Well, good morning, everyone.

Mesa City Council study session for May 14th, 2026.

Council member Goforth is unable to attend.

And she is excused.

Council members Taylor and Haredi are participating by Zoom.

Otherwise, all other council members are present.

As usual, we have a city council meeting on May 18th.

And item one is to review the agenda we have for Monday, May 18th.

So, council, if we want to go over that.

Let's see.

Yes.

All right.

Great.

Since both of you are on Zoom, if you have some questions, uh please ask them.

Otherwise, if you want to go through it, council, we'll go through the agenda.

I have some questions about our agenda for the 18th, but I want Frankie to have the opportunity to ask anything first.

No questions right now.

Got it.

Miss Taylor, the mic is yours.

Hey, thank you.

Uh good morning, everybody.

Um so I was looking at item four B as in boy.

For our contract renewal for vehicle detection systems.

Um I read over it.

I have a pretty decent understanding that this is essentially um to help traffic flows.

Um, but I just had a few uh just questions I wanted to follow up on because I think it's important that the public understands as far as our understanding goes.

There's this is not like automatic license plate readers, facial or plate detection technology, because I know that can be controversial.

So does our does the data that we're aggregating for traffic flow, is that gonna belong to Mesa?

Is it gonna belong to Summit or is it gonna belong to Wave Tronics?

Like who's keeping the information?

Are we analyzing it?

Are they giving us reporting?

Um just curious to know.

Well, we have the experts in the room to help as well question.

Mayor, uh, we we normally would, and this is sounds like a bad joke, but Mr.

Kadarian's stuck in traffic and uh is running a few minutes late.

So, council member Taylor, we uh we can definitely have Eric and his team follow up with you uh after this and and get all those answers to to that question about that item.

But would the anybody from the police department be able to have a you know this is all this is all transportation yeah and and to the council member's point it it does not involve the the items that she that she was referring to.

This is all about um traffic signals and and um and the communication between those, but let uh I'll do a very poor job of explaining it and just have Eric follow up with her so that we can get her the correct answers.

So, Miss Taylor, we'll move on to the next well, uh hold on.

Um, just right on time.

Yeah, uh stand by, Miss Taylor.

Uh just walk through the door based on the signalization on vehicle detection system.

So for me for the the and is there a specific question or just to explain?

Sorry.

You wouldn't believe I got stuck in traffic.

So it's okay.

That was just actually really funny in its irony.

Um not funny for you though.

Just just saying it's just ironic.

Um, yeah, I was just curious to know, Eric.

I I do want to state for the again for the public, just so they understand this is not license plate reading technology.

This is not facial technology, AL ALPRs.

This is just to simply help with traffic flow to my understanding, and correct me if I'm wrong, is to improve essentially the safety of our traffic flow.

But um, one curiosity I had particularly was when we're getting all this data back.

Are we subscribing to a reporting system through Wave Tronics or Summit?

Or does Mesa just get everything kind of in-house?

Are we aggregating, analyzing, and using that data to basically determine is this a good contract that we are going potentially into?

Do we want to come back and use this company again?

Um, so can you explain that for me?

Sure, mayor.

Uh council member, that's uh that's that's I'll I'll uh attempt to answer all of that at once.

If I miss anything, please um let me know.

Um so at each one of our at each one of our traffic signals, we have detection.

We have some form of technology of detection so that um we don't have to have extra green time, let's say, for a side street when there aren't any cars there.

Um this contract's that's on the agenda for Monday is a new form of detection.

Uh most of our signals, we have over 500 traffic signals.

Most of our traffic signals either have in ground loop detectors that um quite honestly are the most reliable for us, but they end up getting cut quite a bit with all the um you know construction activity, utility activity that happens around intersections.

Um for the past 20, 25 years, we've been using video detection.

Um what we've found with video detection is it does not there are certain times of the day that the videos get washed out because our grid system um goes north, south, east, west.

That when this the sun is setting or the sun is rising uh directly to the east or west, the that that video gets washed out and we we lose our detection capabilities.

So um this contract is for uh uh a new form of technology with with wave tronics um and um we've tested it out and and we're quite happy with it.

Um so all of all of this information detection information actually is at each traffic signal and gets sent back to our our um transport our transportation management center um back at the transportation building.

Um we collect all that data on our servers and it's a lot of data.

We're trying to to figure out how to how to use it.

There are um national standards for signal performance measures that that we're trying to use it to to make our system more efficient.

Um but really what this agenda item is, it's uh it's a new form of technology that we would like to start using at our traffic signals.

Thank you.

That's great.

Um that all makes sense.

I just had okay, one follow-up question that I thought of.

Does can the police or an outside agency access this data without like a warrant or a subpoena?

This is again just I really want the public to understand this.

Is that accessible?

Would it even have driver information associated with it?

Sure.

The this specific product that um doesn't have any, it doesn't have any sort of data, driver data associated with it.

It's just simply presence detection out there.

Is there is there a vehicle at the traffic signal?

Okay, perfect.

That was all my questions about it.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

Ms.

Taylor, any other questions?

Uh yes, I did have a question on 4E as an echo.

This is for the purchase of Apple computer products.

I read the council report.

Um I used to work in tech, so I understand that every so often you need to kind of refresh your technology.

I was just curious, I didn't see in the council report, and I am very sorry if I missed this.

I was looking at like how how old are the current products that we're using?

What are we using?

How long was our prior contract with a vendor, you know, Apple Dell, et cetera.

You know, and what are we doing?

Are we selling off our old laptops, our old tech?

Or I just want to understand where the money's going and how we're doing basically business going forward and what we're doing with our old technology.

Good morning, council, Mr.

Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members, uh Mayor, Councilmember Taylor, Scott Kahn, CIO, City of Mesa.

Uh to answer your questions, we take all of our hardware equipment that is utilized by city staff and uh in the in the business of uh providing services to residents, and they're typically on a three to five year replacement schedule.

Uh we do this in a proactive manner so that we don't incur what's called technical debt.

We get behind uh the times, so to speak, and make our equipment less effective uh and less capable of using the new advances in technology as they come out each year.

So in the case of the uh the Apple products, the iPads and so on, they're on the same three to five year replacement schedule, typically five.

Uh and it's the same schedule we use for PCs or desktops, and we plan this ahead of time and we plan a very systematic replacement in each and every department by tracking which pieces of equipment they've had, when it was purchased, and uh it's its age.

So we will select the ones that are in the four and five year range and typically replace them.

And in the case of Apple products, we're averaging uh 100,000 to 300,000 a year in replacement costs.

And the company we work with actually gives the city back money uh for that privilege, and they wind up destroying the products.

We typically do not resell Mesa products.

We make sure they are completely wiped, all Mesa data is cleaned off of them, and uh they're basically e-wasted.

Do we use the money that we receive to go back into purchasing the new products?

Uh actually, the the money that comes back to us from the e-waste program, we actually were donating to community spirit last year.

Matter of fact, the council did a matching fund where we were able to uh give uh an elementary school uh last was it last last year, uh $12,000 uh toward uh toward buying new technology equipment for their computer programs at their school.

Okay, okay.

Um that's that's helpful.

I mean, I understand that we're basically trying to stay ahead of the the curb so that we don't have a bunch of old PCs, laptops, iPhones, et cetera, that start dying off on us.

And could just for the public sake, because I know that that can happen and people like to know the expense.

If we were not to stay ahead of the curb, what do you think our debt would be?

What do you think the costs would be to the city of Mesa if we just kind of let things run their course?

Maybe we've got laptops that would run seven years or eight years, but not everything stays on that same schedule.

Uh mayor, council member Taylor, uh, the technical debt that would occur would exhibit itself in the form of not being able to perform the work.

I mean, when a machine cannot use the new software that comes out or the upgrades of the software that come out each and every year, uh, and and typically more than more than once a year, uh if a piece of equipment is old or the uh the the chip inside is incapable of dealing with the new software code that is put out there, uh the application simply stops working, and it it makes the city staff that much less effective uh because they can't do the things they used to do.

And it's no fault of the case.

So it's a much larger amount of money because of the the essentially people can't get their jobs done quickly and efficiently, so there's a huge lag in time because software needs to be updated, my laptop broke, I have to exchange it for a new one, uh my phone is slowing down, I'm not getting my emails or my messages, et cetera.

Is that is that a good way of to state that?

Uh that's a very good way to state that.

And uh you you would also notice the the drop in responsiveness, the delay time.

Uh I mean, picture yourself working on a program and you you hit send and you're waiting for it to go and you're waiting for it to go, and you get frustrated, and the person you're trying to send things to gets frustrated.

Uh so the overall service level goes down, and it would it would create an impact.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you.

That answers my questions perfectly.

I appreciate your time.

Thank you.

Miss Taylor, you have other questions.

Yes, um I do.

I have I have one other.

Well, I'm not trying to be Karen Bass over here.

So I was just looking at um just so people understand 4G as in girl, uh, you know, the new the new components to our fire trucks.

If we could just have someone give just a little overview, it's 16,900,000 up to that amount, is pretty large.

Um, but you know, we need our fire trucks to be in perfectly wonderful operation operating condition.

I I do remember when we toured the North uh public public safety facility, we were told there's a fire basically every single day in the city of Mesa.

So just for again the public's sake to understand this is expensive, but this happens.

It is um it's the city's doing our job as best we can to make sure that we are prepared and ready for emergencies, and uh maybe we can just do a little explanation of why these things tend to cost so much money.

It's just the market that we're in.

Thank you, Miss Taylor.

We do have our experts here.

We have Jason Mickelson, who's our fleet director and assistant chief Brian Darling here as well to explain it.

I had the same question because I know these trucks are spread over five years, purchase four or five years, and it's best to get in now to help save some money.

So, Jason or Chief, how good morning, Mayor.

If I may mayor too, would you talk about what's happening in the market as well with the fire truck manufacturing?

Yeah, yes, that's part of your answer.

Thank you.

So good morning, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council members, Councilmember Taylor.

I mayor already introduced our fleet maintenance uh Jason Nicholson, so he's gonna have a good answer for you to explain all things fire maintenance related.

So morning, Mayor and Count uh Vice Mayor, Council members.

Yeah, and in the market that we're dealing with right now in the fire apparatus industry, we used to be able to obtain purchases within 10 to 12 months on all those items.

That market has shifted from COVID to where we're up to the three to the four-year mark.

So in regard to this purchase and to your question, what we decided to do, what we what we're trying to do is so we are we are purchasing this five-year bond all up front, which in the in the initial onset saved about 980,000 uh doing it this way, and in that way that those all the types of units that are on up for um purchase right now, that they can arrive in the scheduled years that have already been set over the eight-year replacement schedule for that apparatus.

And it it also puts us in that predicament that if something was to happen outside of our normal replacement, it's gonna take us three to four years to be able to replace that unit, which could put the city in in the fire operations and uh a pretty hard time to be able to provide the front loading, right?

Is that right?

We're buying everything up front.

Yes, ma'am.

So we are front loading, but those units will arrive according to the years that the replacement schedule was set over the next five years.

So for example, on that, there's nine pumpers.

Three of those pumpers will arrive in 28, three of them will arrive in 29, and three of them will arrive in 30 to match that schedule.

Got it.

And so that also could I assume, or actually just tell me, because we're getting those units um according to the year that they'll be needed, then they will also be manufactured according to the latest standards and technology specs for that year.

So in other words, something that's made today could change, and by 2030, when we have those those pumpers, we could assume I'm hoping that the 2030 um product is manufactured according to what would be necessary and safe and and standard of 2030, not 2026.

Yes, ma'am.

So no matter what that calendar year is, we have to follow what's called NFPA, National Fire Protection Um Agency.

So if something changes in any of those calendar calendar years, the manufacturers do have to make those changes on the truck on the trucks on the apparatus.

Okay.

Okay, and so and you said we're saving 900,000 because we're buying everything up front essentially now.

Um we're buying in bulk.

I call it the Costco effect, is that right?

Uh yes, ma'am.

So we we saved that initially.

That does not include the cost increases that are gonna happen over the next four years.

So this the savings is actually a lot more.

There's just no way for me to predict what that is, but it is a lot more.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Jason, why don't you explain the different types of fire apparatus just overall?

I mean, you've got uh engine companies, you have ladder companies, heavy rescues, anything else?

Yes, yes, Mayor Freeman.

So on this bond, we have nine pumpers, which pumpers are the typical units that most of us see running around every day.

Also on there.

I think you have some visuals.

Um we do.

Oh, yeah.

So why don't we bring that out as well?

Did you just learn how to do that today this morning, Jason?

Chief, it's the madest fly.

We have a device.

All right.

Stop.

We were in the mess on uh jumping up.

Sorry about that, Mayor.

Had a little technical difficulty there.

Chief, they are white trucks, right?

Yes.

Okay.

The most appropriate color.

So what we're showing up here first is the nine pumpers that are on there for to be replaced that will be replaced in the years that I mentioned earlier.

These are the typical units that all of us see running around each and every day.

What are those costs, by the way?

Just those are running about 1.1 to 1.2 currently.

Per five years ago, they were about 740,000.

Okay.

This is a drawing, so this is the specification that Mesa follows that um we that we get from the manufacturer when we're building.

The next type of unit that's that's on this to be replaced are two of our hef heavy rescues, uh also called squad units.

These type of units will respond to major events across the valley, right?

So these are regional assets.

They can go into Phoenix, Tempe, whatnot.

So they're uh these units are pretty old.

