed site?

Now, the planning commission staff, members of the council, the attorney, Mr.

Basha.

Do any of you live in this area and are you familiar with this intersection?

Any of you?

Okay.

Now in a show of hands.

How many of you who live in the area have been at that intersection and have watched 100% of the time cars go through that red light.

Every single time I'm heading south to go left because I live in that area.

I'll show you where I live.

I live right here.

This is where the firehouse is.

No, I don't want this intersection to look like it's quiet because it isn't.

It's an incredibly busy intersection with traffic that flies through that.

And the reason I bring that up is because I don't trust a traffic study that's been done by the developer.

We need to have a traffic study that's going to incorporate the new traffic that's going to be coming from the west towards the east and encompasses everything that's going to involve in that intersection.

I've lived in Gilbert for 22 years.

I built my home in Marbella Vineyards with my husband 11 years ago.

It was a quiet area.

I oppose this being a target built there for a few reasons.

As a mom and as a former educator in a Gilbert Public School High School, I know the impact of when a child gets killed.

Every year, kids in our high schools get killed, teenagers.

It impacts the family, it impacts the school, it impacts the community.

I don't want to make that gamble in this area.

It's going to create so much more issues for the residents and for the people for the children who play in this area.

For there's an elementary school within a mile and a half.

These kids are playing in this area.

The trucks that go down Wilson Way, who's going to enforce that they're going the right way?

We have third-party carriers that deliver to Target.

It's not just Target trucks.

My husband works in transportation.

He can dispute a lot of what this man is saying about the trucks and what they're going to do and what their behavior is going to be.

It doesn't work that way.

The other thing I want to say is we have three targets.

Target is a dying brand.

While we were sitting here, I Googled their profit margin 2025.

It is down 9.4%.

Decline in profits.

You can Google that.

Target is a dying brand.

We don't need a target at this corner.

Thank you.

Kayleigh Ray.

Good evening, Mayor Anderson, members of the council.

My name is Kaylee.

I live in South Gilbert and I support the proposed development.

I want to address this idea that Gilbert already has plenty of targets, so we don't need another one.

I'd ask the council to think about that the other way around.

South Gilbert is the missing piece, not because it doesn't fit, but because this one corner has been sitting empty for more than 20 years.

But I also don't think this is just about Target.

The application in front of you is a rezone and a site plan.

Tomorrow it could be a fries, a sprouts, Costco, or another anchor entirely.

What you're actually deciding tonight is whether this corner finishes as a real commercial center after 23 years or sits empty for another decade, waiting for the perfect tenant that has not yet come.

Higley and Okateo is an empty corner.

It has been zoned for a shopping center since 2002.

That just so happens to be the year I was born.

In that amount of time, I have grown up, graduated high school, attended college, and received both my bachelor's and master's degrees, all while this lot has sat empty.

A major store was always meant to be there.

It just never got built.

South Gilbert can keep waiting, or we can finish what was started.

Please approve this plan.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Whitney, I can't make out your last name.

Thank you, Mayor, Vice Mayor, and uh council members.

Um my name is Whitney Georgevich.

I'm a Gilbert resident.

I have three children, uh, eight, ten, and twelve, they go to Gilbert schools.

I live in a Gilbert neighborhood, not unlike uh the one that you're hearing from the residents here tonight.

Um I'm in here in support of this target.

Um there's a reason that this matters before the Gilbert City Council because this affects all of Gilbert.

It's not about just one neighborhood.

I do understand that there are concerns there, but the trucks that people are concerned about, they're already there in those neighborhoods.

They're in Amazon trucks and UPS and moving bands and all these different things, and people that can rent U-Halls and all of that.

One of the things I picked up on in uh the attorney's comments was that, and then if you spend five seconds Googling this developer, you will see that he is very well accomplished.

And if he says he's gonna close on the property and he's gonna build shopping center or target, uh, I think you're getting a shopping center or a target.

So the choice is do we want the gold standard of household retail that's got 20, 25 year jobs, good income, uh, good tax revenue when we're getting beat up on utility bills rising, and we have got big capital improvement projects coming up.

Um I would choose the the gold standard, you know.

You you go up the road there to uh I used to live at Valviston baseline.

I'm sure all of you are familiar with the uh fries that's up there.

That place is an eyesore.

It's an absolute uh you know ghost town, and all the residents that are in um the lake, the lakes there that get to look at that now.

I would guess that none of them were around when all the opposition to that fries was getting put forward, and they made them build that store backwards.

So now when Fry's leaves, you got nobody that wants to come in there because you you've got a weirdo building, and now everybody's got something they really don't like, and none of them were around for any of it.

So you're gonna get a shopping center with inferior tenants, lower credit tenants, worse turnover, vacancy, all these problems, and you've got you know, the Tom Brady of retail knocking on your door, wanting to come in and do good things and help our community.

I mean, I just can't see any reason we wouldn't do this.

And uh I would just ask respectfully that you all make the hard decision.

Uh I understand that you have to make and I appreciate that, and and please pass this uh this uh zoning change.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Robert Wilderman.

Robert here.

Dwayne Sledge.

Good evening, Mayor and Council.

My name's Dwayne Sludge.

I'm a fourth generation Arizona.

My 10 grandchildren are sixth generation Arizona.

We're original homeowners in Marbella Vineyards.

Live about a quarter mile from this property.

I'm one of the 647 that went over your traffic study.

I use Peninda's way to get home.

The fire trucks use Hawkateo, not Wilson.

We listened on the Zoom call with the developer last night, trying to keep an open mind, as we know that something will be built on this site.

While I appreciate their efforts, we still have major concerns.

Once Ocketeo becomes a through road, traffic will increase.

A major box retailer complete with the build out of the Gillwood Regional Park and add large event days, traffic will increase.

Individually, each of these may be managed.

Combined, they create a level of congestion and safety concern that I still don't believe has been fully accounted for, specifically as to the effects on the residents who reside in the communities around this intersection.

The comp excuse me.

More importantly, Wilson Way access to the property.

I can't stress this enough that in our opinion and many of our neighbors, this is the biggest concern regarding this development.

The comparisons made last night and again tonight that homes back up to fries down the road, or that traffic enters target on Queen Creek Road are not equivalent situations.

In those cases, traffic is not traveling directly in front of homes on neighborhood streets that the residents use every day.

Introducing commercial traffic will inevitably cause Wilson Way to miritable way to become a shortcut to Higgley.

If you want to go west on Accateo, you're not gonna wait in line to try to turn left.

You can't do it today.

It's very difficult to get on there, Hockey, to go west today.

You're gonna go down Wilson to Meritable Way, Higley to give your chant yourself a chance to get to that left turn lane to turn left down Accateo.

That's just what's gonna happen.

They're gonna travel in front of homes where my grandchildren live, where we play in the park, wiffle ball and play catch, where people every day try to back out of the garages.

