Thank you so much for joining us today.

It is November 19th, and we'll begin this convening with an invocation from police chaplain Jim Williams.

Please rise if you are able.

Madam Mayor, Council and Staff, thank you so much for what you do for our city.

Please join me in a prayer of invocation, inviting the Lord to join us today.

Heavenly Father, I come to you requesting your participation as I lift up to you, our mayor, our city council, and their staff members.

As we near the end of the year, I'd like to offer a personal thank you for all these precious and willing individuals that constantly share their leadership, talents, gifting with our great city.

Father, I ask you to draw the mayor and the council close to you.

Anoint them as only you can, understanding and discernment as only you can provide.

Grant them favor and draw them close, allowing them to know and understand and fulfill your purposes.

Father, please put a hedge protection around all of our city leaders, employees, and their families, keeping them healthy and safe.

And Lord, I thank you in advance for your decisions and discernment and your love extending to our city.

And to you, Father, we give all the praise and all the glory.

Amen.

Thank you so much for your words.

Please join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag.

Under God, indivisible, liberty, justice.

Thank you so much.

I'll now call the meeting to order.

Will the clerk call the roll?

Councilman Guardado.

Here.

Councilwoman Hernandez here.

Councilwoman Hodge Washington.

Here.

Councilwoman Pastor.

Here.

Councilman Robinson.

Councilwoman Stark?

Here.

Councilman Warren.

Vice Mayor O'Brien.

Here.

Mayor Gallego.

Here.

Thank you to everyone who is joining us, but a special thank you if you are celebrating your birthday today.

Uh Mario is here with Mario Brajas and Elsie Duarte are here with us to provide interpretation.

Mario, would you introduce your team?

Yes, Mayor.

Thank you.

Good afternoon.

Once again, my name is Mario Warajas.

I'll be working today with uh El C Duarte as far as uh Spanish interpreters.

I'll now take a moment to introduce ourselves to our Spanish speaking audience.

When I started, you'll say Mario Warajas.

Novamente, eso is para ayudarnos a poderle el service interpretación del Espanyol.

Muchas gracias.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you so much, Mario.

I will now turn to our city clerk to read the 24-hour paragraph.

The titles of the following ordinance and resolution numbers on the agenda were available to the public at least 24 hours prior to this council meeting, and therefore may be read by title or agenda item only.

Ordinances numbered G seven four four six through seven four five one.

S five two three five one five two three nine one through five two four three six and resolutions two two three four five through two two three four seven.

Thank you.

I'll turn to the city attorney to explain public comment.

Thank you, Mayor.

Members of the public may speak for up to two minutes to comment on agenda items.

Comments must be related to the agenda item and the action being considered by the council.

General comments that go beyond the scope of the agenda item should be made during the citizen comment session at the end of the agenda.

The city council and staff cannot discuss or comment on matters related to pending investigations, claims, or litigation.

Additionally, any member of the public who appears before the council in their capacity as a lobbyist must, as required by Phoenix City Code, disclose this fact before addressing the council.

The City Code states that speakers must express their comments respectfully and courteously.

Use of profane language threats or personal attacks on members of the public, council members, or staff are not allowed.

Any comments that are disruptive and unrelated to the council's business.

Any person who violates these rules may lose their opportunity to speak further and could be asked to leave.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you so much.

We begin today with our boards and commissions.

We have an exceptional group of individuals here today for uh boards and commissions.

Vice Mayor, do we have a motion?

Yes, I move to approve mayor and city council boards and commission nominations.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, say nay.

Passes unanimously.

Would those and congratulations to our new commissioners.

Thank you for serving your city.

And if you could come forward for the swearing in.

Can we just keep coming?

Can we just keep coming this way?

I think we'll have two lines if there will come forward.

Congratulations to everyone.

Please raise your right hand.

I state your name.

Do solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution and laws of the state of Arizona.

That I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same.

And defend them against all enemies.

Defend them against all enemies.

Foreign and domestic.

And that I will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of the office of.

So it's a duty of the state your office.

According to the best of my ability.

So help me God.

Congratulations, Commissioners.

We're so pleased to have you serving us.

Well, thank you so much to our commissioners.

We appreciate your advice.

This group will help us with everything from appointing public defenders to land use decisions, and we really appreciate your service to the city of Phoenix.

Next, we have a vote related to our municipal court judges.

Vice Mayor, do we have a motion?

I move to approve municipal court judges for the public safety and justice subcommittee recommendation.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

I'll turn to councilwoman Hernandez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, just had a couple questions and comments for the uh nominees if they're able to come forward.

Good afternoon.

Thank you for joining us.

Um, I understand that you've both been nominated for these appointments by the judicial selection advisory board and the PSJ subcommittee.

Always learning something new around here, so thank you for bearing with us.

Um, and congratulations to the both of you.

This is really a career moment for for you.

Um, and I just have a couple questions uh for each of you so that I can understand a bit more about how you um about you and how you are coming into our municipal courts.

Uh so my first question is how do you see your history as a prosecutor shaping the direction of your court?

And it is that oh, you could take it one and another.

Thank you.

Yes, I'm currently a prosecutor with the city of Phoenix.

Before this position, I was on the bench at Superior Court for 16 and a half years.

So and before that, I was a prosecutor in La Paz County, Pennell County, Attorney General's office.

So I have a wealth of experience.

Actually, on both sides, right?

Trying cases as well as listening to cases.

My experience with the city of Phoenix is much different than my previous experience in the fact that I'm dealing with more community issues.

You didn't do so at the felony level as much.

So here with the City of Phoenix, when you're prosecuting cases, you're dealing with cases that deal with individuals.

It affects their families as well as communities.

So the way that we approach these cases is different than felony cases.

And the fact that that's what our focus is is really the entire picture, not just the individual crime.

So what is the appropriate action in the case?

How should this person be held accountable?

Whether it's jail time or whether it's community services, they're looked at from a much broader perspective than a felony perspective.

And so, with my experience as a city of Phoenix prosecutor, that would shape my view as a municipal court judge, understanding it's a different focus so much.

Thank you.

And I think my background is pretty similar to my colleague.

I was with the prosecutor's office for about 11 years, but I've been on the bench for the last almost eight.

Um I was a defense attorney prior to being a prosecutor.

So I think my familiarity with the prosecutor's office for the city of Phoenix just allows me to understand how the systems work and make sure that justice is being done for all of our citizens.

Thank you so much.

Um, and then just my next question, my last question for both of you is what reforms do you want to see in our municipal court system?

I think there's plenty of suggestions that actually we've talked about on occasion.

Um I think there needs to be more accessibility.

Um right now we do have court trans uh translators that come in.

I think that we could perhaps have a certain courtroom that is Spanish speaking only.

Um I think that there's better ways that we can provide accessibility to our community by having specialized courts.

Um, right now we currently do have veterans court and mental health court, but I think those courts could be expanded, like I said, a Spanish speaking court, perhaps a DUI court, um, domestic violence courts.

So making more specialty courts, I think would assist our community a little better.

Yep.

And then could you repeat the question one more?

Yeah, just uh what reforms would you want to see um in our municipal court system?

Um that was a very good answer that my colleague is.

Um I would also like to see um to make sure that the citizens have access to justice and that they feel that they have access to justice.

Um I'm down on the fourth floor, I do the civil cases, and so when COVID came around, we implemented some things that are seemingly simple, but they work really well for people, and that is being able to attend by video hearing for civil traffic cases or parking tickets.

Um, guinea downtown can be difficult for some people parking and negotiating all of that.

So I think that I'm really really proud of Phoenix Municipal Municipal Court for all of the things that they've done post-COVID to make sure that people can get to court, they feel like they're being heard and that they've got good access to justice.

Thank you so much for that.

Uh, really appreciate the both of you uh just being available for those couple of questions.

And then I just have a question for staff, maybe, and this might be for you or Lori.

Um, you know, our I've talked a lot about just the justice, how our communities are impacted by justice.

So um would love to know if our court system, our municipal courts, sorry, let me start that over again.

For um, our court system in Arizona has had a trend of racial discrimination, um, just as our Phoenix Police Department has.

So, can we have our municipal courts produce racial outcome reports for us if Judge Taylor is here?

I think that's probably an appropriate uh question for the chief presiding judge.

Yeah, thank you, Judge.

Thank you, Judge Taylor, and welcome.

Hello?

Okay, yep, that worked.

I saw the red light.

Um Madam Mayor, members of the council, councilwoman Hernandez.

As I understand the question you're asking whether or not we would be able to produce anything for you that would break down results in the municipal court by race.

Um and the answer there is no, I don't believe so.

The biggest reason for that being that that is not a data set that we in the courts keep for any reason.

It's not something that we look at, and so it's something that we would have a very difficult time if we could do it at all in actually putting something together that would break it down along those characteristics.

Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Uh, would you be open to having more conversations?

Just I at the root of this, I want to make sure that our courts are functioning in a very equitable way.

And I know from conversations we've already had, I think that's what's happening, but would love to be able to share that with the community and show examples of how that is happening.

So if you're open to having those conversations, absolutely.

Okay, perfect.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

And I know our municipal court system has worked very hard on reforms.

I got to work with Judge Taylor on uh reforms related.

We were taking people's drivers of licenses due to unpaid fines, and we work to address that and with incredible outcomes, including we heard from a woman who left a domestic violence situation when she got her driver's license back.

So great outcomes there, and you've worked, we have uh specialty efforts related to veterans, uh, people experiencing homelessness and more, but we can always continue to learn and grow.

Uh does anyone community court is a wonderful thing that also has happened at the municipal level, so yes.

Uh does anyone else have comments or questions?

Wonderful.

Well, thank you so much, and uh congratulations uh to our nominees on what I'm gonna predict is about to be a successful vote.

Roll call of them, yes.

Yes, Hodge Washington, yes, pastor, yes, Robinson, yes, Stark, yes, wearing, yes, O'Brien.

Yes, Gallego, yes, passes nine zero congratulations.

We will look forward to the confirmation.

The city of Phoenix provides a advisory role to the state of Arizona on liquor license.

That is the next portion of our meeting.

Do we have a motion on liquor licenses?

Yes, I move to approve items three through 15.

Second.

We have a motion and a seconds.

We do not have any public comment on these.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Aye.

Any opposed passes unanimously?

Perhaps of interest to some uh might be the Durant's liquor license was on today's agenda.

City Clerk, are we ready for ordinances, resolutions, new business planning, and zoning?

Yes, Mayor.

Vice Mayor, do we have a motion?

Yes, yes.

I move to approve item 16, 372, except the following items 30, 35, 36, 37, 38, 40, 44, 60, 66, 70, 71, and 72.

Noting that items 39, 67, 68, and 69 are continued to December 3rd, 2025.

And can the clerk confirm if there are any other items that should be excluded for in-person public comment?

Yes, Mayor, Vice Mayor, members of the council, also excluding item number 23.

That's item number 23.

Second, we have a motion and a second roll call.

Hernandez?

Yes.

Hodge Washington.

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Waring?

Yes.

O'Brien.

Yes.

There you go.

Yes.

Passes 9-0.

We next go to item 23, which is ballot sorting system lease, including training, maintenance, and repair.

Do we have a motion?

Yes, I move.

Yes, I move to approve item 23.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Leonard Clark is here to provide testimony in support of this item.

Leonard, the floor is yours.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

My name is Leonard Clark, and um I was born in Phoenix and have lived here or about in the area of Phoenix, and I think it's very important that uh we make sure that the elections by what you're doing today, that's why I support it, continue to be free and fair, and I'm here to continue to support the early voting list and being able to mail out our ballots.

You know, because fortunately in the past, our Republican friends, not only Democrats wanted this, but it is under attack by certain people in Washington, DC, who shouldn't be sticking their noses into our business.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

The majority of voters in Phoenix elections do choose to vote by mail.

Any comments?

Roll call.

Juan Adam.

Yes.

Yes.

Hodge Washington.

Yes.

Pastor.

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Waring.

O'Brien.

Yes.

Naygo.

Yes.

Passes 90.

Next is item 30, which is a contract with Bobby Yang for dental care.

Councilwoman Gordado, did you want to make the motion?

Yes.

Move to approve item 30.

Second.

Motion a second, and I'll recognize the councilwoman for comments.

Thank you.

I want to highlight the critical importance of providing dental care services through the Head Star program.

As we know, Head Start is dedicated to promoting the health and well-being of young children and their families.

And dental care is a vital component of this mission.

Firstly, dental health is fundamental to a child's overall health and development.

Poor oral health can lead to pain infections and difficulties in eating, speaking, and learning.

By ensuring that children receive regular dental checkups and treatments, we can prevent these issues and support their healthy growth and development.

Providing dental care services through Head Start also addresses disparities in access to health care.

Many families in our community may face barriers to accessing dental care, such as financial constraints or lack of transportation.

And also when thinking, do I put food on the table, pay my rent, or take my kids to the dentist?

By continuing to support dental services for Hit Start, we ensure that all children, regardless of their background, have access to the care they need.

Dental care services for the children participating in the HeadStar program.

It's not just about preventing cavities, it's about ensuring that our children have the best possible start in life by prioritizing their dental health.

We are investing in their future and in the future of our community.

Thank you to Deputy City Manager Gina Montes and the Director of Human Services, Jacqueline Edwards, for bringing this item before us today.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you so much.

Great recognition of how important the dental care that we provide through Head Start is to this community.

City of Phoenix administers Head Start for many parts of our city.

Councilwoman Pastor.

Yes.

If anything, we know that dental uh is very important because if our gums are infected, uh it can infect our whole body and get into our bloodstream.

But most of all, I just want to give a shout out to Kip, who's from the Willow neighborhood, who is our dentist, and so uh he uh probably knows the most important how um why children need uh dental services or dental um practices.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Roll call.

Guardado, yes, Hernandez, yes, Hodge Washington, yes, Pastor, yes, Robinson, yes, Stark, yes, Warren?

O'Brien?

Yes, Gallego, yes, passes nine zero.

Items 35 and 36 are related items that cover apprenticeship programs, so we will take them together.

Uh acting vice mayor, do we have a motion on 35 and 36?

Yes, I move to approve items 35 and 36.

Second.

Thank you.

And noting that councilman Pastor will not be participating in this one.

Two exciting items.

City of Phoenix has been a real leader in apprentices.

We got national recognition for the first of its kind of semiconductor apprenticeship.

We're trying to make sure with these tech jobs that are coming to our community that our residents are prepared to take them.

Uh, just recently got a note from one of our apprentices who told me she bought a home thanks to her apprenticeship and is now getting to spend more time with her kids.

Previously, she'd had to pick up extra shifts at a logistics job, but now is making enough that uh she just works her traditional hours.

Uh one of these items lets us do more local funding.

We had traditionally been using a lot of federal funding for this, but that uh we're seeing that diminish, and so this will give us flexibility.

A huge thank you to our city employees who administer this program and our workforce board citizens who are appointed and who have made this a priority.

Roll call.

Yes, Hernandez, yes, Hodge Washington.

Yes, yes, Robinson, yes, Stark, yes, Waring?

Yes, O'Brien.

Yes, Maygo.

Yes, passes 80.

Item 37 is a real resolution to participate in and support a bid to host the 2028 Olympic trials marathon and related events.

Before we go to a motion, we'll go to public comment.

And we will begin with Paige Mullen, followed by Dr.

Art Mullen.

And I see only uh Dr.

Mullen moving forward.

Paige, do you need to just okay?

So we'll first Dr.

Mullen, great.

Over here.

Hi, everybody.

Everybody having a good day, I hope.

Hope you're feeling good.

So I'm Dr.

Art Mullen.

We recently completed the Phoenix 10K and Marathon.

This was our 50th year of that race.

We had almost 5,000 runners participate.

And this is a race that's uh been, of course, very dear to my heart.

And I started it in 1976.

A few years ago.

I was in kindergarten at the time.

At my original race press conference, I had Jesse Owens 1936 Olympian who won four gold medals.

Jesse came to the press conference, told him I was putting on a 10K run, and he said anybody that runs over 100 yards is crazy.

So that was the beginning of a race that started at 40th Street and Camelback.

We had approximately 1,500 runners.

I anticipated 500, and so I had tongue depressors from my office that we handed out from one to 500.

So after the first 500 runners, we had no idea where anybody finished.

Frank Schorter was uh the winner of the first race.

He was uh 1972 Olympic marathon runner.

So the race, which was the inception of what my ideal was, and and certainly my utopian and maybe if you could tell us what you would like to see on this item.

Pardon?

Well, we have we have two minutes per speaker, so if you could tell us on this item anything we need to know.

So on this particular item, which is support for the 2028 Olympics, uh, we have submitted an intent to bid, and that bid will be in by the end of uh of this month, so the first of December.

Uh having a history and having been the uh chairman of the US Olympic Committee for four years and having carried the Olympic torch.

I think that we could definitely be a significant component in helping Phoenix to obtain that bid for the 2028 Olympic marathon trials, which will be held in a city of the Olympics choice.

Thank you.

Councilman, did you have a it looked like you might have a question?

Or no?

I didn't get it.

It wasn't clear to me.

That's why I'm you would could you just please repeat that for me if you can?

What would you like?

Uh which one would I like pardon?

I guess uh I think at the moment, as agendized, uh the the city would be partnering with a different company.

Yes, so so would we combine that or our feelings that we would like to be included since we are a local group, and the group that is submitting the bid, of course, is not a uh homegrown entity, and we are, and since we have had that relationship with the running community for many many years, we feel that we should be part of any type of bid that would be submitted, and therefore we have submitted uh an intent to bid as well.

Wonderful, that's very helpful, and thank you, and thank you for your incredible commitment to racing.

We now have generations of individuals who fell in love with running.

Thanks, thanks to your leadership, and we appreciate you investing uh from the races back into our community, including for healthy food for folks.

Thank you very much, and sorry to give you such a and just to confirm for folks uh Paige Mullen does not need to speak on this item.

Is that right?

Or okay, so Paige will speak on this item, and she will be followed by Leonard Clark.

Thank you, Mayor and Council members.

I just wanted to clarify that that you had asked a question, and I think for uh for us, we would like to be included.

It doesn't have to be competing, but if there's any opportunity to be included, it it it's something that we would like to request.

Thank you.

Councilman Waring and then Councilwoman Pestor and Paige, maybe if you could.

I don't know if they have questions for you or not, but maybe stay.

I'm sorry.

Go ahead.

Uh Paige was sitting down and I was recommending that I don't I couldn't tell if you had a question or a comment, but I thought she might not be able to do that.

I would kind of ask staff a question.

Sorry.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um so what can we do to include them?

I mean, we're here now, it's an agendized item.

Is there something we can do?

I certainly entertain doing it.

Yeah.

So uh thank you, Mayor.

Councilman Warren.

I think.

And I think Councilman Robinson, do you want maybe have has a I think you could state the council's intent in your motion?

If Mayor, thank you very much.

I I will make a substitute motion once we get to that point.

Okay, if that's okay, that I think we'll address these issues.

Perfect.

Okay.

And there is no motion on the table, so you can just make the motion.

Okay.

Well, thank you very much, Mayor.

And Dr.

Mullen, thank you for all that you've done over the years.

Umor, I would like to make a substitute motion.

Oh, just a motion, just a motion.

Oh, I'm sorry.

So we have two speakers left.

But we could do the motion before the speakers and they could react to it.

Why don't we do the motion and then the speakers can react to that?