Uh the reason why these units, they they do tend not to get the mileage that our normal units get, but these units are only guaranteed to be supplied parts for 20 years.

And so we're right there at the threshold of these types of units to be able to repair them if necessary.

Are these diesel gas what powers these trucks?

They are diesel ma'am.

Okay, great.

Thank you.

Perfect.

And this is a current picture of the uh specification that Mesa is looking to replace the one that was in uh the picture that I just shown.

The last one on uh on this for the purchase is one of our rear mount ladders.

Uh we will be replacing that with another rear lab rear mount uh ladder.

Sorry.

And the current ladder, most of our ladder fleet, they're all running about 140 to 169,000 miles on them.

And they're you know, obviously you can see in there that they're anywhere from 10 to 13 years old currently.

Most of them are in the 13-year-old range.

These particular units take four years to get at the current in the current market, which is up from 12 months five years ago.

And the cost of those two point six million dollars.

Oh, mayor and council um staff's done a good job, and we appreciate everything Fire's done did to get out in front of this and try to ensure that we can have timely delivery of the apparatus.

And unfortunately, we're playing the hand that we're dealt.

There's um it's not a very competitive market.

There's really only two manufacturers, is that three manufacturers?

And so um it it's not um, it's not robust competition as it relates to the pricing uh on on these apparatus, and and it has increased substantially as Jason mentioned, both the price and the lead time since COVID.

So uh appreciate uh them planning ahead and and mapping this out so that we can keep these apparatus on our delivery schedule.

Yes, Mr.

I don't have any further questions, but I just uh wanted to say thank you for a great presentation and walking us through the cost of the units and um the schedule for which we're buying and then the savings that we've we've I guess I could say the savings we have now, but the future savings based on the cost of these units increasing in their subsequent parts.

So thank you, Jason.

Yes, ma'am, thank you.

Uh Ms.

Duff.

Um looking at this brings me back to we had the first electric fire truck in the United States.

Very proud of that in District 6.

And I was wondering how that was performing, and is that a consideration for future purchases, giving uh fuel cost and maintenance and the health of our firefighters without the exhaust fumes.

Yeah, and mayor council member, and now you know, please chief or Jason um speak up here.

Um we you know, initially, and I don't think anything's changed since I've been last update on this.

You know, the crews have really responded well to um to the apparatus.

It you know, certainly uh because of it's much quieter, it doesn't have some of the exposures of uh you know that normal um diesel um powered uh vehicles have I think the the desert environment it's withstood you know pretty well uh so far.

Um that the biggest problem right now, the biggest hurdle has been the cost.

And um we we're definitely interested, but we think as the market gets more robust, that will bring down uh the cost of those vehicles to a point that you know we could we could look at that, but I they shot up dramatically um after we purchased ours.

We we were uh as you mentioned an early adopter, and then the market's gotten robust, but they haven't been able to keep up with the demand, which has kept prices high.

So we're we're continuing to monitor the market and and if there's opportunities, but we want to compare that cost benefit, you know, to being able to make sure that we can get as many apparatus out on the timeline that we that we can, and right now it's just been cost prohibitive to do that.

But we we do think they've been um well the crews the crews like them, so that that's really a good sign.

And I think they would have less maintenance overall because they don't have the um combustion engine.

Yes, ma'am, it depends on which way you look at it, right?

The normal day-to-day uh maintenance cost that we get from the diesel engines.

It yeah, you do save some time and some money's there, but then in some of the on the electrical side of it, it almost kind of evens out, if that makes sense.

Interesting.

Uh what's the ballpark for a new I'm just curious on the comparison?

For the new electric ones, so they're they're almost double the price of a gas of a diesel engine.

Yeah, well, hopefully that'll change in the future.

I think it'll be better for our firefighters.

Thank you.

Mayor.

Yes.

Mayor and council, and maybe I'll go back to I think a question that the vice mayor made, and I'll I'll make a comment on it, because I think it's worth the council knowing about this.

Uh nationally, there's uh uh litigation involving this industry because it's been alleged to have engaged in anti-competitive practices, which have resulted in an artificially high prices to the apparatus.

We are looking at um joining that litigation in the near future.

Um we're gonna come back to council probably in an executive session the next couple months.

Um the the fire department needs to move forward on purchasing and getting in the queue to be able to purchase um these apparatus.

So the fact that we may join that litigation um in the future shouldn't in any way affect um the need to move forward to purchase apparatus that are critical to obviously serve the community.

But I just want to make, you know, the I I I know the vice mayor is aware of it.

Um I just want to make sure council's uh aware of that, so you're not surprised, and we'll come back to council.

We plan to come to council.

We've talked internally already um within the next couple months uh as we look to potentially join that litigation.

All right.

Thank you for the update.

All right, with that said, Miss Taylor, anything else on this agenda item?

Yeah, I only have one more.

Uh I would like to understand um can someone just walk us through a little bit more of this contract that we're going to um enter into for the Hohokam Stadium in Fitch Park.

We certainly can.

We'll send the fire guys off the bias here.

Oh, yes, thank you.

We have Mr.

Hirschberg coming up.

So this is item 4K, Ho Cam Stadium and Fitch Park Improvement Project.

We're just doing a CMR, CMAR.

CMR.

Good morning, Mayor Council.

Uh Mayor, Councilmember Taylor, 4K.

Umil to uh about a year ago, I think.

We were talking about the Cubs.

Um this is part of the our facility use agreement uh we entered into with the A's.

This is a 25-year lease originally uh with the A's for the use of Hoecam and Fitch Park uh for their str their training facilities.

Um in that facility use agreement at every 10-year interval to maintain the operations and the current state of the facilities, the city is required um as part of those agreements to make uh upgrades um to the facilities.

Um and there's a couple of triggers, either um items that have been previously capital items that have been previously replaced and have uh out um live their useful life, or if five or more teams in the Cactus League have um similar facilities.

So at the after uh uh lots of back and forth with with the team, and we've landed on some improvements to address um a hitting lab at Fitch Park, uh similar to um not the same size or scale, but as uh to what fits the team's needs at Fitch Park for their use, um as well as updating some of the facilities um at HoCam uh specifically for in the locker room areas, team dining and their uh sports medicine facilities.

Thank you.

Is this our first or second tenure interval that we're doing improvements in the 25-year contract?

Uh Mayor, Councilmember Taylor, this will be our first tenure interval.

Okay.

And just so everyone can hear and understand, including myself.

What what happens if we were to say, no, we're not gonna do that?

Uh mayor, council member uh Jim can probably jump into that, but uh again, it is a binding agreement with between the city and the team, so Jim.

Yeah, mayor and council.

Um they would seek well all remedies that they could under the contract.

I mean, it'd probably sue us for damages, uh, monetary damages, maybe specific performance and force us to actually make the improvements.

And they could also terminate and uh look to walk from the stadium.

So they they probably have a you know, sort of a variety of potential remedies that they could seek.

So we are legally bound to do this, is that correct?

Mayor and council, yes.

I mean, it's it's obviously it's an agreement.

And just for context, too.

Uh you we're we're the owners of this facility to get uh a team to sign for 25 years, they they have an expectation that they're that we're going to maintain that facility in uh you know in good condition.

Uh otherwise they wouldn't have signed for 25 years, they would have signed for five years, maybe 10 years, and then they would have used those opportunities as leverage to get either improvements or to walk.

Um so you have sort of this um tension.

Um you as a city you want the team to sign a very long-term commitment to the city, but as a team, they want to be able to know that the facility is going to be maintained in uh good condition if they're gonna stay there for a long time.

And so that's the tension you have within the within any sort of long-term relationship like this.

And so, yes, we're we're required to under the agreement to make these improvements.

Thank you so much, Jim.

And then one last question so that um people can understand what is the city's revenue annually.

Could we give just a quick estimate of what we make from Hohohocum Stadium, all the baseball games, string spring training, et cetera.

You know, it um mayor, council member Taylor.

We we can certainly show you how robust our sales tax collections and and revenue are during the month of March during um spring training.

It is our second Christmas and kind of the lynchman of part of our um uh our whole economic model has has been built around that.

So all of as we saw this year, spring training numbers were back, I think, to pre-COVID numbers as far as attendance and um people in from out of town spending money, uh, shopping, uh, eating in our restaurants, and that is crucial um for this, and this is why the community back when the Cubs initially were looking at relocating, fought so hard to maintain the Cubs' presence here in Arizona and in Mesa and then recruited.

Um we we actively recruited the A's to come over and fill um the stadium uh after that.

So you know, I I don't look at this as a contract that we have to do in duress.

I think if the this is the this is part of the partnership, and you've got to maintain a um a world-class facility to keep these teams here um in Mesa and and happy to be you know tenants in our in our facilities, and um it's it's unfortunately just the cost of doing business to make sure that we can maintain a robust spring training presence and all the positives that it brings to the community because of that.

Do we have a dollar figure?

Yeah, it's it's self-sac.

We can give you that.

It's um you you can see what February is and what April is or or others to show the bump that we get and it's is it's in the millions of dollars um that that we see as far as um higher revenue in in March than um what we see at other uh other months of the year.

It's it's we we would say that it is potentially equal to or exceeds the amount that it costs us to do these updates, especially if we were looking looking at it over the amount of revenue that we've gained over the course of 10 years.

Yeah, absolutely.

I think the ROI on what spring training brings to the local economy far exceeds um any of the capital investments that we have to make um into these facilities.

Right.

Okay, thank you.

I I'll I'll just wait for that number to come and then I can I can let people know what it is.

Mayor.

Yes, Mr.

Adams.

Thank you, Mayor.

I might be able to offer a little historical perspective here.

Uh at this time in 2013, I was serving on the economic development advisory board a few years into that term, actually.

So uh from my perspective, the the visitor revenue, the sales tax revenue, and other uh ancillary and associated revenue from spring training would far outweigh the number we're looking at here.

But the other thing that that I recall very vividly was there was a very strong political will at the time on the part of the sitting council at that time to retain not only the Chicago Cubs, but attract the Oakland A's.

And um I think that uh whenever you're dealing with professional sports organizations, there are certain expectations, as Mr.

Butler and Mr.

Herschberg have outlined.

And you have other communities competing for these teams.

People want these teams either uh uh resident in their city or conducting their spring training activities in their city for the obvious revenue and visitor reasons.

So uh I think that's the reason that uh for many reasons.

We looked at that long-term 25-year contract.

It gave the A's a sense of certainty, and it gave us the opportunity to build on that relationship.

And I I recall many discussions at the economic development advisory board level about the value and the worth of this, and I think we on at least three or four occasions unanimously endorsed the city moving forward with with these arrangements.

So now we're numbered above right now, but it's well over there.

Well, there you have it.

Yeah, 12.

Okay.

Thank you.

Thank you, Rich.

Um Mark, before you go on, Joe, we have Joe here from General Manager of the A's.

Joe, do you want to come up and say a few words about the importance of the A speed in here in Mesa, Arizona, as well as obviously the A's are moving to Las Vegas for a specific reason they recorded from leaving Oakland, and then your spring train your games are played elsewhere, but then moving to Oakland.

I mean to uh Las Vegas.

Mr.

Hersbury and I had the opportunity to go up to the groundbreaking in in Las Vegas.

So just maybe give us an overview of your perspective.

Yeah, and thanks again for having us here this morning.

Excuse me, Mayor, Vice Mayor Council.

Um to my left also is Dave May, he's our sales and operations manager here in Mesa.

Um I have the unique perspective um of being one of the longest tenured employees with the team since we moved to Mesa.

So uh as Rich mentioned, um, almost 13 years ago when we made the move to Hookam, uh that's when my my career started with the A's.

So I basically was brought in to help run what spring training would look like in this new facility.

Um obviously back then very shiny, looked great, still looks great.

Probably looked at uh the best that it's ever been this season.

Um so I've had over a decade of working in the community here and not only obviously at Hookam, but with Fitch Park and the Lewolf training complex.

Um Manny Cologne, my counterpart down there, he's in the Dominican Republic today.

But um the city has been a great partner to us.

Uh we love being here.

Um it's worked out very, very well on a variety of levels.

I think uh Scott mentioned and Mark mentioned this last season with spring training.

Um fantastic year.

So many different people came to Mesa.

Attendance was up, tourism was up, um just fantastic all around.

And then the other part that that we've looked at too was just embracing the community that we're in here, even though for my my specific responsibility is only spring training.

Um year-round, you know.

I think uh Mark, I was talking to Mark before the the meeting.

We have the the luxury of being uh in first place currently, right?

So this is a great time for our team.

But we had a player last night that made his major league debut, Henry Bolte.

Uh and he had a great game, two for two, made an incredible diving catch in center field.

You know, it's kind of all the news.

But the cool part about that is because we've been in Mesa now for an extended period of time.

His career started here.

So it started right down there at Lewolf Training Center.

Um, and so now he's in the big leagues over the course of the last three or four years.

Um again, it's been a great time for us here in the city.

Um loved working with everybody uh associated with the city, partnerships within uh even downtown Mesa with 12 West Brewing and the ASU Mix Center.

They do a lot of our graphics on our scoreboard out there.

We try to really engage where we're at, um, and it's been great.

These improvements for us are gonna help us obviously stay competitive with those around the league, but also give a benefit to the people that do come to the stadium every spring, and then even the rest of the year.

Um right now we currently have high school baseball championships happening at the stadium.

Um next week, I believe we have the WAC tournament, um, which is another great story.

