Good afternoon, thank you for joining us.

We'll begin with an invocation from police chaplain Fezmeyer.

You are welcome to join me in prayer.

Almighty God, protector of our protectors, Heavenly Father.

Thank you for today and opportunity to live for something greater than ourselves.

Thank you for those who serve, who lead, protect, and bring life to this city.

Grant wisdom, understanding, and discernment to all who will receive this divine gift.

And may we act justly, love mercy, and walk humbly before you in all the words and actions of this day.

For we pray this in your most holy name.

Amen.

Councilwoman O'Brien, would you lead us in the pledge?

I'll now call to order the formal meeting of the Phoenix City Council.

Will the clerk call the roll?

Councilwoman Guardado.

Here.

Councilwoman Hernandez.

Here.

Councilwoman O'Brien.

Here.

Councilwoman Pastor.

Here.

Councilman Robinson?

Here.

Councilwoman Stark?

Here.

Councilman Waring.

Vice Mayor Hodge Washington?

Here.

Mayor Gallego.

Here.

Also want to welcome all the people in the room, but also Sonny the Dog, a four-legged member of Team Phoenix, who is with us.

And we'll get to hear from or see in item 35.

Mario Barajas is here with us to provide Spanish interpretation.

Would you introduce your team, Mario?

Yes, Mayor, thank you.

Good afternoon.

My name is Mario Barajas.

I'll be teaming up today with uh El C Duarte, who will be uh will be serving as uh today's Spanish interpreters.

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

When I started, you're so Mario Barajasy.

Thank you so much, Mario.

Would the city clerk please 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 number G seven five zero one through seven five zero seven s five two six nine eight five two seven two seven through five two seven seven zero and resolutions two two three six seven through two two three six nine.

Thank you so much.

Will the city attorney please explain the role of public comment?

Yes, 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 in 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.

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.

Such comments 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.

Thank you so much.

We have a great group here for boards and commissions.

Vice Mayor, do we have an open uh a motion?

Yes.

Motion to approve Mayor and City Council and Boards and Commission nominations.

Motion and second.

All those in favor please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed, nay.

Congratulations on your unanimous confirmation.

Thank you again for your service to our city.

Please raise your right hand.

I state your name.

Do solemnly swear.

You can solemnly swear.

That I will support the Constitution of the United States.

I will support the Constitution of the United States.

And the Constitution and Laws of the State of Arizona.

And the Constitution and the laws of the state of Arizona.

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

And defend them against all enemies.

And then defend them against all enemies.

Foreign and domestic.

And then I will faithfully and impartially and partially discharge the duties of the office of duty for the office of Ford Order and the voice 40 later.

According to the best of my ability.

So help me God.

Thank you for serving our city.

Congratulations.

If you'll go behind the council, would like to thank you personally.

Congratulations.

The City of Phoenix provides an advisory role to the state of Arizona on liquor licenses, and we'll turn to that portion of our agenda next.

Vice Mayor, do we have a motion?

Motion to approve items two through twelve, except for 12.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

All those in favor, please say aye.

Aye.

Any opposed?

Passes unanimously.

Item 12 is in Councilwoman Stark's district.

I do not see any speakers on this item.

I'll turn to the councilwoman.

Thank you, uh, Mayor.

So it appears that this applicant has not resolved all the pending city voting uh permit and use permit requirements.

And so um we've also gotten a slew of letters of opposition, so I would like to recommend approval based on those uh two facts.

And I'm sorry, just to confirm you said recommend approval.

You said I say approval denial.

I'm sorry.

You can tell I'm still not back from home yet.

Do you want disapproval?

Do you want to approve move to disapprove?

I can't.

I'm sorry.

Do you want to make a motion to disapprove?

Yeah, and when I'm sorry, I want to make a motion to recommend disapproval based on the two facts.

Second.

We have a motion and second.

Any comments?

Roll call.

Yes.

Hernandez?

Yes.

O'Brien?