Perfect.

All right, so we'll recognize Councilman Robinson.

Leonard, do you mind if he does a motion and you can then you can comment on the motion?

All right.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, I would like to make a substitute motion to authorize the resolution to support the bid to host a 2028 USA TF Olympic Trails uh Olympic trials marathon with the bidding race producer's good faith effort to partner with a local nonprofit organization with significant experience in Olympics and local running events.

Second, but I believe that's a motion.

Okay, okay.

All right, so that is the motion on the table, and Leonard, and then we'll be Leonard will be followed by Phil.

If you could both consider that in your comments that is the motion on the floor.

Thank you, Mayor and Council.

And first I want to say what a great honor it is.

Uh hope you're feeling good.

Oh, yeah.

Um I have to not get emotional because running I gotta stop running has been something that near and dear to my heart.

Um 70 pounds ago before I guess before I got this injury in the army, and um I'm waiting on a knee replacement.

I had a dream to run someday in the Olympic trials marathon.

It didn't happen, but um I'll be the first to volunteer, and I really strongly support and I'm Dr.

Art Molen and our our runners.

Phoenix is a very welcoming community, and uh the runners are a very loving group of people.

We may compete against each other, but at the end we love each other, and I think this would be very powerful.

I know our chances are not great, but Phoenix, I just want the world to know and the United States Olympic committee to know.

Phoenix is a beautiful place, especially in March.

This is a beautiful place to have an Olympic trials marathon, and uh, I'm so sorry, but this is one of this is why I'm here harassing you because I had to give up a lot of my running a while back.

So hopefully, if one of my knees replaced, I won't be here bothering you, but I will be the first to volunteer.

Hope you're feeling good.

I always remember you, Dr.

Molman.

Thank you.

All right.

And our final speaker on this item will be Phil.

And we got our first volunteer.

Good afternoon, Mayor.

City Council, community, thank you.

First off, I'd like to start by congratulating Dr.

Mullen and Paige on the 50th anniversary and all that you do for our community.

Thank you very much.

I'm Phil Dumante.

I'm the CEO of Brooksey.

I just wanted to quickly introduce myself.

We are the event producer referenced in the resolution to uh spearhead this bid for the Olympic trials for 2028.

We produce eight events with about 60,000 participants nationally.

We're one of the largest endurance event companies in the US.

And we are also the producer of the Phoenix Marathon and Mesa Marathon locally.

When the opportunity came to up to host the 2028 Olympic Marathon Trials and Paralympic Marathon, we knew immediately we wanted to be involved.

We submitted our intention to bid, uh which was due by September 1st, and then started evaluating some of our partner cities across the U.S.

Phoenix immediately rose to the top as the clear choice.

And of course, this being a community that can host a world class sporting event.

In closing, I would like to just say we would welcome the opportunity to collaborate with Dr.

Mullen and Paige.

So thank you for that.

We're very excited about the opportunity to partner with Phoenix on this historic moment.

And we look forward to championing this bid, partnering with the local community and helping Phoenix shine on the road to the 2028 Olympics.

Thank you for your support.

Thank you so much.

That concludes public testimony.

We like to think we're the closest big city to the Olympics outside of the Southern California region, and we're hoping to take advantage of that.

Councilwoman Hodge Washington has been very involved with that effort, and I will turn to her for comments.

Thank you so much, Mayor.

I just wanted an opportunity, thank you for the opportunity to express my strong support for this resolution and for Phoenix's full participation in the bid to host a 2028 Olympic trial marathon.

Um hosting the Olympic um trial marathon, I think presents an incredible opportunity for Phoenix.

Past host cities have seen economic impact exceeding 13 million dollars, driven by hotels, they dying in transportation and local spending.

This would be a major boost for our tourism industry, our small businesses, and the many workers who depend on these sectors.

In addition, the national and international visibility we gain is just as meaningful with more than 250 media members expected and a broadcast reach of more than one and a half billion viewers.

I think it would be yet another opportunity to showcase Phoenix across uh across the globe.

I want to highlight that the city's commitment outlined in this resolution reflects services we regularly provide for large-scale events.

It includes coordinated support for permanent permitting transportation, public safety, emergency rents, um, preparingness and access to city controlled venues.

Um this bid is a smart investment in our community in our economy, our reputation, and our long-term vision for Phoenix.

It's a premier destination for major national and international events.

Again, I fully support this resolution and look forward to continuing the work to bring 2028 Olympic trial marathons to Phoenix.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you so much, Councilwoman.

Councilwoman Pastor.

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

Um, I'm actually excited about this, but uh before I got to my excitement when this was presented originally to me, um, I had concerns about the marathon, the Mullen Marathon.

And I had spoke to staff and said, wait a minute, it is a this is a standard marathon that we have.

It is around the date, and I have concerns about it.

Um then a couple months later, uh I went back to staff and said, Hey, I want to know Art Molins calling me, what is going on?

And then I then they said, Oh no, no, no, you we we have figured it out, found a date, and is going are going to make it happen.

So, what I want to say is that I think um two marathons can coexist.

And and what I mean by that is that we moved the date for the Art Molin, and I was a they made me aware of it, but that the Olympic also can coexist within our large city, and it's just a matter of conversation and talking and really uh understanding one another and the impact.

But I also wanted to thank the doctor for the 50 years because you've been in our city for 50 years, and you deserve the respect of our city in the sense of supporting our city, and now we we welcome a new partner in this process to understand that as an Arizona of five generations, and as a Phoenician, that we do respect one another of in our growth, but we also respect one another and what we have today.

So I just want to thank both of you for the compromise and what you did did with each other and and got there.

So thank you.

Thank you so much, councilwoman.

I wouldn't support this motion.

I like that it recognizes local expertise is very important in addition to national roll call.

Yes, and on this, yes, Hodge Washington, yes, Pastor, yes, Robinson?

Yes, Stark?

Yes.

Waring?

Yes, O'Brien.

Yes.

Yes.

Passes 90.

Item 38 is next.

It is avionics equipment supplies and maintenance contract for the Phoenix Police Department.

Do we have a motion?

I move to approve item 38.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Councilman Hernandez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Just have a few questions for our police department.

Mayor, members of the council, Councilman Hernandez, Assistant Chief Brian Lee, and Commander Brian Reagan are coming to the table to answer your questions.

Thank you, Chief Lee for joining us.

Um, my first question is how many aircrafts do we have, and how much is the cost for upkeep for these on these aircrafts?

Madam Mayor, members of council, councilwoman Hernandez.

Um, I believe in our current fleet right now, and I do have Brian Reagan, who's the commander overseeing the air support unit, uh, who can correct me, but I believe we currently have the two fixed wing, and then we have five of the uh helicopter aircraft.

Okay.

And then uh can you share what the cost is for upkeep on those?

I would have to get that for you, councilwoman.

I don't have that available, but we can certainly pull those numbers for you and make that available.

And I think you said that, and I didn't hear you, so thank you.

I will take that follow-up.

Um, and then how many of the aircrafts are restricted from flight or currently grounded that are not being used?

Uh Madam Mayor, uh, council, councilwoman Hernandez, uh, none of them are currently right now, unless it would be for routine maintenance.

Okay, thank you.

Um, and uh my next question is how often is the police department's aircraft equipment being deployed on average in the month.

Um mayor council councilmandez, it's uh daily uh police equipment are being um deployed.

So we have helicopter operations that run every day in addition to supporting the police department and the fire department as well as fixed wing um go up multiple times per week as well.

Okay, thank you.

Um, and do we know?

Well, I think you just shared a little bit about why what they're deployed for.

Um, is there anything else you want to add to like what they're deployed for?

Uh mayor council, uh, councilmember managers, they're done on routine patrol flights, so they're done during specific times throughout the day, and then as needed, um, the rest of the time for uh rescues and then any tactical support.

Okay, thank you.

And what neighborhoods are they typically deployed in?

Um, like do we know what districts do we keep track of that data?

Uh mayor council, councilman is uh they're done uh throughout the city.

So it's really uh primarily based on calls for service.

So that's either done by radio calls by the by the citizens or officers requesting assistance from the the rotor or the fixed wing side.

Okay, thank you so much for those answers.

Um, I just want to be clear that I am not a supporter of our police department having its own air force uh because that is what this is, right?

Police have become a militarized body, um, and then they act against black, brown, and working class people.

So we should not be surveilling our people, we should not have military equipment in our neighborhoods.

We should really be in the business of providing resources.

Uh, the pilotist PC 12 is a military plane that is widely used for military intelligent missions and used by border patrol.

This equipment has also been used to track down and surveil protesters.

Um, you know, from our DOJ report, we know that that report outlined that target the targeting of protesters, and there was actually a lawsuit against the city for this exact behavior.

Um, plus we have to account for this equipment, uh, account for that this equipment is being used for its intended purposes.

This summer, just this summer, we had a media report on one of the helicopter pilots who was joywriting and tracing names in the middle of the night over my neighborhood in Maryville.

Um, we should not be spending millions of dollars on this Air Force.

This is another example of an unnecessary expense that we could cut and use those funds to actually support our communities.

Um thank you very much.

Thank you.

Roll call.

Juan?

Yes.

Hernandez?

No.

Hajj Washington.

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson.

Mayor, can I make a real quick comment?

Please, if you recognize you to explain your vote.

Oh, thank you.

Um my vote's gonna be yes, obviously, but I think it's important for folks to understand that I have had the opportunity to supervise the air support unit, and I wouldn't necessarily characterize it as an air force.

I would characterize it as an air support unit, just that a support unit and the services that it provides.

And I think Commander Reagan was about to get into it or Chief Lee, the services it provides, just for everyone who's here understands is not just surveillances but high-speed pursuits.

There are a multitude of things that the air support unit is used for that helps to reduce not just the liability on the road on the street, on the ground, but it helps to save lives.

And it happens, I would argue, probably on a daily basis that they are deployed.

I'd also add that um the fixed wing units that when you sit back and you look at what they have been able to do over the course of the last several years, the apprehension of criminals who have committed a multitude of heinous crimes, everything from you know the most brutal sexual assaults you can imagine all the way up to homicides, I mean, and everything in between.

And that is a service that we can ill afford to not have at our disposal.

And I I say that having what I believe is to be a pretty good knowledge of its working, its inner workings, and yes, from time to time, or I should say my colleague mentioned a situation where a pilot may have spelled his name in the air that was well publicized.

I believe the police department has dealt with that accordingly.

And be it right, wrong or indifferent, things like that will happen occasionally.

But I am in full support of our air support unit for all the right reasons, and again, I vote yes on this topic.

Thank you very much, Mayor, for the time.

Stark, yes, Warren.

O'Brien?

Yes.

Gallego.

Yes.

Passes 8-1.

Item 40 is NVLS Learn Database Subscription Services.

Uh, we'll begin with Councilman Hernandez.

Thanks, Mayor.

So I got a little distracted over there.

Um, just have a few questions.

Sorry, this is not a laughing matter.

Got a little distracted.

Um, just have a few questions for uh PD again um on this item.

I'll wait for Chief Jordi Giordano toin us.

Thank you, Chief.

Um, first question is what neighborhoods are the readers or like where in the city are we using these readers?

LT.

Madam Mayor, members of council, Councilwoman Hernandez.

Right now we have approximately 132 of the ALPR devices that are actually fixed mounted out in the community.

Uh they are uh in each of the precincts, but we have the uh primary concentration of them was in support of the real-time operations centers that went into effect a little over two years ago.

Uh and most of them are primarily focused on the crime suppression area between 19th Avenue and 27th Avenue from Indian School to Northern.

Thank you, Chief Lee.

And then my follow-up question is just as it is right now, right?

If we make no changes to how this press this program works, um, are there any parameters in place so that our department cannot share license plate information with ICE or DHS?

Madam Mayor, members of council, councilwoman Hernandez.

Currently, right now we have the ability to limit who it is that we share uh our information with.

Um under the Motorola program, uh the information and the data that's collected is owned by the the uh the entity, which would be the city of Phoenix, so we can determine who it is that we share that information with.

Thank you for that.

My follow-up question would be we can set parameters for who is accessing our data, but we don't have do we have a path to ensure that others and even the company itself is not sharing data with um with ICE and DHS.

Like, could, for example, could I DHS go through DPS, DPS make a suggestion to us and access certain data or certain information.

So, Madam Mayor, members of council, Councilwoman Hernandez, right now, the way the system is designed, is it any agency that is entered into a data sharing agreement with uh Motorola uh and utilizes that portal, they would have the ability to access data uh under that agreement.

Now, if we do not share with those those entities, it is possible that those agencies might go to another data sharing uh entity uh to uh receive the same information.

Um, but again, that would go through Motorola that would not have any any impact on Phoenix.

Okay, thank you.

Um, you know, I understand this vote is is just to change a name on a contract, and it's a contract that it and I understand that that decision to enter into this contract was made uh prior by previous council.

Um, but this contract would continue our city's participation in the national vehicle location service program and expand our use um of automatic the ALPR or uh also known as the automatic license plate reader, um, including access to the law enforcement archival and reporting network, which is otherwise known as Learn.

There's a lot of acronyms, y'all like we need a whole index of just acronyms in city business.

Um, but I want to be clear that this is mass surveillance on our residents, and I'm against the state collecting and storing the data of our residents, um, especially under the current federal administration.

Um, you know, we have an administration that at every turn has showed us that they will disregard our constitutional rights and fail to follow any precedents that have been set.

Um, you know, they're constantly attacking our civil liberties and literally being challenged every day.

Um these systems track and can archive years of vehicle location history for millions of drivers without their knowledge or consent.

Um, and that data can be shared beyond our police department to older other local, state, and even federal agencies.

And I I hear you that we can control who access our data, but we don't have control over the company itself.

Um and so that causes me a lot of concern in the communities, you know, like as I mentioned, including those federal agencies such as ICE that are actively putting uh pulling apart our families in our neighborhoods.

Um there's also have has been national reports that document other companies like the flock cameras and other ALPR systems that have abuse this technology.

So I just want to remind us of the documented of the officer who used license plate readers to track and harass the woman they were stalking.

I believe that happened in Texas.

I think we heard that in the previous council meeting in Georgia.

They use the license plate reader info to track down and criminalize a person for accessing abortion care.

Um multiple reports show that these systems have been misused to follow ex-partners, protesters, journalists, and everyday people with no suspicion of suspicion of a crime.

So I think as a council, we just have a responsibility to assure that our police uh department, our police usage of the system will not contribute and result in the same in those same abuses.

Um, if we are truly committed to transparency and community safety, we cannot continue expanding surveillance powers without oversight, uh, public reporting and enforce enforceable limits.

So I appreciate the the work that the mayor and the council has done to improve this.

Um and hopefully, you know, we as we continue continue to contend with this federal administration and their direct threats over our people.

Um, I would hope that we really focus in on how can we really safeguard our residents' information and their safety in light of the attacks that we are seeing daily from this federal administration.

So thank you so much, Mayor.

Thank you, Councilwoman Cordado.

Thank you, Mayor.

So I just wanted to um talk a little bit about what we did um a few years ago.

Um, you know, we it's it all started with a meeting um that I did on 27th Avenue where we had hundreds and hundreds of people come out and talk to us about that challenges and the issues along 27th Avenue and the prostitution and just all the challenges um that our children were seeing every day when they were when they were walking the school.

Um, and I remember having meetings.

Um, I think Eddie was still here when we started um those conversations about what were the tools, what was it that we could bring into the and to our communities to start looking at this issue.

Um looking at those YouTube videos, seeing moms coming to me and telling me um what their kids were seeing, what they when they were walking to school and how a lot of people sacrifice and buy a home in these areas and for them to feel unsafe going out into their front yard was something that was very difficult for me to be able to see because I I grew up in a lot of those situations um where I grew up and I I knew that this was something that I that we had to do something about and very grateful um to the mayor, um to the council, to previous council members um that had also been a part of this in the past.

Um, but uh but of course we were under a different administration as well as we were um making these changes, but I think that license plate readers are an invaluable tool and that it's going to enhance our security and law enforcement capabilities.

They help us track stolen vehicles, like locate missing persons, and ensure the safety of our community.

However, with this powerful technology comes a responsibility to safeguard the sensitive information it collects, protecting citizens' data is paramount.

We must ensure that the information gathered is used solely for its intended purposes and is shielded from unauthorized access.

This means implementing robust security measures, strict access controls, and regular audits to prevent misuse or bridges.

Moreover, transparency is key.

We must open the we must open with the public about how their data is being used and the steps we are taking to protect it.

This builds trust and reassures our community that their privacy is being respected.

Again, always been transparent.

We will continue to be transparent.

I think this council is committed um to striking that balance on how is it that we're tackling the issues in our communities, but at the same time being able to protect um residents in our community.

Um, so with that being said, I would like to make a motion to approve item 40 as recommended with the stipulation that staff develops a written policy that specifies that Phoenix generated ALPR data will only be used for local law enforcement purposes.

With any other requests being approved by both PD and the law department on a case-by-case basis, and that the contract will explicitly state that the vendor is prohibited from selling or providing Phoenix generated data to data brokers or third parties.

We have a motion and a second, and thank you, Councilwoman.

Thank you.

That motion will say this is this is data is not supposed to be used for data brokers, which is very important.

Does anyone wish to comment before we vote?

Uh, Councilman Pastor and then Councilman Waring.

Yes, um, I understand um that it's very important to keep uh people's privacy.

Um privacy, keep it within our system, not to be used uh against them.

And and what I mean by against them, I know that's a negative term.

Um, but what I mean is that uh to be used with other agencies to hurt and create harm and havoc within our community.

However, I also know that the license plate readers have also solved many crimes on 27th Avenue, in particular on Thomas, where the QT is situated, and where we have had two murders there and other incidents that have happened in that area.

So we need to strike a balance and figure this out in a way where we keep our uh whatever is collected private, and we're also transparent with the community if we can and cannot do what we're asking you to do uh with the data because then we will determine at another date our vote in the future on that.

Thank you.

Councilman Waring.

Thank you, Mayor Chief.

With the uh motion as presented, you could still partner with federal law enforcement and give them the data as long as you ran the request through the law department.

Correct.

Mayor members of council council.

That's correct.

I have no doubt that uh this apparatus for lack of a better word, has probably been used in horrible domestic violence situations and child sexual predators and murderers and rapists and so forth.

So taking that tool away from law enforcement to my mind would be foolish.

But that's just me.

So thank you for what you guys do.

Appreciate it.

And uh use the thing appropriately.

Councilman Waring is among our most quotable.

Use the thing appropriately.

Roll call.

I would have loved to delve in the jargon, but then people would laugh at me.

So councilwoman Hernandez doesn't want any more abbreviations.

So no, we already need an acronym index for the public and for me.

Yes.

Hernandez?

Yes.

Hodge Washington?

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Waring?

Yes.

O'Brien?

Yes.

Bayego.

Yes.

Passes 90.

We next go to item 44, which is the request for authorization to sell a police canine.

Should we begin with Councilman Hernandez?

All right, yes.

Or do you want a motion first?

Let's do a motion.

Okay.

I move to approve item 44.

Second.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just actually have a question for legal.

Um the city invests heavily in training these dogs to attack community members on command.

And once they're turned over to private own owners, what I believe does the city hold should these dogs attack and hurt community members because they've been trained to do so.

Mayor, members of council, councilmember Hernandez.