Uh the WAC baseball tournament happens at Hookam Stadium.

Uh the last two years or the last two years of his career, Jacob Wilson played for Grand Canyon University, played at Hoho Cam Stadium at the WAC tournament baseball tournament.

We end up drafting him, goes there, plays there for spring training, and then was runner-up in rookie of the year last year.

So um all around, it's it's been great for us.

That's that's kind of my take.

I love working here.

That's that's for sure.

Um so yeah.

Thank you, Joe.

Thank you, Joe.

Uh Mayor Council, Joe touched on it briefly, but uh the the community impact goes beyond just participating, utilizing ASU for different programs.

They've contributed financially to our park system um and and upgrades to baseball fields there.

They've participated in um several parks and recreation programs being play bringing players out for clinics, um, and the bringing trading cards and the guys show up with their sharpies and ready to sign autographs.

I mean, and the the little kids light up.

It's it's pretty neat to see.

Um, but I I do want to touch on Mayor, you mentioned it briefly.

One thing that I do here in the community, and I get a lot of questions about does um the team moving to Las Vegas affect anything with the relationship with Mesa?

And the answer is no, again, as we've highlighted.

This is a part we're in year that we're 12, 13 now of a of a 25-year agreement, but there's no other teams doing spring training in Las Vegas.

So the team needs a place to play and locate.

It's much like the Diamondbacks who are not are don't do spring training in downtown Phoenix.

They use talking stick fields in Scottsdale.

So it's a similar relationship.

So this has no end the team moving to Vegas has no impact uh on the relationship with Mesa, and we actually hope it's an improved relationship with uh a Legion Airlines and and the airport and the direct um ability to get to Mesa uh for those games and building that fan base and drawing them in.

Yeah, I think we're all excited for 2028 as we open that building in Las Vegas.

But I think as Mark mentioned, the first location that those fans would be coming to see that team would be in the city.

It would be at spring training in 2028.

Good.

Thank you.

Ms.

T.

I just wanted to say one thing real quick to follow up.

Um I this is important information for the public to see and hear, and we can go back and reference it.

But baseball is the quintessential American sport.

And I think that we are extremely fortunate to be essentially such an American city in Mesa.

Particularly, I want to say this in light of the 250.

We're in A250.

And I've learned so much in the short time that I've been on council and prior to that going to some baseball games, but particularly in this position, about how strong the baseball community is, and how incredibly magical it is to see all of these people come from all around the state and even outside of the state, straight to Mesa, so that they can watch spring trainings.

I've met people who have vacationed in Mesa for over two months just so that they can attend the spring training games because they're just that excited to be here.

Um and the revenue from it is obviously wonderful, but more so we're we've created an excellent brand for our city.

It creates a loyalty to Mesa, and um I think it it really highlights the American spirit of sport.

And we all know that the Sam Law is literally one of the best movies that has ever been made.

So I mean so thank you, Joe, thank you, Mark, for presenting.

I appreciate this.

Mayor, yeah, um Brian Richel's prepared to talk about what a difference our march is uh from a revenue standpoint.

Yeah.

Yeah, good morning, Mayor, Council Brian Richel, uh, director of the Office of Management and Budget.

So when we look at the city sales tax, we look at it on a monthly basis.

Um we're not able to isolate exactly what is causing or what uh impacts um specifically to the revenues, but we do see roughly about a three million dollar bump in March in our total city sales tax, and that includes all of the categories that I've mentioned before, like retail, bars and restaurants, uh auto rentals, things like that.

But the impact that we see uh is about a three to four million dollar average uh bump in our city sales tax in the month of March.

To compare that, we uh we average about 26 million, 25, 26 million throughout the year if we just take a straight line all the way across of the other months.

So we get about a three million dollar bump compared to what our Christmas is is about a six million dollar bump from that.

So we do see an impact, um, a good impact from having uh the uh the spring training in the city of Mesa, and it does, but we're not able to isolate it, but we do see an overall uh impact due to spring training in the month of March and also with the spring break and things like that.

And and mayor and council again, what Brian is speaking to is just what we see come back into our coffers.

But um, as was alluded to by council member Taylor and others, what this means to all the small businesses, the restaurants, the hotels, everyone who um the ecosystem of the spring training industry, it it more than um it has a dramatic impact on all of all of those businesses throughout the city of Mesa, um, in addition to the benefits that we see coming back to our coffers as well.

Thank you, thank you.

Perfect.

I'll I'll just add uh, you know, we we've been in the spring training business for decades in Mesa, Arizona, starting with the Cubs and other sports teams, and and I'm grateful that the A's and the Cubs stay here in Mesa, Arizona because that's branding.

That's what Mesa is.

We are a spring training uh city.

We facilitate that, and more importantly, what you don't see is the community service that the teams do outside of their organization.

So having the you know, professional ball players in Mesa, Arizona and elsewhere, it is fantastic and be able to enter enter uh great with the public, I think is is so important.

So thank you, Joe, for that, and we look forward to 28 up in Las Vegas, and that'll be a shorter hop, you know, between Mesa there, it's an hour away to go up to games up there, professional games.

They might get into the freeway too.

Anything else you'd like to add, Joe?

No, just uh thank you again.

Thank you for your time.

Appreciate it.

Okay.

Mark?

I'm good, Mayor.

Council member Taylor.

Any other questions on that?

Uh no, no further questions.

Thank you, gentlemen, for answering.

Thank you, Joe, for presenting as well.

It was it was a pleasure hearing from you.

All right, thank you.

Have a good rest of the day.

Um Ms.

Taylor, any other questions on the agenda?

Uh no, that was those are my questions.

Thank you so much, Mayor.

I appreciate it.

All right.

Council.

I know we have uh I will say 7B, 7C, Mr.

Smith amendments to Mesa City Charter Section 211.

Is there anything you want to address there?

Citywide.

We're gonna have a presentation on it.

Okay.

All right.

Vice Mayor.

Mayor, can we get a little discussion on 5D?

So we're doing a foreign trade zone extension.

Apple, um, which currently operates a data center in Southeast Mesa, um has one of the foreign trade zone sub zones under uh FTZ 221.

But a foreign trade zone is for manufacturing, not for data.

And I'm curious, because it does say in here operate high tech manufacturing and storage facility, but it doesn't the supporting documents don't speak specifically to what it is exactly that Apple's going to manufacture there.

How many jobs, what's the wages?

So are we are we seeing an evolution of this data center into a manufacturing center like we hoped it was back about 15 years ago?

Uh yes, uh Vice Mayor uh Mayor Freeman and uh council, yes.

Um they're not changing what they're doing in their operation from their original FTZ approval.

So they're just adding additional acres to the existing operation.

Um foreign trade zones are um eligible for businesses that are manufacturing their importing product and manufacturing or or in a production environment, but it's also for warehousing and distribution.

But you are correct.

Um the actual data center activity in um on that property was heavily scrutinized by CBP in their in their site visits last year.

It is not FTZ eligible space.

It's only the the manufacturing areas within that approved area.

Okay, so they're not getting the tax incentive under the FTZ for the data center.

It would only be things that are actual manufacturing.

Yes, yes, those areas are segregated within the facility.

And um this one when CBB did their uh CBP did their site visits last year.

CBP being U.S.

Customs and Border Protection.

So they are the I'm on acronym patrol.

Thank you.

Um the oversight um of their regular operations.

They perform the site visits, they ensure compliance for all of our FTZ operators.

So as part of the application process, there are also site visits and pre-application meetings to ensure that CBP support is there before an application, whether it's initial or in this case an expansion, before it's even submitted, so that we make sure there aren't any roadblocks by the time it gets to the foreign trade zones board for approval.

CBP is part of that process.

So they heavily scrutinize this one to make sure, first of all, that Apple was utilizing, fully utilizing their current activated space that have been activated in 2014-2015, and before they would approve even these additional seven acres.

Okay, because uh I mean anecdotally from the outside, I don't see manufacturing happening.

It's they have a traffic signal there, and the only thing I see coming out of there is the security guards going home and and uh UPS truck every once in a while.

It doesn't really strike me as manufacturing, it strikes me as data storage.

It's good to know that there's an agency that's actually looking at this.

Yes, yes, they are.

So they are importing components, products primarily for um data center cabinets that are then um that are then exported either into U.S.

commerce for other global data centers or um re-exported overseas.

So Apple is a cabinet maker.

Interesting.

Yeah, and Mayor, um council.

Yeah and Mayor Council, we um you know we've had a great relationship with Apple over the years and and um several of us had the opportunity a few years back to go to go see um the actual assembly process that Chris is just talking about and and the fact that they bring the parts and components in assemble it and then distribute it out to its um other data centers or other um facilities across the world is that that's happening as a component of their activity here in Mesa and so that that is what the FTZ supports not not the data center uh portion of the of the program.

Is it the server itself or cabinet the cabinets and equipment um they are server cabinets yes does having is there a um an amount of land that we can that is maximized under foreign trade zone 221 for example having this as a subzone does that restrict us from creating another subzone if we find a manufacturer that has 800 9000 jobs or could we just make the application under the foreign trade zone 221 we're allowed up to 2000 acres within our foreign trade zone so we are nowhere near that capacity.

Okay so we have a lot of capacity but we're using some of that capacity to cover that's over a data center really yeah mayor and vice mayor that that is true but we do have more than adequate capacity as Chris ref referenced right now in the future if that were to change and we were uh to become constrained you know that's obviously something we could we could look at but um but since we do have adequate capacity then uh it's it's not imp impeding any of our other economic development efforts I would love to be constrained the amount that would be a good problem where are we now how much how many acres are we using now uh we're we're under 150 right now so apple is most of that okay um however i i will um i will let you know that with the recent activity in the last year or so with tariffs and um other things that are happening within our economy there is an a very large increased um attention on utilization of foreign trade zones and whether or not um it would it would provide enough of a benefit for companies that are either manufactur importing and manufacturing um within mesa or um or re-exporting those or for those that are warehouse and distributing because they're not paying duties while those those parts um and items are in are in their warehouse okay so we we currently have two active um operators in Mesa so it has not been largely utilized in recent years but with the activity that's recently happening we have four that are in process right now um one of them obviously is the Apple operator agreement we have three others that are about to sign operator agreements that were recently approved in the last two direct express is one right is our current yes in addition to the the previous acres for Apple okay and just out of curiosity if they only manufacture on a portion of this why wouldn't they just readjust the acreage so that it doesn't cover the data center portion of this building it's the whole thing.

It's actually that's the way it's submitted on the application but CBP actually monitors the square footage that's being utilized okay for FTC.

So we're just seeing the property they're gonna shrink it down to what it's actually applicable.

Right.

So will they shrink it with that as they see it that won't those extra acres if you will the data center portions we could still use those in another foreign trade zone area if we wanted to they wouldn't count against us correct okay answers my questions thank you very much I have a quick follow-up question to that go ahead miss taylor I was considering what Scott said where he said he'd we'd love to be constrained um I think I understand we have two thousand I did you say two thousand acres is that right and we're at one 150 correct so this is foreign what is our what is our constraint for um non foreign manufacturing like do we have a constraint on how much space we can use for just you know united states based manufacturing no um so Benjamin Snow deputy director for economic development uh mayor council council member uh taylor there are no constraints on domestic we would that's just normal part of our normal course of business attraction that we do in all of the available buildings and acreage that we have available within the city boundaries um of note here just to make sure everybody on council and in the community is aware the foreign trade zone 221 includes the entirety of Mesa's municipal city boundary and that that's been the case for about the last four years originally it was centrally located around the gateway airport and so it's a great uh economic development tool for us and we do use that when that when that comes up when people ask about the ability to utilize

Um of note here, just to make sure everybody on council and in the community is aware.

The foreign trade zone 221 includes the entirety of Mesa's municipal city boundary.

And that that's been the case for about the last four years.

Originally it was centrally located around the gateway airport.

And so it's a great uh economic development tool for us, and we do use that when that when that comes up when people ask about the ability to utilize foreign trade zone benefits, and it it includes companies throughout the entire city, and we use that uh logic all the time.

Would you Okay would you just speak to the fact of of the benefit of the foreign trade zone for a man American-based manufacturing?

Because I I think there's this idea that it circumvents that, but actually a foreign trade zone can really support local manufacturing and exportation.

Absolutely.

I can I can speak to that.

Great question.

Mayor, um council member or vice mayor.

What you have is an opportunity to defer or completely um delay or eliminate the duties that you charge on imported component parts.

So think of as an example, you're gonna uh manufacture a widget that needs components A, B, and C, let's say component A is gonna be coming from a foreign source.

You bring component A into a foreign trade zone, do things with it, add it to the rest of your product.

If you sell that, then finish product outside of the United States, you don't have to pay any duties at all.

If you do sell it within the United States, you've delayed the payment of that duty until the time that you sell the A, B and C combined component to a customer somewhere.

So it's a it's a pretty big advantage for companies.

So raw materials come in and then American heads manufacture it and then sell that product domestically and internationally.

That is correct.

So it really is a way to bring in those raw materials and create American jobs.

Absolutely.

Well said.

Ms.

Taylor, any questions?

No, I I think that I would just um we maybe maybe you have a little bit more of a discussion about this in the future.

I need to learn a little bit more about it.

I've heard negative feedback on foreign trade zones from the general public, but because I myself am not an expert on this, um, and I I would need to ask more questions, more educated questions.