That's just going to increase.

The developer has stated they intend to control commercial traffic by using restricting right turns.

Somebody earlier said speed limit signs don't work.

These aren't gonna work.

Again, families live on these streets, and my grandchildren are part of them.

They live on Meritable Way.

This is not a theoretical concern, it's a predictable outcome.

And if approved as proposed, it will happen.

Acknowledging that reality is critical when making this decision.

I'm asking that if you're going to approve this, build that eight-foot wall all the way down Wilson to Ockateo with the landscaping.

Do not let Wilson be part of ingress and egress to this site.

And side note, last one.

If it is approved and we get all this extra revenue, will that help reduce our water bill?

Thanks.

Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members.

My name is Andy.

I'm going to speak plainly tonight.

And I want to point out the issues that led to the continuance still haven't been addressed.

I mean, I think they talked about we don't need that many parking lots, parking spaces, and they came up with the sign.

The resulting request, it's not a close call.

It's not a gray area.

It's a clear case that the project doesn't fit the site.

Doesn't respect the sound, the surrounding neighborhoods, and doesn't align with the zoning that was intentionally placed there to protect the residents.

If this project actually worked under SC, we wouldn't be here today.

The only reason we're here is because the applicant wants intensity the site cannot handle.

And they want the town to absorb the consequences, and those consequences fall on the people who live here.

On the families whose homes face the parcel every single day on the homeowners who invested their life savings based on the zoning that they were told they could rely on.

We all want Gilbert employees paid competitively and services funded properly.

But revenue exists under SC.

It does exist under SC.

We're a lot.

And they're right.

But what they didn't say is why it changed.

The town recognized that the original zoning was too intense.

And they added restrictions to protect the residents moving in.

And that wasn't an accident.

That was deliberate planning.

That was good planning.

That was the planning that still protects our residents to this day.

And here's the reality.

When a project only works by bending the rules, that's the clearest sign.

It doesn't belong here.

You only get one's chance to do this right.

And the right choice is clear.

Vote no in the rezone, protect the residents, protect the neighborhoods, and protect the integrity of your zoning process.

Thank you.

Thank you.

John Carter.

Mayor Anderson, Vice Mayor, and Council members, thanks so much.

My name's John Carter, and I'm a uh resident of Gilbert.

And one couple things I want to just kind of bring up real quick is that there's three targets within five to ten minutes of that site.

So there is plenty of targets in the area.

The thing that I found most interesting was is that in the 70-page slide deck, not one target was presented as an example of what could or couldn't work.

That's pretty interesting to me.

The traffic survey was only 24 hours.

That's not enough.

You got to have two weeks, month.

There's got to be some averages.

We got to talk, you know, we got it, we gotta see those numbers.

And then the fire trucks, somebody said it before, they use ACTO, they don't come in and off of Wilson way unless they're coming into the neighborhood because somebody's got a call.

Okay, so just a couple things that I want to make sure that you guys really think about when you're when you're going to the vote.

I'm gonna keep it really pretty clear and concise, but having a large retail like Target within about 150 feet of a neighborhood, it presents a significant quality of life and safety concern.

And here's basically a few points on on kind of what that means to me and to the rest of the people that are opposing this.

Significant traffic congestion, we talked about that, right?

And safety hazards.

Um about a hundred and fifty-foot buffer, it's just insufficient to manage the high volume of traffic that it's gonna generate.

If a truck comes in and they can't make that turn, they're gonna be in the other lane, you can't get by them.

What if there's a call of the emergency from the fire trucks and they gotta come down Wilson Way?

Well, if that guy's stuck out there, he can't move his big truck, then what?

Right?

Noise and light pollution.

That's another point.

Residents will face constant disruption from delivery trucks, often arriving early mornings or late at night, honking customer traffic, high intensity, 24 by 7 parking lot lighting.

That's it just it violates a peaceful environment in a residential community.

Nobody really talked about this, but we've got somebody in the neighborhood that has talked a lot about it when he tried to go to sell his house.

Declining property values, the presence of a high traffic commercial operation immediately adjacent to all the homes.

It often is accompanied by increased littering, loitering.

They have the problem out in Queen Creek, they've got signs when you walk in, they don't want your kids loitering in their in their uh stores, and they're doing it, and it's a freak it's frequently associated with decrease in residential property.

So I just strongly to you know, please vote no, oppose this.

I just don't see this as a positive for our neighborhood, and that specific intersection.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Sean Miller.

Good evening, uh, mayor, vice mayor, and council.

My name is Sean Miller.

Uh, I've lived in Marbella Vineyards for 20 years.

I'm very proud uh Gilbert uh resident.

Um I want to thank the town council for the job that you guys do.

I know it's a hard job, but leadership is just that leadership.

Um also want to point out uh appreciate the Basha family for what they mean to Gilbert and uh uh my daughter being a Bashabera, I'm always appreciative of the Basha family.

I want to share a little background about the situation we find ourselves in today, which in my opinion is uh somewhat unbelievable but believable, given the unrealistic attacks Marbella Vineyards regard uh in regards to this project has led to.

Um, but every project the bridge, the current HOA board, kids practicing in the park, um anything and everything seems to go this way.

Uh to be a supporter of the Target project, you have to find you know these little holes where you can fit support in knowing that you will be attacked once you do.

Um my hope is that this stops tonight.

Um I call it a three-legged uh stool of support for this project and the provok proposed zoning change, um, which seems like it shouldn't be.

85298, the zip code that we live in, 44,000 residents.

85297, 35,000 residents.

We could fill this room three or four times, I'm telling you.

Target is gonna be welcome, very successful, and this project is worth it.

Um the first leg of this stool, uh it meets or exceeds SCNGC development requirements.

Um the the design is in line with you know the the Gilbert way.

24 years of being empty uh site.

Um the Aquatillo Corridor.

Now, the bridge, the park, the post office, the new lifetime fitness, all of these things kind of seem to go well with the target.

The closest target is actually in Queen Creek.

So there's tax seepage there.

Um you could build two 75,000 square foot SC structures and not even be in this meeting today, which is 150,000 worth of square feet, and that's bigger than what's being asked with this target.

Um the general fund is another uh thing uh that that you know would benefit.

Um let's see what else.

I mean, go in the fire 10 million dollars about in 10 years of of tax revenue.

But the last thing I think is really important is jobs.

200 proposed jobs, and some of these jobs are livable wage jobs where people who have these jobs can be back in the community and where they live.

You know, I'm asking you guys to support this project.

Um it is a is a good project, and and really it's approving uh 62,000 square feet uh uh improve uh uh increase in square footage.

Thank you.

Thank you, Sean.

That ends the request to speak.

I do have for the record a number of uh cars that were submitted that did not wish to speak.

And of the 75 that were submitted, 43 of them were in favor of the project, 33 opposed to the project.