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Waring?

Hodge Washington?

Yes.

May you go.

Yes.

Passes nine zero.

City clerk, we read it for ordinances, resolutions, new business planning, and zoning.

Yes, Mayor.

Motion to approve items 13 through 74, except for the following.

Item 25, 30, 35, 41, 43, 50, 72, 73, and 74.

Note in that item 24 is as corrected for the memo of the human resources director dated April 8th, 2026.

Item 31 is being continued to May 6, 2026.

Item 74 has additional information.

And can the clerk confirm whether any other items that should be excluded for in-person public comments?

Yes, Mayor, Vice Mayor.

Also excluding item 54.

That's item 54.

Second.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We have motion and a second roll call.

Yes.

Hernandez?

Yes.

O'Brien.

Yes.

Pastor.

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Waring?

Hodge Washington?

Yes.

There you go.

Yes.

Passes 9-0.

We next turn to item 25, which is an authorization to enter into a contract with Father Matters Incorporated for youth crime prevention services.

We do have one member of the public to comment.

Mr.

Harris, the floor is yours.

Go ahead and speak now.

Please go ahead, Mr.

Harris.

Okay.

Um first of all, I never thought I'd uh come in here and actually be against you guys giving funds to a uh foundation or an organization.

Um but I am here to say that I uh urge this council to vote no on giving the funding the father's matters.

Um I don't think that they are capable of running this uh plan.

And to be honest, if I went and lost Jacob on January 11, 2019, we wouldn't even be in here talking about this funding for this father's matters.

Um I believe this funding came from my hard work and dedication of losing my son to make sure that no more youth are lost to the city.

I work diligent with the with the uh assistant city manager and the former city manager on finding funds to fund a youth program, and to find out that this money is going to be going to a program that has no capabilities of taking care of these youth in the city is sad.

Um I truly believe that being dedicated to saving these kids' lives, you have to be 100% committed, not 50% committed.

My father used to always tell me you can't be a jack of all trades and a master of none.

So when you come in here and you say that they want to save these kids, the last time they had anything to do with youth was in 2008.

So I like to ask them what changed since 2008 to 2026.

1.5 million dollars.

So I say you guys need to find a better foundation and for and put this money in, somebody that's 100% decayed to these children because it's not a five-month program.

When you make a commitment to these youth of the city, be a mentor is for life.

There are no business hours on being a mentor.

That is a 24-hour seven-day a week commitment.

So if someone is not prepared to make that commitment, then I say you guys vote no.

If you guys think a foundational organization could be successful with 50% commitment, then vote yes.

If you know that that isn't possible, then vote no.

Do not give them the funds.

Mayor Councilman Hernandez.

Thank you.

Uh Mr.

Harris, would you mind saying up there?

I just have a couple questions for you.

Uh, thank you so much for uh being here.

Um would you be willing to share a little bit about your personal story with us about your family and your son specifically?

Um, you know, we have pretty similar stories, and I think um I believe that if you share that, it could it would add very important context to your your testimony.

Jacob was shot in the back twice and murdered by Phoenix Peace Police Department's uh Christopher Burts.

Jacob was involved as an arm robbery and the sad situation that made me go to this work, was the only person, the only child that had a father in their life at that time was Jacob.

His three friends did not have any fathers in their lives, they didn't have any mentors in their lives, they didn't have any adult supervision that they needed.

So I made a commitment to make sure that no more youth do this, and as well as I fought for seven years to try to get those three kids out of prison.

So if you don't have that type of dedication to these youth in this city, please sit down because I like to ask fathers matters where the heck were you guys at these last seven years when we've been in this fight to get this funding, and it's sad and it's sickening that these type of organizations come out of the woodworks when there's funding available, but don't want to do anything to fight for this funding.

Thank you, Mr.

Harris.

Um, and thank you so much for just being vulnerable enough to share that with us.