I think it would be helpful though, uh, for us in the future to have kind of a pros and cons discussion publicly because of the fact that Mesa has so um so much allowable acreage, and of course, we want domestic manufacturing, but to better understand how it can benefit us.

I think a lot of people get stuck on the it's just gonna be foreign businesses coming in, opening up, only hiring specific types of people.

Um it's gonna be, you know, high labor, unregulated jobs, um taking up our space, you know, benefiting these companies outside of the United States of America.

So there may be misnomers that we could clarify in future discussions.

Yeah, mayor and and um council member Taylor, uh I know economic development would be glad to come and sit down with you and educate you a little bit more on what BFTZ is.

It is it's truly not a an either-or.

This isn't um an incentive that hurts domestic manufacturing.

In fact, it encourages uh domestic manufacturing by giving these companies a break on duties that otherwise they'd have to pay that might make it cost prohibitive to actually manufacture in the United States, and they would have otherwise taken that manufacturing overseas.

And so this is uh enhancement that was set up by the federal government that they were able uh to take advantage of that that helps and benefits domestic manufacturing.

And so um we can definitely it's a complex program because we don't talk about it uh you know a lot um because it is a federal program that to this point only touches um a few companies within within um the city, but um this is unique to that type of manufacturing that's called out for under the federal statute.

We of course have thousands of other foreign businesses uh both in Mesa and in in the valley um who don't use the foreign trade zone because they are not uh conducting a business that qualifies uh for that, and and of course we we welcome that investment.

We welcome all foreign man foreign and domestic manufacturing and well Scott, I'll add to that and say the chips that are in these phones have raw materials that we don't have or at least can't produce here in the U.S.

So we import those, and now we have TSMC, and those are American jobs, right?

Or batteries, there are metals and batteries that are mined here, and they could ship those in, and there's a battery manufacturing plant just on the wrong side of the Mesa border in my district.

Right.

But we should gasel LG.

Yeah.

LG.

And we sell gas, so we make money on this.

This is great.

But those are local jobs.

So that's how these foreign trade zones can operate.

Yes?

Yes.

I'm seeing you.

Yes.

You're either falling asleep.

But that's how we can create American jobs here.

So to uh council member Taylor's point, I think there's an education piece to be had about what would an FTC actually is.

That's a that's a great conversation to have with the community.

Absolutely.

We're happy to have that conversation with the council member.

Um that posed the question, as well as anyone in the community, it's it is a great tool.

And I think it's a it's a solid recognition that we live in a global economy, and so for Mesa to be able to play and participate and to be able to take advantage of that fact.

I think this is a wonderful tool.

And thank you for the presentation.

I feel better about what that is, because if it was a data center for data, I was attacked.

Foreign trade zone for data, I was not gonna be happy.

All right, thank you.

Absolutely.

Miss Duff.

Um I'm not sure if there's other cities that have the FTZs at their airports and such, but I know it's a huge economic advantage, and it really hasn't come to total fruition.

I deal an important expert for over 35 years.

Um, but it's a huge economic um benefit that we have this in Mesa.

I don't think it really has been capitalized on as much as it could, because a lot of the tariffs, a lot of the duty fees coming in have kind of not been significant, and now they are significant.

And so that was um going from something that might have been like a six percent tariff to like a 20 percent tariff is enough for companies to look like how can we get more efficient and uh with our cost structure, and that consideration is well, if we go into a foreign trade zone, we can save those costs.

Now the exemption is um only if it's going outside of the country is for what they export.

So what happens when you buy a foreign piece and most manufacturing, it's rare to have an advanced manufacturing and not have any foreign parts.

But you bring it into the United States, you pay the tariff, and then let it goes back out of the United States to another country for the sales there, then that country has to pay their own tariffs.

So it's like double paying duty.

Um I know I bought hooks in from Japan, and then I brought them over here, and then I sold the product back to Japan, and it's just always made me crazy about having to always pay the, you know, have these double loaded duty.

And um, I was a small manufacturer, and it doesn't really matter.

But um it really it was like something that really hit my margins, and um I really value having a foreign trade zone.

I think is a huge economic driver for Mesa.

Thank you, Mr.

Adams.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um I think Councilmember Duff summarized that really well.

I there are some advantages to being old and having been around a while, and uh when I when I think back well this might be one of them.

Um there was a very robust discussion about this issue at the economic development advisory board level when uh former director Jib Geniak came in and uh and now I know that current director O'Donnell is is and her team are very uh well-versed in this, the benefits and the reasons that we we did this, and uh I think that uh our friends at economic development can probably put together a succinct summary of uh how this came about, the benefits, the pros, the cons, and uh uh summarize that.

But there was uh there was a great deal of consideration given to this.

I I couldn't tell you in what year, but uh then again that was uh something was really well debated at the economic development advisory board level and recommendation moved forward to council that uh this was a good thing because as the vice mayor pointed out, just about everything that I probably will use today, even my my Ford probably has foreign manufactured parts in it.

And um what what the example that Councilmember Duff just gave is it it's essentially uh uh uh uh a tool and a vehicle to avoid paying tax, if you will, two, three or four times on the same thing.

So I'd I'd suggest that uh perhaps uh the economic development folks could put together a brief presentation at a time future that uh would answer some of these concerns and give the background.

We'd be happy to do that.

With the mayor's pleasure.

So that's the council's pleasure too.

Uh Ben, you did point out something I think was really important.

All of Mesa is part of the foreign trade zone, and it's up to 2,000 acres.

Yes.

Um, we were originally created um as a traditional site framework in 1997, which central which was centralized around Mesa Mesa Gateway Airport.

Correct.

In 2022, um economic development came to the council with um a proposal and application request to expand that and transition it to what's called the alternative site framework or ASF.

And that is what we're currently operating under since July of 2022.

That expanded our FTZ area to our entire Mesa City boundary, which is which is a huge um a huge benefit for companies that don't necessarily need to be centralized around the airport.

And I also wanted to uh make a quick comment to Councilmember Duff's point that there are actually seven foreign trade zones in Arizona.

We are the only one that operates its own within our city boundaries, so I think that is an additional benefit in us being able to provide that additional um departmental oversight and being able to facilitate all of the players that are in this process because it's a lot to manage.

And for a company to consider whether or not utilizing a foreign trade zone is for them, also requires a lot of resource and expense on their part just to have the trained personnel on site to manage just that operation, that part of the operation, and be able to respond to site visits from CBP that are going to walk in and say, okay, I need you to tell me on this particular manifest.

I want to see exactly where this part is at this particular moment, and they have to be able to provide that.

So it it pro it's a lot.

Um so that process is heavily scrutinized, and we help facilitate that as grantee of a foreign trade zone 221 to make sure that all of those questions, any red flags can be addressed before it even is submitted to the foreign trade zone board to make that process as efficient and ensure success for the companies that are applying.

That's a great answer, Ben.

Well, let's let's uh we've got a lot of information here.

We need to cover more on the agenda, but I want you to know, and we all agree that we are competing against global enterprises and having the foreign trade zone here in Mesa Arizona is critical.

And because last Friday is with Nick and Scostel talking to the Japan delegation, talking about the importance of foreign trade zones, and so pitching them to come and bring more businesses outside the U.S.

to Mesa, Arizona is critical, and they were asking questions about the foreign trade zone.

So thank you.

All right, uh, you'll do a presentation later.

Going through council, anything else on the agenda?

So, Mayor, just um really briefly.

Evan can tell you the distinction on items 11A and 11B.

This is a situation where we're giving it's just introduction, and so we would suggest keeping both items on for introduction this first week, but we want council to have an option between the staff recommendation and the PNZ endorsed recommendation on this particular item, and and Evan can walk you through the distinction between between those.

Yeah, I was gonna ask.

I had a question on that, Evan.

So great.

Uh thank you, Mr.

Butler.

Uh, mayor, I'm happy to do a full presentation if you'd like, or I can just answer some questions for you.

Evan, maybe just in the name of high level.

So there are two ordinances being introduced.

This specific property is located um in the citrus sub-area.

The citrus sub-area identifies RS-35 as an appropriate zoning district to kind of keep that feel of the citrus sub-area.

Um, what we have done historically and for other properties is recommended approval of lots less than 35,000 square feet, provided that density, the overall density of the development is consistent with that RS-35 density, meaning um, but maybe the lots are smaller, but we have more open space, which kind of contributes to that feel.

This specific project is proposing 47 lots, and at 47 lots, they are just over that density of 1.24 for RS 35.

They're at 47 lots, they're at 1.27.

Um, so staff recommended approval with the modification that the plan be brought into conformance with the uh 1.24 density of RS 35.

The planning and zoning board recommendation was approval, but with the removal of that condition.

So the planning and zoning board was was okay with the proposed 1.7 density.

So there are two ordinances on for council's discussion.

Staff made the recommend recommendation that we did uh for consistency's sake, that's how we've treated other developments within the citrus sub-area.

Uh it's really more kind of a policy decision for council, and that's why there are two ordinances on the agenda.

Good.

Thank you.

Mr.

Adams, this is your district.

Uh did you want to just say something briefly on it?

Yeah, thank you, Mayor.

Um, you know, first of all, this is a uh very nice development that uh is being proposed for uh you know high quality residential for uh one of the last large available parcels in district one.

Um you know, a little bit of history uh on the sub areas, and uh I remember very well discussions when I was a member of the planning and zoning board when uh the citrus sub-area was uh being debated and created and uh very active members of the community in that area.

Uh Mr.

Lou Lenz was one of them.

Um very uh very dedicated and active member of the community and and and others.

Um a great number of presentations and debates and considerations as these things were put together.

And we have uh not just the citrus sub-area, but we have the the Lei, the Lehigh uh sub-area plan and others, and um uh I I appreciate that the planning and zoning board.

Uh we're getting closer, a 6-0.

Uh haven't still quite got to that seven-member attendance, but uh I won't go there.

Um are attempting to be accommodating.

I appreciate that.

I don't think any of the sitting planning and zoning board members, however, have the perspective that I do, and perhaps some others here on council and staff do of the intense amount of work that community members put into the creation of the sub-area plans.

Um they don't have that perspective.

And I appreciate staff's recommendation because uh we have tried to hold to the letter of these sub-area plans.

Um, you know, in football, 99 yards doesn't get you a touchdown.

So people would say it's one lot.

Well, it either is or it isn't in compliance with the sub-area plan.

And an argument can be made on both sides of this.

However, um I'm a supporter of the sub-area plans.

I was around when they were created.

I supported them then.

Um, and we either hold to them or we don't.

So um I'm inclined in this particular case to be supportive of staff's recommendation because they are honoring the legacy of the sub-area plans and the people who created them.

So that's kind of where I'm at on it, Mayor.

Okay.

Well go ahead.

Uh so on a question on this, because uh I remember vividly also having discussions about the sub-area plans, right?

Down downtown isn't Lehigh, Lee High is its own, but Lehigh isn't downtown, and and so Desert Uplands.

Desert uplands, the Gay Eastmark area, all these had a uh we're a large city and population and geography, and we have many areas that if you want to live suburban, you can live suburban, rural, you can live rural.

So I think protecting that's important.

My questions along that side is uh House Bill 2721 took effect in January 2026.

And I believe the number, so that's a middle housing that allowed for a higher density of up to 10 or 20 percent.

I can't remember, but I believe the threshold was 10 acres.

So since this is 40 acres, could this do a high density piece?

Uh thank you, Mayor Vice Mayor Summers.

The that that's a good question.

The general plan is is supports um larger lot development.

So in addition to the the citrus sub-area, the general plan would not be consistent with a higher density residential.

Um I can look into that a little bit more and get you uh get you a specific answer.

Um the what the applicant is proposing um is is generally consistent with with the surrounding developments, um, other than the density staff doesn't have a concern with that, but it's like person can be able to do that.

I can concur with that because when I looked over the materials, it looked like it was fitting into the neighborhood, but the law that was adopted in January is the one I think we need to look at before we make any uh before we appro uh embed the rights here.

We have an additional speaker.

Uh mayor, vice mayor.

Um so you're right, this is uh a new law that's gone into effect, and when we updated the code to reflect it as a use type middle housing uh in conjunction with conversations with the league, uh the way that the code is written and that the league is understood, the statute, it doesn't modify underlying um zoning district standards.

So if you're gonna put middle housing into a development, you're gonna have to make up for the density elsewhere in that large development.

Which is what he referred to earlier, I think, which is uh correct.

So the the density that they're proposing is slightly over what would be allowed with the RS-35, which was consistent with the Citrus sub-area plan.

So just theoretically, could the developer make smaller lots by adding a lot of park in open space?

Yeah, that's a good question, Mayor.

Vice Mayor.

So yes, so we are the as a planning staff are kind of more focused on the density of RS 35, which is that that 1.24.

So to get that, there are lots in this subdivision that are smaller than 35,000 square feet, but to get that density, there's substantial amount of open space provided within the development.

Has this been platted?

It is uh a preliminary plat is a concurrent application as part of this.

Okay.

Not yet.

It's in process.

You see where we're going.

And I see council.

Yeah, right.

And isn't middle the middle middle housing bill doesn't that only apply to central business districts within one mile of a central business district?

Um Mayor, Councilmember Duff.

Uh it applies to two different areas.

Okay, the first you you're correct.

There is uh within one mile of a designated central business area, which is the downtown uh area in Mesa.

And then secondly, it would apply to any new residential development that's exceeds 10 acres.

Oh, sorry, I forgot about that part.

Yeah, that's that's the all right, got it.