With that, I'll ask if uh Mr.

Anderson if you want to uh address any of the comments.

I said once we said I have my chance now, right?

I can clarify your card said not speaking, so it's your not speaking.

I feel that we'll speak there are a lot of cards.

So uh we we can move your card, but just for clarification, um, at the podium, you we indicated that you were not speaking.

Do you now want wish to speak?

Okay.

Okay, we can move your card.

It's good.

State your name again.

It's Bill Brown.

Push the button down there.

I'm sorry.

It's Bill Brothers.

Sorry, Bill Brothers and I live in Marbella Vineyards, and I think there's a lot of people that have opinions about what works and what doesn't work.

I don't think anybody disagrees that it'd be nice to have a target closer to us in South Gilbert.

But there's a big lot at the corner of Riggs and Higley that doesn't back up to people.

The problem you have here is they didn't do the park there.

They cut through there, the park there, they cut through there.

There are people that play disc golf there that don't live there.

There's no doubt about it.

And they cross all sides of the street.

People are almost getting in accidents.

It's not about should target be there.

That location has to be studied after the bridge is open.

And then you say, okay, really, can we accommodate it?

That's all I'm saying.

It's not about target would be a great store, probably, but the traffic there is going to be a disaster.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr.

Anderson.

Thank you, Mayor, for the chance, just to share a few thoughts here.

Let's just first dispense with some of the main questions that came up.

The traffic studies that were done included all of the future traffic, including the traffic happening or will happen over Akateo Road.

That was absolutely clear, required by your staff and completed by our engineers, then reviewed by your staff multiple times to make sure that was done correctly, including all that traffic.

So when it seems to me that if we focus on traffic for just a second, I would gently remind the council of what I started with was every concern or question you have.

Ask yourself, would this have the same concern if it was SC today?

And the answer is yes.

Now no one's here tonight advocating for cut through traffic, heavy trucks on streets.

What we're saying is that you have one of the best retailers in the world saying they will direct their operational instructions to their drivers to be courteous, kind, etc.

If this is just an SC, you don't get that chance.

A yes vote tonight guarantees that you've got good operational traffic, additional signage, etc.

Let's let's again be clear.

It seems to me that a lot of folks tonight, when you cut through the noise, are arguing that nothing should be built on this site.

That's just not realistic.

You can't argue that you want zero traffic on one hand and then choose all of the users on the other.

If you want to choose the users that you have, then I would kindly suggest you buy the property from the Bashia family.

And David Bashett tonight has clearly testified of their efforts to find a good user for this site.

So when I go through all these things here, um I'm happy to if Mayor, if you have questions about target operational issues, we can call them up.

I heard one person try to make the argument that target equals dead kids.

I don't think that's what they were trying to do.

I think they were just trying to say that traffic happens, and what we're saying is no one is advocating for injuries to anyone.

What we are saying is that same concern exists under SC today.

I heard a lot of concerns about just again the project not fitting.

Again, I would respectfully say what are the objective standards when we measure whether a project fits.

We can find those today in the SC stand development standards, we can find them in the GC standards.

I gave you plenty of examples this evening of how we exceed those in every instance.

And the argument that the PAD deviations are clear evidence that we're trying to squeeze too much in here.

Ask yourself whether or not uh the elimination of one parking island in the pickup area so that we can put a shade canopy over it, which would prohibit plants from growing, whether that's really trying to squeeze too much in.

That's about comfort of customers when they show up to the site to pick stuff up.

I want to be clear that no one's trying to negatively affect quality of life.

But again, back to my ultimate question, which is does that same concern exist under SC versus G C.

The answer is yes.

We've suggested a couple of conditions of approval that we think do an excellent job of mitigating any impacts from this change.

Mayor, I I probably missed something I would look to you or to other council members for something you would like me to address, but I would sum up the concerns of the opposition in that way.

Thank you.

Anyone have any I I have one question and then he does.

Council member.

Um I do have a question.

I I think I remember somewhere that you had a request in there to reduce parking.

Uh the number of parking spaces.

That's true, Councilmember Buckley.

That request through your zoning code is with the planning staff.

It's through an administrative use permit.

It's not in front of the council this evening.

And the planning staff can speak to that and their thoughts about it.

My understanding is that that is ready to be approved pending this zoning approval.

So this planning staff have looked at that carefully and are ready to approve it pending approval this evening.

Point being that it's not a con it's not a concern.

And and on that note, too, there was an allegation made that hey, this this just doesn't fit.

Um the site, we've already shown that it it fits.

Anyway, uh I I waxed too long.

Okay.

I I I don't know, I'm a huge proponent of not reducing any parking because we have so many places now that parking was either reduced or there was not enough parking.

And now you know you you can't get in and out of you can't get in and out of a restaurant or whatever because of that reduced parking.

So that's why I wanted to clarify.

You make an absolutely fair fair comment.

And usually in the context of residential neighborhoods, I agree with you.

We need that.

But in the commercial setting, right now, again, you've got planning staff, engineering, engineers inside and outside, and target looking at this, saying that it's that it this fits and there's actually an excess.

And by the way, I'm happy to address why there's a target in Queen Creek and a target in Chandler and why one fits here too if you'd like.

But please help us get some tax revenue here.

Yeah.

Well, well, that that's kind of up to you.

But I just want to I wanted to clarify that I was correct on that.

So okay, thank you.

Councilmember Lyons.

Um, Mr.

Anderson, I don't remember the answer to this question from the planning commission, but um somebody brought up the issue of making a westbound turn onto ACTIO.

Is there a light going to be put in at Wilson or not?

Can't remember whether what you guys said.

So, Mayor Anderson, Councilmember Lyons, the traffic signal today is in front of the fire station where the trucks exit.

And so the when I asked the question of the transportation staff, they say there's not one that's needed there.

Okay.

With that said, somebody brought up the access off of Wilson.

If we were going to do it, block that off.

Is there any way this could be designed so that there is no egress or ingress off of Wilson?

Is it possible to lay this out to do that?

So it it it absolutely is possible.

That's an honest answer to you.

But as we've said from the beginning, that right exists today.

And so you're gonna have if this is voted no, you would have that driveway would just be there, and you would have less control over who would be using it.

And just like Cooley Station or the one at Morrison Ranch, there are there's those are driveways that exist on the local streets.

I I get it, and I respectfully uh agree that nobody wants that type of cut through traffic.

Here, though, again, we can direct and uh through signage, et cetera, to the best of our ability.

But I I can have Dane talk more about it, but when their drivers are given their directions, and then there is a violation, it affects their performance records and even results in possible firings.

So they have every incentive in the book to follow those clear directions that they get when they go to a store.

It tells them the time, the way they enter, the way they exit.

One other question, and this may be for your client, but if the store was moved further south, you've got the issue with the loss of revenue because of the reservation.