Um, you know, we're the city of Phoenix right now is going through our budget community budget hearings, and um, I've had my district, we've had two, and in both of the hearings that I've been in, um, we've heard directly by youth themselves and by parents, um, that they are asking for more support, more investments into not just mental health, but all kinds of services for our youth.

Um, does you know you mentioned that you've worked a lot on making sure that this doesn't happen again.

What have I mean, besides, I've seen you in all the work, so I know, but I know you mentioned in previous testimonies, uh you've mentioned the Jacob Harris Foundation that you've started out of this work as well, correct?

Yes.

Okay, and in your pro in the programming in the found that your foundation is looking to do, um, does that encompass mental health support for our youth?

Yes, it does.

Okay.

It does.

And then it we also um, besides doing the mentorship and trying to do working, uh, one of the main objectives we're gonna be pushing, and I have uh several um entrepreneurs ready to come in and help and assist as we're gonna be uh promoting entrepreneurship to the youth.

We're not gonna be teaching them to be working bees, we're gonna be teaching them to be the boss to own the business, not simply work for a business, which is something that these minority children need to know.

Thank you.

And in addition to the mental health support that you are looking to provide to our youth and these entrepreneurial skills, um, what other support or what other programming um would you are will your organization or your foundation support um these most marginalized teams?

Well, some of them are even the actual uh some of the programs that Lori's actually assistant manager is gonna be trying to implement in the parks and recs as well.

Uh, we would like to do a free basketball league for the kids, something that encompasses the whole summer.

So it gives these kids something to do during the summer.

So they'll have games on the weekends, practices during the week.

We also have reached out to Grand Canyon University to have some of their students come in and be uh tutors to the youth for free, as well as uh we are working and trying to find actual uh child psychologists and the uh foundation planning on trying to fund us for our for those kids.

We want everything to be completely free for the kids.

We don't want these families to have to want or try to come up with any money or kids not get any services because the funds aren't there.

And this is something that we are not committing to for just three years.

This is something we're committed to for the rest of our lives.

Thank you, Mr.

Harris.

Um, I don't know if anybody is here from Father's Matter.

I would have a couple questions for them.

To our staff, is anyone here from the and uh the folks are nodding no, we do not have anyone here from the applicant.

Perfect example on why they're not good for these kids.

Thank you, Mr.

Harris.

Um, I have a few questions, maybe staff would be able to answer them if that's okay.

Not to the foundation specifically, but and actually have a question for Mr.

Harris.

Do you mind if I do that while he's hasn't fully mostly sat down but not fully?

Will you tell us about your involvement in this program?

How many meetings you had and with whom?

Uh I think your assistant manager, city manager Lori can attest to that.

What about seven years worth of meetings?

I would say, or at least the last four.

We've been we've been working with Lori on trying to get these funds.

So it's not something that's been uh temporarily.

Okay.

Um your former city manager, actually, Jeff Burton challenged me.

Yeah, he asked me, he said, uh, what are you prepared to do?

So what I went out and did was reach in my pocket and I start a nonprofit foundation.

Not only do I reach in my pocket to start this foundation, I reach in my own pocket every three years.

So this be the third year to put on a free basketball tournament for the community.

Uh Councilwoman Washington, Councilwoman Hernandez actually helped uh sponsor some of that last year as well and put some of that cost.

But mostly that comes out of my pocket.

So I mean, it's not uh it's not about money to me anymore.

It's about my son's legacy.

This is in my foundation.

This is my it's Jacob's.

And this is what Jacob done, and it's what Jacob did.

He would give you the shirt off his back, and this is what I do.

So that's why I'm here.

Thank you.

And so the city needs to competitively procure nonprofit services.

But how long ago would you say the city committed to doing a procurement for youth violence intervention to you?

Last year.

Last year.

Like about was there a milestone or about when?

Lori would give you can better attest to the exact dates.

Um, I believe it was about a year ago, though, that it came, uh, the conversations were ongoing.