I so my concern is, and and I'm um this is not my district, but uh I'm looking at Mr.

Adams.

Howing what that law is, we don't have a plat yet.

We have two different proposals on the table.

I can get a sense which way it's leading.

My concern would be if it even though it might come at least close enough to meeting the character of the area based on the letter uh one per 35, whatever the heck it was, I can't remember.

Um there's a potential uh that this could actually go into a denser community with more open space, and does that still meet the area plan if it were to be developed as a clusters of more dense homes?

I suppose the way I would look at that is we're we're talking about one lot.

Yeah, one lot.

So I I hear you're I hear where you're going, but you know, some somebody has to blink here.

So it's counseling.

Council, let's do this in lieu of time.

Uh this is an introduction to the ordinance.

So we have time to get into the weeds on this.

Yeah.

I think we should have.

Yeah.

But in all due respect, I was one of the founders of our Lehigh sub-area and knowing the importance of sub-areas and the characters and things people work on so hard.

Uh I I'll just say I'm in favor of 11A right now because that's the staff recommendation, sister sub-areas, and and I don't believe in deviating from that.

But uh having that, Lou Lenz was one of my mentors in that, and that's why we started Lehigh sub-area.

You have the desert uplands, which is you know, there's no deviation on a lot of that up there, and our dark sky ordinances we work on.

So with that said, I'm gonna say that over the dais, and if we can move forward, uh, I'd appreciate that.

We good with that time.

We have some time.

Yeah, we have some time.

So it's just uh, you know, one lot.

Okay, uh, and and it's a beautiful area.

It's in agriculture right now.

Uh right now, having anything else just to wrap it up.

We're good.

Yeah.

Thank you, ma'am, for your comments there.

Okay.

That was a lot on the agenda just for Monday.

Thank you, everyone.

Almost need a break.

Um with that, uh, item two A is a presentation discussion on the proposed 2026 general obligation bonds, including public safety street and transportation projects.

Okay, everyone, this uh let's get uh we'll get back going here.

Lance, if you want to come up.

Cool.

Okay, item two ways of presentation and discussion proposal on the general obligation bonds, including public safety street and transportation improvements presented by Lance Webb, engineering.

Good morning.

Mayor and Council.

Uh happy to be with you, Lance Webb, city engineer here with the engineering department.

Uh, here to present and discuss and uh uh ask for direct direction on this 2026 general obligation bond election.

Um major feature of this this proposed 2026 uh geo bond is public safety projects.

We've been working with uh the departments on the various needs and priorities here throughout the city.

Um and identified uh some of those needs associated with this program today.

This uh first project includes uh new public safety training facility um out at our public safety training facility site uh in Northeast Mesa.

Um it proposes to uh finish out really all all the improvements for uh that remain at the at this site.

Um this uh graphic is of the new public safety training facility for our fire department and uh the associate associated costs with that.

Um as you recall back in 2022, um uh we went forward with a public safety bond uh and identified some needs out there between kind of pre-COVID and following that with inflation and identifying a variety of of other needs uh out there and more comprehensively looking at this site, what what all the needs were and working with our PD and uh fire groups.

Um we identified really what that needs to look like from a master planning level, and some things like uh different uh ingress egress, the utilities, the upsizing, that type of stuff, and and really kind of honing in on the needs uh for this site.

So this uh this uh program proposes uh 44.7 million for the 2026 uh geo bond to uh complete out these improvements on this site.

Also, in addition at this site is the joint training building facility.

Um this particular building is is unique where it will be a shared space with both our police and fire groups, uh proposes 20,000 square feet and uh 16.8 million with this Mesa bond.

Um it provides that unique opportunity for our these departments to provide training uh for different simulated uh virtual environments for both our fire and PD and the uh infrastructure is is really kind of intended to mimic what we recently did at the Cubs uh pitching facility, if you're familiar with that particular site and the work that we just recently completed there.

So, mayor and council, before we move on, I I appreciate one highlight one of the things Lance said.

This what we took a step back after um after the last process and said, okay, what do we need to do to go ahead and and really build out the site to do the things that police and fire need as to the piecemealing things in a way that just really didn't utilize the site to its highest and best use and and still didn't meet all the needs of of public safety?

Um so appreciate engineering working closely with police and fire and coming back.

It this includes we're gonna have a separate entrance um to the location, it's gonna take care of a lot of the parking, but this is some of the the training constraints.

This metal building one for um to allow fire to do the the training that it needs, but it'll allow both police and fire to also conduct more training during the hot summer months where um sometimes daytime training and other things weren't allowed, and so this is the this will really allow us to get um police and fire the resources that they need to to do the adequate training that we all agree is really important to them and and and essentially build out our public safety site um with these proposed enhancements in my mind is there any grant funding available for these projects, you know, especially on the public safety side, even from the federal side to maybe even our tribal partners.

Have we pursued that?

We are we're always looking um for ways to supplement um just and just because we get authorization if we're able to bring in any enhancements through grants or other opportunities, um, that would just be less you know, bond the um allowance that we would need to apply for the facility, but our staffs are always looking for different ways to bring in those those type of investments.

I know some of our federal legislators are really good in finding monies like that.

Yeah, absolutely.

And and probably not to the magnitude.

Uh it could be a portion to your point.

And so, in order to proceed, we we want to make sure that we can ultimately be able to complete um the facility with just uncertainty that comes along with grants or especially with the federal budget.

But um, that doesn't mean just because we have authorization that we're we wouldn't stop trying to look for that.

Yeah, put it in your checkbox.

Yeah, absolutely.

Appreciate it, carry on.

Thanks, Lance.

Uh this next slide here is uh the ask for uh five million for property acquisition for two additional sites.

Um this map is one that our fire uh department has been using to identify where we've currently and still have remaining needs throughout the city, highlighted in the areas in uh circled there in green.

Um the intent is to look for at least two additional sites uh with this effort.

I know that we've looked at various sites somewhere in the range between two to two and a half acres is what we'd be looking to identify uh for these areas.

And mayor and council, this is again just trying to stay ahead of growth in some of these areas.

It's um if we can go in and inquire some of the space now, just like we did.

I mean, we think of the acquisition of site of uh where station 224 is being constructed right now just a few years ago was the middle of nowhere, but uh if you've driven by recently, you know that's not the case today.

So this is why uh real estate will try to identify uh two uh two locations that we can just try to stay ahead of of growth and be able to acquire these sites at a reasonable uh price.

Yeah, I I was just look watching Chief Hayes duck us back here because she knows what's coming.

Uh yeah, from two of us.

Yeah.

So site future I and future F concern me.

Oh, don't worry, I'm very concerned too.

I know it's so it I'm glad to hear that.

And I know we're gonna buy two sites.

Uh G and H would be perfect, by the way.

But but thinking, but truly thinking about where um where the demand is, like future D is a heavy demand area and potential.

Uh I'm worried about what happens if the county ends up without fire service uh in the future.

But getting back to I and F, you know, one of the reasons we got 203 done many moons ago was because it was so and I think you were at that station, weren't you?

It was so close to the Tempe border, it was running more calls in Tempe than it was in Mesa.

That was 207.

207 was doing that.

But 203 was built and then 218 to bring it a little bit more to cover Mesa.

And by all means, I mean, we should be sharing resources.

This there's a value-added service to sharing those resources and having more capacity.

But when crews run more into somebody else's city and it's our taxpayers paying for it, right?

I'm a little I'm a little concerned about those locations.

Yeah, yeah, I I can assure you those will not be at the top of our list.

This just reflects all of our future needs um from from after doing the data analysis of where these can be best situated.

But I agree with you, and I'm shared, and and and don't worry, everyone's lockstep in this.

Uh, Chief Camelli and others that we've we've had these conversations that we would have to have some kind of agreement um with Tempe and Gilbert to build a station right on the line um where there's some uh cost share associated with it because they would be running in into both.

And frankly, those discussions will take years uh probably to come to some kind of uh I'll still be here probably.

Well, you know, uh we we may all still be here, but um it's um those won't be be easy discussions because there's not exactly partnerships equivalent to that right in the valley that at least I'm I'm aware of.

Um maybe there's some national models we can use, but um but certainly we do have needs, as you said, in these other sites that we can get ahead of some of the growth there.

Yeah, and you're right.

I haven't seen it here locally, but there are other organizations that are there split the house.

For example, maybe in uh F or I, you have a Tempe ladder and a Mesa engine.

Right.

You're so we're splitting the resource and people can argue about the color of the trucks.

So uh absolutely that would be funny, red and white.

That's right.

Yeah, mayor and council.

I uh I I I apologize.

I probably should have highlighted the fact that those areas that you highlighted, Vice Mayor, um are areas that we'll be focusing on here here on this particular box.

Yeah, I would I would think one northeast, one southeast is probably key, at least in this next move from the growth.

Well, and then you know, what there might be some future partnerships with Mesa Public Schools.

I'll just say that, you know, there there might be some areas there that we could incorporate.

But then also out at 216 east of Los Santos, you know, there's discussions about a fire district potentially and providing service up there, whether we do it or someone else.

You know, that that is in the talks.

So, you know, providing service up in that northeast quadrant quadrant, which that future station is.

But okay, go on.

We can have a discussion on that later.

Uh also proposed is uh the central station here in our downtown expansion and tenant improvements.

Um those improvements are just under uh 30,000 of tenant improvements of existing the existing building that was built um back in the mid-90s or 2000, sorry.

Uh and and then we've also gone and and done some structural analysis on that building to determine the feasibility of expanding up with an additional level uh to this this building just under 15,000 square feet.

Um the vertical expansion proposed is 20.8 million as part of that program and 7.9 for the existing building and tenant improvements on that on that site.

Lance, who's who's in that building right now?

Uh if Chief Nasbit or uh wants to come up, um Councilmember Mayor, Councilmember Taylor, we can explain that is where our our central division, okay.

She's she's uh doing a great thing and and sending up other staff on this delegate uh delegate but they can they can tell you this is where our whole central division is is based out of.

So uh good morning, mayor, vice mayor, and council.

Uh Patrick Phelps, deputy director of the police department with me is Spencer Hauk, our police planner.

So currently that building is the central substation where our central patrol district is housed.

So all patrol operations, bike unit, any of those patrol operations operate right out of that facility today, adjacent to the headquarters facility.

And and that's why I think uh it, you know, it probably took me a few years to figure this out uh too, that even though it's it's located right beside the headquarters, it functions as a completely separate operation.

So just think of any of our stations, superstition, northeast, what whatever it may be, um central is is operating as its own um independent entity that just happens to be co-located next to headquarters.

Is that fair?

Uh okay, okay.

Yes, yes, sir.

The headquarters is predominantly the more the administrative units of the organization whereas patrol operations for that area are out of the central substation.

I I guess I have one other curiosity.

So the way that we use language on the presentation, you see tenant improvements is that implies to me that the public safety is like renting from the city.

Is that right?

Uh no, we uh um mayor and council member Taylor.

Uh when I refer to tenant improvements, essentially a renovation of the existing space.

Okay, so sorry, yeah, you'll have to forgive me.

I'm coming from this mentality of like we have other tenants in this building that aren't city operations.

I can see that.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, Lance, carry on.

Thank you.

Uh also uh proposed as part of this program is the demolition and relocation of our west uh yard warehouse.

Um what we are proposing for this.

We we've looked at this, we've done quite a bit of uh extensive work on both both our east and west uh yards uh here in the city mesa here in the west yard.

Um, as you can kind of see from this aerial, uh there's a large area of lay down uh that we have that are utilized by our utility groups.

Um and this is the original facility.

Um relocating, demoing and relocating this facility does a couple things for us.

It opens up the space to uh do additional work for our fleet, which I'll talk about here in a minute.

But also for this bond, we are proposing 3.9 million with this Mesa bond to cover those costs associated with those groups associated with uh public safety and um uh transportation group in this case.

So, mayor and council, um this is you know, we've jokingly said sometimes that we need to do some of the the non-sexy stuff in order to actually make some of the major improvements that we need to do in our west side service center, then eventually our east side service center where we are uh in desperate need of enhancements that will um allow us to do our jobs much more efficiently, and this is a perfect example of that.

We have we have to relocate the warehouse in order to have room to do the things that we need to do in fleet, and Lance will speak to that in just a second.

But I really appreciate the fact that um we've been able to um sequence events, and this is the first domino that needs to fall uh before we can have the room to expand, and then once we get the west side uh taken care of, then we'll be able to shift our focus over to the east side um and and be able to take care of the needs there.

It's also multi-departmental.

All of these um, and and when you see that uh Lance is talking about allocating uh nearly four million to the bond and then eighteen million to utility obligations.

Um staff has done a great analysis of who is actually utilizing these sites and what percentage, and that's how those costs are allocated out to the appropriate user based on um the use of that facility, and you'll see that as we talk about the fleet facility in just a moment as as well.

But this is the first re first thing we have to do to give us the space that we need need to do for fleet.

Right.

Uh thank you.

Um, the 18.1 million uh utility obligations, as Scott mentioned, is specific to the breakout for those groups that use this and and those utility groups that use that.

Uh as I alluded earlier, uh it also includes the West Yard fleet.

Uh major improvements really um uh pretty comprehensive uh for this site.

I think it's long been known on the West Yard fleet area um for the the types of vehicles and equipment that we service uh we're we're underserved, and there's a need to fill that need.

This proposes a 77.1 million uh total revamp of the West Yard uh fleet uh building and uh of that 40.1 million in utility obligations and 37 million with this with this per particular geo bond.