So anything further south of there is not viable from an economic perspective for a business of this type.

Is that not correct?

I'm so glad you asked that question.

Some of you on this council and our firm have been involved in hit Higglian Riggs for over two decades.

And that site is and it was owned by Vestar, one of the largest retail developers in the valley, they've never been able to make it work.

And so that that's just not a viable commercial corner.

So for just clarity so everybody understands when a business like this comes in, they look at a circle of business area of commerce around them on that part of town because of the reservation, there will never be any residents on that other side of the border.

So that cuts the available business in half.

Exactly right.

And it and adding to that, there's those in this room who have lived through this.

You have seen that site scale down every time over the years where it was started large and now it's smaller.

And be and it got turned to residential.

If I came in to you here and said, hey, I'd like to do single family detached.

Some people behind me may cheer, but you would just squash me like a bug.

If I came and said to you, I want to do apartments, which we've got all sorts of clients that would love to do that.

I'd get squashed like a bug by both residents and I would be the first one to do that.

And I would I would lay down and take it because I know it's not correct.

Right.

But the point, so you ask yourself, what is this use?

It's we've again, I think a gentleman said it very well.

You got the chance for a gold standard here, and it's actually further away, shorter in height.

It is compatible.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I'll close the public hearing and bring it back to the council for discussion andor emotion.

Yes.

Councilmember Buckling.

Thank you, Mayor.

I uh I want to start off with um what I had the pleasure of saying last time.

That is thank you all.

You brought your voice, you did it respectfully and civilly.

And um you showed many in our community that um yelling doesn't work.

You were just authentic as you could be, and you gave us your voice, and it's really appreciated in a in a time right now when uh we're getting constantly screaming and yelled at, and Sean, you had spoke about uh the attacks.

You should try being a council member.

Um so I too have uh received some feedback, and one of those things in conversations I've had with uh several community members was um with the opponents is you're not representing me and you're not listening to me.

Um you don't listen.

Uh I heard it earlier and in a different topic that we don't listen to you.

Please do not mistake me listening and hearing you with agreement.

It may or it may not.

I'm gonna hear what you have to say to help me formulate a decision, and then I'm also going to make that decision based on many of the other facets that should be going into this decision.

And um, listening to you is a very, very important one, and I have done that, and I've heard from both sides.

So there are uh some things that um I think are believed to be true, but aren't um having worked very closely with fire uh for 23 and a half years, 21 in this department.

I do know that fire uses Wilson Way, and the data proved it, that's why they turn in there.

Um they don't use it for very far, but they do use it because the number one um biggest reason for a collision is backing.

And nobody wants to back a giant fire truck if they don't have to.

You drive through and then you pull out at the light onto uh Catillo there.

Um I was a little concerned.

So I keep hearing about traffic.

This is gonna cause more traffic, this is gonna cause more traffic.

Yeah, it is.

And so is anything else that goes there.

And when many in this group and some that aren't here, asked some really intelligent questions.

I asked for a continuance so we could get those answered for you.

Because they are important to answer.

We need the truth.

And many immediately, once a continuance was given, so that the developer could actually um address those things and so that our staff could address those things.

When we continue something, it costs money, time is money.

And we have, again, one of the shortest staff, the shortest staffed um agency, government agency, municipality in Maricopa County.

They had to drop other things they could be doing to go to go do more due diligence to make sure that we had true answers to these questions and/or assumptions.

And many immediately immediately blew up my email saying, do not give them the continuance.

Don't do it, just say no to it.

Well, I hate to tell you, but what that tells me is you didn't want the answer to those questions.

Or you would have been okay with that.

And that wasn't everybody, that was just some.

So this has clearly been a real emotional topic, and I understand, right?

I get it.

Um, which is why I have put in a lot of time myself doing research because I owe this community, right?

Everyone in this room, um, a smart decision.

One of the things that was brought up was, and it's said again tonight, doesn't fit, doesn't fit on the property, doesn't fit.

Well, uh, and the a store in Temp B was used as a model is one of the only ones that is on a smaller footprint.

Well, I happen to know that store until I married my wife uh 12 years ago.

I shopped in that store every day.

I lived a half mile from there, that target.

I did some research, and here's what I found.

Um, we talk about fit.

The floor area ratio of that one in Tempe is more dense than what's being proposed here.

Meaning it fits better than the one in Tempe.

That one's 110,000 square feet on 10 acres.

This is 128,000 plus the other two pads, 139,000 on about 16 acres.

Um that far ratio is is better here than it is there.

Having shopped there hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of times, even with a more dense store in Tempe.

I never had backflows onto the streets, even at Christmas time.

I never had um problems finding a parking space.

Christmas, I had to park further out and walk.

Well, you do in every store here.

Um that's that's the fact, that's the data.

And I was racking my brain because the developer was adamant.

We have to have these online curbside pickup parking spaces, and thinking they might be able to be used differently and help, it was just racking my brain because my lens, right?

We all have our lens, and then sometimes there's the truth.

And my lens was nobody uses that because I don't use online order or curbside pickup.

I go to any store and I see them empty.

And so I made a wrong judgment, and then I did research, and what I found was this, and I used multiple different AI platforms to check and test and see if I get lied to.

And these are the consistencies that I found.

Target reports post-COVID, 40% of their shoppers, online order curbside pickup.

That means 40% of the target shoppers change the parking needs significantly because pre-COVID, we all went into the store.

And with an average dwell time in that space of 30 minutes, that means you can only get two people per park and space with 40%, and it's 50% plus at Walmart.

There's a National Federal Research Foundation, what a retail research foundation, can't remember what they're called, but they do lot pull lots of data for small, mid and big box stores, and they report about 35 to 45 percent of all shoppers today use online order and curb site pickup.

So then I asked the question, because one, when I looked at ours, and I did and I did the math on ours, even though we use an ITE standard, which is a 1982, long time ago, completely different shopping behavior standard.

We were asking the developer to put in four park enough parking for 4.39.

That's even higher than the ITE standard requires.

So there was a buffer.

Great, we know differently now.

But what I also found was with that high high number and a lower uh using online the low dwell time, you need significantly less parking spaces today than we did five years ago.

Um disagree with your numbers on the five the in respectfully.

Uh the 329 you said you need three, okay, close.

Um looking at this in multiple different platforms, letting it do the math, and me checking the math.

Um, I showed a little higher than that, but it was lower than 400.

Okay.

And the more than 500 you're asking for based on current shopping behavior today, that tells me the data doesn't lie, and it and there are enough parking spaces now because we have changed.

Um sorry to belabor this, but this is important.

This is all important.

I have been accused of only caring about revenue.

No, not true.

That's one of the many facets I look at.

I do think this is the highest and best use for that spot.

It's gonna produce two to one jobs of a shopping center, two to one revenue of a shopping center.

