Mesa City Council Meeting – June 11, 2026

The Mesa City Council met on June 11, 2026, to discuss a consent agenda, two removed items regarding Valley Metro transit services (light rail operations and paratransit/ride choice), and to hear public comments on a proposed data center. The meeting included an invocation, pledge of allegiance, and a brief disruption by a sign-wielding protester who was removed. Key actions included approval of the consent agenda, approval of the light rail operations agreement (5B) with one dissenting vote, and approval of the paratransit agreement (5C).

Consent Calendar

• Approval of minutes from previous meetings.
• Liquor license applications for: Little Drummer, Angry Crab Shack, Tailgate Bar and Grill, Holiday and Express, Boulders on Southern, Oro Brewing Company, Quick Corner, Yal Sua, Sipal Zix, Breakthrough, 711, Faux Bon Me Cafe, and Akoto Sushi (Items 3A–3M).
• Contracts and agreements: one-year contract with four-year renewal for electric utility distribution transformers; three-year contract with two-year renewal for hazardous facility support; dollar limit increase for route planning and management solutions; purchase of solar-powered portable traffic signal trailers; design-build contract for Aeropine Park and Whiteman Park playground renovations (funded by CDBG); lease agreement for a downtown restaurant and food business incubator at 11 W. Main St.; fiber access agreement with Apache Junction; foreign trade zone operator agreement with MGC Pure Chemical America; and intergovernmental agreement with the Superior Court for jury administration services (Items 4A–4E, 5A, 5D–5F). All consent items were approved unanimously.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Noah James Markham spoke on both Items 5B and 5C. On 5B, he supported light rail expansion, emphasizing its importance for homeless individuals and people with disabilities. On 5C, he advocated for paratransit and ride choice, stating it is critical for disabled persons who rely on these services.
• David Winstanley (District 6 resident) spoke on Item 5C, questioning the efficiency and cost transparency of Valley Metro’s fixed-route bus service. He noted a 10% increase in direct costs and 7% increase in indirect costs, a 5.3% farebox recovery, and a $13 per boarding subsidy, calling for accountability and independent review.
• James Beck (Eastmark resident) spoke during items from citizens present, opposing the proposed NTT data center (a non-agenda item). He cited concerns about water scarcity, strain on infrastructure, lack of community transparency, and the need for a full environmental impact study. He urged the council to slow the process.
• Nathan Taylor Taft (Mesa high school student) also opposed the data center, highlighting water consumption (closed-loop systems still use millions of gallons), the speculative AI bubble, and insufficient community outreach (only 91 notifications, two attendees at the neighborhood meeting lasting 20 minutes).
• Braden Peters (local resident) opposed the data center, noting Mesa’s high density of data centers (over 15 built/approved/proposed in seven years), rising water and electricity costs, potential health impacts near Lakeside Sports Park (2.8 million annual visitors), and lack of community involvement. He urged the council to reject the project.
• During the public comments, a protester holding a sign was removed by police after refusing to lower it, following a warning from the mayor. The mayor stated data centers were not on the agenda.

Discussion Items

• Item 5B – Valley Metro Light Rail Operations and Maintenance Agreement: The council discussed a request to approve $18.3 million in Mesa taxpayer funds for one year of light rail operations and maintenance ($3.6 million per mile). Councilmember Taylor voiced strong opposition, citing low ridership (less than 1% of Mesa residents), a 95% taxpayer subsidy, unmet fare recovery targets, and contractual lock-in. She argued the agreement was entered into by prior councils without voter approval and called for legal exit options. Councilmembers Adams, Summers, and Duff supported approval, emphasizing the city’s legal obligation under the joint powers agreement and bylaws, risk of lawsuit if defaulted, and the broader benefits of transit (economic development, multimodal city, density, equity). Councilmember Heretti noted voter approval of Prop 479 (60% of Maricopa County voters) and efforts to improve efficiency at Valley Metro. City Attorney Smith explained that withdrawal would require agreement from Tempe and Phoenix or covering costs, and nonpayment would result in loss of voting rights and 12% interest penalties.
• Item 5C – Valley Metro Paratransit and Ride Choice Agreement: The council similarly discussed the paratransit subsidy. Councilmember Taylor distinguished this from light rail, expressing support for subsidizing paratransit due to its direct benefit to disabled residents. No other councilmembers spoke against it. The item was approved separately.

Key Outcomes

• The consent agenda was approved unanimously.
• Item 5B (light rail operations) was approved with a roll-call vote. Councilmember Taylor cast the sole dissenting vote; the motion passed.
• Item 5C (paratransit/ride choice) was approved unanimously.
• No formal action was taken on the data center proposal, as it was not on the agenda. Public comments were heard and will be considered in future proceedings.
• Meeting adjourned after no further business.