This will allow for uh the blue here on the on the bottom of that exhibit is specifically for heavy duty.

Uh we'll also include uh warehouse for parts there in the brown uh tire shop on the kind of the north side of the building, and then light duty and in there in the green and office space for our fleet department on that southwest corner.

So, mayor and council, I I think many of you have been out to the West Yard and have uh seen the conditions that um our folks have to operate under.

Uh this facility, I think was first started in 1969.

Um so there have been upgrades and enhancements um since that time, but we're still working in a very antiquated and undersized, maybe most importantly, facility, so that um we we have workers that can't um service equipment inside a bay because the bay is not big enough for the equipment of today's equipment, so they're having to work outside in the elements during the summer to make sure that our solid waste trucks and our other vehicles are um undergoing maintenance, and so it's it's just it's not sustainable.

And when we hear concerns about the ability of um vehicle readiness, both on the solid waste side, transportation side, uh PD side, this is all a direct result of not having the facilities that um we need to get that throughput.

We've in the budget council has um uh we've talked about the fact that we're gonna go to a third shift to to utilize the best that we can under the existing facilities that we have, but that's just a band-aid.

This is what we have to do long term in order to make sure that we can get the throughput on all those vehicles and and provide uh fair working conditions you know for our employees who right now just uh are dealing with a very antiquated uh building that that's not fit for what they need to do.

What when I talk particularly with police and fire um the the issue of uh fleet services rises to the top of frustrations with the rank and file.

So and there's nothing worse than having to turn in a truck for a lube oil filter, and it takes two plus weeks to get it back.

Bad enough in a police car, it's horrible in a fire truck because you have to switch out hose and all.

How does it how does this help citywide?

So this is the West Side.

How are fleet services arranged?

Is that gonna help the East Side uh Northeast Police Station superstition?

This is part of it, and this is what Mike can tell you about.

Um we need to get the West taken care of, and this is what this is about, and then we'll shift our focus to the East.

Yeah, the Frankie isn't here, so I can oh shoot he's on the line.

Yeah.

Oh, the water manager council.

Mike Lewis Fleet Services, yeah.

So uh as uh Mr.

Butler said the West Side needs to be accomplished first, obviously with a solar waste.

About 40% of all of our fleet is PD from both sides.

Now, the addition of the third shift with the three light duty technicians over there, that helps the east side alone over there.

We're taking up the available base base that we have at the east side, bringing on that third shift and those three light duties helps the turnaround times with the PD fleet.

Um the efficiencies at the West side also will improve the PD fleet not adding any more technicians over there, just making facilities to where they're more efficient for the technicians to use.

We don't have shift overlap employees doing this working on the same job, the same vehicles at the same time.

Um just a process flow will improve the throughput.

It would as long as the rising tide, you know, raises all boats.

I think we're gonna be in a it is it's not and it's not a one or the other.

It needs to be both in order to really sustain our operations as as a city.

So, but we we are we're working through some land issues over on the east side, and so it just made sense while we're still um working to make sure that we have the necessary space uh for the um work that needs to be done at the east side center that we at least tackle the West.

And and it will make a huge difference by by doing this.

Um but you're right, uh Vice Mayor.

It's this is they all work together, and so we've got to take care of this center, and then and then we'll be coming back in the future about the east side.

Yeah, okay, I'll make you a comment on that later.

The next slide's gonna get Scott Conn excited.

See you there.

Okay, then finally, uh this program proposes to upgrade the the Topaz uh radio network, uh the regional wireless cooperative, um, that's utilized by multiple agencies, multi-jurisdictional here, uh Mesa, Apache Junction, Queen Creek, uh Gilbert, um, I think even Fort Fort McDowell and Yavapai.

Rio Verde, Rio Verde, uh, multiple agencies that utilize this.

It's it's reaching the the point where the equipment is no longer supported, uh, like like much of the technology that we have.

And uh this proposes uh to cover Mesa's share of this 15 million overall upgrade of the 10.1 million for Mesa, uh, which would then uh put us more in um compliance with uh some of the needs associated with our interoperability with our police and and fire and municipal services.

Yeah, again, bread and butter activities.

I mean, our our first responders have to be able to communicate with one another, and that's what this is all about, just making sure that we keep the system uh functional for the yeah, I think about the old days when we tried to communicate.

Right, so it's extremely difficult.

Sorry.

Carrier pigeon?

Pretty much, yeah.

We threw radios at each other here.

I'll hope you can hear us.

That was just between Mesa PD and Mesa Fire.

Okay.

Why aren't you on the same channel?

Because we don't have that channel.

Yeah.

So this uh proposed bond program basically that this is a summary of uh public safety projects um uh associated with the 2026 uh request uh amounts and then other funding is as noted previous uh with the new public uh training safety facility that 21.6 million is uh remaining from our 2022 uh public safety bond, and then these other two are uh divvied out by utility obligations for those groups that utilize both the west yard and uh warehouse.

So mayor, that's the public safety side, and we'd be glad that if there's any other questions before we transition over to transportation bonds, I think all of this is critical in our uh progress here in public safety.

So we don't we don't have very few choices with this, but with that, even the uh West Mesa service yard having been there uh for many years is time really time to update that.

And I was just thinking just the employee retention and the morale there having a new facility that's up to standards in today's uh you maintenance.

These are these are skill sets that are in high demand both from the public and the private sector, and frankly, when they can go to a maybe a car dealership and work on vehicles in a nice air conditioned, you know, facility, and we're having to try to compete against that.

Uh it's I mean, Mike can tell you it's I mean it's we we appreciate our our guys want to be here and helping and giving back to the community because there are sometimes better conditions that they could be uh working in.

So this this will definitely help on the employee retention and recruitment side of things as well as we compete for high skilled high value mechanics that that work on these vehicles.

Mayor, just a quick comment if I may.

Yeah, um, as a guy who likes to work on his own vehicles, I can tell you it's miserable in July on your driveway with the hood up and no shade.

So, Mr.

Butler, I think you're absolutely correct.

We're asking our techs to work out in the elements, and uh that that's a miserable situation.

So, and it doesn't contribute to employer retention.

The other the other point I just want to make I make sure I'm clear on um Lance, your previous slide, these are all voter-approved funds, bond funds, correct?

Go ahead and vote well they're with the 2022 or the 2026 right.

So the West Yard warehouse and the West Yard fleet would then be uh covered by utility obligations from the various utility departments understood that utilize those facilities.

Right, right.

Okay, well we we don't have to drill down into it.

Uh the point I'm just trying to make is the vast majority of these funds are voter approved.

Correct.

Thank you.

Well done, Brian.

Worth every penny.

Time is money.

Yeah, yes.

Okay.

Anything else?

Yes, let's move on.

Moving on.

Okay.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh so this uh a number of transportation improvement projects have been uh discussed also and and vetted and considered with this proposed 2026 uh general obligation bond.

Uh we've been working closely with our transportation group, similar to the 2020 uh bond that was uh presented.

We uh different proposition, but looking to leverage Prop 479 on regional projects and allowing Mesa to basically extend that funding to more projects throughout the city, as you'll see these projects.

Many of these are focused on safety improvements and connectivity throughout the city.

So as part of that program, we're recommending uh regional roadway improvements um for this uh 38.2 million total for the Warner Road.

Um that would be front funded um with this and then reimbursed 21.3 million uh as part of Prop 479.

This becomes basically a major uh connectivity location, much needed in our our Southeast Mesa, as many know.

Um, and provides that bridge um in this area across the RWCD canal and the East Maricopa floodway.

So we're front loading the money and then we'll get a reimbursement off of the 479.

Correct from our investment.

What what percent of return on that 479 money?

So with Prop 479 for our two projects, we can get a uh 70 percent reimbursement or up to 70 percent of the projects, and so um the the bonds here is essentially our 30 percent local match.

Yeah.

I mean that's huge to get 70 percent return for these projects, even though we front load it and then get reimbursed.

Then you have Mesa Drive phase three.

Right.

So the uh the other regional roadway, one of the other regional roadway improvements we're looking at is Mesa Drive phase three, which completes the work from Maine to Brown.

Uh long been on kind of the radar and planning with our transportation group.

That's uh in total 50.8 with a reimbursable with Prop 479 uh 31, and then a uh bond expended uh expenditure of 19.8 million.

Um this allows Mesa to basically complete out uh anyone that's driven Mesa Drive phase one, phase two, uh, and this is that third and final phase there.

So as you know, from Maine down to the 60, yeah, you've you've seen the improvements that have been made um to Mesa Drive, and and this will carry it up to Brown, and that's the last of the improvements.

It's uh yes of these major improvements on Mesa Drive.

Uh-huh.

So and I I will just highlight um, you know, Prop 479 was was voted on by the you know, the Phoenix region, and it's a 20-year program.

These two projects are um allocated in the first phase of of the program.

So between 2026 and 2030, we can receive reimbursement for this, and that's why we're bringing these forward.

Yeah, Mayor, Mayor and Council.

There are other projects obviously associated with that, but these are the ones that align with that earlier time frame and and make sense with this particular bond.

I have a question on that project, and I know Candace and I have talked about in the future, but on Mesa Drive at the canal crossing, the the Tempe cross cut.

Does that include a good a really nice uh stop there?

Crossing stop signal signalized.

So, Mayor, we just recently upgraded that crossing to uh a full pedestrian crossing.

Uh or full sorry, full industrial crossing.

I drive it every day.

So um and so that that that was uh CIP project that we've been working on over the last few years and was installed last year.

Maybe I'm thinking horn.

But that's a different one.

I'll differ.

I'll follow up with you on Horn.

Okay.

Carry on No carry uh over to District One.

District one needs to know that on horn.

Okay.

Uh the the proposed bond program also includes several shared use paths um throughout Mesa.

Those, as I noted earlier, will provide connectivity and completion in some cases of some of these pathways and systems.

Um these projects include the Lehigh special shared use path, phase two, and and the nodes um portion of that project for 13 million.

It also includes uh gateway shared use path in our Southeast Valley, uh, the phase three of that, which completes uh movement from Haas to Power Road for 11.8 million, and then also the US 60 shared use path, uh SUP from the Eastern to Consolidated Canals, which currently does not exist for 13 million.

And Lance, you should um the gateway shared use path completes a regional link.

Is that fair to say, Eric?

Uh correct.

I it was so we we've built two phases of the Mesa Gateway along essentially along the 202.

Uh we're missing the section between Haas and power at Power Road, Gilbert has a shared use path that this will connect to, and and so yes, it it provides regional connectivity.

Uh also included is our our downtown SUP uh for 12 million, allows us to work and start to chip away at the first uh phase of elements, the light walk path here in in our downtown.

And uh that's the image there on the on the upper side, and then the one Thomas Road SUP for 17 million will provide kind of a connectivity loop uh from Red Mountain SUP down to Longbow.

This uh program also includes safety improvements as I alluded to earlier.

Um one of those major programs is Higley, uh McKelops to Broadway Road with uh focus on raised medians uh for safety for the public.

That this was an effort that we went through in 2024, more recent.

Um that that project will uh is funded for 10.4 million, and then also Broadway Road.

Um the arterial reconstruct from basically Spur, which is between Stapley and Gilbert to Gilbert and the intersection work there and raised medians between Stapley and and Gilbert for 18.8 million.

Lance, can you speak on the Broadway um project?

That is part of a much larger um amount of work that needs to be done along that stretch that could be consolidated into one project to try to uh ease the burden on businesses and and residents in that area.

Could you speak to that?

Correct.

So currently we're thank you.

Uh currently we're uh under construction with uh with the Broadway and Stapley project out there, uh doing a lot of the utility relocates and and uh gas and electrical.

Um doing this on the front end of this bond allows us to uh take advantage of the work that we're doing in in that area and meet some of these improvements.

I know that's uh something that comes up often from the public and saying, hey, you you've you've done this work and you want to come back out and do that.

We would look to basically leverage and and do this work within a time frame that works with that project.

So do it all at one time.

Quick one could you go back?

Quick question, please.

Lance, I'm I'm confused and I'm probably not reading this map correctly, but you you talk about Higley, but I see Greenfield is is circled in red.

I'm sorry.

Should it be over one?

Should it be over one of the things?

It should be okay.

Hey, you know, uh I guess I'm I'm not not that bad at map reading.

So okay, understood.

I just thought that was that's what you meant.

So thanks for the clarification.

Before we start up, Miss Taylor has a hard stop here right now.

Do you have any questions, Ms.

Taylor?

Uh no, I'm gonna continue to read over this presentation, and I'll reach out to staff.

Um if I have any.

Well, I have questions, but I I do have to have a hard stop now.

But I wanted to say thank you to Lance and you know to the rest of the team for the presentations we saw today.

And I really appreciate, of course, as always, the extensive answers to my questions.

And um, I just hope everyone has a really great rest of their day.

Thank you.

Thank you, Miss Taylor.

Have a good rest of the day.

Thank you.

So there's just four of us left now for the record.

Maybe.

Uh the this provides uh summary of the transportation projects that we're recommending with this bond.

Um as noted prior, um, the 2026 column there is what we will expend with as part of the bond.

Uh those regional improvements uh include the reimbursement of under the other funding column there, and the total of the overall program of 180, 86 million.

Oops.

And then finally, this is just a general graphical representation throughout the city of what where these projects fall and within what districts.

So the 2026 uh uh Geo Bond proposes two questions for this, uh, both one for public safety and one for transportation.