We're not gonna bleed more revenue to um Queen Creek.

I also agree with some of the opponents that, yeah, some of that is going to trade the store west of them in Gilbert.

So there's some trade-off there.

Fair enough.

But revenue is important.

I think then I look at it from a terms of how what would provide the most use for that.

And that is well, there's a park there.

Okay, so shopping center would absolutely people would use it from the park.

They might need, you know, fruit for their kids' soccer game, whatever.

But there's also equipment and sunshade and chairs and other uses that visitors will come using this park, and they will contribute to the general fund by spending there on the things that they forgot to bring that they need to pick up, um, whatever.

Um we'll try to wrap up here.

I made lots of notes.

I listened to the chamber.

Okay, the chamber board is a group of business leaders, very, very smart business leaders in our community.

They think this is absolute best case scenario, or they wouldn't have given a letter of recommendation for it.

Um I looked at it from a perspective of kind of the devil you know you, the devil you don't.

What we do know, uh, as proposed, yeah, it's a target.

We also know that the side facing the residents developer agreed to not go to the height of even SC.

They lowered it.

I think it was like 23 feet.

Okay.

The front side is higher, facing the road, big deal.

But the houses aren't gonna see that.

Um what I don't know will go in there, I don't know.

I know what has talked about it.

Car washes is one of the people that approached in interest.

What you won't see in your home at 10:30, 11 at night is a target store.

What I don't want you to hear is the whining of a dryer.

So I know what's proposed now.

I I know it's not ideal for everybody, it's ideal for some.

I think that the developer has worked very hard to adhere to our very strict standards that our staff put them through the ringer on to make sure that they did make concessions.

So if it's zoned um rezoned, sorry, that many of the features fit well within the SC standard today, and even better.

So I will shut up now.

May I first council member Lyons?

Am I first or you?

Oh, I he's first.

Okay.

Uh just a couple questions here.

This may be for staff or Mr.

Anderson.

Um, as it's currently zoned right now, uh, if you wanted to come in and put in two 75,000 square foot buildings, you could do that.

Is that correct, Kyle or or Reese?

Either one of you.

Uh Mayor Anderson, Councilmember Lyons, that is correct.

There could be two seventy-five.

That'd be 150,000 square foot footprint on that lot, and it would never come before this council.

Is that correct?

That's correct.

As long as it's not a single user.

That's correct.

Okay, so that's one.

Um could uh two users share a hundred and twenty thousand square feet.

Okay, all right.

Um that that was that was one of the questions that that I had that was important.

And and Reese, you said you guys don't use um, and this may be for your your client.

There's a dumpster out back, and I remember in the planning commission, they were talking about it being visible to the neighborhood.

You made a comment earlier tonight that there were or somebody did that there'd be no dumpsters back there, that the trash and everything is dealt with internally bailed, is that right?

Correct.

So, Mayor Anderson, Council Merlin.

To let me just build on what you were saying and clarify just a bit.

The conversation at the planning commission was about the screening of the compactor.

Right.

Not about dumpsters.

Okay.

So there is zero dumpsters behind the target.

There's an internally loaded compactor.

Okay.

And that and the issue and the stipulation that was put on at that plan and commission hearing was to make sure that it was screened.

Now that's already a code requirement, but as uh council member Anderson, Brian Anderson at that night said, add the stipulation, and we said, yes, that's already part of the code.

I gave you a long answer to say it's not dumpsters, it's a compactor, and the rules require it to be screened.

Right, thank you.

And it's there at the north end where the loading dock is.

Right.

All right, so just my comments on this.

Um this is gonna be one of those things where I feel like we're damned if we do, damned if we don't, because the opposition support is about 50-50.

So we're gonna make somebody mad no matter what we do.

Um somebody asked a question: did any of us live down in that area, have two children that live within a half a mile of there?

So I know the area very well, and through this process, I've been down there just watching stuff to see how traffic moves.

Now, I have a real problem with what I call the Higgliapolis 500, which runs all the way from the 60 to rigs, and we're pushing really hard to try to help plus up our officers because that's what it's going to take to get that down as more police on the streets, which go to the issue of revenue driving, another discussion.

Uh, as far as some of the changes, like with the curb side, I've got 11 grandchildren, nine of them under seven.

My daughter and daughter-in-laws use that because they're afraid at times to take the kids in the store with everything going on, they can order it, they can pull up and grab it.

So I don't have a real issue with the changes for that.

I think that that's very smart into the point that was made about uh curb side being increased, I think is important.

Finally, the biggest thing for me is the highest and best use for this property.

Councilmember Bucklin, you brought that up, and we've talked about that repeatedly with other uses in the community.

And um you also made the comment the devil you know is better than the devil you don't know.

Um it's been brought up that this there was this council, or not this council, but council had been approached about you know uh apartments and stuff here, residential, and that's a conversation that comes up constantly.

Uh for me, I I like I said, I don't think that there's gonna be a good way to satisfy everybody.

So we're gonna have to make a tough choice, and it falls down to the revenue generation.

I know the traffic, I was looking at the traffic and stuff and watched that it is bad.

I actually think, and I'm not a traffic expert, so I'm gonna put that caveat out there up front, but if we don't have that area driving all the way up to Power Road or all the way to Queen Creek or all the way to Channel to go to a store like this, and it's in that area, that's gonna take some relief off those arteries feeding that because like I think Mrs.

Ray said, it's a half an hour drive from my daughter's house to the target at power, even though on the map it's like nine miles or something like that.

It's it's it sometimes of the day it is ridiculous.

So for me, I think it has to weigh down to what's in the best interest of a holistic perspective.

It comes down to the revenue aspect of it.

So that's where I'm at with this.

Councilmember Buckley.

Um, I wasn't gonna say a whole lot more, but uh after Kenny's rendition, I I kind of felt compelled to um go ahead and and state some of the things that I've written down in my notes.

But uh, you know, as elected officials, we have a responsibility to balance economic development opportunities with the long-term expectations of residents and the integrity of the town's planning process.

While I support quality retail, commercial investments, and continued economic vitality within Gilbert, and I truly do support all of that.

I also believe that development must remain compatible with surrounding neighborhoods and aligned with the standard and vision established for the area.

I also considered concerns relating to project intensity, traffic impact, neighborhood transit transitions, and the presidents that approving substantial deviations from the existing zoning standards may create for future development in the area.

Gilbert's success has been built thoughtfully and balanced plan and and balanced planning and maintaining the high quality of life of our residents that everyone values, and there is a high quality of life in the area out there, and um I myself and and uh and and everything that I've looked at and read and studied.

I mean, I I agree with the quality of life and keeping the quality of life in there.

Um I don't believe that the proposed zoning change represents the appropriate fit for this location, and therefore I cannot support it.

And I had more, but I cut it down.

So Vice Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um yeah, I live on uh other side of the bridge on Aquatillo.