My understanding is that once the dog is turned over to the handler, he is no longer in service by the city, and so the city would not be liable for any other acts.

That would be the owner.

Okay.

Thank you so much for that.

Um again, I want to be clear, I just want to be very transparent with the community.

Um, I do not support the canite units.

In my view, that is dog abuse to train these dogs to attack people.

Uh, furthermore, this is just one more weapon that we are throwing money at that we should be investing in care.

Um, and it's actually good to hear that these dogs will be uh will be going to a good home and have uh a restful life after we've used and abused them here at the city.

Um thank you.

Roll call.

Guardado?

Yes, Hernandez, yes, Hodge Washington, yes, Pastor, yes, Robinson, yes, Stark, yes, Warin, yes, O'Brien.

Yes, Gallego, yes, passes nine zero item sixty is next.

Will the city clerk read the title item 60 is for ordinance G7448 and ordinance amending Phoenix City Code Chapter 32 B flood planes to update definitions to better align with current federal emergency management agency standards and to correct minor code deficiencies identified by Arizona Department of Water Resources Thank you.

So this is related to flood control and FEMA.

Councilwoman Stark.

Thank you.

I move to approve item 60.

Second.

We have a motion and a second roll call.

Yes, Hodge Washington, yes, Pastor, yes, Robinson, yes, Stark, yes, Warin, yes, O'Brien.

Yes, Gallego, yes, passes 90.

Next we go to item 63, which is the abandonment of right of way at 1920 West Thunderbird Road.

Uh do we have a motion?

I move to approve item 64, second or 63.

And then we have Alec.

Okay.

We did have 63 polled in the motion, though, so I think we should vote.

All right, roll call.

Sorry.

The uh this is a roll call on the abandonment.

I believe it was pulled in the omnibus.

It was not pulled.

It was in the omnibus.

All right, we have already voted on item 63, so we go to 66, which is a public hearing.

We'll open the public hearing.

We do not have anyone to testify, so we'll close the public hearing.

This is a rezoning application related to the ACE Hardware PUD in at the northeast corner of 43rd Avenue and Bell Road in District One.

I will turn to Vice Mayor O'Brien.

Thank you, Mayor.

I move to approve per the planning commission recommendation and adopt the related ordinance.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

Roll call.

Yes.

Hernandez?

Yes.

Hodge Washington.

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark.

Yes.

Waring?

O'Brien.

Yes.

Gallego.

Yes.

Passes 90.

All right.

Item 70 is an authorization to grant LKY real estate, their fourth fund, a binding waiver of enforcement related to special permit provisions for data centers.

This is in District 8.

Do we have a motion?

I will move.

Oh, go ahead.

Oh, go ahead.

You can go ahead.

Go ahead, Vice Mayor.

I have it.

Yeah, I'll happy making.

I know you're um not here.

Motion to approve item pursuant to the proposed waiver modifications contained in the memo dated November 19th, 2025 from the chief council and adopt the related ordinance.

Second.

Thank you.

We have a motion and a second.

We have a huge number of data centers that wish to do business in the city of Phoenix and the state of Arizona.

Uh Joe Dana with Channel 12 just had a report that data centers are adding to peak demand of energy in Arizona at a rate 100 times faster than any other customer class, according to APS statistics, causing 94% of new energy needs.

And they uh Joe Dana reported homeowners paying a rate hike nearly three times that of data centers.

Uh yesterday we had a council meeting where we had 11 different requests uh for data centers.

So this is this is one where we are just there's no type of real estate that is seeing so much demand right now anywhere where there's access to electric transmission.

We are seeing interest from data centers.

Uh the memo that was just updated, has some important protections for our community, uh including some of the updates for cybersecurity protections for our own infrastructure.

We uh the memo also includes that that we won't have above ground transmission that would disrupt nearby property owners.

Um, this will be our first data center where it has some protections around heat because there are some significant heat emissions, and councilman Hodge Washington worked to make sure there is a dog park as part of this, so there is a community benefit to the local neighborhood.

Uh, we did get a request that this be powered with renewable energy that is not in this draft.

The city's been spending an enormous amount of time trying to make sure that we evolve with this asset class and a huge thank you to our legal team, including um our city attorney to David Benton, Lori Van Herren.

Thank you to Josh Trish and Alan on the planning side, Mitch on the IT side, Chief Chris, who worked very hard to get fire protections in this waiver.

It really has been an incredible team effort, and I understand people all over the country are looking at what we are doing here.

We will continue to learn on these because they are complicated and there's nothing in this country that's happening at the same level as AI and data centers.

It is a huge change in our economy.

Uh would anyone like to comment on this?

Roll call.

Mayor Mayor Fime.

Yes, please, Councilwoman Hodge Washington.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, thank you so much.

I just wanted to up.

I just want the opportunity to highlight the importance of working together as we consider this request.

When we adopted the ordinance, our goal was to ensure that data centers operated safely and responsibly, especially when they were located near homes and businesses.

Um, the ordinance said clear expectation to protect public health and safety, and this process shows how collaboration can help us meet this goal.

I want to take a moment to acknowledge the applicant.

In this case, the applicant worked closely with city staff to address concerns around fire safety, hazardous material, energy and water use, and noise impact.

Our planning and development confirmed that the materials submitted met our requirement.

City manager recommended approval based on the commitments made and legal.

Um, I don't continue to work with the last minute to make sure that our our rights were documented properly.

But what mattered most for me, especially for district eight, is that it has been a cooperative effort.

There are benefits to our community as a result of this.

The city outlined what was needed, and the applicant responded with measures that align with the intent of the ordinance.

To me, this is how responsible development should move forward in our community.

Because the waiver maintains our health and safety priorities and reflects meaningful collaboration.

I'm comfortable supporting this.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you so much.

Any additional comments?

Roll call.

Yes.

And yes.

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Warren?

O'Brien.

Yes.

Gallego.

Yes.

Passes 9-0.

Next, we have 71 and 72, which are related items.

71 is the middle housing text amendment, and 72 is the middle housing overlay district.

We will have one public hearing, but two votes.

Thank you to everyone who's been working on this, a huge amount of research since we last had a hearing on this.

Multiple departments from our legal to our planning and development department have looked at a wide variety of issues, including many that the community brought up, as well as several identified by council members.

Since we last met, we have uh received uh a letter from uh led by state representative Aaron Marquez, uh also from uh uh state legislator Matt Gress, who are going to work together on amendment at the state legislature.

So we are so thankful to our legislators.

This all started at the legislature when they passed a mandate, and um Aaron Marquez is leading an effort, he introduced legislation this year to try to exempt middle or historic districts from middle housing that did not move forward, but there is a much broader bipartisan support uh moving forward now.

So we appreciate our state legislators who have heard from the community and have addressed that.

We have also received a letter from the legislative council at the state legislature saying unequivocally that we must adopt this and implement it by January 1st.

We have um some other updates, so I'll turn now to our planning and development director for a staff report.

Thank you, Mayor, members of the council.

Trisha Gomes, Deputy Director for Planning and Zoning will provide a quick recap of the request, a summary of our recommendations and some additional information based on what we heard at last meeting.

Trish.

Thank you, Josh.

Um, mayor, members of the council.

As you mentioned, there are two items before you today.

Item 71 is Z-TA-1-25-Y, a text amendment that revises zoning regulations to permit middle housing as required by state law.

It also revises zoning regulations to comply with the restrictions of the state law.

Item 72 is the rezoning case Z-3-25-4-7-8, which conveys rights to develop middle housing to lots zoned for single-family use within the required areas surrounding downtown.

Uh informational presentations were provided to the village planning committees in September of 2025.

The planning commission heard these items on October 6, 2025, and recommended approval of the text amendment as shown in the recommended text in exhibit A of the staff report by a vote of six to two and approval of the overlay as shown in exhibit B of the staff report by a vote of five to three.

As a follow-up to the discussions at the November 5th council hearing regarding concentrating metal housing within one mile of downtown as required by the state law.

The next few slides illustrate existing land zoned R2, R3, R3A, R4, R4A, and R5, which allows middle housing similar to what is required by state law.

On the right is the overall area, and on the left is zoomed in for the north half of the city and the south half of the city.

The areas in yellow represent 20% of the land area zoned for middle housing for the entire city, and 30% of the land area within the one mile boundary of downtown is already zoned for middle housing.

And with that, staff recommends approval of TA-1-25-Y per the Planning Commission's recommendation and adopt the related ordinance, and also staff recommends approval of Z-3-25-4-7-8 per the planning commission recommendation and adopt related ordinance.

Happy to answer any questions.

Questions for staff.

Councilwoman Hernandez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, before I ask my questions, I also want to note that council received a letter from the Goldwater Institute, which I think just points to show or shows how broad housing policy can be impactful when you have someone like the Goldwater Institute that I absolutely do not align with on anything.

Um, but I think they made two interesting points in their letter, which I'll read just for the record.

Um these two paragraphs kind of just sat with me.

Um, these fears are misplaced.

Phoenix's historic neighborhoods were built in an era when duplexes and accessory units were common.

Allowing middle housing in these areas doesn't threaten the history, it respects it.

And while we support multifamily development where the market demands, where the market demands it, enabling small scale middle housing actually reduces pressure for larger, more intense multifamily projects.

In that way, allowing middle housing in historic districts is not a threat to historic preservation, but instead instead helps preserve these neighborhoods as thriving communities rather than exclusive enclaves.

It is also worth noting that the many property owners in historic districts already benefit from substantial tax advantages unavailable to other homeowners, including in some cases, property assessment ratios that are half of what non-historic owners pay.

Opposition grounded in concerns about fairness or burden is therefore difficult to square with the significant financial benefit those areas already receive.

So just want to make sure that the public also knew that we also received that letter.

Um, but Josh, I just have a couple questions for for you and the department.

Um, and first, thank you so much for all the work that you have done to really I know that not everybody's happy with the way the process has rolled out, but you have really took in the challenge of a state law was passed.

We are in the situation where we have to adopt to it and make changes to um comply with that state law, right?

And you have went and done the work that needed to be done so that we can make the best decision possible.

So thank you for that.

Um, but my first question is in HB 2721 and our tax amendment as written, is there any language that removes the historic preservation process?

Mayor, members of the council, councilwoman Hernandez.

No, the uh one year state of demolition and the design review process remains in place.

Okay, thank you.

Um, and can you walk me through what that historic overlay protection process currently is?

Mayor members of the council, councilwoman Hernandez, absolutely.

We have a slide uh that's teed up.

I'll also ask uh Helena Ruder, our historic preservation officer, to come up uh to expand on that.

As I said, the two one of the two of the primary processes that remain in place for requirements.

One is a one-year stay of demolition, and another is design review.

Helena will can walk the council through how those how those interplay uh uh after this text amendment is adopted.

Yeah, let's see.

Thank you, Mayor Members of Council and uh Council Member Hernandez.

Uh yes, so any um basically applications for new construction or modifications to the exteriors of existing buildings or applications for demolition come to the historic preservation office for review.

Uh more specifically, if it is an application for demolition, uh it is reviewed by me uh to see whether or not it would qualify for administrative approval or if it's subject to a stay of demolition.

Um, either way, if it's either an administrative or uh stay of demolition, uh, if it's the primary residence on site, the applicant has to have a redevelopment plan approved through a public hearing process in advance of being able to actually obtain the demolition permit.

Um so there is all that entire process will uh you know continue to exist, um, as well as any new construction in terms of you know detached buildings, detached accessory buildings, duplexes, that sort of thing.

Okay, thank you.

So just to reiterate, in HB 2721 or our tax amendment as written, is there any language that removes those steps?

Mayor members of the council, councilwoman Henry's no.

Okay, thank you.

Um, and have you, I mean, I'm sure I'm assuming you've kept track as I've kept track of other cities that um in Arizona that have been moving.

Is there an update that y'all can provide on which cities have already moved to adopt um their ordinances to comply with the state law?

Mayor's members of the council, councilwoman Hernandez.

We don't have a comprehensive list, but we do we are aware that Mesa Tempe and Scotts Tele have all passed their ordinances.

Yeah, uh, and I think actually just yesterday, Chandler approved theirs as well.

Flagstaff voted unanimously without opposition from community or council members.

I'm hearing that Suk Sonic is on the same trajectory.

They have not heard any opposition from their from um there's no concerns there and is moving towards approval is also what filled those gaps.

Um in that, just a follow-up in that same area.

Um, have you heard or seen um other historic districts and the other cities in our neighboring cities have the same concerns that we've heard from our residents here?

Mayor members of the council, Councilman Hernandez.

We haven't done a comprehensive review of that feedback across.

I think Tucson certainly would be maybe the most noteworthy uh as they've worked to respond to to concerns and what they're bringing forward to the council.

Okay, thank you.

Um, and I ask that because you know I like to do my due diligence check with other cities and other partners.

Um I we have reached out.

I what the response to me has been that Tucson's historic districts have not have no concern with this, they're not moving to oppose the adoption of their ordinance.

So I just want to share that because I think it's important for our residents to hear that that other cities are are leaning into this, embracing it and moving forward um forward with this.

So thank you.

Those are all my questions for right now.

Thank you.

Uh, do we have a motion for particularly item 71?

Thank you.

Uh Mayor, I do have a motion and just a couple comments.

Um there is if we do not approve this, there is a clause that would say it would apply all over the city, and then different development regulations would go away, including some of the protections that the historic preservation overlays have today, correct?

Mayor, members of the council, councilwoman Stark, yes, that is correct.

Yes, and I believe in Tucson they did a study prior to um their recommendations to do an analysis citywide, and so part of my I have a recommendation on that.

Um I I'm not a supporter of the legislation, but it is what it is, and I'm not going to break the law.

I will tell you that I do think we have some of the most significant historic homes in the state of Arizona, and I I fear this might incentivize some of those being torn down.

But having said that, we have to approve something.

I think there are some things we can do, and I'll be more than happy to be at the legislature with you trying to get an exemption for historic districts.

With that, I move to approve item 71 per the planning commission recommendation, and that staff returned to the city council for authoration to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the Morrison Institute, the Arizona State University to conduct a study that will address the following.

One recommendations for potential areas expanding the middle house overlay to strategic strategic areas within the city beyond the law, state law requirements with the goal of advancing affordability, which is exactly what Tucson did in their study, and they did add additional areas.

Two assessment of the impacts of the middle housing law, including the demand on infrastructure and urban services, three incentive strategies to encourage the development of middle housing units with an emphasis emphasis on affordability, and four analysis of other regulatory and policy updates needed beyond zoning regulations to encourage middle housing development and adopt the related ordinance.

Second, thank you.

We have a motion and a second.

And uh either Julie or Councilman Stark.

Councilman Stark was once our planning director, so she is a subject matter expert.

Um people testify that we should adopt this citywide uh with this vote.

We cannot do that.

If that's correct, um the the way uh the laws written, if you want to expand something, it needs to be uh uh addressed at the time of the advertising, you cannot be more intense than what you've advertised.

So that's why we need to do this study.

Um again, I know that's what Tucson did prior to making the recommendations on what should be included.

So I think if we do that, um that will help, and then we can look at other significant areas in the city that may benefit from an overlay.

Having said that, I also think there's other incentives out there that we should be looking at.

For example, um, when you look at middle housing, often you'll see that they have more narrow streets, they allow for um on-site parking for guests.

So there's some things I think we could do as a city looking at development standards to really incentivize um developers, whether they're small developers or house uh home production developers to give them some tools to really build something and build it affordable.

I I really do think there's a lot we could be doing that we're not doing yet, and I'm committed.

I know I think other council members are, I can't speak for them, but I think they're committed to looking at avenues and hopefully with the help of the Morrison Institute, we can do that analysis properly.

Um I I do believe in middle housing, as I've noted, I live in middle housing, and and it really does provide.

In my case, we're empty nesters.

We wanted a smaller house, but many of my neighbors are young people starting out in their careers, and it's what they can afford to live in.

So we do need that.

But I do also believe in our historic districts.

I think what you bring to the city is so important, and we need to recognize that.

So with this study, maybe ways to help you.

And if you do go to the legislature to get the exemption, I'll be there with you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

And I'm happy to join you with that and happy to speak to the governor's office as well.

Councilman Hernandez.

Thank you.

I would like to offer a friendly amendment to that motion.

Um, and I would want to add a time limit on when that study needs to come back to us.

I think a year would be fair for all of us, something that most of us can land on.

And I I don't I want to be very clear on the language.

Saying to do an impact study to see where we can expand.

Um, I think it would be best more appropriate if we're gonna go that route is to look at the study for citywide expansion.

And I say that because what I don't want us to get ourselves in the situation of is that we're gonna go through the study to only identify certain areas, then we do that, and then we're gonna have to come back to do another study to find other areas for expansion.

So I think it would be most efficient if we do that if the majority of the council is on board with the with the impact study to have that return to us within a year and already do the study for citywide.

And and quite frankly, that's what it meant.

What that's the recommendation for potential areas, that's what I meant was to do an analysis of the entire city and then come back with potential areas.

But I do want to make sure we're addressing the issue of affordability.

And I hear you, and that's why I'm like, okay, I wouldn't be willing to compromise on that.

Um, but I would like to very much add a time limit for that study to be back.

I I was assuming I was hoping it would actually take less time a year.

But a year is fine.

Absolutely.

I would encourage the Morrison Institute to, if we move forward, get us that study as quickly as possible.

Um but no later than a year, so that our team has the ability to go back and draft whatever following amendments we need to make expansion happen.

Um so I don't know if you're open to that for any amendment.

No, I am, and I I think and I hope that they'll also come back with some other recommendations to look at different development standards that will help incentivize middle housing, such as looking at street widths or looking at setbacks and and looking at height variation, anything they can suggest, I am very open to because I do want to see us building middle housing.

Okay.

If I may chime into the conversation, Councilman Hutch Washington.

Thank you so much for the opportunity to just chime in.

I'm concerned about us putting a time frame on the return of the study.

Um, because I would hope that any study would actually look at the impact on the if this if this if this ordinance passes on the historic district and see what, if any, affordable uh affordable attainable housing is able to be derived.

I would actually advocate for a more open-ended and let our actual researchers tell us what the time frame for giving us real results would look like.

I I appreciate my colleagues' attempt to be um trying to give ourselves some parameters, but I also think it's helpful for the individuals that are for the entity that's going to be doing the research for us to kind of tell us what they think is necessary and not us as a council put on arbitrary deadlines for them to back into.

Um it's it's no similar, it's no different than some of the other studies we've seen in other areas where it has not been enough time to actually determine this adequacy of the information to be presented, given the fact that it would its goal or it would be a part of the decision making and determine whether or not we want to go to a citywide.

I would hate for us to be the reason the report is not as comprehensive or as uh as it could be.

So that would be my that would be I just wanted to share that concern.

I would rather us as I said before that's be guided by the researchers and not guided by our arbitrary deadlines, Mayor.

Thank you.

Yes.

Did staff want to respond to that?

Who I'm sorry, who just said you said mayor?

Oh, it was Councilman Cordado, sorry.

I I guess just follow up to that, Josh.

Um, do you more or less know how much how have we done this somewhere else?

It sounds like we have.

Do we know how long it took, how big that city was, and more or less how how much time it would take us to do something like this?

Mayor, members of the council, councilman.

It took, I think Phoenix, uh sorry, Tucson, uh, at least several months.

Uh, and in with respect, they're they're a much smaller city.