This uh graphic is intended to show um what that impact would be on each household.

I'll let Mark maybe speak to that.

Well, good morning, Mayor and Council.

I'm Mark Hughes, City Treasurer, and you know this last slide does estimate the total cost of issuing the bonds.

As you can see, for a homeowner with a taxable property value of 250,000, the total average annual cost would be 69 dollars, and the median uh homeowner in Mesa, the impact would be $54.

Um, I did want to point out though, forgive me, so um the two rows on top, so the numbers were transposed.

So obviously the 150 million dollar public safety, which would be the larger authorization, would have the impact of $36 and $28, respectively.

So those amounts were transposed, so we'll get those fixed today.

Once again, would you stress the difference between assessed value and market value?

So the full cash value is similar to the market value, and you know, all these amounts are provided by the county assessor.

Um the assessed value, it goes through a series of formula, which you know I'll also explain next week when we uh when I present the secondary property tax.

But the assessed value is uh it's going to be limited, um limited to either the higher of the full cash value or annual five percent increases, um generally annually uh five percent increases.

So the limited cash value is not so if your house is worth $500,000, that's the full cash value is not the limited cash value.

The limited cash value is by the assessor, as you mentioned, and that's the amount that the lower amount is what you're being taxed on.

And mayor ice may that is correct.

So you do you are taxed on the limited property value.

So thank you.

Uh with that, I'll take any questions from mayor and council, if there's any that remain we have our bonding attorney here, Zach is there as well.

So if we have any legal questions on that.

Yeah, mayor and counsel if I could well included in your packet is the resolution to actually uh to put this on the ballot.

And so, and this will come back to council on June 1st.

And so it I invite you to look at that resolution.

June 1st is the last council meeting um before the deadline which we have to provide the information to the county.

So that's sort of if you have any questions, um, you know, please set a one-on-one with um, you know, Scott and me, and we can talk about it.

I think for people that aren't familiar with looking at those resolutions, first of all, they're you know, in large part driven by um bond statutes um and requirements.

And so the sometimes the most important part is near the end uh for most people because they want to know what the question is and how the question's gonna be worded.

Um, and that's referred to as the tagline.

And so if you look at the resolutions, the tagline, and I'll just read the tagline for the two questions.

For public safety, it's it's Shaw Mesa be authorized to issue and sell 150 million dollars of general obligation bonds to provide funding to support fire and medical police and public safety improvements, facilities and communication systems, associated equipment, apparatus, and technology, municipal improvements uh that support community and public safety, and that and acquisition of land for such purposes.

And so that's that's the public safety uh tagline or question.

And then for transportation, um shall mason be authorized to to issue and sell 135 million dollars of general obligation bonds to provide funding to support safer and less congested streets, including barterial street improvements, pavement reconstruction, street improvements, street lights, traffic signals, communication from infrastructure, shared use paths, associated improvements, and the acquisition of of land for such purposes.

And so those are the two questions that we're proposing to council to be put up put on the on the ballot.

And again, that'll come back to you in the form of a resolution on the June 1st meeting.

And which ballot will it be on?

November or something.

November.

Okay.

So um these questions will um these averages will increase our property tax.

I know as we go on, sometimes some of our debt drops off, and then we take out new debt.

So it almost kind of minimally increases, but this would be on top of the current uh rates that we are now paying.

Mayor Councilmember Duff, that's correct.

But as you pointed out, so generally when we uh we are planning uh on average about six issuances, so it generally takes us about six years to use the full bond authorization.

That's just you know, historical how it works out.

During those six years, there will be uh the older bonds that are getting paid off during that time.

So if that helps answer your question.

So the um expected um amount on the property tax isn't all at once, it's over a duration as we exercise the bond, right?

Because we don't take out the money and then do the project.

We take out one by one as we do the project.

Mayor Councilmember Duff.

Generally we issue in the summer, we reimburse ourselves for about half a year of expenditures, and then the remaining of the bond, remaining of that annual bonds helped fund the projects for the rest of the year.

So we we will only issue what we need.

Um and just because we have the authorization, we will not issue until we uh speak incurring costs.

That's right.

We that's why we don't sell uh mayor and and council member.

That's why we don't sell until the it's ready to go until we're ready to go on the project, and and then we come back to the rate increases let's say it gets approved, and on year one, we're able to exercise a certain amount of improvements, and it could maybe be a six dollar increase that year, or in the next year it could be another 10 or whatever, something like that.

Yeah, we we try to be transparent to basically show that this is the totality, maybe the worst case scenario if you wanted to put it that way, because you're right.

What this doesn't take into account is bond refinancing, other other things that happen over the the life of that.

Um we just want to be upfront about and transparent about the worst case scenario, and then we're uh the staff is constantly looking for ways that we can minimize that impact.

And we were we're obviously as judicious as um we thought responsible this time.

It's been six years since we've had a transportation bond, and and certainly uh I think you all would agree our public safety needs are are essential.

And so um we we were very considerate though of understanding just the burden that um everyone's failing right now in economic conditions.

We wanted to be you know very judicious in the projects that we selected.

Obviously, there's a long list that on both that could have been utilized, but these were the projects that were most important from a safety and and um transportation standpoint, and then um understanding that you know we'll we don't want to get something ahead too far ahead of ourselves on some projects that might need a little bit more development before they're ready um for a bond proposal.

So th so these um fees, these annual amounts, we're not gonna see all in one year, they're gonna be stretched over years as we do the projects.

So it yeah, it's uh minimal impact.

Okay, thank you.

Mr.

Adams.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I'm glad, Mr.

Smith, that you read those taglines because from time to time, uh a constituent will will challenge me when I say, well, those were voter-approved funds.

The retort is well, people didn't understand what they were voting for.

I I can't think how you could make that any more clear and easy to understand what that question means.

So thank you for bringing that up.

I tend to think that uh think and hope that the majority of our citizens who vote are informed people and understand plain language.

So I I I can't imagine how to make that any more clear and easy to understand what a yes or a no means.

And I'd encourage anyone any of my constituents who who feel otherwise, reach out to me and I'd be happy to have that conversation.

But thank you.

You have a public outreach plan for these?

We will we'll be getting at it together and we'll we'll get it back to council so they understand, but we'll be you know doing public meetings and and uh outreach and communication um to our residents, informing them of of the projects that are um uh up for their consideration.

I think it's important to point out as been presented in the past that we're always restructuring our debt and you know, trying to save monies where we can and the interest rates.

I know yourself, Mark, and Mr.

Kenyton have always presented the ways that we're saving money in our city to be financially responsible, but yet having to bond certain projects to just increase our ability to provide services in our city are essential, so and we appreciate the voters in Mesa for understanding that.

And I know that polling has been done to know that this is a critical component that helps us uh reassess and move our city forward.

So, with that, is there any more questions on this council?

Do we cover everything?

Lance, we're all good.

Yeah, more Mr.

Smith.

Okay, all right.

Thank you.

We'll move forward with that.

All right.

Next is item two be a presentation discussion on the proposed 2026 amendments to the Mesa City Charter, including to Charter Sections 209 and 21 to conform and be consistent with state law.

All right, ladies, welcome.

Okay, so uh you all know me, obviously, but for the public, I'm Holly Mosley, City Clerk, and I have Cursed Dorchak.

I realized earlier when I uh came up and my eagerness to help, I did not introduce myself.

Uh Kirsten of Orchak, I'm with the city attorney's office.

Right.

So we are here to talk to you about this year's proposed charter amendments for the 2026 general election ballot.

And basically for the public, I know you all know what a city charter is, but I thought public may not know what is a city charter.

It is a city's foundational government governing document, and uh city charter establishes how a municipality is organized, what powers it has, and how it operates.

And once ratified by the city's voters and approved by the governor, their charter becomes the organic law of the city, effectively your local constitution.

Mesa became a charter city back in 1967, and we are one of 20 charties charter cities in Arizona, with Litchfield Park being the newest in 2023.

Next question may be why do we amend our charter?

Um, there are various reasons listed on the screen as to why charter amendments may be proposed to our amendments this year are mostly to conform with state law.

So the state statutes change and the charter provisions may need updating to comply with state law.

And since we have been a charter since 1967, we've had a lot of amendments along the way.

Um there's other reasons listed, and another one of the reasons uh for one of our amendments is to update outdated language or procedures due to modern technology.

So we'll discuss those a little more in detail.

So this is the process for charter amendments.

Section 903 of the city charter provides the process for us.

Amendments may be framed and proposed by ordinance of the council, uh report of a charter commission created by ordinance, and an initiative by the electors.

After the submission of a proposed amendment, the council shall submit the same to the electors.

And if to if approved by the majority of the electors, the amendment becomes effective after a set date or 30 days, and also requires approval of the governor.

And uh, as I mentioned, since 1967, we've had many amendments uh in 14 of our elections, with the most recent being in 2022.

So this year we uh we have meetings through the years with the city clerk's office, the city attorney's office, city manager to kind of look at our charter and the various potential amendments that we could use for various reasons.

Um and then each year we kind of reprioritize those potential amendments um to bring them before council.

So this is a quick question.

So the approval of the governor, is it the same as a veto?

What happens if the governor says no, I don't approve?

Does it uh does it fail?

Does it go back somewhere, or what happens in that case?

Yeah, mayor and council, that's an interesting question.

I don't I don't know if it's ever happened.

I think it's it goes to whether or not you're if you do something that the governor believes uh exceeds the bounds of the Arizona Constitution, and then the governor uh wouldn't sign off on it.

And so I don't know if it's ever happened, actually, to be honest with you.

And so it's become somewhat I think it's been, I don't want to call it perfunctory, but it's it's the idea if if you if you try to do something pretty extreme, um there's sort of uh there's a backstop there to prevent you from doing something that's clearly beyond the bounds of what is legally possible.

Sometimes I just like to ask those questions really wondering what would happen.

Right.

Thanks.

So glad we have attorneys on our team.

So this these are the two uh sections of the charter that we're proposing amendments to this year.

Section 209 is related to the council meeting procedures, and section 21 is related to ordinances in general, but specifically the sections that pertain to posting and publication procedures of our ordinances so section 209a, it sets forth certain procedures applicable to council meetings, including the time, place, and frequency of regular meetings, public notice of meetings, and purposes for which the council may convene an executive station uh session, and state law does regulate these same procedures.

So this section is very long.

I didn't include the full language of it, but I'm gonna break it down by sentence basically to make it a little easier to identify the changes that we're proposing.

So the first section sentence of this section actually is this about the schedule of meetings.

So you can see the changes that we're proposing.

Um the at least the time and the place of the meetings that in our charter says that we have to meet at least twice in every month, and such times that and places that the council prescribes by ordinance.

And we have done that.

So our council, our state law does require the same that we hold the fix the time and place of holding the meetings by ordinance, and that's what the council has done, and you can see here the state statute, and then also our code that says that.

Um, but because of our charter saying that we have to meet twice every month, um, we don't have the flexibility that the state law would, if we just were in accordance with the state law, then the council could set the time and date for the meetings, and it wouldn't necessarily have to be twice a month.

You could decide whether you if you had, you know, you'd be more flexible with your time.

So if you have meeting months where you can establish every all your business in one meeting or during your summer breaks, you would have that flexibility with this change.

But all public meeting notices would still apply.

Yes.

Thank you.

And I did reach out to some other cities to see what they do, and they are, you know, they kind of vary, but um Chandler follows the same actual charter language that we follow.

Um Tempe is at least once a month, one meeting a month, and Gilbert just follows accordance with state law, so they can decide each year how many times they want to meet each month.

Yeah, mayor and council, if you were to consider this and um and the voters were to approve.

It it I don't see a dramatic change, but as Holly said, I mean, you you think of December and we have sometimes the back to back meetings at the first of the month.

Maybe we consolidate that into one meeting.

It might be a little bit longer, but it would save you and and the public time from having to come, you know, two Mondays in a row, and and and and that's just an example, but I wouldn't envision that most months outside of the holidays and and uh summer that we would consider any drastic changes to what we're business as usual.

It's just again to conform with state law and take some of these um ministerial acts that have been embedded into the the charter and then allow you the flexibility to change it by ordinance, but still needing to comply with state law as the vice mayor said on all postings, all notifications, uh that wouldn't change.

Sure.

So the next sentence is about the notice of meetings.

So as you can see that our charter requires a 24-hour notice to each um of each of our meetings.

That's already the state law.

We already follow we would follow that anyway.

Um so the currently the the charter section 209 includes some but not all the state requirements for public notice.

So by following state law, we would make sure that we're in compliance with everything.

This this is limited to what the state law actually includes.

I would just add um one nuance.

You'll see that in the current language it says whenever practicable that we would give 24-hour notice.

Uh that's actually not in compliance with state law.

Um the only time we could have a meeting with less than 24 hour notice under the open meeting law is if it's an emergency, and there are laws that govern whether that's appropriate or not.

So it would be removing language that's not in accordance with law.

And the next section is related to executive sessions, and it lists all the various reasons that the council may hold an executive session, one of which is currently not allowed in state law.

Um, I don't know if we want to mention that specifically the matter which might defame or prejudice the character of reputation of any person.

Um that is not according to current state law.

The statute listed on the screen enumerates the only purposes for which a public body may hold an executive session, and we are proposing simplifying the language and following in accordance with state law.

Okay.

Mayor and council, if I could also just add, we're I mean we've broken it down because when you do things in PowerPoint to make it big enough, you have to make it look like three different things, but it's in the in the in the charter, this is one paragraph.