So I know the area very, very well, and I drove the neighborhood a number of times over the last two weeks, and just envisioned the building there and envisioned the neighborhood and just envision what quality of life looks like.

And uh and I started thinking about you know, if we if we keep it as C, what does that look like?

And I just want the residents to know remember a story about three years ago when we first sat on the council, and it probably you know, probably messed with my mind because it was one of the first issues we dealt with was bottled blonde.

It was a nightclub.

Well, pizza pizza place during the day and nightclub with lingerie at night, and res in in the heritage district, and residents lost their minds, and they should have.

Forty-500 people signed a petition, and we couldn't do a thing about it.

And luckily, it didn't get billed.

If we keep it as C, we're looking at a potential for gas station, uh, bikini coffee, car wash, and it doesn't matter how many signatures you guys get, it won't matter.

We can't stop it.

Just want everyone to understand, you know.

Well, someone mentioned the W you can W you know the W you don't know.

But there's also some things that I have concerns about.

You know, I really, you know, when I hear people, you know, and developers and Risa Massine, you said this, but when I hear people say it's been empty for 24 years, well, the odds of another developer making a phone call the next day was the same odds as if the first phone call that said I'm interested in doing this.

When that bridge is done, we're that property is going to be worth a lot of money.

And the question is, what do we want to see on it?

And my personal issue with with property rights may be different than some people up here, but I'm gonna explain my philosophy of property rights.

When uh when if someone owns a property and they stay within their zoning, they own that property.

When they want to change their zoning, although we don't get the check, that property becomes ours.

We're we're stewards of that property, and we have to make the best decision for residents about that property, whether we own it or not, when they ask us to make a decision on it, they're handing their baby to us to make a decision.

And maybe that's a radical form of property rights, but that's just the way I I look at it.

We have to make sure is it the best use?

And does it fit the area?

Now, fit, I don't want to use the word fit because it's all we've been talking about tonight is does it fit?

I need to ask, you know, does it complement the area?

Does the town need the revenue?

Yeah, the town needs the revenue, but the very first thing that Mr.

Anderson said tonight was what this is about.

This is about a bigger building.

Wasn't about revenue, it was about a bigger building.

So I I take a look at you know what could be there compared to this, and going there and looking at being 180 feet away to 200, 170 feet away to 280 feet away.

I saw that I saw that distance.

I I drove it, and I understand that sound travels more in the early morning and also it late at night, which is when these trucks are supposed to be coming.

And so it came back down to me for you know, quality of life, you know, and that can be heard a thousand feet away in the early morning and at night, even more early morning night because there's no other sound to stop it.

And for me, it comes down to quality of life, and like everyone says, you know, you're not gonna make everybody happy.

Um but if I go to a box store and I go to try on a shirt, and I like the love the shirt, and it's too small on me, it just doesn't fit.

And that's the way I feel about this this project right here.

Has nothing to do with Target.

Target's a quality store.

The developer is a very, very quality developer.

It just doesn't fit from what I saw in this neighborhood, and it doesn't fit the quality of life for me.

Councilmember Buckland.

Thank you, Mayor.

There is one thing that I um in my notes forgot to mention, I do think it's important.

Because also when I look at fit, I look at what kind of partner are they gonna be.

And the one thing that Target brings that no other retailer I know of brings is they are hard on crime to the point that they have their own crime lab.

So they immediately become a partner with our police department to combat organized retail theft, which I recall just recently.

Um our amazing detectives took some people down on that.

These are felonious people, not misdemeanor shoplifting pack of gum, um, but stealing thousands, thousands and thousands of dollars.

They combat identity theft, they combat um credit card um theft, and they have their own lab to support so that our detectives don't have to start from ground zero.

They've got a great set of evidence with which they can now launch a better, faster um more effective investigation.

That for me was also part of the fit.

What kind of partner are they?

That's what kind of part of there.

Councilmember Torques.

I first wanted to ask Kyle, you said you could have two users inside of an 128,000 square foot building.

Is that correct?

Did I hear that right?

Uh Mayor, Councilmember Torgerson.

It's users.

Say that again.

You would it's use or building they couldn't have they could have a building that's 170 feet or 128,000 square feet.

Right.

As many tenants.

Yeah.

Yes.

So there you can have a building in SC, you can have a building that's uh 128,000 square feet in your example, but it has to be different tenants.

So let's say you had 150,000 square feet.

You could have two eleven thousand square foot restaurants and a target in the center of it.

Correct.

And they wouldn't be in front of us if they did that.

So if he just expands his footprint, he walks over the whole thing.

Can still expand the footprint, correct?

Okay.

The cap is 75,000 square feet for a user.

For oh, for the user, got it.

Okay.

That's that was something I needed to understand clearly.

All right.

I want to talk a little bit about the noise that has gone with this.

Initially, somebody went around the neighborhoods putting together a petition to bring in Whole Foods and 17 other small retailers, as though that they were bringing a literal uh plan to us of development.

They went around getting signatures as I'm done with that guy.

I misspoke.

It is 75,000 square feet is the max footprint for a single user.

So you can have two 75,000 square foot buildings.

Right.

But they'll have to be two separate.

That's that was concerning.

Sorry.

You got it.

But they went around, we want a Whole Foods and these 16 other retailers or whatever.

That caused a problem.

Because this is not about Target.

Target's great.

I shop at Target.

The one he used to shop at, I used to live in that area too.

I used to go to all the time.

It's not about Target.

And people keep focusing on Target.

And it makes me think that you're just being snobby about where you want to shop.

Smaller stores are going to bring more traffic.

They are.

Every study is done.

If you bring smaller stores in there, overall, in his study, it went from 77 to 8,500 or something like that.

That street is gonna get busier no matter what.

No matter what, it's gonna get busier.

We gotta be careful what we wish for in that area.

Because if we wish to keep it at SC, no, you're gonna get more traffic, not just from the Higgle from the bridge, but you're gonna get more traffic because you're getting more traffic to those stores.

Hopefully, it's not a goodwill in a and a uh gymnasium.

Hopefully, it's not bikini beans and and whatever.

Uh hopefully it's what you want, but it will be even busier than what Target's bringing you.

Uh somebody made the talk to comment that you don't know what it's like to live up near a fries or something like that.

I'm sorry.

My home backs up to a fries retail center and a dogtopia for which I lost an argument here on this diet in this room because I didn't want the dog topia directly behind my house.

Guess what?

They're actually not a problem.

I was very surprised.

I had to eat my words on that.

Yes, I said I was wrong.

I I had to eat my words big time.

They are not a problem, neighbor.

Uh I just want to address the the things that came in.

Uh across the street from here was proposed to Walmart, which we said no to.

That Walmart is apartments now.

The evil word for everybody in the room, apartments.

That Walmart that would have been across the street generating millions of dollars is now apartments for which we do not get apartment taxes on.