Uh so I I think to councilwoman Hodge Washington's point, there are some variables that are unknown to us at this time.

Uh it we would follow whatever direction the council would want to give us if if a year is where you'd like us to go.

Maybe one consideration would be that the expectation would be within a year that we're coming back to report on the progress with the expectation that a study would be provided with the idea that there might be some variables out of our control that we might have something completely done by then.

But again, we would follow the direction of the council uh whatever you see fit.

And have we seen um have we seen how long it's taken in other cities besides Tucson?

Do we know Mayor Councilman Dardardo?

I again I I think we're we're unique in the sense that we're 529 square miles.

We are a really large city with a robust set of neighborhoods and uh uh a complex zoning framework.

So I think it'd be difficult to look at another city and and find a model to replicate.

Again, if it's the direction of this council to at the very least report back within a certain time frame, we can certainly commit to that.

Uh I mean, I I think for me, I think I'm open um for them to coming back and reporting back to us.

I I just want to make sure that it does get done correctly, that we are respecting.

I mean, we've had a lot of community members here um talking to us about these about this issue.

And I think um this is I I believe this the study um could be a great thing to figure a lot of different things out.

We are a growing city, and and I support this, but I also want to make sure um that it doesn't that it doesn't get rushed, um, that we do it right, um, that we come back with the correct information.

So because we will be making um decisions um based on the study, and we don't want to make any any round decisions because we are talking about people's properties and things that we're that we're looking at.

Um, so I agree um that we need to look at this, but I'm not sure that I would be comfortable later making decisions based on something that might have been rushed, right?

I mean, I don't um agree that the state legislature should tell us what to do.

I believe that um for the most part constituents come to us about issues, zoning issues, problems that they have.

Um, I don't like it that this is being imposed on us and imposed on on the neighbors.

Um anything um that we that I personally can do to be helpful as as you guys are going back to the state ledge to try to be able um to change this.

Um we want to be helpful.

Um, I think that I am of I'm a strong believer um that neighbors should have the right to dictate what goes into their neighborhoods.

Um, when neighbors have a voice, that means that they get involved in their neighborhoods, that means that they vote, that means that they care.

And I think um this is not just um, you know, we we have to look at the at the long term and we have to look at the at the big picture.

And I know that all of our neighborhoods where neighbors are are very active, um, those neighborhoods are a lot safer, and there's a lot more that gets done in those neighborhoods because those neighbors um are heard.

Um, with that being said, I I support the study.

I I think we should move forward with that.

Um, but I also believe that we should do that right.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilman Warren.

Thank you, Josh.

Just so I understand.

So we got letters asking us to expand this to the whole city.

But I think after what Deb said, we can't do that, correct?

At this meeting today.

Mayor, uh, members of the council, that is correct as we're advertised today.

We are not advertised for an expansion of it citywide.

If we did it, it would actually be illegal.

Yes.

Mayor, members of the council, again, I would just say we were not advertised for a citywide action today.

I wasn't saying they're gonna give us the chair, Josh.

I'm just saying, you know, it's not something we're supposed to be doing.

Uh okay, so the 90-day delay, that was another thing that I received.

We can't do that because that would push us past the January 1st deadline.

Mayor, members of the council, uh, as I think mentioned by the that that is correct, and I think affirmed by the direction we got from JLBC earlier today.

Okay.

Um you have given us a map that shows, I mean, I don't think you've referenced it.

We're talking like none of this exists anywhere else in the city.

It's all over District 2, this type of model, this zoning, right?

So to say we're gonna expand it through the whole city.

It's already through the whole city.

Um, it's just not allowed in every section of the city, just like every other type of zoning isn't necessarily allowed in every part of the city.

That's why all the zoning things, since I used that before, are distinct and separate.

Correct.

Mayor members of the council that's correct.

Um for the mile area that we're talking about, how much of it already has this zoning and use.

Mayor members of the council, I think is uh deputy director uh Gombs including her presentation approximately 30 percent.

30 yeah, it's already a third.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

I think that councilwoman Hernandez and Councilwoman Stark were asking different questions of Morrison, and I appreciate the question Councilman Stark was asking, which I believe was where are the most appropriate areas?

To me, that is a different question, and that is the one I would prefer to ask.

In Phoenix, we have said we want less dense housing development on our mountains.

We've generally said we want to preserve those mountains.

They are more of a public asset, and we don't want high density housing on the mountains.

That is something I still think is a good policy.

I also think from an engineering perspective, it is more difficult to build housing on mountains than flatter land.

So for multiple reasons, from protecting the preserves to engineering reasons.

That is a policy I do not wish to change.

I love that we have diverse neighborhoods in Phoenix.

The character of the historic neighborhoods is fabulous, and it really creates a wonderful sense of place.

We very separately have a farm district where we honor our agricultural roots, and that is also a very special place.

We've created our own category of zoning, mixed-use agriculture with goals including preserving our agricultural heritage.

We are blessed to be a city that has a huge amount of land that is not yet developed and the chance to develop housing in in many of those areas.

So I believe we can still protect our historic neighborhoods, protect our neighborhoods generally, and make a huge contribution to housing.

Uh not to go back to our earlier item, but we are seeing it, particularly in the southwestern portion of our city, a lot of farmland that was once zoned and expected to be housing, and now we are getting requests from data centers in that area.

Uh we just had a transmission line, I think, take out 80 units of affordable housing in councilwoman Hernandez's district.

So this is not a hypothetical conflict, but that's one we are having as well.

Um we had a really big discussion at the last meeting about the role of older neighborhoods, and I got a chance to go uh reference a study that the city had hired place economics to do several years ago to about historic preservation, and they found older neighborhoods have a greater share of housing units that are affordable to low and moderate income households.

So our historic neighboring cards are today making a very important contribution to affordable housing, and that is also a trend that you see nationally.

We can invest in housing that's affordable and protect our historic neighborhoods.

Other cities have looked at blanket policies and and in my mind have not been particularly successful.

One city, two years after eliminating single family only zoning, so fewer than 80 diplxes and triplexes approved out of over 9,000 housing units that city permitted during the same period.

Uh this missing middle is not a silver bullet that solves our housing challenges.

City of Phoenix is working so hard on this.

Yesterday we unanimously approved prioritizing our housing trust fund and and setting goals and parameters around that.

Our voters have been very generous, more than 55 million in affordable housing bond investments and and this county number one in the country for new housing units last year.

So we are from financing to different code changes.

We're doing a lot to add to affordable housing.

And this solution from the legislature to me is not actually the solution that we need, and didn't look at the realities on the ground.

Uh the city took some of the comments you gave us very seriously.

For example, we had testimony around the water system and sewer system in this area, and I think I now know more about the sewers in the historic district than my own neighborhood.

Uh but we have we have some areas that have two-inch pipes, so that is not conducive to a fourplex that just doesn't provide the appropriate water in that area.

So there are real challenges in many areas developing middle housing in the historic districts would be much more expensive than in other parts of our city that have different infrastructure options.

So I liked the original motion from councilwoman's Stark and will leave it to my colleagues on deadlines.

I think we all want action as soon as possible, but a nuanced targeted analysis.

Perhaps we could have milestones along the way and get updates as opposed to waiting for the entire look at the entire city, but it's gonna target in areas that are appropriate.

Correct.

Okay.

Councilman Hernandez.

Okay, so for clarity, what are we gonna vote on?

And I think I don't know.

I'm I'm ready to speak.

Because you just, I'm sorry, Mayor, you just said that the you're good with the original, but I also wanna remind all of us that the reality in the streets is that in Phoenix, the largest city in Arizona, we also have we have had to create sanctioned outdoor campgrounds for people to live in their tents, because we don't have enough housing for people to live in.

So I hope like people take that to heart and consider that when we're talking about changing zoning that has historically been used for racial segregation.

So that is also part of the conversations that need to be had.

So I guess my question for clarity on the motion is just councilwoman Stark's, because I thought my understanding was councilwoman Stark was accepting of my friendly amendment to have this study back to us within no later than a year.

I I think what I'm saying is you have to look at the entire city and then target the areas that are appropriate for middle housing.

So you can't do a study without looking first comprehensively and then zeroing in on where the appropriate areas are.

Right, but my question is that can be done in less than a year and no later than a year.

That was my friendly amendment, is to do this study that most council members seem to want.

I actually think there's a lot of studies already out there that show the impact of this.

Um, but I would be willing to compromise that if we can get it back with no later than a year.

I agree to that.

Yeah, I personally think it can probably be done, and quite frankly, if it doesn't, I guess then we could always make and always come back and make adjustments.

Yeah.

Mayor, if I may, the the thought I'd add to that is that our next step, if you think about this as a two-step dance, is to come back to you with the IGA.

Yes.

And the IGA would then have a solidified scope.

And I think at that time, we could certainly report back about whether or not that one year is feasible.

And if we needed to make adjustments, certainly we can do that in collaboration with you at that time where you would be requesting action on the IGA.

That's the right thing to do.

Okay.

That's why with that, I may I apologize, Mayor.

I can't really raise my hand.

My concern with the IGA if it has something that conflicts with our prior conversation.

If we move forward, meaning if we move forward saying we want it back in one year and the IGA says something different.

What we would, I mean we would not be, it would the IGA would then have to again be reviewed by us as a council in order to make that change.

So if we're having this discussion, is it just does it make more sense for us to say let's have the conversation with the Morrison institute for Morris Institute first, figure out what this scope would look like and then come back with the IGA.

I don't know if it necessarily has to be a part of this motion at this juncture.

If since we can't seem to agree, and we're doing this, I would say on the fly.

I am in I'm in favor of a study, but I want to I want to make sure one we're on that we have some understanding of what the scope truly should look like.

And then once we've determined the scope, then we can determine what the time frame looks like.

And what I'm hearing is there is a dis there's a disconnect between the scope as presented by my colleagues.

And I have, I mean, and I think it might be helpful to understand the pros and what the intended outcome of the scope, I'm sorry, of this um study would be.

So my thought is if we can't agree, I I don't think we should include the study in this motion.

Well, I think we agree on the study.

It just I don't know that we have data on the time frame, but we do councilwoman Pestor.

Thank you.

Um I'm just gonna bring it back to center.

Um Josh or Councilwoman Stark, I don't think our audience or our constituents or those that are impacted are even understanding what we're dialoguing about.

Um in the motion, can I see the motion?

I gave it to in the motion.

In the motion, it states to approve 71 per the planning commission recommendation that staff return to the city council for authorization to enter into an IGA with the Morrison Institute of Arizona State University to conduct a study that will be will address the following assessment of impacts of the middle housing law, including the demand on infrastructure and urban services.

Recommendation for potential areas expanding middle housing overlay to strategic areas in the city beyond the state law requirements with the goal of advancing affordability.

Three incentivized strategy, incentive strategies to encourage the development of middle housing union units with an emphasis on affordability.

Four analysis of other regulatory or policy updates needed beyond zoning regulation to encourage middle housing development.

So basically, the motion is to approve 71 and I'm assuming 72 with these with a Morris Institute study to look at these four areas.

What is being asked is to add uh a timeline uh to this Morrison Institute study.

And what's being asked is if we can say bring this back in a year, have Morris Institute do the study in these areas.

We first step is to get the IGA in the IGA write the scope, bring it back to council, we take a vote on that, we determine what the scope is, or say yay, nay, add this.

Once we do the IGA, then it goes into play with the scope, and then the Morrison Institute can start.

The question is can they do that?

Can we get this done in a year?

So I'm gonna go back to Josh.

Josh, when we have had conversations, we have been talking about a year, and so I believe that we can do it within a year, or at least bring back recommendations or demonstrate what they have seen and are looking at.

We may not be able to have text amendments at that time, but we are able to at least get things moving, demonstrate where middle housing should really be.

Um, and just keep moving forward.

Am I am I off on what my conversation is?

Mayor, Councilwoman Pastor.

No, I understand.

Again, if it's the desire of this council to require that we report back with the study within a year time frame, certainly as we work with Morrison Institute to develop the IGA and report and finalize the scope, that could certainly be an element that we discussed with them.

Okay.

So I want to add some clarity, I guess, to some of this is that um a study was done in Tucson.

We are doing this a little backwards.

We probably should have done the study from when when this first started.

Um let me tell you what I know now and what I didn't know then.

I'm very sorry.

Um, but what I know now is that we need to do a study, and so opal, we heard you loud and clear, or at least councilwoman Stark heard you loud and clear.

Uh and uh the study is there.

We also heard from everybody.

I want to say Ginger, Susan, Gigi, Robert, Brad, Bob, Terry, and many others, and patients in this whole process.

And I I want to say that you guys have done such a great job to bring this to the forefront in the way you have brought it.

But this legislation came to us, and we have to vote on it, and it's being mandated.

And if we don't vote on it and it doesn't pass, then there are other pieces that go along with it.

Our funding of 1487, it becomes by right, it becomes citywide.

There are a lot of other pieces that go along with this with this.

And hey, I'm with you guys.

I live in a historic home.

I'm there.

I understand the impact.

And what I have to say is that this has been a difficult piece for me.

Um because the community holds history and culture.

The stress that I've carried to protect you guys has been months, and it's now hitting me.

So please bear with me.

Then a girl that lives on 13th Avenue and grew up in that home that never thought it was going to be a historic home.

Here I am today.

What I also want to say is there are comments that were made at the two weeks ago that I found very inappropriate.

And two weeks ago, it talked about these neighborhoods being very privileged.

Well, these neighborhoods were barrios at one time.

These neighborhoods were barrios that had Hispanic families living in those areas.

And everybody scattered everywhere.

And at that time, there was new housing.

So going into new housing was where everybody went.

Since I am that girl in that area, became a little rough, and uh things weren't great in those areas.

But when the freeway came through, what we asked and what people asked was let's let's make these neighborhoods uh vibrant again.

Let's make these neighborhoods have the things that they that everybody wants.

That's what our west side wants, that's what our south side wants, that's what Levine wants, and that's what the North and the West wants, and I forgot the East, and we are still expanding.

What it doesn't mean is that a girl like me, who happened to get a teaching degree, who happened to get 27,000 a year, couldn't afford a home at that time, and really couldn't move out of her house.

So she cut a deal with her parents and said, I will live in this house, I will help maintain this house, and I will do what I have to do in order to save for rent or say for a house.

Well, that didn't happen because 27,000, I had all insurance, I had a new car, I was living life, right?

Well, what made it happen is when I went to get my master's in public administration in Chicago, and in Chicago is where I really got supposedly a good job because I was making 60,000 at that time.

You know, I'm a hustler, figured it out, found somebody that had a great apartment, wasn't using it, lived in Lincoln Park, and only got charged $500 because I was a student.

Can't blame me on my hustling skills, but what it did, what it helped me for the four years that I lived there was save the money that I needed in order to make a down payment.

Found a house right by my parents, paid 210,000, and that was a lot of money for me, but I had enough for down payment.

That's at 32.

So the stories that we heard two weeks ago is the same story I had.

The only thing different to me is I hustled, and I tried to make it so that I could save money and make things happen.

And affordability affordability was not there during my time because 210,000 was a lot, it's all relative, right?

It's all relative, right?

Depending on what the economy is.

So I agree that we need to do affordability.

I agree we need to help our community.

I agree on all of that.

But middle housing wasn't or isn't affordability, especially in the mile mile mile radius.

And it's not going to prove to be affordable.

So as this piece has said, this motion, it is talking about let's look to see where we can build affordability.

Let's look to see of the areas that this can happen, and let's let's look to see.

We heard what they want.

Let's see if we can make it happen.

We have been doing middle housing as it was proven and shown in the map.

I'm not really sure if citywide, and that and this is a question for Josh.

Why can't we go citywide?

Since we're already doing it in this map, why can't we?

What would what would the difference be in going citywide?

What would that impact be?

Mayor Councilwoman Pastor, I think that's the point of the study is to better understand what type of applicability would make the most sense for us as a city.

I also know if we go citywide, it could be zoning and pieces of commercial buildings.

There's a bigger agenda in this.

Demolition of historic homes, it's a year, I know it's not.

If somebody has a lot of money, no matter what, they can wait the year out.

I understand that.

The infrastructure and drainage and parking, that's important.

So that's part of this study.

But most importantly, I hear the concerns of the neighborhood stability.

And I believe that if we continue to stick together and push the way we have been pushing today, and the way you've been pushing the city, that energy really needs to go to the legislature, and really needs to be pushed upon them.

The mayor has been involved in this, and to tell you the truth right now, I'm a 50-50 on this vote.

Do I become the rebel and vote no?

Or do I do I stay and vote the way they want me to vote?

I'm not really sure where I am today.

And so right now, when the vote comes up, you'll see where I'm at.

But let me let you know that I have worked every piece of this legislation that I've could have worked on, they worked on.

And we couldn't find it.

So I'm very sorry.

But we are in the situation that we're in, and we're we we have been told by the legislation when to adopt this and when to implement it.

So I wanted to say this because I know you guys are waiting to speak, and I think you have should have the ability to speak, but at least you know in the front end what is being talked about and what the motion is is happening.

Before I end, Warry.

And my Scarlet, who's asleep, and the reason why I asked him to come was to demonstrate that there are families that live in a historic neighborhood.

Thank you.

Councilman Wearing.

Oh, okay.

I didn't want to start too soon.

Have you got mad at me?

Um gosh, uh a lot of talk about the legislature.

Governor Hobbes must have signed this bill, correct?

Mayor Councilman Waring, that is correct.

Okay, so the one person in Arizona who could have stopped this in its tracks by themselves was Governor Hobbs with a veto, correct?

Yes, Mayor, Councilman Waring, that was correct.

Okay, thanks.

And I'm gonna respond to Wearing.

There are a lot of other housing bills that were in front of us that it would have made it worse.

And so I want to state that as a city and as our intergovernment fought against that legislation and kept on fighting against that legislation.

But if there was a starter home bill that we needed to make a choice, is it starter home that we're gonna let go through, or is it this?

Mayor, can I make one more response to that?

Since we're going down this dark councilman Warry.

Um I guess I'll just say this.

She doesn't have to sign anything.

And so she must have either wanted to sign this or decided to sign this, or whatever.

But I don't know when this she has to sign one of those bills because there's a whole bunch.

I don't know when that started.

Having worked down there, I don't remember Governor Palatano being like that.

Everything was a fight.

So I guess I was there a few years too early.

Thank you.

You were.

Um sorry, just real quick.

Yes, Council.

Think of Mayor.

As the only council member that was at the legislature when this bill was signed, I want to again reiterate that the original bill was very clear.

It was a great bill that was drafted.

It was intended to apply citywide.

The League of Cities and Towns compromised to make it one mile within the central business district and had the support of all 91 cities and towns in Arizona.

That is what happened.

Um, and yes, while council member Waring being said, it's solely the power of sure.

The governor has veto power.

She chose not to veto this bill because there was a compromise by the leagues of cities and towns to make this very narrowly tailored to a mile within the central business districts.

So that is what happened.

Councilwoman Stark.

Thank you.

I appreciate that.

Um, however, if you really look at the bill, there are many towns and cities that are exempt from this, like Paradise Valley, Mountain Hills, Sedona, World Valley, lots of communities that don't have to worry about this.

So kudos to the league for what they thought they had to do, but that doesn't necessarily mean that certain council people agreed with what they did.

And I I, for one, don't think we should have damaged our historic districts, but we've got to do something.