Um we've been asking, even in here in council, I've asked counsel to even start putting in uh funds.

But after watching what happened with Fathers Matters and with these funds being, I've never seen anyone uh not do an interview stage.

You simply put in someone's information, it kicks back a score.

And based off of that score, is who you guys decide the fund and not fund.

That's like hiring somebody off of the resume and never giving them a job interview.

Um so that's why I've come in here now and came in here previously and formerly asked the city council to directly fund the Jacob Michael Harris Foundation with funds from the city.

Um it's time that I'm tired of seeing funds being wasted.

Uh you guys put money into the Oak program for youth, and it's failing.

It's felling miserably.

I don't want to see this fell because I fought for this.

So I don't want to, I I have some investment into this, and I don't want to see it fail.

And I I truly believe that Fathers Matters does not have the capabilities or the investment.

I think it's just a money grab, honestly.

And in uh September, the vice mayor, councilman Robinson and I put forward a series of policies.

I think you were not a huge fan of all of them.

Would you say this conversation was very separate and unrelated from that September memo from the the vice mayor or the councilman and my which one was that?

Um I apologize, Mayor.

Could you elaborate a little bit?

How would you you want to describe it?

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, so it was a three as part of our three uh three party pre-three person memo.

One of the things that we asked is that the city staff look into potential programs that provide intervention for youth who are likely to be justice involved or involved or have interactions with our police department.

I don't think that I they're kind of the same.

What I what I do say that I don't agree with, unfortunately, is a lot of a police involvement when it comes to the youth programs.

And that's just simply because sometimes you don't want these kids to feel like they're in a hostile environment.

And uh it's nothing, no knock against.

I don't hate Phoenix PD, but simply unfortunately, the bad apples do make the good ones look bad.

So I mean, when you have a child that comes in and you want to speak freely, you don't want them to feel like I can't say anything about the police because the police are standing here in front of me.

So I think that those two things do need to be separated.

I do think when it does come to the police department, since you did bring up Phoenix P.

I think that uh it was uh kind of amazing and eye-opening when one of the partners that I dealt with in the community, uh Ben from Port Air tells me that what the city of Phoenix is giving for this youth crime prevention of 1.5 million over three years is only one day of shutting down the Phoenix Police Department.

There's 1.5 million would only be the pay for one day.

That is sad that you're gonna take one day away from Phoenix PD to try to save the lives of these kids over three years.

Okay, thank you so much for answering those questions.

And it we I was not aware of the years you were working on this item.

So everyone will let Mr.

Harris sit down.

Okay, thank you for uh councilman Pastor.

Sorry, just one follow-up question.

Um Councilman, yeah.

Thank you.

I mean, I think you know, between the work, the years of work, Mr.

Harris, that you've done on on this topic, and a lot of other folks.

I mean, I think um that also mirrors a lot of the work that mayor and some of our in some of our council members, right?

Seem to be supportive of.

Um, is that would you say that that's fair?

That's an accurate statement.

Um, I can say that some of the things let's say youth this youth program.

Like for it's out of the way.

It's nice to see a movement in a positive direction.

Do I think it's uh a pebble in an ocean?

Yes.

Okay.

Um, but I mean it's it's like mooding moving a um a boulder up a uh slopery slope.

I mean, a slippery slope.

I mean, I've seen positive out uh things, don't let me get me wrong.

Like I've seen uh the city management office, um, especially a lot of work under Lori, see a lot of changes since it's uh they won't be turning dogs loose anymore after they shoot someone like they did myself and they did Alex Hernandez, or they did Jacob and Alex Hernandez.

I apologize.

So that's that's one positive move.

Um I met with the mayor's uh chief of con uh chief of staff, they didn't make a move to make it to wear special assignments to now have to wear body cams.

So I mean there's been some, I don't want to not give credit where credit's due on some things, but we're still having youth in unarmed civilians murdered in the streets as well.

So thank you.

Councilman Pestor.