Careful what you wish for.

Uh unfortunately, Bassers, as far as I'm concerned, accepted their zoning.

So they have to come here and ask for a variance on that to ask for a rezone.

Had they fought that at any point from C2 to GC, I think they'd have a better argument, but they accepted it.

When you look at things like Epicenter, the traffic would be amazingly busier than what they're proposing.

But that's okay.

We're going to be careful what we wish for.

One guy said about offsetting water.

No, it doesn't, it's an enterprise, but I just got back from Rhode Island.

I've been up since 3 a.m.

Visited my daughter.

Her three bedroom apartment water bills 300 bucks.

So I'm starting to really thank God for my 152 dollar bill.

I appreciate the people that came out here and actually stayed and spoke, every one of you.

Even the guy didn't understand I was trying to defend the fact that he's got a quiet neighborhood.

I got a lot of copy and paste from people, and copy and paste when it's addressed to everybody tends to get answered by Taylor because it's not to one specific person.

But I appreciate the people here because it took time out of your day.

I give you an individual answer because it's important to you.

But it is hard for me to not recognize that overwhelming number of people in the neighborhood are actively upset about this.

And so if I err on the side of caution and I err with the neighborhood, I absolutely will be a stone wall if there's any single complaint about what goes in there.

You can have car washes and bikini beans and whatever you want, but you're gonna get what goes in there.

There's no stopping it.

Because if you're not, you're gonna live with the consequences of it.

You've made it very careful that all of our heads are on a stick.

You know, we're we're on the take.

You hear all these ridiculous things, especially online.

I've had disengaged.

I'm losing contact with like childhood friends because I'm just disengaged from social media.

It's ridiculous the things that are said about every person up here.

I hope you're right.

I really hope you're right.

I hope that something comes along that has no traffic and provides you that quaint little restaurant.

Overwhelmingly, you're saying this in the stick with a zoning.

I hope you're right.

Any other comments.

I'll be very brief because a lot of what I was thinking about was has already been said, but I I did I too understood when we asked for postponement that the applicant would postpone this, that would it was an opportunity to sit down and negotiate with the applicant.

He didn't do that.

He didn't sit down with them and negotiate on those deviations.

Those deviations were on the table.

Um I heard tonight, build an eight-foot wall.

Um, don't uh allow the the trucks to come in off of uh the Wilson.

Um it was an opportunity to negotiate with them about that, and you didn't take that opportunity.

You you said you were okay with not meeting with the developer and talking about those things.

So that's a little bit uh disturbing for me.

Um, and I I won't dance around the issue like maybe some others will up here about revenue.

Revenue is important to me.

And if you're in the budget discussions that we've all been in for the last uh six or eight months, you'd know how important revenue is.

When I hear somebody tell me that they're going to target in Queen Creek, spending their money in Queen Creek, um, that hurts us.

And we have to have uh an opportunity to create the community that we all want.

And the way we do that is through um budgeting wisely and and uh collecting the revenue that we need to do that.

Uh I have a different opinion of property rights than maybe the vice mayor has.

Um to me uh the town we give guidance on um properties it develops, but we we don't we don't mandate what goes on property.

It doesn't become our property.

Uh it's owned by the in this case, it's owned by the Basha family.

And you heard him testify tonight that he's been trying to find something, including apartments.

I'm sure he's had other retail development that has approached them.

And that's kind of gets to what Councilmember Torgenson's talking about is be careful what you wish for because it could be one of those uses that you aren't really thrilled about, which we don't know.

Um I think that it the opportunity we have now, and I'll say it again is um we want the best for Gilbert, and the best for Gilbert is what we can control the way that we are with this particular project and do it in a way that and I hope that there would have been more negotiation with the applicant to talk about some of those issues and those deviations and maybe work with that.

So I'll leave it at that.

And and again, I thank you all for being here too and taking the time to be here.

I know it's very late, and your your time is very valuable to us.

Thank you.

Mayor I move that we approve public hearing item number 24 as written and with the stipulations that Kyle had uh required or recommended.

Second then a motion and second, please vote.

Motion carries four to three.

At this point, I'll um recess our regular meeting and convene in special meeting.

And uh I'll ask Councilmember Kaprowski, she's about this item number 29.

Yes, for item number 29.

I need to recuse myself from voting on the CIP program due to the potential conflict of interest, as my company is a qualified vendor with the town of Gilbert.

Although neither myself or my husband currently perform work for Gilbert, my council term concludes this year, and our firm may pursue future opportunities related to CIP projects.

Thank you.

Any discussion.

We'll make a motion to approve.

Second.

We moved and seconded, please vote.

Motion carries 60.

Come back, Councilmember Kabrowski.

Item number 30 is the budget.

Conduct a hearing regarding fiscal year 2027 property tax levy and direct staff, if necessary to submit an ordinance setting the secondary property tax levy for fiscal year 2027 at 36 million, six hundred and thirty-five thousand for adoption on June 9th.

Discussion.

Yeah.

I mean, there was a few months ago, but you know.

Do you want to do you want to go over it again?

There has to be updates this the last time we smoked.

Yeah.

Mayor and council, you know that I love to talk about the budget, and I'm happy uh to give a brief presentation if you would like one tonight.

Or happy to answer questions.

Okay.

I will give you the speed version given the lateness of the hour and that we have talked about this uh in public meetings prior to this.

So if you'll put it up.

All right.

Tonight is preliminary budget adoption night.

As you know, Gilbert's money is not just one pot.

Uh there are separate restrictions for each of these areas that have revenue, and we very carefully manage all of those restrictions.

The town has lost a significant amount of ongoing money in the recent years, and this is due to changes not at the council or anything that council had control over in these four specific areas.

Loss of revenue in our income tax and sales tax areas doesn't impact the entire town the same way.

It impacts specifically in the blue area with our general fund, and the departments affected by that are at the bottom, mostly police, fire, and parks and recreation are affected when we lose sales tax and income tax, which have been a majority of the losses recently.

We do a budget process.

We look long term and our budget process takes the full year.

Right now we're at prelim adoption part of that.

We've had study session already.

We'll have final adoption in June.

We did work and have our zero base budgeting earlier in this process, which saved about four 2.4 million dollars to be able to use towards higher needs within the budget that is part of our fiscal 27 recommended budget.

In the general fund, there was requested about 81 million dollars.

The recommended budget includes about 16 million getting funded, about 20 percent.

So there are some significant things that are not funded in the budget due to funding constraints.

A lot of the things that didn't make the cut are important items, they're not just nice to have.

We are able to defer some of those items for a short period of time, but the impacts of that will become more apparent to the town over time.

Staffing is one of our largest gaps.

We requested about 300 positions across the town.

We're looking to fund about a hundred of those positions, 43 of them through one-time contracts because we don't have enough ongoing money to fund even all those hundred positions at a full-time rate.