And so I I see my motion is trying to accept what they legally has told us what to do, but I think we need to do a study.

I think we need to make a commitment to the entire city for affordable housing, for middle housing, and so I I know you guys want to speak.

I'm sorry you're listening to all this dialogue.

I will be at the legislature helping you.

I know I'll probably be standing next to councilman pastor and the mayor, but we have to do something.

I'm sorry that it hurts you guys, but I I guarantee you I will be there in support of all of you.

Um, and I do think the study is important because I think we do need to have affordable housing.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Councilman Stark is correct.

This only applies to cities with a population above 75,000.

So cities such as Fountain Hills and Paradise Valley are not included.

I think we can all agree Phoenix has a higher percentage of our housing stock that is affordable than those communities.

And so disappointing that this burden is disproportionately put on the neighborhoods who are here today and completely unfair.

Phoenix was one of those that signed in against it.

I believe what happened was cities came and said this is ridiculous, this would apply to a lot of areas where middle housing doesn't make sense.

Uh let us identify where they should go.

And then there were some stakeholders at the legislature who thought we would identify areas that no one would want to build in.

So they thought near the central business district would be desirable, terrible unintended consequences in Phoenix's case, but it was not meant to deliberately target historic districts.

And that was sort of how it I believe it got narrowed.

Government affairs can correct me if if they want.

But perhaps we should get to community stakeholders.

We will open the public hearing again.

This is for both 71 and 72.

Um I think we may have one more council comment before then, but our first two speakers when we get there will be Patience Huntwork and Raquel Gustavson.

Did anyone have additional comments before we go to all right?

Patience.

The floor is yours.

I want to respond to several of the arguments that were made in defense of middle housing.

Um historic preservation is damaged.

Not because the process of the city is discontinued, but because market forces, inexorable market forces are unleashed, which will incentivize destruction of historic structures.

So the continuation of the historic preservation process is pretty irrelevant to this.

Also, the reason the citywide application is unacceptable, is because the process and the middle housing itself being so rigid is bad and it's foolish.

That's why the rest of the city, the rest of the city does not want this.

And I liked the word that councilman Waring used.

Foolish.

And you're being coerced to do something foolish.

Now we get tax benefits for a reason.

We get tax benefits to incentivize us to hold on to historic properties because history usually is considered important to Americans.

Other cities are buckling under because they're being told there is nothing they can do.

It's not so much that they love vets.

There's nothing they can do.

Racial segregation was outlawed in 1840, 1948 in the case of Shelley V.

Kramer.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Raquel Gustafson is next, followed by Eric Gilmore.

Mayor and Councilpersons, thank you for hearing us today.

Thank you, Laura Pastor, for sharing your story with us.

We have been needing to hear that from somebody sitting in your seats.

I'm here as a lifelong resident of Willow neighborhood.

And I hear the affordable housing being thrown out continuously.

Has no one considered that waiting a year for a demolition means that the developer who purchased that home will not be collecting income during that time.

Then they have to demolish which costs money, then they have to rebuild which costs money, then they have to figure out how to get the sewage and electricity into these homes.

As a person who is currently re refurbishing my 90-year-old home, it is expensive.

We're doing it ourselves by with our own hands.

Every person who's sitting here is being looked at as some elite and and um very rich group.

We're not, we've worked hard.

The reason why our neighborhood is so beautiful and so safe and so desirable is because we put our blood, sweat, and tears into making it that way.

So then to just say we're gonna have affordable housing, it's not gonna be affordable.

Some developer who's coming out of San Francisco and buys up these houses, where do you think they're going to displace the cost of waiting a year or two years without income?

It's gonna go right back into the persons who are renting it.

They're not gonna sell it to some nice teacher in her family who's gonna be able to own a home in the in these multi-family homes.

She's not gonna be able to afford it.

No one's gonna be able to afford it.

It's gonna be rentals and Airbnbs, and there's not going to be any consideration giving once they demolish the building, the historic requirements are no longer required.

They're gonna make ugly houses that don't support the look that we fought to have and the history that is valuable.

Eric is next, followed by Sarah Cooper.

Eric Gilmore, if you could sort of wave so we know you're coming.

Okay, Eric is downstairs, so we will.

And if you are downstairs and I call your name if you want to start heading up, we would welcome that.

I do not yet see Eric, so we will go with Sarah Cooper.

If Eric comes, he'll be next.

If he doesn't, John Cooper will be next.

Go ahead.

Floor is yours, Sarah.

Thank you all.

I'm not a public speaker, so I apologize if I misspeak or offend anybody.

I hope I don't.

My name is Sarah Cooper, and I have been a resident in Willow Historic District for 36 years.

I feel as if there is a potential threat to my home, my neighborhood, and my community.

I'm here to try to protect my way of life, which is based on my home, my neighborhood, and my community.

I believe all y'all can help me do this by voting for a 90-day delay on the middle housing tax amendment amendment Z T A 1 25 Y.

A 90-day delay would provide a short pause.

It will give experts time to determine how middle housing can be implemented in a way that truly benefits all Phoenix residents without putting my community at risk.

The delay will also allow the Arizona state legislature to consider amendments in the upcoming 2026 session, including possibly an exemption for my home and my community.

So, whatever you all can do to help make this happen so that we can push back the legislature, like you would like us to do, I hope.

Um, please do.

Thank you.

Eric Gilmore, and could you sort of wave if you were here?

All right.

I have concluded Eric is not here.

John Cooper is next, and then Erin Montano Searles.

John Cooper is next, followed by Aaron.

Okay.

John Cooper, Phoenix Resident.

And I prepared a couple of things to talk about, but um it's kind of changed it a little bit.

Am I on?

Okay.

Councilperson Stark.

Thank you.

You've worked really hard.

And um council person pastor.

Thank you.

Okay.

Um, where was I here?

Okay.

Um, I'm sure all of you guys know you're you're smart people on MPR this last week.

Um, all things considered, um, on point.

Nothing but um affordable housing in the United States.

And nowhere in any of those shows did they mention uh middle income housing, 50-year mortgages, um, relief for you know um town payments, all kinds of other things, but no middle housing.

And the other problem is whenever anything is mandated, people are gonna push back, as well.

You know, when you ask people to do things, they'll do things, but you mandate it, and then you limit it to only a stretch in the center of town.

Well, what good is that gonna do for housing out in Arcadia or anywhere else throughout the uh valley in the November 5th uh meeting here?

The uh whoops, outgoing.

Is that it?

We're at two.

Okay.

Okay, um 1954, George Orwell's Animal Farm, all the animals lived, you know, equally until they started going one group was better than the other.

Thank you so much.

Aaron is next, followed by Ted Luther.

Evening, uh mayor, members of the council, neighbors.

As a reminder, we have two minutes up here, so uh I want to be as concise as possible.

This is extremely important to me because uh the first home I ever had was in Willow uh as a newborn.

I was brought over to Encano.

The first home I ever bought.

Uh I bought as a long-haired research analyst for council, uh ponytail and all.

So it's very important to me.

And I know the council, I know staff has worked really hard on this.

I appreciate that.

And I'm a little more aware, you know, the process and what you're up against and what the state has left you with.

But so most of the things you're hearing, you're probably understanding you know, but I wanted to talk to you about some things you may not know.

As someone mentioned before, we are often looked as elitists and very wealthy.

As I mentioned, I bought my house when I was a research analyst, making about 42,000 a year.

On my block, we have a retired school teacher, two school teachers, young professors, small business owners, including myself, uh, small theater producer, yoga instructor, bartender.

These are not folks who are rich and wealthy.

They put a lot of time and effort into their homes, and they bought into this neighborhood because of the community it has and something like the middle housing opens up the doors, or in my opinion, a total destruction of the historic districts.

Maybe not today, maybe not next year, maybe not even 10 years, but eventually, when we are no longer 50% historic, we are no longer a historic district.

So I just want to leave you with this.

You said it best.

Let's ensure growth honors our neighborhoods, preserves our history, and strengthens our communities.

Thank you.

Yes, uh, Aaron, Aaron, uh, Councilman Hernandez has a question for you.

Thank you, Mr.

Montes Ceros.

Um, can't remember where you quoted that from, but yes.

Um, but my question, uh, how old were you when you bought your home in Willow?

30.

30?

Yeah.

I'm not gonna ask you how you are now because I don't want to age you, but how much did you buy a home for?

What's that?

How much did you buy that home for?

250.

Okay.

Do you know what the average age for a new home buyer is now?

I imagine it's not 30.

It's 40.

Yeah, I was gonna say 45.

Do you know what the average medium price for a for a home to be bought in the greater Phoenix area is now?

I think you do.

What is it?

450,000.

Thank you.

Okay.

And so I got that quote from uh your most recent flyer about your next upcoming community meeting.

Thank you.

Yeah, and I asked those questions because I think I'm trying to get to the I'm trying to understand what the real issue is at the heart of the fear.

Is it a fear of the buildings in the community of the types of homes that are going to be built, or is it the fear of the people that are going to come into those neighborhoods?

Well, I think fear is a strong word.

It's definitely not fear.

As I mentioned, my whole block uh are folks just like me.

We're all, you know, we've we work very hard.

We've invested in our properties.

That's not fear.

It's about changing the neighborhood that we all know and love.

It's about that's it.

It'll it'll and potentially, not potentially, most likely, erasing the historic districts.

And that concern exists even with the earlier questions that I asked our staff to explain that none of the historic preservation processes being eliminated.

I would implore you to look into that a little more because I don't think it's as concrete as you believe it is from preventing developers from coming in and putting together what they want.

Okay, I'll look into that.

Thank you.

Ted Luthor.

Ted is Ted downstairs.

If Ted, if you were Ted is coming.

Perfect.

And if if you are sort of in the on-deck position, if you might want to come uh closer, we would welcome that.

So Ted next, followed by Chuck, followed by Dean.

Wait, okay, Ted.

Ted, oh we don't have.

All right, Chuck's up.

And then uh Dean Fanger, followed by Ginger Maddox, followed by Susan Edwards.

All right, thank you.

Uh the problems with middle housing overlay district begin with its first paragraph.

A municipality must authorize the development of middle housing on all lots zoned for single family residential use.

Here, the state exceeds its jurisdiction.

The home rule of the Phoenix Charter was ratified by voters in 1913.

The state cannot arbitrarily revoke a city charter, nor can it muscle itself into the minutia of city zoning and administration.

Historically, all rezoning is initiated by the property owner, unless a government declares eminent domain.

For eminent domain to transpire, a government must first prove a public benefit.

With vague allusions to affordability shortages and crises spewed by its sponsors, the law's plain text pays no heed to any of these terms, nor does the detail a quantifiable outcome.

For imminent domain to be proper, a government must also certifiably inform all affected property owners.

Employing city staff to scotch tape notices on 1% of city doorways does not meet the standard, especially when this bogus law intends to overlay the entire city with a brand of zoning that strikes land use and safety codes off the books.

Forcing council to ratify this weirdly worded land heist, the state is without constitutional merit.

Therefore, council is within its rights to reject the middle housing overlay district and send it to the courts for judicious review.

Council is also within its rights to call a special election of qualified electors and property owners to legitimately determine public interest for this brand of rezoning.

Thank you.

Okay.

We heard from the crowd that Dean is here, but uh does not wish to speak.

He is marked in opposition.

Ginger is next, followed by Susan, followed by Ellen Kanakakos.

Apologies for my pronunciation.

I'm ginger Matthawks.

I've lived in an SFQ story for 39 years.

When I bought my home as a young professional, I paid $63,000 for it, which is quite a shock.

Um some of you know that um I was part of the research team when we battled the FAA.

So as far as I'm concerned, this is no hill for a climber.

And we need to do our research the same way that we did it when we took on that 5,000 pound gorilla.

So in my research, I found that the federal government actually has an advisory council on historic preservation, which outlines eight implementation principles for creating affordable housing in historic districts.

And for the last two weeks, I've sent two different emails to um all of the council people as well as our fine mayor.

And I particularly noted that number six states an emphasis of consensus building.

And I think as we have said in the past, we probably should have done that long before now.

But nonetheless, if we have to go to the legislature, I would hope that you would pass on what I have sent to you regarding these implement implementation principles, so that when we start to create our scope of work, we have some other experts who have had history in this, not only within our cities, but across the country, and you'll see on that page four the list of experts that contributed to this are enormous.

So we do have people that we can count on that can give us good counsel.

Thank you.

Thank you, and we'd welcome you sharing it with our legislators, Representative Gretz and Marquez probably need all the help they can get.

Uh Susan is next, followed by Ellen, followed by David Lewis.

Uh I'm Susan Edwards.

I uh Madam Mayor and Council members, Susan Edwards.

I live in Encanto Manor, and I'm president of the Arizona Neighborhood Alliance.

The uh where is my newspaper?

The my requests are number one, I won't go into water and sewer pipes that are safe for what's now allowed, but not for four times the density.

Uh when advocating for a historic uh exemption at the legislature, please ask if they will bring water and clean our houses when the sewer pipes back up.

I'd ask for that.

And I would also say that I know that when the uh lobbyists were working on this bill, they asked for historic exemption, and they were told by certain people, some in this room, that uh that was not on the menu.

Um I would also like to, we would also like to require that because this law specifically violates the state law on general plans to um get the League of Cities and Towns to sue the state uh because this is in violation of the state law on general plans.

It's in contradiction of the two.

And the other thing is I want to be clear come to my street and look at the house that was torn down with no permit.

There you can say there's a year delay, but the and the penalty, you know what the penalty is?

It's a hundred dollars max of two hundred and fifty, and you can have a civil fine, but who's gonna do that?

So it's not gonna stop anybody.

So if you think there's really any any prohibit or prohibition there, it doesn't exist.

And the only things that are gonna get built are gonna be by primarily out-of-state investors to build short-term rentals or luxury uh landlords.

And uh by the way, just for information, council or councilwoman Hernandez, I was 38 when I bought my house in 1984.

I paid 155,000, and that's an equivalent of 485,284 today.

Thank you.

Uh we have about 45 more speakers.

We will likely take a 10-minute break around six o'clock.

Uh see Ellen is next, followed by David, followed by Tim Smith.

And Ellen, uh, could you wave?

Uh C-A-N-A-C-A-K-O-S.

All right.

I do not see Ellen.

So David Lewis is next, followed by Tim Smith, followed by Michelle Smith.

And if you need to leave, if you don't mind telling our staff you no longer need to testify, then we don't need to call your name.

Um thank you.

So are is Ellen?

We Ellen's not here, right?

Okay.

Do we have David Lewis?

If you are David Lewis, could you wave?

Okay.

Uh Tim Smith.

Tim's not gonna speak, but I'm in the point.

And you're Michelle?

Yes.

All right, Tim is not going to speak, but Michelle is going to speak, his wife, and welcome, and then Robert Warnicie.

Followed by Scott.

Great, thank you.

Thank you for having us.

My name is Michelle Smith, and I um am a retired teacher.

I've lived at 1617 West Virginia Avenue in the Del Norte Place neighborhood for the past 38 years.

My husband and I are the only the second owners of our home built in 1941.

We were in our early 30s when we bought our house.

Our daughter was eight.

We both worked full-time.

We couldn't afford to hire work to be done.

So we, along with my father, did many projects to restore our home over the years.

He was our project manager.

We took a broken down two-bedroom, one bath home, and worked to keep the historic integrity of our home.

I even have photos of my sister, my husband, my dad, and myself working on the roof we replaced in 1995.

When we purchased our home, not many people wanted to live near downtown.

It was the shell of what it is today.

Empty storefronts, little to do, and no one wanted to go there after dark.

Restoring older homes is not always easy.

It takes commitment and tenacity.

We've made living near downtown a positive and enjoyable place to live through sweat, hard work, and yes, plenty of money over the years.

My husband and I were also part of a committee of a dozen neighbors who researched and documented the history of our neighborhood.

This was a two-year project, with the final outcome being we achieved historic designation in 1993 for Del Norte Place.

I'm begging you to vote to consider how middle housing can be implemented throughout the city of Phoenix, not just in the restrictive one mile radius written into the language.

The city needs to come up with a plan in which everyone is part of the solution.

Affordable housing gains will not be the result of this power and money web.

It will be to the benefit of a few developers, not residents seeking affordable housing and a nice place to live.

Thank you for your time.

Mr.

Warnic is next, followed by Scott Ferreira, followed by Dr.

Cannon.

Good afternoon.

I'm Robert Warnicky, 506 East Catalina.

I'm the leader of La Hacienda Historic District.

I'm the Vice President of Phoenix Historic Neighborhood Coalition.

And uh Councilwoman uh Phoenix Historic Neighborhood Coalition sent a letter on November 13th specifically outlining the problems to historic neighborhoods.

If you could take a look at that, you would see a little bit about what the guidelines allowed in Coronado.

Um you can do today is provide a sunset for whatever you do do.

We're gonna go to the state, we're gonna try to change the law.

If we're successful, but you have overentitled everybody to four plexes, you won't want to then pull those entitlements back because you'll be sued under Prop 207.

However, if the entitlements you were to grant today were to automatically sunset and only continue to exist upon renewal, then you wouldn't be sued under uh Prop 207 when we get your power back to do planning.

So a sunset is the one thing you can do today that would give you power later.

Uh if you're gonna do this adoption of a study motion, do the study on the historic districts as well, so those entitlements don't automatically go in.

The motion I heard was only for the study for the expansion, but we need the study to include the historic districts so those entitlements don't automatically go in on January 1st, and when we change the law at the state, it'll be too late.

So the motion needs to be amended to apply to the historic districts so that no entitlements will be fixed until the study is done.

Um that would be my recommendation on that.

This the uh I ran out of time.

Help the historic neighborhoods.

We've helped the city.

Thank you.

Thank you, Scott is next, followed by Dr.

Cannon, followed by Kathy Cook.

Hi, Scott Frere here from District 4.

Mayor, Vice Mayor, esteemed members of the council.

Thank you for your time today.

It is difficult to hear the frustration some of you have expressed both at the last meeting and even this meeting, stating that the city's hands are tied against the state.

We elected you not only to ensure our city's security, growth, and success, but also to stand up with us in moments we cannot do so alone.

I am here once again representing countless families across our historic districts who want to participate in this critical decision, but simply cannot take time off from work.

I assure you they are here in spirit and many watching online.

We are here to voice our opposition to item 71 and 72 as currently written.

While although we support uh while we oppose those items, we do support a study and a sunset clause.

A little about me personally for my remaining time.

My personal connection to these historic areas goes back more than 25 years.

I first learned about the beauty and value of these neighborhoods by attending a historic home tour while I was in elementary school.

Fast forward several years.

My wife and I, both Arizona natives, were part of the higher density housing ourselves, renting in multifamily units along McDowell and 15th Ave, later down near the Garfield neighborhood.

Now my wife and I fortunately are raising our young family in a historic neighborhood.

It is one of my greatest joys to see our daughter playing with her young friends in the neighborhood, a place with character, history, and a strong sense of community with people from all walks of life.

This is why preserving its integrity is important to me and so many others.

We understand this process is challenging, but take a moment now to ensure responsible application, and I hope to see you all standing with us on the steps of the state legislator.

Thank you.

Dr.

Cannon is next, followed by Kathy, followed by Ann Derning.

Thank you so much for your time.

My name is Dr.

Robert Cannon.

I have lived in Willow now 28 years.

I have been on the board, served on the board a long time.