So I'm gonna go, I'm gonna recall in history for me, and I just want to make sure I'm my facts are correct.

Um my understanding is that about a year, maybe a year and a half ago, maybe even two years.

Um there was a conversation, it came out of a group of citizens that worked with uh assistant city manager, um also uh the city manager Jeff Barton was originally part of the conversation and in um with a collective community group uh to discuss some of the issues in the community and what could be possible solutions, and uh the RFP that uh was released was part of those conversations for a solution uh to put money back into the community to put money towards the youth to developing in particular uh districts or uh with the school district, and that was all part of the conversations that uh that the community was meeting with uh staff and management.

Um some of our meetings were, but not our meetings consisted of putting funds into a school program.

No.

No, correct.

But what I'm talking about, ultimately, what happened is the RFP was created or came about because of your work and the conversations that you were having with management and staff.

Yes, absolutely.

I just want to make sure uh I had I had the correct information and facts because I had been following it behind the scenes and was aware of the RFP and what it was acting, uh what it was asking for because it also imp it also uh touches district four.

Um so I'm just trying to go back in my in my memory.

The other piece is that um one of the conversations is really having um activities for the youth after school and in the evening so that they can engage in positive activities within their neighborhood.

Yeah, okay.

That's what I wanted to.

Absolutely.

That's where uh actually uh city assistant city manager came in and said that uh wanting to extend the community hours at the community center on South Mountain was some of the direct input in that meeting in those meetings as well.

Um the suggestions was was actually making the community centers and all programs at the community center completely free, as well as implementing uh free meals for the youth at the community centers during the summer as well.

So there's a lot of other integrates in there as well.

Okay, thank you.

No problem.

Appreciate it.

Yep.

I think we're done.

Councilwoman Hernandez had questions first.

Yes, thank you, thank you, Mayor.

Um, just have a few questions for staff on the process side.

Um, since no reps from uh fathers matter is here, um, but where does the funding go if it's not if it doesn't if it's not awarded to this grantee?

Mayor, members of the council, councilwoman Hernandez, the funding for this program comes from the neighborhood block watch fund, and so it would remain in that fund to be used for purposes specified for the fund, which include block watch grants or other programs intended to improve public safety.

Okay, thank you so much.

Um are we is anybody able to um kind of explain what the selection process was like with this grant?

Because I'm really curious if in the process this organization provided um success rates with youth, um, details about the types of youth program they're looking to provide, um, or and like their reasoning why they felt they're the best fit for this grant.

Mayor, Councilwoman Hernandez, members of council.

Uh yeah, so the selection process through the RFP, um, there were 20 applicants, and they were um each scored on the following categories: organizational capacity, program design, community engagement, program focus implementation plan, their administrative or grant readiness, their geographic provision uh of services, uh, their evaluation methods, as well as um their ability to manage a budget and their fiscal responsibility.

So each of the 20 applicants, or each of the 20 submissions were scored by the panel of three that consisted of three uh city staff members.

Through that, there was a score of a thousand total that was uh given to each of those applicants for fathers uh matters and their program level up youth crime prevention program.

They were the highest um score that was decided to move forward for a contract at 883 points.

They're to your next question of their background of youth programming.

So they did provide um information within their RFP on their experience.

They've been in the community since 1997, providing services to youth families and the community, and their youth specific activities really started back in 2008, but have continued to this day, including um with a teen outreach program in partnership with the Phoenix Union High School District, and they have continue ongoing engagement at both uh Trevor Brown and Maryvale high schools.

They have done uh youth leadership and empowerment events, a conference in the past.

They have also done uh prevention workshops for approximately 16 years across uh several Phoenix Union high school high schools, and they have ongoing participation with other community um agencies as well as public um agencies as well, targeted in youth programming uh from uh prevention health, behavioral health, uh coaching case management.

Thank you, Jacqueline.

I was just curious because even glancing at their website um under their programs, out of everything they have listed, there's one thing mentioning teens, and this is really crossroads for teen parents, so it seems like it's more geared toward team parents.

