Good afternoon.

How is everyone today?

Welcome to the Mesa City Council study session for July 20, 2026.

Mayor Freeman is traveling internationally.

Uh so he will be excused today.

Also, Councilmember Goforth is absent and also excused.

All other council members are present.

First order of business today is to review uh the agenda items for both July 20 and July 27th, since we will not have a council study session on Thursday.

So a lot of these items I think are overlapping between introductions, yeah, introductions and adoption.

So we'll start with a July 20 meeting.

Does I know we went over this the other day, but does anybody have questions or comments?

Yeah.

I I'm probably the only one who might have that.

Um you said the 20th, right?

Correct.

Okay.

So I just wanted to, it's more or less a statement.

Remind everybody in the public that 5A, um, which is levying the amount to be collected by secondary property tax.

I just double checked with the city staff, and it was great news.

I want to kind of celebrate.

We're actually dropping the tax rate from 0.8582% down to 0.85%, and that's because development has been so successful in the city that we're essentially spreading the peanut butter thinner.

So it's less of a burden on our residents.

We're reducing the tax rate that they're paying because other businesses and new residents are helping to pay that.

Um also just to remind everyone, Mesa does not have a primary property tax.

When you get your tax bill and you have your primary and your secondary, um, I think a lot of people get a little bit confused about this.

I have people talk to me about this.

Your primary tax is your county tax and your school bonds that you're paying back.

That's not the city of Mesa.

The city of Mesa only has the secondary tax.

We don't have a food tax, um, and that our secondary tax is paying back our capital improvement bonds.

So I just wanted to kind of remind the public of that because I got a refresher on it as well.

And then uh I had one question for item 5B because I've gotten a few emails.

Well, you didn't tell us if it was chunky or smooth peanut butter.

Yeah.

Um, I'm gonna go with smooth.

Yeah, yeah.

And pre-mixed and pre-mixed.

Yeah.

Anyone else on that item?

No, um, as council member um Taylor had mentioned, we've received quite a few emails in 5B.

And um ready to discuss it and address it.

I don't know if you just want to wait till we get upstairs since we've heard from members of the public and have a further discussion, or you want to do a preliminary touch?

I'm fine to wait, but if you'd like to kind of breed discuss among us, we can do that now, and then with the public up there.

I like that.

Okay.

Okay.

Go upstairs with it.

No, we could discuss right now and go over it.

Yeah.

I just had some questions.

I I was thinking maybe.

Yeah.

Hi, Commander Reno.

How are you?

Thank you for joining us.

Yeah, I'm well, thank you.

Time's going to, I guess.

Yeah.

It's been a long day.

Don't worry, don't worry.

Yeah.

That's not there it is.

All right.

I was new to this memorandum of understanding, and I was reading over it.

And um, my questions are a little bit more broad.

I was hoping that maybe you could teach us a little bit about how long have we participated in this MOU in the past?

So we've had a MOU with at the FBI reference um reservation uh enforcement.

So we have two uh gang members or gang detectives deputized with the FBI on safe travels MOU.

This is a specific MOU for violent crime for our the rest of our gang unit to participate in, and it's specific to the city of Mesa.

So it what this new MOU will provide us is overtime reimbursement for investigations specific to violent crime, and it also provides us four vehicles.

Okay.

So it's just it's adding on it's adding on to an existing MOU we've had with the FBI for uh a little over 13, 14 years now.

13 or 14 years.

Oh, yeah, since about 2014, I think.

Um violent crime.

I was reading the explanation.

I mean, it was pretty intense.

It's like trafficking, murders, uh smugglers.

So am I correct?

In understanding that we've already been working with the FBI on those types of violent crimes.

Yes, specific to uh Indian reservations, yes.

Okay, got it.

Okay, specific to Indian reservations.

But now this does help helps us further our efforts here in the city of Mesa.

Okay.

So this would be the first introduction into the city of Mesa with this?

With this type of with this MOU, yes.

Okay, got it.

How long would it last?

What is the length of time?

The time duration is not specified.

However, we can't opt out of this MOU at any time with a 30-day written notice to the FBI.

Okay.

Um let me just follow up to any needed.

Repercussions.