Right now, he's on deck, but uh I've been in the background.

So we moved to Willow for one reason for diversity, acceptance.

Those of you that know Don Vallejo, my husband is a retired Phoenix police officer.

We have lived in a community of spirit, welcomeness, and trust me, when I hear the term um rich or we weren't rich, trust me.

Um we struggled, second mortgage, remodeled our home, been on the home tour three times.

We love our neighborhood.

We gave back to our neighborhood.

I served on the Phoenix Light Rail Board, the Civil Service Board, the City of Phoenix Pension Board.

We are members of the community.

We thank you so much for your time.

This journey has started two years ago.

I was commenting to my neighbor in the back.

I feel like I've been on a monopoly game for two years moving houses around.

But this is a serious issue to Willow.

And the staff I know has worked hard.

And I know when we show up, they probably say, Oh, here they come again, because yours truly just finished Third and Fifth Avenue redesign.

I happen to know a lot about streets and transportation, more than any volunteers should know.

But after eight years, preserving the neighborhood, and most importantly, supporting the Willow Historic Conservation Plan, which is approved and signed by your predecessors almost 30 years ago.

With that, thank you.

Thank you.

Kathy is next, followed by Ann, followed by Sasha Robinson.

Hello to the council, and thank you for your service to the wonderful city of Phoenix.

Um I'm asking that you delay the vote for 90 days.

Possibly study.

Um see what you can do in that amount of time and then continue on.

But I want to say, you know, it's it's upsetting to hear that you know, only old people live in the historic districts, only rich people live in the historic districts.

I myself have only been here about nine years, but my daughters, one of them in her 30s and one in her 40s, so wanted to be part of the historic district.

They live in FQ Story and Willow.

They've given up a lot to be there to work on their properties, which are always, you know, in progress.

You know, it's not easy when you're young to get it all done the way you want it.

But when I would visit them, I just saw what a beautiful, wonderful community it was.

I lived way out northwest.

It was nothing like what these districts, these communities have.

So I just want to say my daughters are there, they have young children.

The community is not just old people, it's young people working really hard, very welcoming, very diverse.

Um, I also want to say really quick.

Um, two doors down from me.

Uh, a home was completely demolished without permits, knocked down.

Somebody who also owns Airbnbs in the Willow area, told me that he's gonna wait till January and put up a fourplex because that's what he does.

So it's happening.

It's not this will happen, or it might happen.

It's happening.

Two doors down for me right now, and this is somebody who he's not all he's not about affordable housing.

He's not, you know, a bleeding heart for anybody.

He's taking care of himself.

So if you can, please delay this vote.

Thank you.

Ann is next, followed by Sasha, followed by Opal.

Um greetings, uh, mayor and council persons.

Um, my name is Ann Durning.

Um, I first moved into Encanto Vista in 1984, and now I've been in Encanto Palmcroft for the last 11 years, and I love these historic districts.

I would echo the comments of Mr.

Warnic and ask that you delay implementation for 90 days.

Thank you.

Sasha is next, followed by Opal, followed by Jim Goff.

All right.

I'm told Sasha left, Mayor.

I'm okay.

Okay, go ahead.

Okay.

Um I'll be brief.

Uh thank you so much.

Um councilwoman Stark for this motion.

Um, I am the co-chair of Safe Historic Arizona.

I live in the Willow Historic District.

My name is Opal Wagner.

Um, but I'm going to speak for myself because obviously we've gotten a lot of information in the last hour, so things have kind of are kind of changing here.

Um I signed in as opposed, but I fully understand this text amendment has to be adopted by January 1st, 2026.

That is the law.

Um I want to um advocate for the motion that councilwoman Stark has put on the table.

I think it is the best uh course of action that the council has available to take today.

So I'm hoping council members are considering that.

Good policy is built on solid, rich, um uh detailed, high high quality data, and that is what we need to make good decisions for our city.

So thank you for suggesting this study.

It's exactly what we need.

Um, as uh Mayor, you pointed out with the uh sharing the letter from um representatives Marquez and Gress, our historic districts are continuing to work for an exemption for historic districts for the middle housing law, not because we fear anything, but because we believe that historic districts have incredible value to our city and we want to preserve them.

Um we look forward to the city of Phoenix partnering with us in that effort at the legislature, and we know that when we partner together and collaborate, we have been successful on so many projects in the past, and we will continue to do that on this.

Thank you so much.

Jim is next, followed by Brad Brower, followed by Henry Partington.

Hi, I'm Jim Goff.

I've been a resident of Willow for 26 years.

Um let's be honest.

This is an overreach on the part of the state legislature intended to crush the city making uh zoning making decisions and to straw man them into a approving this ordinance by possibly withdrawing state funds.

For that reason, despite fierce opposition, city council planning commit came to you with a recommendation to approve this.

I'm asking that the city council not make the same mistake and today vote to uh do a 90-day delay.

This allows the legislature to uh prepare an amendment or a new law which exempts the historic districts from the middle housing law.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, um mayor, city council, returning city manager.

Um my name is Brad Brouwer.

I've lived at uh 302 West Monte Vista Road for 21 years.

I've had the honor of being the leader of the Willow Neighborhood Association on many occasions, being the second to Dr.

Bob Cannon when he was president and I was vice president.

But we keep, like he said, we keep switching it back and forth.

We have the joy in all these many years of being working with the city of working with our elected officials and our city staff who has done so much for our neighborhoods, and we truly appreciate what the what happens for us.

Thank you so much for what you do.

I'm sure that Josh is very tired of seeing my name in his inbox, but here I am.

Um what I'm missing here from the city of Phoenix is the strength and the muscle that the city has is the greatest economic engine in this state, allowing this state legislature to tell us what to do.

I'm hoping that you folks can take that back.

Um the idea that the state legislature did to check a box, which was horrifying.

Um this doesn't create reaffordable housing.

I'm a 25-year real estate broker.

I kind of know what housing is.

Um what this does not do is give an affordable housing after tearing something down to put it back up.

And we look at a example down the street from us and on the edge of Willow, which is um uh Cambridge and Virginia at First Avenue, where this woman gladly proclaimed on ABC 15 that she they built 28 units.

They started 949,000 and go to 1.3 million dollars.

I don't see how that's affordable.

It's not happening in this area.

Um, the only thing that's happening affordable for a um a uh developer is gonna require state or city re got requirements from them and subsidies.

Thank you very much for your time.

Thank you.

Henry is next, followed by Jill Garing, followed by Joanne Kaufman.

If you are Henry Partington, could you kind of wave?

All right, looks like Henry had to depart.

Uh Jill Gehring followed by Joanne.

And then followed by Beth.

Hello, my name's Jill Garing, and I got historic for Willow before it was historic.

Um Carrie Goddard asked me to do a overview to find out if Willow could be historic enough enough people want it.

And we got half of it, and then the other half of it later.

But it was a it was all about a three-rear project.

What I'd like to say to you today is take a really hard, strong look at what historic things are right around us that belong to the state.

You've got many things that are state that are basically state icons or something, and push back on them in all directions.

Not just don't just go up and say we want to do this because they aren't gonna let you.

But try to bear embarrass them a little bit, try to push on it.

But I think we really do have to get together and explain why it's not a good idea.

One is you start digging up those neighborhoods, and you have all kinds of lead paint, you have spread all kinds of pollution.

You know, it it really isn't good to turn that earth over and try and use it again, leave it down there.

But pick as many put things as you can.

Don't just stop with I want historic, but make out how economically difficult this is going to be.

Because it will be.

You're gonna have to put in new sewers, you're gonna have to pull out old sewers, and every time you hit one of those old pipes, you lose it.

So please, please help us.

And find the things that the state values that are there too.

Because it's that's how it is.

Joanne is next, followed by Beth Tracey, followed by Steve Dreiserson.

Good afternoon, Mayor Calleco and members of the City Council, and thank you for giving me this opportunity to speak.

I would like to clarify some comments that were made at the last council meeting.

Uh, first of all, I would like to stress that we are not all old, rich, or entitled, nor are we racist.

There are many young people uh who uh cannot attend the uh meeting due to the fact that they have to work.

Uh the gentleman that preceded me mentioned something about the development at First Avenue and uh Virginia, that's called the Bower, and it is listed at $950,000, which in my opinion is not at all affordable.

It seems counterintuitive to tear down existing homes to address the housing crisis when there is so much vacant land available.

On the bus over here, we saw plenty of vacant land.

Uh, this will have a negative effect on our property values.

I have to ask how many of you would be pleased if a multifamily two-story structure went up next to or across from your home.

If our historic uh neighborhoods are happening places to live, it's because we made them happen by investing in them before they became gentrified and working to restore and maintain these homes.

Now I realize you're between a rock and a hard spot, and I do appreciate your feelings and your concerns.

But I would like to say in closing that historic neighborhoods belong to all of us.

Before we lived here, we enjoyed walking through here, riding through here, exploring with the dream that maybe we could live here, but even if we couldn't, it's all of ours to enjoy.

Please don't consider tearing these down.

Leave them for future generations to enjoy for your children, your grandchildren, and so forth.

Thank you very much.

Beth is next, followed by Steve, followed by Caroline Carrie Payne.

Beth has left.

Steve is next, followed by Carrie, followed by Beth Joy.

Mayor and Council, I'm Steve Dreisison, and I'm a 50-year resident of the FQ Story Historic District.

I know I don't look it.

As a past president of the Story Preservation Association, I've been active in historic preservation for decades.

I was responsible for noise mitigation along I-10 from rubberized asphalt to noise walls, both added years after the freeway split our neighborhood in half.

You see, I-10 is my backyard.

I was a leader in the battle against the FAA, flight paths that threatened our neighborhoods when they were changed overnight without public process or input.

The middle housing tax amendment, as proposed, is the greatest threat to our historic neighborhoods.

The idea is laudable.

The concentration of one mile radius around the central business district is misguided.

I moved into my tiny house in 1975.

It wasn't historic.

It was what I could barely afford.

I love the character of the houses as unique with no two alike.

In the 60s, the Wilbur Smith plan declared that there would be no residential use south of Thomas Road, and that the Pavago Freeway with its hundred foot span over Central Avenue would run through downtown.

That design was stopped by voters in 1973.

Those close-in neighborhoods deteriorated and time passed before a new plan to finish I-10 was proposed.

The last mile was completed in 1990 with more homes and more homes with historic character were demolished.

The effort of thousands of homeowners stabilized these neighborhoods, which then slowly thrived.

A dear friend and fellow preservationist likes to say the historic neighborhoods kept the lights on downtown while downtown was trying to come back.

It only took three or four boom bus cycles to make to take that hold.

Others have pointed out that our neighborhoods are already offering middle housing.

That's developed organically.

I agree.

Many have urged the scope of middle housing be expanded.

I agree.

The FAA flight path battle showed that internal only process fails.

Let's not make that mistake here.

Expert analysis is warranted.

We can do better.

We can do this right.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Carrie is next, followed by Beth Joy Boris, followed by Jamie Cowgill.

Okay.

Thank you so much, Mayor and Council members, for your time.

Uh I'm Caroline from District 4.

Uh, I'm gonna go fast, so please bear with me.

For the council, I know this is probably moot, but I urge you to vote for a 90-day delay in implementing the middle housing text amendment.

If this law is not amended, then it could literally end historic neighborhoods required to implement middle housing.

How?

Because any middle housing that is created by raising existing property to the ground will force prop the property owner to build something new and non-historic, because the historic preservation office requires them to do so.

New homes, even homes that are only modified to become two, three, or four plexus, can lose their historic designation.

And once 50% or more of the homes in a historic neighborhood are no longer historic, that neighborhood loses its own designation under the HBO.

The law doesn't limit the number of homes that can be transformed into middle housing, so the path to destruction of historic neighborhoods is wide open.

Neighborhoods are not guaranteed preservation.

And this is a reminder for everyone.

Uh, there is no language in 9-462.13 of the ARS designating these homes as affordable, no language mandating rent caps on dwelling units and no financial mechanisms to make them affordable.

So owners of new middle housing property will have to set rent at market prices just to break even.

Section B4 says I mean municipality must not set restrictions permitting or review processes for middle housing that are more restrictive than those for single family dwellings within the same zone.

Would rent caps or tax breaks uh be considered more restrictive than pricing for single-family homes?

It's unclear.

The law should be amended to allow ways to make middle housing truly affordable if that's what the Senate or sorry, what the state legislature truly wants.

I am pro-affordable housing, pro-density, and pro-diversity in my neighborhood.

But this law, as written, in my opinion, will do almost certainly nothing for affordable housing because there's no mechanisms to make it happen.

We should adopt middle housing laws, but not at the expense of historic neighborhoods, which are cultural gems in our city.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Beth Joy is next, followed by Jamie, followed by Chris Norton.

Mayor and uh council, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today.

Um, my name is Beth Joy Borgars, and I live in District 4.

And Councilwoman Pastor, I just want to let you know how much I appreciated your story today and sharing uh sharing the struggle that I can I can feel that you've got.

I had a whole speech thing written out, but you know what?

I uh from what I'm hearing, I do still want a 90-day delay.

Um, but what I'm hearing is that that's not a possibility legally.

Um, so what I'm gonna just say is coming from from my heart, really.

Um, I I've lived in the willow for four years now, newcomer to historic preservation to historic preservation.

I learned my almost learned my lesson the hard way when I wanted to put a new gate.

And my neighbors said you got to go to historic preservation.

And I did, and I have a new gate.

Anyway, there is a there is a process.

But I'm just, you know, I just don't see how middle housing is or it will be affordable in our neighborhood.

It's you know, the houses you can't you can take them down, you can rebuild them, but it's not going to be affordable.

I also want to say I wasn't I wasn't not until I was 40 that I bought my first house.

Um, and I'm not sure what the equivalent would be today.

So anyway, I'm just urging you to to do everything you can to fight for what your constituents are asking you to do today, and that to either do a 90-day delay, which you said you can't, but just continue to fight for us because we're gonna be here continuing to fight ourselves, at least I am.

Can't speak for all you guys out here.

Jamie is next, followed by Chris, followed by Claire Michael.

Hi, Michael.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, Mayor, Council.

Um, I had a big speech all prepared, but from what I've been hearing, yes, this you're going to vote this thing through, and we will have to fight at the state legislature, and that the study would hopefully show us where the right places are for middle housing.

So I just wanted to thank you all.

I would like to say that I'll get off the clip is these historic districts are priceless, and they need to be saved.

They really do.

Um we go to happy hours every second Friday.

We'll have 50 people in a backyard, and they bring food and they bring wine.

We have the home tour, and I would like to invite all of you, because I think Brad's gonna give you free tickets to the home tour so that you guys can actually experience what our neighborhood is like and the festivals and the kids' club and everything that goes on.

Um I wish everybody could live there, but uh unfortunately you can't without tearing it down and starting over and turning it into something other than Willow and FQ Story and Coronado and Ashland and Alvarado and Los Olivos and all of the others that are down here in our community.

Thank you.

And I look forward to you all standing with us when we go to the legislature.

Thank you.

Chris is next, followed by Claire, followed by Kat Sweet.

Council Mayor and Vice Mayor, my name is Chris Norton, and I sit on the board of the Willow Historic Neighborhood.

Uh a key point of not heard adequately explained by Historic Preservation Office is how our neighbors actually stand to lose their historic designation from the impact of this text amendment and law.

Last week I called HPO and was told a historic neighborhood and all homes therein could automatically lose their designation protections and tax benefits if there's a 50% loss of contributing homes.

For home to be contributor, HPO evaluates its original integrity, setting, location, feeling, association, design, workmanship, and materials.

It's a lot.

A contributor needs to have a high level of most but not all attributes.

If an existing home is chopped up to add units and move windows and add doors, the home ceases to contribute.

If a home is demolished, whatever replaces it will never contribute.

Yes, there's a design review process in place to ensure new construction is compatible with the neighborhood, but it must not and cannot be faux historic, their words.

Thus, demolishing a historic home forever removes it from the list of contributors.

Maybe it won't happen this year or next or even in the next decade.

But it's not hard to envision an eventual loss of 50% and permanent erasure of all historic neighborhoods over time.

This is what we fear.

We don't fear the change, we fear the destruction.

I'm also a real estate broker and work with developers.

They tell me they can't spend more than 20% of a newly built property final value on the lot.

So if they bought a $500,000 historic home to replace with a triplex, that product needs to be worth $2.5 million.

Rents would need to be $4,000 a month just to pay the mortgage.

That's not affordable.

Actual affordable housing uses tools like partnerships with cities that own the land or incentives like the low-income housing tax credits, affordable housing defines maximum incomes for renters and limits rental rates.

The middle housing law has none of this language.

This is why our residents were pushing for a 90-day delay of implementation, so historic homeowners and advocates for affordable housing could lobby the state for changes in its next legislative session.

Thank you.

Claire is next, followed by Kat, followed by Molly McCoy.

Hi, my name is Claire Michael.

I live in District 6 in Arcadia.

I support citywide adoption of middle housing.

I don't live in the narrow downtown zone, but I would like to have middle housing in my community.

Studies show middle housing does improve affordability through increased supply, in addition to other benefits.

For me, this policy is about taking steps to create a Phoenix that supports housing and financial stability, affordability, walkability, and deeper community connections.

A few years ago, I was fortunate enough to buy my home in one of the few naturally affordable condo complexes in my area, or in Phoenix for that matter.

As someone from a low-income household, this has been life-changing for me, giving me more financial freedom and stability than I ever thought possible.

I've had relatively fixed and low cost compared to if I was renting.

But even renters in my complex tend to experience some level of stability because they have small landlords, not corporate ones who are trying to maximize profits, and that's the same dynamic that middle housing creates.

Because of this, people stay in my community for longer.

So we know our neighbors and are able to connect and look out for each other.

While condo complexes like mine aren't middle housing, enabling options like duplexes and so on, citywide will allow more Phoenicians to experience community housing and financial stability and affordability.

That has been so impactful for me, but on a less dense neighborhood scale.

For these reasons and many more, I urge this council to expeditiously adopt middle housing city wise to mitigate our housing crisis and enable development of diverse housing options that meet all families' needs.

And as a friendly observation, it sounded like the limitation on voting on this today was the notice.

So is it not possible to renotice this for a few weeks now from now for citywide adoption?

So thought.

Followed by Dante Mitchell.

Hello, City Council.

I'm here today on behalf of those that are unable to take time off work to voice my similar opinion.

The opinion being affordability and the growth of uh service uh of the surface area for Phoenicians.

I do believe that the council should move forward in the rezoning proposal.

It is in the best interest of for the future of the city.

We should put the needs of young families and those facing the worst of this affordability crisis to the forefront.

I work with the nonprofit that talks to Arizona families every day.

They are struggling, hard working class Americans facing evictions and foreclosures.

They receive our financial assistance based on employment criteria from our benefactor.

These are not people looking for handouts.

They simply want a place to live, and Phoenix is moving away from an affordable from an affordable city comparable to LA and New York, stayed in walkable cities.

In the book, The End of the Suburbs, changing economics and demographics has caused people to look for more options in their city.

If they are not available, they'll look elsewhere, possibly other states and other cities.

Stunting the growth of the city neighborhoods as well as the city itself.

And then finally, the development of those neighborhoods will lead to more innovations that will support those that cannot drive, which is quite personal to me.