So I mean, even without seeing application and just looking at their website, I have a lot of questions around are they the best fit for this?

Um that's like I said, just glancing at their website.

Um in the process, do like how are they is there an interview piece that happens in the grant process?

There is not an interview piece specifically in the grant process or in the uh RFP process, not as uh in this specific one.

Okay, thank you.

Um thank you so much.

That that's all my questions.

And I mean, it's based on what I'm hearing from Mr.

Harris and just looking at the website and the experience I've had sitting on grant award uh grant committees awarding funds to different organizations.

Um I looking just at their website alone, I have a lot of concerns that this is the best fit for this grant to really lead work around our youth.

So I do not believe that they're the best fit, and I'm not gonna be able to support this item today for them to be selected as the grantee.

Um, thank you, Mayor.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Thank you so much, Mayor.

Um, I just want to start off.

Maybe it might be helpful.

We've I heard we just have some questions about uh maybe it might be helpful to explain what it is the RFP is, what are the services and what is the goals that we would like to see from the ultimate awardee?

Mayor, vice mayor, members of council.

The RFP was developed to seek proposals for the reduction uh reduction and prevention of juvenile crime, um targeting specific neighborhoods in Phoenix, as well as making sure that this was an evidence-based program.

So aligning with the evidence-based strategies, as well as ensuring that was there was outreach, early intervention strategies, and community collaboration, along with the cultural relevance to be able to work with both youth and their families in the community.

Uh partnerships was another aspect that was important in this.

Um can you walk us through the specific performance metrics that will be used to evaluate the proposed, like identifying which metrics would be can you identify how these metrics will be quantified and tracked over time to ensure that the goals of this um program are being methods?

Mayor, vice mayor, yes, I can just give me one moment.

I have a summary, but I can pull up the specific ones for you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The first goal is focused on reducing youth substance use aggression or any type of delinquent behavior.

And so this is the purpose is really to ensure that youth are equipped with critical life skills to foster resilient self-control and responsible decision making.

So the first objective in this goal is that 75% of youth participants will demonstrate improved decision making, problem solving, and refusal skills by post-survey.

So there will be a pre and post-survey.

This is the tools that they are using in this are an uh evidence-based strategy, a life skills uh botvin life skills uh program.

So the second objective is that 70% of youth will show a reduction in aggressive, disruptive, or defiant behaviors.

Objective three is 80% will improve school attendance, punctuality, and academic engagement, and then uh objective four in this goal is 100% of the youth identified as high risk, will receive case management and mentoring within the 30 days.

That is of the first goal.

The second, there are three goals.

Oh, yes.

If I may, before you go ahead with the other goals, I guess it might be helpful to just because I think there's some I have some questions because we're this is the first time that we're doing this kind of understanding.

Um so those goals sound um great aspirational, but what are we using to determine um the baseline for our students and how does one show a 70%, for example, reduction in aggression?

Is that they only fight three times a week?

I mean, I don't know how we're curious how we quantify that.

Uh thank you, mayor, vice mayor, uh, members of council.

Uh so there are pre and post surveys done along with this evidence-based strategy, the botvin life skills.

And so we'll assess each of the um youth um at the beginning of the process, and then after the five-month intervention occurs, they will be assessed again.

And when you say we, are you talking about the grant the awardee or the department of human services?

Thank you.

Um, father matters will do that.

They will need to present these results to us, and um along with the the other two goals and the measures and metrics that are associated with each of those, uh, what we have is that there will be an evaluation component six months in to the contract.

So they will need to report on their progress of meeting their objectives and meeting their goals.

From there, uh, the human services department will determine if they are meeting their goals and objectives as stated in their proposals as they are contracted to do.

If not, there will be a essentially a performance improvement plan put in place.

This will allow us to ensure that they are again meeting what they are stated to do.