Um what would be the repercussions if we didn't enter into it?

Um what would be the repercussions if we didn't enter into how would it affect the public safety?

Um we're still gonna do our operations as we do them with our with our people.

What this could potentially do is just with overtime budget, you know, mitigation and things like that.

Um that could be a problem just because we're trying to minimize our overtime.

Okay.

Um, but operationally, we're gonna keep doing what what we do.

This one will help minimize overtime use it.

Okay.

Can you explain some of the benefits of moving into this?

Like, can you explain a little bit more about how operationally it would help if we moved into this MOU and voted yes on it?

Like I said, it'll it'll pay for overtime reimbursement, it'll give us cards, but also specifically provide support with like forensics.

If we needed to use the FBI forensics team for anything that would help us out, we have access to that and um other resources as far as um supplemental um agents to come help us out with the investigations or other task force members from other agencies.

So, like the city of Chandler has been involved in this uh MOU with Safe Streets for about three or four years now.

Okay, okay, and I also noticed that Phoenix has been involved with it for a while as well.

Is that right?

I don't know if Phoenix PD has been involved with it, but it is in part of the with the Phoenix field office of the FBI.

Okay.

And then um, I was curious to know do we have does the city of Mesa have any other partnerships similar to this, like with the U.S.

Marshals or something of that nature?

Yes, ma'am.

We do have uh part or we do have ums with the United States Marshall Service.

Oh, we do.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms, and Explosives.

Uh, like I mentioned previously, the FBI Safe Trails MOU.

Okay.

Um, so we do have MOUs with other federal entities.

And how long has that one lasted, would you say?

Just um the Marshall Service.

Yeah.

That's probably 20 2008, I want to say.

Oh, a while.

Okay.

So this is not new to the city of Mesa Mesa to enter into MOUs like this to work with outside organizations in this capacity.

No, this just kind of formalizes our relationship a little bit better.

Okay.

It makes it a little bit more efficient to use uh their resources.

One last question.

General public purview.

I mean, since now I know we've already been doing this for about 13 years.

I've I've never seen anything of it in like the public eye.

I've lived here from us 20 years.

This is not something that we would see a drastic change in our neighborhoods on our streets.

No, ma'am.

We will still do uh police work, how we do police work operationally.

It'll still it won't change anything operationally.

Our our folks that are involved with this MOU, they will be housed at our in our facilities under our supervision.

Okay, okay.

Thanks.

I'm gonna process that for now.

I appreciate you answering those questions.

You're welcome, Matt.

I'll just go ahead and comment.

I was gonna save the comments, but I might repeat myself upstairs.

So uh trying to look into this a little bit further and a better understanding.

I just want to let you know this these are our offers officers, they are not federal officers, they are city and mesa police officers conducting business as usual, um work that they already do.

So this agreement allows the reimbursement for I think two deputized game detectives, anyway.

Some hours that we already do, and like four for four vehicles or something, or maybe that was the previous agreement when we did it with the Salt River Indian reservation.

So our current um MOU is with the FBI reference Salt River is two gang detectives that are deputized and a sergeant, and then three vehicles.

Okay.

This will allow our uh six gang detectives to be deputized and have safe streets task force, a sergeant and the lieutenant with four vehicles.

Okay, great, great.

Um, so like I said, this is not new.

We've did it with the Salt River Indian Reservation, and so um this is just continuing our work that we already do.

So these are not federal officers, this is not FBI or ICE or DHS working in our community.

Is our officers doing the work they already do and being able to um be reimbursed for some of those costs?

Um and this is not the same as the Memphis Safe Streets task force.

That's what I've been told.

I haven't gotten into a lot of detail how that's different, but I know that was quoted in quite a in uh quite a few of the emails.

This is not the same situation, it is not the same workings, it's not the same purpose.

So we have to disassociate um from that and the agreements with the FBI Phoenix Field Office, right?

Okay, that's about all I have on that.

That's very helpful.

Thank you.

Yeah, yeah.

Thank you, Commander.

Okay, you want to commander one thing.

Um I I think that's caused a little bit of confusion on the council report.

It talks about Phoenix Safe Streets task force.

This isn't sending our officers into Phoenix.