And so we're we're changing one paragraph, and so we were looking at the first sentence and saying, well, we we want to comply with state law, but then you realize the next two sentences effectively in that same paragraph.

Well, there's other sort of I'll call them glitches with the state law that um may arguably we're not in compliance with, and so we might as well fix the whole paragraph if we're gonna fix the first sentence in the charter.

So why don't we say so?

We end up saying basically we end up saying comply with state law three times in one paragraph because right now the charter has all call them just little glitches between the state law and the charter.

And so we want to fix as we go through this.

You know, we've we we met about I think three years ago to have a conversation about fixing the charter and sort of all all I guess all the call them glitches now in the charter.

If we're gonna fix a pair, if we're gonna touch a paragraph, let's fix the whole paragraph mentality.

And so as you see, it looks like three slides.

It's one paragraph, and we're basically saying we we won't we're gonna comply with state law, which we do, um, but we might as well say it um consistently through the paragraph and not just in the first sentence.

Right, thank you, Jim.

Yes, this is a very long section of the charter, and this is what it would look like with the proposed language.

So this is all of those sentences and then one paragraph.

Oh, and while I'm at it, I'll just I'll read the tagline for this one.

This is um the tagline within and this is an ordinance and it's in the packet.

Um and this is gonna be the ordinances are intended to be introduced at your meeting Monday of next week, and then voted on the first.

So if you have any questions regarding this, please you know come talk to me or Scott.

Um, you know, sooner, you know, hopefully today, um, because this is because it's an ordinance that has to be introduced.

But anyways, the tagline for this one is to conform with state laws shall Mesa City Charter Section 209A relating to council meetings be amended to require that the procedures for fixing the time and place of regular meetings and giving public notice of meetings and the purposes for executive sessions be in accordance with state law.

And and the full just you know, the the ordinance shows the whole paragraph, it shows it in what I'll call strikeout, so you can clearly see what the current charter says, what the revival revision is.

This this um this ordinance will be included in a publicity pamphlet.

So going back to residents knowing exactly um transparency of what the intent is and what we're doing, all the information is provided to you before you vote on that question.

Very good.

Thank you.

All right, so the next section of the charter that we are proposing in amendment to is related to ordinances in general, and we have two parts to that section.

211B relates to the procedure uh uh posting ordinances, and then 211D relates to the definition of publishing.

So 211B1 governs the notice procedures for proposed ordinances, requires following introduction of an ordinance that the city clerk post a copy of the ordinance in three public places within the city, and that a summary of the ordinance be published in the newspaper prior to a public hearing.

211B4 governs the notice procedures for the adopted ordinances, and it is the same publication and three posting in three public places, and we then publish a full copy of the ordinance in its entirety in the newspaper.

So we are proposing changing 211B1 to be in accordance with state law.

Um currently the state law requires us to post in th in one public place and on our website, thanks to modern technology, which is another reason for this proposal.

Besides the state law is just the modern technology, and the changes that a lot of people do not utilize the newspaper as much as they use the utilize the internet these days.

So they have modified the law back in 2021 so that we only have to post in one public place, but because of this, we still post in three.

So we post on our website and we post in two of our libraries and consider that the three public places, and this would allow us to post on our website continuously and on one in one public place.

And it requires uh two weeks after adoption that we publish it in the newspaper.

And actually, the next section is about the publishing part.

So this is just the posting part.

So because our charter defines publish as being a one time uh posting at one time in the newspaper of general circulation in the city, that's why we have we will have to continue to do that.

If it's in accordance with state law, and there is uh potential legislation right now that may change the the publication requirements in the newspaper to say that we don't have to where we won't be required to publish the entire ordinance any longer.

We could just publish a reference to the ordinance and lead people to our website to find the full ordinance, which would save publication costs.

Well, I think maybe in the future print, you know, newspaper print might be going, you know.

I don't know where it's gonna go in the near future, but there's not as much as there was.

I think you won't hear me say this often, Mayor, but this is one area where the legislature can be more nimble than we can just by the construct of the charter, because in essence, um, you know, the legislature can look at trends technology, they can pass um, they can pass legislation each year that can address that and and bring uniformity to most of the cities and towns.

But of course, if we're limited by our charter, um it may sometimes make us go above and beyond and have to have to use more antiquated methods than what state law even mandates us to.

So this is simply again bringing us into compliance with state law in a in a way that, like you said, it it communication in the way that we post and the way that we do things, I think will continue um to change as technology evolves.

If I may add just maybe a a nuance to this, um, as attorneys love to do.

Uh this would be in conformance with state law, but I sort of want to highlight that the charter would still have posting and publishing uh requirements above and beyond what the state requires.

Uh the statute that governs posting and publication of ordinances in general only applies to ordinances that adopt a penalty or punishment.

Uh and that only has to be posted and published after it is adopted.

Uh state or our charter, there's a summary publication and posting requirement once it's introduced, and then again, once it's adopted, currently that publication is a newspaper.

It's the full ordinance.

Uh and as you'll remember our admin text amendment uh not that long ago, it's 150 pages.

They can be lengthy.

Um this change was made by the state to sort of adopt these new technologies, but that only applies to the ordinances governed by that state statute, which is the penalties.

So we will still be going above and beyond, but we're just reflecting those modern technology changes that the state has.

Great.

Thank you.

Yeah, and to Kirsten's point with the legal costs.

I did have the staff poll what we spent last year on posting or publishing ordinances in the newspaper, and all of last fiscal year it was 20,000, and already this year it's 25,000, probably because of those very lengthy ordinances.

And we're only in May.

So this is just a summary of the proposed amendment of adding a requirement that each ordinance be posted on the city's website.

Revise the number of physical public postings to require ordinance to be posted at one physical location in Mesa instead of three, and update the definition of publication so the city can utilize modern publication practices as permitted by the state.

And that is all of the explanation about that.

If you have questions in our next step, obviously, is your council direction as to whether you would like us to proceed with these charter amendments on this year's general election ballot?

Um the introduction of the ordinance will be is scheduled for May 18th.

Adoption of the ordinances scheduled for June 1st, and our election will be on November 3rd.

I just have a quick quick question.

Thank you, Mayor.

Might be a question for Mr.

Smith.

I'm looking at uh I think it's page 14, where it refers to within two weeks.

Um do we need to define two weeks as is excluding Saturdays, Sundays, and holidays, or is that an issue that somebody could bring up to to challenge us, or is it okay the way it stands?

Sorry, I'm I'm not seeing where you're seeing the screen.

I'm just wondering, do we do we need to be more specific about that?

Because sometimes uh you you can drill down into that, and is it mean business days or Saturdays and Sundays holidays excluded out of that two weeks, or is it just a calendar two weeks?

Well, I can tell you how what our process is for that.

So I'm not so much concerned about that, Ms.

Mosley.

I'm concerned about someone challenging what two weeks means.

Right.

But we will always be within one week.

Okay.

Because we you introduce the ordinances on a Monday night at the council meeting, and then on Tuesday, we send the submission to the newspaper for Saturday that following Saturday.

Okay.

The only reason I bring it up is I I have a client who's involved in a litigation where the argument centers around the time frame imposed.

That's fair.

And and uh weekends are being argued.

So yeah, and and mayor and council, and we didn't change that, but that's original language, and that's been um it's uh and you can also see six days, and we count it as two weeks, no no ex no sort of no exclusion for and so it's it's it is two weeks.

You're good with it.

Yeah, and and I'm fine with it because that's we we try not to sort of we we focused on trying to change um things that we needed to to be sort of compliance with the state laws.

I said this change ripples through a couple of subsections within this, and that's why you see it when you look at it in the ordinance, you'll see it in multiple places, but we didn't try to change other aspects of it.

Um there are other what I'll call but potential ambiguities within the within the charter, but they've been interpreted and applied consistently for decades, and so we feel we feel comfortable with how we've utilized um you know the the six days or the two weeks um language.

So we didn't feel the need to sort of sort of add on top of those type of changes, because then people are gonna say, well, wait, why are you trying to are you trying to change something by doing that?

And we're like, no, we're not trying to change something with that.

And so you end up sort of end up in a an um and and having a sort of conversation about something that you're not really even intending to change.

Um let me read the tagline on this one because I don't think I've read the tagline or the question.

Um to conform with state law modernization efforts, shall Mesa City Charter Section 211 relating to ordinances be amended to require ordinances to be posted on the city's website, posted at one physical location of Mesa and published in accordance with state law.

And so that will be the question.

Um and like I said, this also the ordinance would which shows uh strikeout and bold all the exact changes to the charter will be included in a publicity pamphlet questions?

I think we Mr.

Adams had any follow-up.

You're all good, Ms.

Duff.

Vice Mayor?

No, Mr.

Bus Butler.

Suffice it to say that these changes are really bringing us into conformance with state law, but we are still in compliance with state law because we've been following the state law rather than the charter where it's a difference.

Is that true?

Correct.

So if if one of these fails, we still have to follow state law.

Correct.

Okay.

Well, it's part of our city charter, too.

I mean, we're doing amendments to the city charter.

We're asking the voters to amend the city charter for these changes.

Yeah.

And it's it's important that we do that to bring it in compliance and absolutely clean.

And it if we don't change it, I think you know, we'd still have to put a herald out front reading on what's coming up on the next agenda.

So modernization of our charter is important.

That's right.

And and so um, mayor and council, if if um you were to advance both the bond questions and these two questions that we would have four questions appear on the November ballot um for the voter consideration.

So um we didn't want to go beyond that amount either, as you know, uh ballot fatigue is a is a real thing, and especially on November ballots.

So uh we would have four questions.

Uh unrelated question back to the um to the agenda.

We when's when are we appointing the uh new uh magistrate?

Because that's not on here.

It's June.

Yeah, I think it's gonna be June 1.

He has uh he had a planned vacation, so he wasn't able to go.

Okay, yeah, yeah.

Yeah, I just noticed it wasn't missing.

Thank you.

Ladies, anything else?

No, thank you.

All right, we're done.

Uh next we'll move on to item three is an acknowledged of receipt of board minutes.

Is there a motion to that effect?

Thank you, Miss Duff.

Thank you, Mr.

Adams.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Motion passes unanimously.

Next is uh current events and conferences attended.

Council members, do you have anything you wish to share?

Ms.

Doug.

Sure, I'll mention a few things.

Um on Monday, I was the host for um the Mesa Chamber was the regional host for the Civics B regional competition.

It was middle school on kids who were um had uh there's three rounds of competition on uh civics questions on the history of our government and uh their essays and we made awards.

Um it was very inspiring to see middle school people excited about civic service and civic policy.

Um and I yesterday I did uh ribbon cutting with the Mesa Chamber for a business called Financial Potion.

They do uh complete um services for video marketing, doing your scripts, doing the video, doing podcasts, they have drone.

Um they were located not too far from downtown, and um we welcomed them and and that was exciting to always have a new business with the ribbon cutting.

And I did something else, and I'm trying to remember what it was.

Oh, we had the service award luncheon on Monday as well, recognizing our employees that did serve what is it 15 and above, and we had some as high as 45 years.

Um there's a lot of people serving in you know um and this spread from 15 to 45 is great.

I love this the staff that we have here, they're so accomplished and professional and do great work, and I was uh a pleasure to um share in that a celebration.

Thank you.

Anything else?

I'll just share then uh I participated in the National Day of Prayer at the Presbyterian Church over here at 161 North Mesa Drive.

It was very great event with Representative Stanton.

Again, I mentioned the Japanese Chamber of Commerce.

I meant I was with uh Nick over and Scott still doing a pitch with them.

And then the clock tower restoration.

We have the clock tower restoration.

Yeah, right here, McDonald.

Over over 100-year uh clock tower restoration, and one of the cool things about it is it has a computer in it, so if the power shuts off and turns back on, the clock hand will automatically move to the correct time.

So, Vice Mayor, you don't have to get up there and move the hand.

So it'll save you a little bit of safety issue for you in case you fall.

And did they take up the paint?

I don't know, I notice it more now that like a copper finish.

Yeah, they had the finish there.

They he updated all that.

So it's uh complete new crop uh clock, and hopefully it'll be there for the next hundred years.

Yeah, McDonald and Maine on the northeast corner.

So check it out next time you're in downtown.

Yeah, I remember as a kid watching it because that was the only clock downtown.

So uh reference it quite open.

Well, with that, Mr.

Butler, your turn.

Mayor and council, thanks for your time this morning.

Uh we will convene again on Monday uh 5 p.m.

for study session because we're gonna have a presentation from the downtown Mesa Association with their annual report and talk about their assessment um and and give you that annual update.

So that so we'll start a few minutes early at 5 p.m.

on Monday.

And uh just just to note everyone's been outside and experienced the heat, so that means it's pool season here.

So Mesa pools open on Saturday, May 23rd.

So uh I know there's a lot of kids that are excited about that, and then um Memorial Day, of course, will fall on Monday, May 25th, and city offices will be closed on that day.

So thank you, Mayor.

I forgot, but I'm gonna add uh Mr.

Adams and I attended the Mesa Parks Board and Rec board meeting yesterday evening and uh thank them for their service, and then we talked about uh cultural significance of uh perhaps a name change at the Park of the Canals that might may be forthcoming.

So appreciate Mr.

Adams joining me with that.

So with that, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn, council.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

It's unanimous.

Thank you.

Have a great rest of the day.