Um, we do have in the contract that um we are able to uh terminate um base whether it's based on performance or funding, whatnot, that is clearly stated within the contract.

So if this organization does not meet the goals and objectives that they have, then um after uh trying to uh cure the issue, then we would proceed uh with termination.

Okay.

So thank you for that uh clarification.

Uh if you want to go back to the goals of the program and the metrics of success, that'd be helpful.

Thank you.

So the second goal is to strengthen family relationships and parental engagement.

So this purpose is to empower parents and caregivers with the skills, confidence, and resources to foster positive relationships, maintain boundaries, and really support the success of the youth, both in the community and in their home.

The uh excuse me.

The objectives and performance measures in this goal are measured through an evidence first measured through an evidence-based tool called triple P.

Um, and this is a positive parenting strategy that does go through the teenage years.

Again, pre and post surveys being done and working with the family overall on this.

In addition, the indicators will include increasing awareness of the services as measured through outreach and participant surveys, establishing formal partnerships and referral pathways for the families to connect with community organizations schools or behavioral health agencies.

And there are they will conduct quarterly partner collaboration meetings to share updates, evaluate progress, and strengthen resource coordination.

So between the number of partnerships, the attendance and partnership counts, the survey data, and the uh the notes and feedback from the quarterly collaboration sessions.

Um from there, we also have the 80% of parents participating in the uh positive positive parenting program will report increased confidence in managing their team behavior.

75% of parents will show measurable improvement in communication and relationship quality with their team, and then 90% of families engaged uh will be engaged with uh uh case management, will complete an individual family development plan and address barriers to stability, and then 85% of families attending at least at least one family fund night or engagement activity.

Um that the goal three, uh, excuse me, when I had first shared the other objectives of the partnerships that was in fact attached to goal three, which is to strengthen community collaboration and increase access to resources.

So again, that's the community resource fairs, the establishment of partnerships, the partner collaboration meetings, and um increasing community service awareness.

Thank you for that.

Um I understand the metrics that were my understanding of the comparison is more so we're going to rely on the report and from the recommended awardee.

Um my next question would be what level of oversight or quality control would the department be doing to ensure that our expectations are there's some consistency between what we expect and what is actually being reported on.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Mayor, members of council.

Regards to that, human services has extensive history with working with community-based partners and in uh managing contracts for program delivery, and so a minimum of a monthly meeting would likely take place.

Um, and uh that would be structured, especially during the initial implementation to make sure that for instance, if uh staff needed to be hired, what is the status on that?

If the initial engagement sites have those been uh secured, when will the first cohort uh work?

So we will based on what they have submitted, we will have those consistent meetings and ongoing reporting is required as well.

So it's not just the conversation that we're having with them, um, but it's also looking at what they're they're required to submit to us for us to ensure that they are meeting those requirements.

So, although we will um a number of the uh or much of the evaluation to see if they're successful is based on that six months to see if there is progress being made with uh youth and their families, that implementation and fidelity of program will be monitored consistently by human services department staff.

Okay, and then my last question is more so um if I remember your testimony correctly, there were 20 applications and there was a review.

There was done the review was done by three members.

There was a three-member review panel.

Um, how did we were there objective score rubrics?

And how did we ensure consistency among staff?

I mean amongst reviewers to ensure that a 10 in one in reviewers one box was the same as a 10 in reviewers twos box.

Uh thank you, Vice Mayor, members of council.

For the evaluation, each of the categories have a uh set number that they could achieve, and it has description of what we were looking for to for the applicants to be able to respond to based on that, and each uh member of the panel's assessment, they evaluated such as the um their you know organizational capacity based on each of the respondents.

Was it a thorough enough response?

Are they able to meet the specific items that are listed in the RFP in that?

And then they each score.

Um, this is there is also a deliberation and discussion after all of the proposals are viewed, and um the procurement officer does uh record um how each of the applicants are being uh scored.

Okay, thank you.

Those are my questions.

Those are my questions, man.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilwoman Stark.