As my partner cannot drive, we had to strategically rent near access points of public transit, giving them uh the option of mobility, which is not even what's available 15 years ago, which means that Phoenix is looking to continue to grow and grow into the modern age.

I do think that this rezoning is the big step.

However, I do want these uh changes to be for families, and I don't want uh big corporations coming in and taking up what is rightfully deserved for growing new family residents in the Phoenix area.

Thank you.

Molly is next.

Dante had to depart, so Tom Connors will be next, followed by Trisha Gillespie.

All right, let's see.

Okay, perfect.

I have not physically come in person before, so this is gonna be an interesting experience.

Um my name is Molly McCurdy, I live at 919 West Fillmore Street.

I'm just off 10th Ave, Fillmore, and Grand Avenue.

Um, I live in a historic home that is not designated historic.

It's 110 years old, it's a 1915 bungalow.

We never had to register it to be historic in order to save it.

So when I listen to some of these comments about needing a historic designation in order to preserve your neighborhood, I implore you to come to mine.

I'm next to FQ Story as well as the Oakland neighborhood.

We have a ton of mixed-use buildings.

We have townhomes, we have duplexes, we have triplexes, and it is a community.

You know your neighbors, people do stay longer in a community with small-scale development like what we have.

There's so much richness in our community, but we still have our historic homes, and we have people who for generations have been living in our neighborhood.

My neighbor, her grandmother owned my home.

She tells me stories of ditching school and trying to like bypass her grandma while she was out on her porch smoking cigarettes, right?

And that's my neighbor, and she's been there for generations.

And I just would encourage anybody to come to the Oakland historic neighborhood, come to the triangle where I live, go to FQ Story.

There is no reason that we cannot honor our heritage and maintain our historic buildings simply by saying we must have a preservation overlay to do so.

I live in that home.

I'm going to take care of that home.

We will preserve that home and its integrity and the historic nature that we love so much.

But I also do not want to prevent other folks my age from being able to buy a home like my husband and I were able to.

Mayor, I have a question from Molly.

Thank you, Councilmember Pestor.

So did I hear correctly that you're saying there doesn't need to be a historic designation?

Simply to encourage somebody to preserve their home.

Someone had said earlier that without that overlay, they were worried the entire neighborhood would decide to sell their homes and let them get ripped down.

So in order to be in a historic designation, it has to be 50% plus to have that.

So the neighborhoods that I'm thinking of, um, not FQ story, because they got demolished by the freeway, but um I'm thinking of the center core of uh the city, which is Palm Croft, Fairview, uh Willow, all the center core in that area, there's more.

Um, I just can't name them all.

Um Del Norte.

I'm I'm going.

Um, but in order, they're in the central core, and they have uh historic designation, and it's 50 plus, as I stated.

So if someone starts going through the neighborhood, I'll use mine in Canton Manor, um, and starts to just because they don't want the house or whatever, there's one in mine that just went in and said we're gonna remodel it and demolished it and wasn't enforced, didn't get uh enforcement didn't come in, and the fine that they got were 150.

If people do that or continue to do that in the encantal manner, we will go below 50.

The purpose of the historic neighborhood is is overlay is not only to preserve it, but it's also to continue to do the things that are needed in a historic home and the cost of it.

A historic home to maintain and to have is costly.

You know that.

I do, yeah.

And I don't get those same tax incentives.

So is that what this is about?

Maintain my home.

Not at all.

I think what I'm simply trying to encourage folks to understand is that people will preserve the history of Phoenix and their historic homes often on their own.

And if the concern is that the 50% threshold would make your historic neighborhood no longer designated historic, that happened in our neighborhood.

I can speak from experience in the triangle neighborhood.

We've had small cottages that have been developed, we've had duplexes, we've had small scale development to fit with our community, and we worked with our city council person.

We go to the Central City Village Planning Committee, we stay engaged all the time, not just because we don't have a historic designation.

But I don't think that's the issue.

And that's where where I'm I'm trying to get at.

I don't think that's the issue right now.

What do you think the issue is?

I guess is my question.

The issue is we have historic neighborhoods, we have a historic overlay.

It has been fought for for 20 years, and we want to preserve it.

I thought the issue was middle housing.

It is middle housing, but I am but but right now, yeah.

What I am hearing you say, it is middle housing, but it's affecting historic districts.

Historic districts already have triplexes, duplexes, they're there.

So it's the fourplexes that I think are probably not there.

There might be some in some some of the historic districts, but I know it's the triplexes and the duplexes for sure, especially in FQ story.

So they're there.

So I'm not understanding why middle housing had to be a mile outside of the the business of the downtown district.

Well, I think that we're building the infrastructure downtown.

I'm just I'm just when I heard you, I was more of like, so she's saying they shouldn't have a historic overlay.

No, not at all.

I just don't think that that is what the crux of this bill is.

I think it's middle housing.

I think that there's some voices here that are predominantly historic district, and I'm coming in and I'm saying from a non-historic district, but from an area where I live in a historic home, that there are solutions that can be found that aren't as scary as say some of the testimony that I've heard today.

Okay.

Thank you.

Appreciate you.

Thank you.

Tom is next, followed by Trisha, followed by Jim Huntworth.

Test test.

Can I get 10 minutes too?

Before I go on, um, I'd like to pose a question to you guys that maybe you can get answers sometime in the discussion here, and that is if we're to pass this legislation or this uh measure, um, what's to keep us from amending the law once we get the the analyses back from the studies that we're hoping to get.

So amending whatever law goes into effect as of the first uh to accommodate that.

So I'll leave that to you guys to maybe talk about.

My name is Tom Connors.

My wife and I moved into our house.

We rented for six months uh in the Willow District, and uh that was back in 1989.

So we're about 36 years in the neighborhood.

Um we we hear your story about um wanting to you know wanting to feel for the people who don't understand what that historic measure entails.

There's a cost involved in it, and it isn't just to the city or to um to anybody else, but to us and the m the amount of money that we put in money, time, love, and care that we put into our house over the past 36 years.

Um we my point I want to drill down on right now, though, is that is the cost and the affordability sort of question that goes on there.

Middle housing may indeed increase density, but let's be clear, it does not promote affordability.

And we've got a great example for that that just came online.

The reality is that housing is priced for the market, not for low or moderate income families, um, depending on where you are in the city.

Okay.

Developers may build more units, but they're unlikely to be affordable for those who need it.

Most instead, we could see the rise of luxury units or market rate uh apartments that push out the very people.

Am I already done?

Holy mackerel.

So I would ask the that you guys vote down the measure as it exists today, unless we can work out something that enables us to amend the overall measure to include historic districts and include a strong measure that allows those to maintain their their presence.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Trisha is next, followed by Jim.

Hello, Trisha Gillespie.

Um, I, of course, like others had something previously written, but uh the nature of the conversation here has sort of changed that.

So I hope I'm somewhat eloquent in what I want to say because um my head is a bit spinning.

The quoted average age of a first-time home buyer is not calibrated to Phoenix, it's not calibrated to Maricopa, it's not calibrated to Arizona.

That is a national figure that has hit the press.

It is not tracked here.

I have tried to find it, and I have been unsuccessful in getting it.

Moreover, to answer preemptively, a question that perhaps won't be raised to me, but I'm happy to share, is that the average age that we're currently at?

I was 11 months away from that when I bought my first home.

My parents bought their first home here.

That wasn't the case for them on the age.

The price that they paid compared to the price that I paid was 22 times more expensive.

Affordable housing is not a new age problem.

It is not a 2025 problem.

Does that mean we don't need to apply 2025 thoughts and policies and new ideas in order to change?

It's not what I'm saying.

What I'm saying is that our community, or what I want to continue with, as others have said, our community is diversified.

We are welcoming the idea that uh a member of this committee sat in front of all of us and told us that we needed to go back to a lobbyist because that's what the lobbyists said need to happen.

You need to do better.

You need to do better because you yes, lobbyists have access to you.

Yes, it is part of the system.

Is it a stain on our government?

I think it is, but it's here, and yes, they exist.

But you need to be better than just promoting the spec the lobbyist position.

What I shared in the last meeting is what happened in the process.

My comments weren't to go back to the lobbyists and restate.

Can you hear me there?

Good evening.

Thank you for uh participating in our meeting.

We will be in about five more minutes before we start again.

And that's the right one.

Thank you so much.

Council meeting will reconvene.

Thank you for your patience.

The team was trying to be responsive and get answers to questions that have been asked.

And we will have some answers after we conclude public comment to those for which we have answers.

We will begin with virtual public comment.

We'll begin with Mike Jell, followed by Will Green.

Followed by Ted Swing.

All right.

Hello, Mayor and Council.

Thank you for your time.

I'm uh Mike Yale.

Last year I moved to Phoenix for work as an energy scientist.

And after living anonymously in a large apartment complex, I spent a few months in a small Spanish colonial A Plex courtyard downtown.

Actually pretty close to Emily on Fillmore, I think.

Um and that experience really showed me how human-scaled housing can create real opportunity.

You know, I actually knew my neighbors, which is you know, pretty rare in a sprawling city where most people live far apart from each other.

So I'm speaking in support of items 71 and 72.

Um, you know, tonight's vote is about bringing Phoenix into compliance with state law within one mile of downtown, and I support doing that thoughtfully.

I also appreciate that council has influence over design standards and infrastructure and how new homes fit into historic areas, uh, particularly through smart development incentives that can ensure growth happens responsibly.

Um but of course I want to acknowledge the concerns we're hearing from residents in Willow and Coronado.

Um, you know, their pride in their neighborhoods is real and valid.

And personally, I love going on my morning walks through LL nearly every day.

Um, but I think what we're missing here is that this new law has the potential to improve the lives of tens of thousands of people, you know, pars possibly far more that are living outside those historic districts, but still within the one mile radius.

And you know, these are people who we benefit tremendously from more flexible community-oriented housing options near transit, jobs and infrastructure.

Um so giving given our worsening housing crisis, I suggest the council expedite a study into where middle housing may make sense citywide.

And I suspect we'd find many benefits and few drawbacks, especially for things like health affordability and community vibrancy.

So yeah, I commend everyone for being here all afternoon and performing your civic duty.

Uh it's becoming increasingly important.

So yeah, thank you for time.

Thank you.

Will is next.

Um and then Ted Swing is available uh to speak if necessary, so we'll see if he wishes to speak.

Uh Will, the floor is yours.

Council.

Uh my name is Will Green.

I live in Central Phoenix, and I'm speaking today on behalf of Southwest Energy Efficiency Project or SWEEP.

Um in support of expanding the middle housing uh overlay beyond the bare minimum required in state law.

As is being done in other major Arizona cities such as Tucson and Flagstaff.

We're moving towards allowing uh the middle uh middle housing citywide.

I was excited to see such broad support amongst public commenters on November 5th uh for expanding the middle housing overlay beyond the bare minimum and uh even citywide, albeit uh you know uh supporters uh had different uh motivations for that.

Well, council member Stark's motion uh will lead to a genuine examination of expanding the middle housing boundary.

It will not will not just be used as a delay for more process um as the people struggle to find housing.

I I want to address the concern uh that middle housing won't deliver on affordability.

Well, new construction is uh a class A product that can be expensive.

Uh mounting body of evidence from Pew, Sweep and uh myorization and others uh is showing that cities who are adding housing at a rapid clip, such as Minneapolis and Houston are seeing the steepest rent declines within existing class C properties.

And that's because new construction results in less people competing for existing housing stock.

Um the housing market is a game of musical chairs as why it becomes constrained.

Competition over the remaining inventory uh becomes more fierce.

And expanding the middle housing overlay would mean adding chairs to that equation, making room for everyone and providing the best rent declines for existing uh lower income renters.

Thanks so much for your time.

Thank you.

Uh Ted, you're registered to speak if necessary.

Would you like to speak?

And Cheryl will be uh next, uh yes.

Yes, uh, this is Ted.

All right, go ahead.

Um, Madam Mayor and City Councillors, I appreciate the opportunity to speak here.

Um I just wanted to say that I, you know, we've heard from a lot of homeowners in Phoenix and longtime homeowners, and I think that's a good thing.

I think they are a good thing.

Um, you know, but they're a success story.

Um my view though is that you know the next generations want to have that same opportunity um to have success themselves, and you know, they were able to succeed because they were able to climb up the ladders of you know the ladder of opportunity, and you know, people need things like uh middle housing, those are sort of rungs on that ladder, and if we don't allow that to be built, then they'll be stuck.

That's basically what's happening right now, and the result is rising rents, rising home prices, people being priced out, forced to move further out, and uh even you know causing greater homelessness.

So I would support the overlay being expanded.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Cheryl is next, followed by Linda.

Cheryl McGregor is next.

Uh Cheryl, the floor is yours.

Okay, uh Cheryl.

Oh, now we got you.

Yeah.

Do you?

Okay, now we can well can you hear me now?

We can hear you now.

Okay, because it keeps has the microphone marked off, so I can't tell if it's coming through or not.

Um, I hadn't really planned on speaking, but I from what I've heard tonight.

I'm gonna suggest that the city council take a road trip to Lynnwood, just west of Seventh Avenue, um, and look at three homes that have been affected by the ADU bill.

We haven't even got to the middle housing bill yet.

These houses sold from anywhere from 440,000 to 500,000 each.

They've been completely gutted, just leaving the front.

All the windows have been removed.

They are redoing the inside, basically knocking down walls and turning it into the same thing you'd get in one of those cookie cutter apartment buildings.

In the backyard, there is no backyard left because they put garages and an ADU back there.

This is not going to be affordable housing.

They're gonna charge as much for these as you pay for some of those apartment buildings.

Um, but they won't even have the benefit of a pool and an exercise room.

Um these have taken over the neighborhood.

It started with one house and now it's three of them.

This has been going on since that ADU bill went in effect at the beginning of the year.

Um, and they're still fenced off.

Um, so I need people to understand that when they keep saying middle housing is going to be more affordable.

It'll never be affordable if they're paying an arm and a leg to start with.

They're gonna want their money back, and we've already had an investor problem.

Our neighborhood already has middle housing.

We have little apartment buildings, um, like for three or four uh units, and we have duplexes dotted all throughout the neighborhood.

Those are actually affordable because they've been here forever.

My parents bought our house for 20,000 in 73.

This neighborhood was one step above a ghetto back then, and it's the historic neighborhoods that brought back downtown.

It wasn't the arena because people would come in and they would leave right after.

We were the ones who demanded things for down here.

We were the ones who fought for it, and now the developers like that because we've done all the work and they want to come in and basically profit off our work and drive us out.

Linda is next, followed by Cameron.

Linda, you're not available.

Linda, you're on.

We can hear you, Linda.

Oh, that doesn't need it.

Linda.

Okay, Linda, you're testifying now.

We can all hear you.

Linda.

I don't need to talk in.

I think it's me.

Okay, I think Linda's not ready to testify.

Cameron is next.

Good evening.

Thank you, Mayor and City Council.

I come before you today in a unique position being a former city planning student.

Informed by my studies, I understand that our country and cities have not adequately considered the value of middle housing.

Such developments can be a crucial element of building communities of reasonable density accessible to all.

You've heard about that.

At the same time, however, it is important to recognize that our historic districts already possess values important to our cities, such as heritage and walkability.

Thankfully, all of these values are not in conflict and should complement each other.

I have witnessed and even lived in historic homes, which have been successfully converted to middle housing.

I understand there is only so much you can do at this point.

What I do ask is that you support efforts to amend the middle housing law to include protections for historic districts.

Furthermore, respectful conversion of historic properties to middle housing should be encouraged in the amendment.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you.

Jason Barr is next, followed by Tammy Weaver.

And Jason, you're registered to speak if necessary.

Would you like to speak?

Oh, I'm sorry, you are registered just to speak.

Yeah, uh Jason Barr Valley Urban Action Alliance.

Um, I have some facts to share today, and I support missing middle housing citywide.

Uh want to explain supply and demand a little bit.

Uh MIT in 2021.

Uh, they had a framework that showed upzoning needs to hire local housing supply and lower rents across the entire city.

Thus, our findings show that upzoning is an effective policy for increasing housing supply, which all else equal leads to lower rents in the entire city.

That's my T.

I'd like to talk about inflation and cost burden over time.

We've had a lot of people talking about that.

Uh the median price of new houses sold in 1988, 1985 was 84,300 or 3.6 times the median income.

In 2000, the ratio of home prices to median income would be four, reached four for the first time.

And by 2023, it had climbed to 5.3.

So I hear a lot of people talking about how they're hustling.

Um, you know, they hustle, they work so hard.

But you know, wouldn't you, you know, if you're on the city council, wouldn't you want to work on changing that a little bit?

Wouldn't you it's first of all, it's worse now, as I just demonstrated, but you know, why are you here if you don't want to make this a little bit better for people?

Uh furthermore, things like college education and methods to get into these jobs, jobs that they've gotten worse.

Um, USA facts, the price the average college student pays for a year of school has risen 59% since 2000, and wages lag behind the rise in tuition.

Um last thing is homeowners have talked about they lose all sorts of money um on their homes.

Uh University of Utah in 2021 did a study that found apartments built between 2010 and 2018 have not reduced single family home values in suburban Salt Lake County.

So those are just some of the facts that refute some of the speakers and things they've said.

You should really be working on making things affordable, um, honoring our future as well as our past.

Um, a past that I should uh let you that I should remind people where there was a lot looser restrictions on buildings uh across this country.

So you should also honor our future and uh the facts that people is next, followed by Nicole Sanderson.

Can you hear me?

We can hear me.

Yes.

Okay.

Um so everyone keeps talking about affordability.

In your mind, does that mean rental properties or actual home ownership?

Let's be real.

Developers champion to spill all over the state legislature.

Not because they suddenly sprouted kind hearts, but surprise, they like making money.

If this initiative was a slam dunk for everyone, we wouldn't need a law to twist arms and sprinkle incentives and tax breaks like confetti.

It's crucial for the city to keep a watchful eye so we don't end up with luxury cardboard boxes and Airbnbs instead of quality homes.

People can actually afford.

Let's put homeownership center stage instead of renting.

Owning a home doesn't just give you a roof, it gives you a starring role in your neighborhood, a shot at the American dream.

Focus only on rentals and you're building a paradise for developers and investors.

Everyone else is just paying rent and not getting a ticket to home ownership for wealth building.

Phoenix rental properties have multiplied like rabbits, while homeownership has been stuck in a slow lane, waving at the rentals speeding by.

More folks are pushed into renting because they can't afford to buy.

Let's tame the runaway rental stampede and help people grab house keys.

After all, when you own your home, you don't just care about the law and you care about the whole block.

I would much rather see the city help residents with buying homes than enriching developers further.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you so much.

Nicole is next.

Hi.

Good evening, Nicole Sanderson, 100 East Killmore.

I support middle housing citywide as a three change that will result in more housing production over time.

I grew up in a duplex.

My parents and I lived above my grandma who had health issues.

Later we moved out.

My aunt put the upstairs unit until my grandma died as an adult.

And my grandfather got Alzheimer's, I converted my single family row house into a duplex.

Working full-time, I acted as my own general contractor to save money.

That city allowed middle housing by right, so I got my permit without a problem.

I spent far less on that renovation plus full-time aids than I would have on assisted living.

And it was better for my grandfather.

He lived downstairs until he died.

But I have other aging family members.

Becoming a microdeveloper like I did is attainable.

By right, middle housing is a low-hanging fruit in this housing crisis.