There's about 200 positions that are not funded in the budget due to the funding constraints.

It would take about 35 million dollars to close that gap and to hire those additional staff.

We are the lowest staffing in the valley.

We have been for more than a decade.

We compare against our other valley cities annually.

What did make the cut?

There is some good news here.

Uh so although we're only funding about 36% of requests all across the town, maintaining service level is our main area of focus.

We did a lot of things to balance the budget.

We did zero-based budgeting.

We also reduced $2 million out of our base budget.

We did cost savings from advocacy center phase one to help close some one-time gap, and also $3.3 million of funding from land sale in the heritage district that also helps close one-time gap.

In the budget, we're looking to fund our essential services as a priority, protecting the people that help provide these services to our citizens, and then supporting economic growth to help improve uh future revenues.

Difference in the budget is about uh 93 million dollars.

Most of that is in the capital improvement side and the investment in infrastructure.

Capital improvement projects are funded uh the full amount up front, so we know we can finish the projects.

We can't finish all of our projects in one year, so it does mean we carry that money forward.

So it is a larger dollar amount than we'll actually go out the door, but it is the most conservative way to budget for those projects.

So we do have uh 1.2 billion dollars of projects that are already in progress that we are working on.

Uh, and we'll look to add about 500 million dollars to that, so our total CIP budget of about 1.7 billion dollars.

Most of that's in the streets, water, and parks and rec improvements.

Lots of good projects happening uh over this next year, construction and project progress on some of our parks.

Advocacy center should open phase one in the fall.

Uh Northwater Treatment Plant will begin treating its first drops of water this summer, and then we'll have uh lake maintenance and irrigation system replacements at a couple of our parks, and then in fall of 2027, splash pad and pickleball courts at Freestone should be opening.

We know that we don't have a primary property tax, which would fund ongoing expenses uh and operations.

We do have a secondary property tax that repays debt that voters uh approved the town to be able to sell.

Um voters approve that on a ballot in order to repay the debt that we need to that has been approved.

It's uh 36.6 million dollars.

The tax rate would be staying at 98 cents per hundred dollars of assessed value.

I think this is about our fourth or fifth year in a row of maintaining that tax rate.

It will maintain maintain our reserves, and then we'll work on continuing those transportation projects as well.

All of this helps us helps us maintain Gilbert and the quality of life that we have come to know and love.

And we have already done a study session on this topic.

Tonight is our preliminary budget adoption.

It does set the maximum dollar amount that we're allowed to spend within the year.

So this is an important night, arguably the more important of the two adoptions.

Um and then in June 9th, it is final adoption.

Final can be a lower number, not a higher number, lower or equal to, but not higher.

And with that, happy to did that cover what you needed, Councilmember Targerson.

Yes, ma'am.

It hasn't changed over several months.

That's the point.

And I just for the average person listening, because since I'm the guy that convinced everybody to go to point nine eight, the one sad thing about trying to pull it down is in the end.

If let's say we did a 0.97, we're going to extend more uh interest on that.

In the end, we'll pay more if we could go if we could squeeze it down, we'll end up paying more.

So I'm happy.

It's the same thing as it was last time.

So thank you.

Thanks.

Councilmember Buckley.

So I I have a question, and it's probably too late.

And we probably should have already I and I'm sure we've already considered this, but um, uh I it's been I think I have seen hopefully the these numbers correctly, but uh we need more motorcycle officers on the road, and I think we cut.

Did we not cut some of them out?

This budget did not cut any existing public safety staff, and the two full-time positions that it does, new full-time positions and ads are in public safety.

Okay.

Well, I'm happy to hear that, and that I read whatever I read wrong.

But is there any way we could add two motorcycle officers to this budget?

I can certainly look into it for next year.

Uh at this point we would have to trade something out.

Um there is an additional funding.

Of what you are okay.

Well, can we put that in that we can at least look for a minimum of that for next year?

For we can definitely take that as a follow-up to um yeah, look at the other.

I think I think that we need that, they need that.

Um, and especially South Gilbert.

So I'm I'm kind of speaking for South Gilbert, uh, to maybe add a couple of motorcycle officers out there.

Um and I understand, I know we're we're gonna approve the budget tonight, so um, but I wanted to bring that up.

Thank you.

That's good feedback, and and we'll take that as we start to build the fiscal 28 budget.

Okay, and they may want more, they may want 10.

I don't know, but at least some is you know, I'm trying to get at that, you know, ask for at least something that we might be able to do for next year.

Okay, all right, thank you.

Thank you, Kelly.

I think we're good.

Any discussion or motion?

I'll make a motion that we accept the budget as presented.

I second that.

Let's thought it is the still away.

We are all turning into pumpkins.

It's been moved and seconded that we adopt the fiscal year 2027 property tax levy.

Please vote.

Motion carries seven zero item 31, acceptance of the preliminary budget for July 1, 2026 to June 30, 2027.

Any further discussion with Kelly or anybody else?

I got one thing.

He's he's he's gotten giddy.

I'll second it.

When's the last time you slept?

I got up like three in the morning to get back here.

So man.

I'll second it.

I second it.

It's twins here.

Move and seconded.

Please vote.

Motion carries seven zero.

I'll adjourn the special meeting and reconvene in a regular meeting.

Anyone need any information on this?

Need a motion.

Is there a second?

Second, and please vote.

Motion carries seven zero.

Future meetings.

You can see those listed here.

Communications report from the town manager.

Thank you, Mayor.

I've got nothing tonight.

For reports from the council, uh Vice Mayor has the first one.

Yep.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um Parks Rec, uh H2O Fest.

Beat the Heat at Gilbert's H2O Fest.

Um, family friendly water festival will feature playful water obstacles and eight-lane outdoor pool, water slides, water activities, and more.

Date is February June 5th, 2026 at Besquite Aqua Center from 3 to 7 p.m.

And the mother-son dance.

You'll be you'll be glowing by the end of the evening after spending this special night with your son or sons.

Light uh refreshments will be served along with dancing, games, and photos.

Wear your brightest or your whitest clothes to make that glow party even more fun.

And that's uh February.

I'm sorry, Friday, June um 5th, 2026 at the Gilbert Community Center from 6 to 8 o'clock.

And that's what's going on with parts of the rec.

Thank you.

Councilmember Lyons.

Thank you, Bice for some really good information there and great slides.

With that, um, I just like to invite everyone to partake in our Memorial Day uh remembrance here at Town Hall on May 25th at 830.

Um so please come out and honor our troops.

That is also my 43rd wedding anniversary, so uh won't you know I'll be there celebrating?

I'm old as dirt.

That's nothing.

My 50th is in July.

Oh yeah.

Yeah, I yeah, right.

Uh no reports from the mayor.

With that, I'll take a motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Let's do it.

We are adjourned.