The Phoenix refers to the Phoenix FBI field office, which covers the entire state.

Yeah.

Yes, sir.

Okay.

I've had the opportunity to work.

Um, I was part of the uh FBI's Citizens Academy and had the opportunity to see how the FBI works with local entities and how they work within themselves and other agencies.

Fantastic program.

So it's great to have an opportunity to receive some funding back for fighting and preventing violent crime.

So this is a great project.

Um I do want to be very clear with everybody as we when we go upstairs.

If folks are gonna make comments on this, this is about a uh a memorandum of understanding with the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

No other agency that was discussed.

This is not about Marshalls, it's not about Phoenix.

This is about Mesa and its relationship with the FBI.

So if anybody has any questions or comments on that, that's what I expect to stay on topic.

So thank you, sir.

Anything else in that?

Just to touch upon that.

It's my understanding by reading the documents that the oversight of this is from the Phoenix field office, the Phoenix FBI field office.

So the oversight and the controls are right here locally within Phoenix.

Yes.

And we have an extra layer of our supervision as well.

So all right.

Any other questions on this?

Any questions on the remainder of the yes, sir?

Mr.

Adams.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, just a quick comment, no questions.

Since I was rather vocal in months gone by about um four 4050, less than a full planning and zoning board vote on various cases.

I noted with delight that two items on this agenda are are all seven members voting.

So I think that the uh uh remedies that uh Mr.

Apia put in place with alternate members and Ms.

Kapaski Brown put into place are working.

It's delightful to have the full the the full planning and zoning board, all seven members weighing in with their opinions on these cases as it should be.

So since I complained, I thought I would say, hey, I noticed thank you, and uh good deal.

That's it.

Was it heard by the old board or the new board?

We have some new new board members, and uh I believe we're appointing one, right?

Vice Mayor Summers, the new board will be in place uh for the first time on Wednesday on the 22nd.

Okay, and I think we have uh another board appointment to A is uh PNZ.

That's correct.

Um, one of the board members moved uh to Utah, so one of the alternates is being moved up into a full-time position.

Excellent.

Also, I'm very glad I read my material.

We are anything else for tonight's meeting?

No, all right.

How about we move to the 27th?

Is there anything on the 27th?

I know a lot of well, like I said, there's a lot of overlap on this because there's introduction on items tonight and then uh final adoptions next Monday, but there are a couple other items.

I I have one, uh it's the only one I have, which is for 6A um Mesa Development Impact Fees or the Mesa City Code.

Hi, Brian.

If you answered my if someone answered this question, I'm sorry, I emailed it, but I might not have I tried to.

No, we we would love to uh get this out there so everyone's clear of what's happening here.

So thank you for asking the question.

Okay, great.

So my question is if the impact fees paid for the debt that was accrued for public this public safety building, and now they're no longer needed because they paid that debt out.

If we leave public safety impact fees as an option in our code, would that not be beneficial for any future public safety buildings that are constructed?

I know we have the capacity fees, but I think my brain was doing like a triple check like well, what if something happens to the capacity fees and those can't be paid?

Shouldn't we still have the impact fees available as an option to collect to pay the debt?

Am I overthinking this?

Walk me through it.

So good evening, Mayor and Council, uh, Vice Mayor and Council Brian Richel, uh, director of Office of Management and Budget.

So back in 2012, the state changed the requirements of the legislation for impact fees itself.

The enough revenue was collected to pay for that eligible debt.

So as part of that ordinance, council said those whenever we get the eligible debt, those impact fees will cease.

So that's why we keep coming back every time we collect enough revenue to pay for, for instance, this one is the last one.

It's for public safety.

So we've collected enough revenue under that old ordinance to be able to pay the debt for the projects that we did.

So but moving forward, staff is now in the process of selecting a consultant to evaluate new impact fees for the city.

So am I correct and understanding because it's under an old ordinance?

The state changed the rates.

Is that right?

Or how we collect them?

Vice, yes, vice mayor and um councilmember Taylor.

The state did change the um legislation.

Um it's a little bit more um labor intensive to develop impact fees now and to track them and other um guidances that we have to follow per the state.