Unless you guys have another plan that would add more units at less cost to the city, you should vote this citywide and build on that with other solutions as well.

People with older mortgages are stuck in their properties now.

The least we can do is allow families flexibility to invest in their own with their own money in more housing.

Other Arizona City Planning Department approve and codify or make binding historic neighborhood design guidelines that are more strict than ours on a neighborhood basis.

And it's unnecessary conflict between middle housing and district preservation will be solved.

Additionally, like Claire said, you can announce and notice another public meeting about this topic to expand the boundary citywide if you would like.

Could our team help me?

We had a ton of people who have dropped off, and I am okay.

Okay.

Um so our staff has shared that that is the last one.

So I will close the public hearing.

And I believe.

Well, why don't we start?

Um, could I ask the city attorney?

We got a lot of questions about we should do a 90-day delay.

Could you read to us what the what does the legislation say if we did a 90 delay?

What happens on January 1?

Yes, thank you, Mayor.

So ARS 9462.13 um section E states that if a municipality does not adopt the regulations required by this section on or before January 1st, 2026, middle housing shall be allowed on all lots in the municipality zone for single family residential use without any limitations.

Okay, so depending on your perspective politically, it's a citywide application, which some people have testified in favor of.

However, at the at the city, we like to go out and talk to the neighbors and give them the chance to have input, and most of the city has not had input on that happening in their neighborhood.

And then other depending on your political perspective, some people can have referred to this as a poison pill.

Again, depending on your political spectrum, that brings this to lots of neighborhoods that haven't had input.

Okay.

Who would like to go first?

Councilman Pestor.

Yes.

Um, we heard a number of things.

Uh the 90-day delay.

Um the 90-day delay uh we just heard.

Um, I want to know about the sunset clause.

A sunset clause was spoken as I was talking to you guys.

I was told that um you cannot change your legal opinion, but I don't know if I'm asking you to change your legal opinion.

So I would like to know uh why we can't put a sunset clause.

So, mayor, members of council, um, we have discussed some of these issues in executive session, and we need to caution council about um staff sharing a legal opinion publicly, as that could expose us to liability.

Okay, so you're saying you're not gonna answer my question basically.

Um can you rephrase your question and ask it in a way that staff can answer without talking about our legal opinion?

I would like to add a sunset clause.

Is that possible?

Mayor, members of council, you can certainly um council can certainly take any action.

Okay, all right.

So um councilwoman Stark, I would like to add a add to your motion if possible, and um I will read this ordinance and its amendments shall remain in effect only so long as the requirements of the ARS HB 2127 21 citation continue to apply to the city of Phoenix.

Should the state of Arizona enact legislation, administrative rule or formal guidance that exemps municipalities design historic districts from the provision of HB 2721, the provision of this ordinance relating to those districts shall automatically sunset and be of no further force or effect on the effective date of such exemption upon sunset, all prior zoning regulations applicable to the historic districts shall be reinstated without further council action.

So I it sounds to me like you've written it that we would do it if the legislature said we could do it.

We just can't sunset it on our own.

The legislature would have to take some action.

The second uh concill have some concerns with the 1487, but I see you're trying to make it um that we won't do anything unless the legislature allows us.

The one concern I have is that if we sunset, don't we still have to have some kind of hearing to do away with it?

I think there's been some case law in the past that says you can't just automatically delete zoning without at least a hearing.

Mayor members of the council, that's correct.

The the procedure would be to initiate a rezone of the property to reflect the changes.

Okay, yeah, that's what I thought.

I thought there had been case law, at least when I was practicing and planning, there were some consider some cases that dealt with consideration reconsiderations, and I think the law was pretty clear that you still have to have a uh another hearing, even if you do a reconsideration, it doesn't automatically go away.

So um I guess I'm still a little troubled in doing a sunset clause.

I just but I don't know as long as it's not saying we're just automatically gonna do it.

So if we could I'll change that, clarify that clarify that piece.

Well, and so I think uh councilman says a procedural question, and and I do as well.

Well, the legislature enacts session law 90 days after they leave session unless there's an emergency clause.

I have uh so which could be faster.

Right.

I have tried to speak with several legislators, and and many believe, especially if the neighborhood stays engages they are that we could pass uh protection for the historic neighborhoods, but no one with whom I have spoken thinks we could get to the threshold for a emergency clause.

So that means no matter what, there would be 90 days after session ends before the legislature, which seems like it would give us time to go through our traditional process.

I don't know, I don't know if we should maybe ask our government affair or we have two former legislators.

Is that is that accurate?

Yeah, I mean, do you think if the well I I would like to share my opinion looking at the political landscape?

I do not think there's a path to get the exemption built in at the state.

If that happens, though, yeah, if you don't have an emergency clause, it would be it would take effect 90 days after session ends.

Session is probably gonna end any time after June, probably June 30th, so it'd be 90 days from there.

So that puts July, August, September, September effective date on that.

But my procedural question that I think before we even get into this piece, my understanding procedurally, we're only allowed one friendly amendment, which I believe I tape I brought that at the beginning before public comment.

So is that procedurally changes?

The second has not yet accepted the friendly amendment.

So technically the motion on the table is still the original one, but Julie, you want to speak to friendly amendments.

Yes, so Mayor and Council, so you are allowed no more than one amendment to a motion if it's a substitute motion.

Um a friendly amendment if it's accepted by the maker, and the second shall not count as an official amendment.

But you know, keep in mind too, the the purpose of a friendly amendment is to make minor modifications or clarifications.

So if it's you know goes beyond that, then it should be considered a substitute.

That made no sense to me, but um, I'm assuming uh councilwoman Stark.

I'm asking um in this in this uh what I just asked.

I would um actually I'm just gonna do a substitute motion.

I'm gonna do the substitute motion of what I said, and uh, should I read it again?

Please so this plus yours.

Um the provision of this ordinance that modified municipality zoning authority within the city designated historic districts are temporary and contingent upon the continued applicability of HB 2721.

If at any time the state of Arizona clarifies through statute, rulemaking, attorney general opinion, or other formal mechanism, the historic districts are exempt from HB 2721.

These provisions shall immediately terminate following termination, the city's pre-existing zoning.

This is where it changed.

After following legislation, it goes into effect 90 days.

Including the regional, right?

Yes.

Then um to approve item 71 per planning commission recommendation that staff return to the city council for authorization to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the Morrison Institute of Arizona State University to conduct a study that will address the following assessment of the impacts of the middle housing law, including the demand on infrastructure and urban services, two recommendation for potential areas, expanding middle housing overlay to strategic areas in the city beyond the state law requirements with the goal of advancing affordability, three incentive strategies to encourage the development of middle housing units with an emphasis on affordability, four analysis of other regulatory or policy updates needed beyond zoning regulations to encourage middle housing development, and five for it to be done to return back in a year.

December mayor, councilwoman Pastor, if you'd like to add a date that that would be fine.

What would the date be?

December 2026.

Okay.

By the end of 2026.

December 2026.

That's my motion.

Second.

All right.

So that is now the motion on the table.

Councilwoman Stark.

Thank you.

I I appreciate your motion.

I still worry about the 1487 and I still worry about Prop 207 implications.

So I feel comfortable staying with the original motion.

Okay.

Well, we have to vote on the second motion.

Okay.

Um Vice Mayor O'Brien had had a question earlier.

If someone in reference to the legislation could explain with what out limitation means.

It certainly could imply that no zoning regulations would be able to be enforced on the property.

Sorry, it was a lot to Okay.

Should the state of Arizona enact legislation, administrative rule, or formal guidance that exemps you miss you municipalities, designated historic district from the provision of HB twenty seven twenty-one, the provision of this ordinance relating to those districts shall automatically sunset and be of no further force or effect on the effective date of which the exemption of such exemption.

So it is six fifty.

What uh why don't we recess until seven?

So Josh, Alan, Julie, and John, you have it.

Kiutin Suthern.

Kiinässä Kultäjälte.

Kinnocken.

Kulaskin Rekolin, että Rolin Sauf.

All right, we will reconvene in thirty seconds.

Welcome back to the Phoenix City Council meeting.

Thank you for your patience.

We are trying in real time to incorporate community feedback.

So the motion on the floor is Councilwoman Pastor's motion.

Do any members of the body have questions on that?

I just rather go to a vote.

All right.

So now then we will go to roll call.

I just really appreciate the feedback and the creativity in Councilwoman Pastor trying to fight for her neighborhoods.

But I commit that I would be a yes vote to repeal this, should or to change this, should the legislature exempt historic districts.

Does anyone else wish to speak?

Roll call.

Yes.

No.

Hodge Washington.

Mayor, can I find that locally?

I will be voting no for a couple of reasons.

I most importantly is I don't believe the sunset clause is necessary.

And I think that the matter itself would be preempted by the legislature if that was the case, similar to the situation we're in right now.

And I question the authority to do the retroactive application.

And I'm hesitant to do this in a manner that will somehow bring the legislature to play with 10 that this is a violation of our state statute and subject as to a four three eighty-five.

I'm sorry, the ordinance case.

If that is the case, does actually exist, but the motion is currently written.

I am not in favor of it.

So I will be voted.

Thank you, Mayor.

Pastor.

Yes.

Robinson.

No.

Stark.

Yeah.

Warren.

O'Brien.

I apologize.

She said no.

Thank you.

No.

Fails two to seven.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

And thank you to everyone who's participated in this.

We have a lot of work to do to make sure there's more affordable housing, and we would love to do it in partnership with neighborhoods and the legislature with a full thought-out process.

Speaking for myself, the historic neighborhoods are wonderful, and we are we are blessed to have them as they are right now.

And I do not think they should bear a disproportionate burden to addressing our affordable housing challenges, which are not just a Phoenix challenge, they are an Arizona challenge, and they are a U.S.

challenge.

The motion on the table right now, uh, Councilwoman Stark has accepted the friendly amendment to do the study in a year.

Yeah, the time has given us a chance to tech with ASU.

They think as long as we can get the data sharing agreement done expeditiously, that a year is realistic.

Uh the second needs to agree.

Yes.

So now the motion on the table is councilwoman Starks with trying to get the study done in a year.

Does anyone wish to speak before we vote?

Okay, roll call.

Yes.

And then this.

Mayor.

All members recognized to explain your vote.

Thank you.

Um, as a country and a city, we are in a housing crisis.

We simply do not have enough housing for everyone, and this creates a cascade of challenges for our communities.

I have been a huge supporter of finding more ways to increase housing in our state.

When I was at the state legislature, I was proud to champion the statewide ADU bill, and I'm proud that I got to work on the middle housing bill that pushed Phoenix to change our zoning laws to allow more middle housing.

Over the last month, my office has received so many comments from Phoenix residents.

Some have been very encouraging, and some have been straight up racist and classist and reflect a really ugly side of Phoenix.

I'd like to highlight one of those emails I received from a resident who opposes this ordinance.

Um, this is what the email says.

I want you to imagine that I am the latest keeper of a bejeweled crown.

It's made of natural jewels of many brilliant colors and cuts.

Over time, and for the sake of affordability, I began adding cut uh cut glass stones known as cubic zirconia to the crown.

As time passes, the fake stones begin to show their age, while the real jewels maintain their magnificent magnificent.

I then reflect if only someone had advised me that changing the composition of the crown would devalue it.

I would never have made that decision.

This is the part that really got me.

Changing the composition of our historic districts by allowing middle housing intruders to dwell in our historic spaces is now up to you.

Thought that was very interesting.

As we build our future, we must be honest about our history, especially when it comes to zoning and how it has been a tool for racial and economic segregation.

Phoenix, like many American cities, has an ugly, painful legacy of races, racist zoning laws and practices that still shape our current landscape.

In 1925, the Phoenix Real Estate Board formalized racial segregation by bearing bearing barring realtors from introducing members of any race, race detrimental to property values in that neighborhood.

This code prevented African Americans from purchasing homes in more desirable areas north of downtown and resulted in covenants that allowed only white renters and owners.

Those restrictive covenants are still allowed in our great state.

And it wasn't until 2024 that the legislature finally passed legislation that created a path for property owners to have the ability to remove those covenants from their deeds.

Those are not accidents of history.

They are product of deliberate policy choices that perpetuated segregation and generational inequity.

The effects are still visible today.

Communities of color continue to face housing instability, rising rents, and displacement pressures as our city grows.

For too long, our city's zoning and housing policies have prioritized exclusion rather than access.

Exclusion that actively reinforces inequities that have limited where black, brown, and working family and working class families can live, build, and thrive.

The establishment of a middle housing overlay district is a long overdue move toward repairing that history, allowing duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and other diverse housing types in areas prevalent previously restricted to single family zoning, helps us create more inclusive, affordable and connected neighborhoods.

Middle housing was once abundant, not just in Phoenix, but across Arizona and the nation.

Zoning laws changed that and made them illegal.

This ordinance not only encourages the creation of more homes, but it also creates a path where mom and pop builders from the community can actually build our community.

And it will bring more opportunities for new homeowners into the Phoenix housing market.

A market where the average home is over half a million dollars.

This isn't experimental.

At least six states, Oregon, California, Washington, Maine, Montana, and Vermont have already moved to end exclusive single family zoning and allow duplexes, tripexes, or fourplexes on lots that used to be limited to one home.

And according to UC Berkeley's zoning reform tracker, there are now nearly three dozen cities and counties across the country, places like Minneapolis, Portland, Charlotte, Spokane, Buffalo, Gainesville, Grand Rapids, San Francisco, Berkeley, Alexandria, Arlington, and Montgomery County in Maryland that have abduct that have adopted similar middle housing reforms, and the results are the same.

Slow incremental change, no bulldozers, no upheaval, no destruction of neighborhoods.

The fearsome race simply haven't materialized anywhere.

This ordinance won't solve our housing pro housing crisis on its own, but it begins to open doors that were intentionally closed for decades.

As a council member, I am just as committed now as I was at the state legislature to make bold decisions to address our housing crisis and look forward to working with my colleagues here at the city of Phoenix to make citywide changes to our housing policy.

As a council, we have the responsibility to continue to advocate for more equitable housing practices, tenant protections, and anti-displacement measures.

This ordinance is not the end of the work, but it is a vital step toward justice, access, and a Phoenix where every resident has a place to call home.

A Phoenix where everyone can thrive and where we value the character of the people in our neighborhoods over the buildings in those neighborhoods.

I vote yes.

Thank you.

I'll explain my vote.

Um I will begin by noting that I still do not believe that zoning is a matter that should be handled by our legislative partners.

It should be zoned and should be handled on the local level, on the municipal level.

If that was done in this situation, we would not be here today.

We would not be dealing with this disruption.

I am I am one of the individuals I consider self myself a housing advocate, but I really think we need to do things in a manner that makes that have been actually tested and have full interest from our community.

The middle housing ordinance, although it may have great intention, it is really experimental when it comes to affordability.

I want to start off.

I want to also acknowledge two those um homeowners that showed up today.

Thank you.

Thank you for voicing your concerns.

That is what the process is supposed to look like.

As we hold these, as we held this public comment, we see that this is truly important to our community.

My office has received hundreds of emails and calls, which shows that this is a complex issue, which should have involved our neighborhoods to ensure responsible development.

I want to start also and say that I appreciate the work from our planning commission, the val the village planning committee, and our planning and development staff.

Within these within the state regulations, they've created a framework that we have to legally oblige it, otherwise we face uh we face the consequences.

I wish this was not the case moving forward.

I would call for actual collaboration by our legislative partners.

Our residents who deserve both predictability and transparency.

They deserve a voice in this case and in this room in this mover forward.

With that being said, I don't want to jeopardize our I don't want to jeopardize our our funding to the city so that we can continue to move forward.

But I would all I just want to make sure that it's clear to our legislative partners that let us partner, let us collaborate.

It is not helpful, as you can see, to just simply make these changes one-sidedly.

I will vote yes because we need to conform with state law, but I would again ask my state partners to work with us, not against this.

Thank you.

Pastor.

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark.

Yes, and I'll see you at the legislature.

Warren?

I guess I'd like to explain my vote, Mayor.

Uh, first, I've in 14 years, I'm I never cease to be amazed at how little influence city as a whole seems to have with the legislature that makes sense.

Um, particularly no sense now that the governor is not Doug Ducy, where I might understand, but it's Katie Hobbs.

I said that earlier and it kind of got poo-pooed.

She didn't have to sign this.

And what I don't understand is the arguments that people made to her to say this makes sense.

City of Phoenix is 500 plus square miles, and we're talking about one square mile, but actually a third of it already has this product.

So you're really talking about two-thirds of one mile of an entity that's over 500 square miles.

I I don't like, and that's gonna solve the affordable housing crisis.

I've also got some news.

We have it in District 2.

And you know what it's not?

Affordable.

It's just not gonna be.

I mean, that you know, we could argue all day about whether government's capable of solving that problem so far, you know.

We can't make baby boomers move out of their houses.

We can't I mean there's just a lot of factors there that are beyond people's control.

Um, but I I this was not gonna solve anything, but we had to do what we had to do.

You heard what the lawyers said.

That 1487 thing, if it sounds like government gobbledygook, you guys are still here in the audience.

I can assure you it's not.

They bring that hammer down and we lose hundreds of millions of dollars that we use for police and parks and fire and roads.

That that's not something messing around with.

So I'm sorry you guys wind up in this situation, but there really was no alternative.

I do think from some of your comments that that um is now understood.

So hopefully this will get addressed by the legislators who wrote the letter um in the spring, but it's gonna be a while before it's undone for sure.

So I appreciate the time, Mayor.

Thank you, and I vote yes.

O'Brien.

Yes, gallego.

Yes, passes nine zero.

Thank you so much.

Next we go to item 72.

Do we have a motion?

I move to approve the item for the planning commission recommendation and adopt the related ordinance.

Second.

We have a motion and second.

Would anyone like to comment?

Roll call.

Yes.

Hodge Washington.

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Wearing?

Yes.

O'Brien.

Yes.

Gallego.

Yes.

Passes nine-zero.

That concludes our agenda's business.

We now move to public comment, and I'll turn to our very busy city attorney to introduce this.

Thank you, Mayor.

During the citizen comment, members of the public may speak to the city council for up to three minutes on issues of interest or concern.

However, the matters addressed must be within the jurisdiction of the Phoenix City Council, and on which the council has the authority to act.

The citizen comment session is limited to 30 minutes.

The Arizona Open Meeting Law allows the city council to listen to comments but prohibits council members from discussing or acting on the issues presented.

However, council members may respond to criticism.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I do not see Jerry, and I do not see Leonard.

It's my birthday.

I'm meeting your uh Raul.

Followed by Janae.

Thank you.

Good evening, everyone.

My name is Raul Burkrine, and I'm a passenger service assistant at Skyarbo International Airport.

I have mixed shoe passenger to who need a wheelchair assistant.

Get around the airport safely to the gate.

I enjoy my job and I like working at the airport.

Skybro is uh thriving a business is booming.

Last year, we broke records for total passengers in a single single year.

A lot of that was thanks to our making aligned.

Airport service workers are essential to the success of our airport, but we see little in return.

We are paid poverty wages and struggle.

Me personally, I have to work two jobs just to be able to keep food on the table.

Pay rents and pay our bills.

I want to be able to spend more time with my family and give them a good life.

But unfortunately, I can't because of how low wages.

Mayor Kajigo and Council members, I'm struggling.

And I'm not alone.