So in when the city decided to um forgo that option, they worked with the state on saying we're just gonna collect enough uh revenue for the projects that we've just built and the debt that we have, and then we will cease and we won't uh collect any more.

However, um now the city is going to um we're out um trying to select a consultant to evaluate new impact fees under this new um state legislation.

Okay, all right.

Council, if I could just add to Brian's uh explanation.

Um the current code says that the impact fees automatically end upon the payment of the debt.

And so the the fees actually already ended.

What you're doing is just really cleaning up the code.

You're taking a number that's in the code um and just uh deleting it.

The code it's still itself is still there.

The concept of impact fees, the fact that we could have impact fees for public safety and for all the other areas.

That part of the code is all still there.

It's just the chart at the very bottom that has the numbers.

You're literally just crossing those numbers out, and so that so we're just being consistent.

The actual fees already stopped.

And in this answer my question too.

Thank you.

Yeah, and and uh vice mayor and and council.

This this certainly in no way, as Brian indicated, we are actively engaged in doing a new impact fee study so that we can address uh council's um desire and of which we wholeheartedly support of making sure that growth pays for growth, and and that requires under state statute.

I'm having PTSD because I was down at the legislature uh when the bill passed in in 2012, that um it was much more onerous, and there are there's a whole um litany of studies and other um uh calculations that the city has to undertake, and that's why we go and we hire a consultant that's versed in doing that for communities all across Arizona, and that's what we're gonna be doing to make sure that we can reinstate these fees to ensure that growth is paying for growth and it's not putting the burden on insisting ratepayers.

Okay.

That was very helpful.

Thank you.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Excellent.

Item 6A today is related to that item, but it's an introduction, and then next week we'll we'll make the adoption.

So if there are any future questions that can be, we have a week to address them.

Anything else for the 27th?

Going once, going twice, seeing none.

This moving, this is a this meeting is moving along.

It's your favorite.

It's my favorite.

Uh item two A is to take action on appointments to boards and committees.

Is there a motion to approve with Mr.

Heredia?

Ms.

Duff as a second, all in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion passes unanimously.

Uh item number three is to acknowledge receipt of minutes of various boards and committees.

Do I have a motion by council member Adams, a second by Councilmember Heredia?

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries unanimously.

Next is the current events and conferences attended.

Council members, anything you'd like to discuss?

That was um in flag staff.

Um sorry, I missed Thursday, but I was in flagstaff for a conference called Downtown Matters.

And they had um national gurus, the written books and stuff all about urban planning and downtowns, and it was significant.

I really enjoyed it as far as locally.

As far as locally, uh Kimber Lanning of Local Firsts spoke, and I always enjoy hearing her.

Um Chuck Morona, strong towns, Joe Minicose of Urban Three, the Happy Urbanist, John John was there, and some downtown um associations and what they've done in their economic developments across the nation from Portland, Maine, Lafayette, Louisiana, a city in Washington.

It goes on and on.

It was a really a good conference.

And a couple of our members from the Urban Transformation Office are there, so we had some good discussions.

Thanks.

Very good.

Anyone else?

I'll just uh remind everyone tomorrow is the primary election day.

So if you have a ballot and have not had the opportunity to drop it off, you can do that, I think till seven o'clock tonight, or you can do it tomorrow, and you can vote in person tomorrow.

So best of luck to all the candidates.

Um, tomorrow we'll be doing a soft opening for Medina Station.

Unfortunately, Mary's not here, and uh councilmember Goforth would normally do it, but I'm gonna go up and do a soft opening at Medina Station for the Target, which is one of their anchors, and uh, and they should be opening up to the public in I think in less than a week, this weekend, I believe.

What's that?

26th.

So you everybody can start shopping on the 26th.

Fantastic.

Mr.

Butler, what do you got that's more exciting?

Well, this is more exciting, probably, Vice Mayor.

Uh the uh study session is canceled on Thursday, so uh we will not see you Thursday morning, but we'll see you back a week from uh today at 5 15 for study session, followed by the council meeting at 5 45.

I love how a future meeting announcement is not a future meeting.

Right.

That is probably one of my favorite.

So, with that, is there a motion to adjourn?

I have a motion from council member Adams uh and a second.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Motion carries.

We'll see you upstairs.

Thank you.