Thank you.

Um I appreciate and the RFP process, trust me, I've gone through many, many times.

It is a lot of work.

However, I am a little concerned.

I think in this case, I would agree that we probably should have had an interview process because we're talking about working with youth, and I think it would have been generally wise to have everyone come in and talk a little bit about their organizations, and you could really get a sense of how they feel and how they want to work with youth.

So I I'm a little concerned that we didn't do that.

And again, look, I've been through a lot of RFP processes, and not every one of them requires an interview.

But in this case, I think they should have.

So I I'm having a little concern again.

I appreciate the hard work when it comes to RFPs, but I I am concerned with uh maybe we should have done some interviewing.

So I'm a little concerned right now with this.

So thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

I'll go to Councilman Pastor and then I have questions.

Thank you.

Um I guess one of the items uh regarding this is that I know the RFP had talked about working with uh the school district, but what I had heard right now is that they're already working with the school district, and I would like to see uh another program within the school district, um, not necessarily an expansion, but another program does uh does uh impact, but maybe impact in a different way.

Uh the other piece is um the data and what we're measuring.

Um, because in me working in our early outreach programs, I understand uh the case management that needs to happen with not only students but with families, and so the benchmarks that are associated right now, I don't think would hit what we're trying to achieve within the community.

Um when you were uh speaking about uh those pieces in my head and in my mind, I look at the money and I look at then I start to ask how many students can be impacted by that.

And so I'm I'm trying to figure out are we gonna measure how many students are active in this program?

Uh what's the impact on the family?

And I'm just not there yet with where we're at in this conversation.

Can you uh I see you're gonna respond, so Mayor, uh Councilwoman Pastor.

Um, to address some of uh what you have said, um, it is a new program that they are putting forward, so they do have that established relationship with the uh Phoenix Union High School District, and that was one of their uh refer um references.

Uh so it is new, it's not a con it's not an expansion of an existing program.

Um for the uh piece on um how many children or how many teens youth will be uh impacted.

So the program has suggested that there will be cohorts of up to 25 youth for the five month period.

For the total of three years and the number of core cohorts that they said that they have committed to do, there would be 425 youth that would be impacted or receive these services along with their families.

Those are measured by those two different evidence-based tools, along with the counting of how many mentoring sessions and family sessions that they will have.

So it is supposed to be two sessions per week for the life skills training, a session at least once per week for mentoring, another session at least once per week for specifically the family or uh skill building together, and then additional events for the entire cohort.

Okay.

What I heard right now is that this is a new program.

And just like Councilwoman Hernandez, I think it was two weeks ago, three weeks ago.

Um at the time I was uh looked up the website, and it really is centered around young teens and fathers.

It's a father's program, um, it's regarding how do you how you know, really as uh how do you become a good, how are you a good father?

How do you mentor your student or your child?

And it's not really around for me, around teens and the impact that can be made with teens.

Um parenting is very very different at a high school level, and parenting is very, very different when you enter a program like this that is very um limited in the sense of the scope of how you make impact um with your family.

Um this type of program is really kind of an everyday touch base uh working with the students family-wise.

Uh it's great that there's two sessions, but are they mandatory sessions or do we highly encourage the way the program is structured and uh needs at least to my opinion, only because of my experience, uh needs to be very built in a structured manner, um, and really being committed to going through this type of program and not being able to go uh measure okay.

They took one, then that's one measurement, they're they didn't take the full impact of the of the program.

So those are just my comments.

I don't need any response, but for me it's about impact and really um changing uh behavior of positivity, and I'm not saying none of these families have positivity, but really uh learning how to work with one another and commute would communicate with one another, and it might not be their parent, it might be a mentor.

And um, so I just struggle with this.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Uh Director Edwards, have you been here for the entire genesis of this program, or did it start before you?

Mayor, I have been here the entire time.

Who set the goals of the RFP?

How what was the process?

What other cities did we look at?

Uh Mayor, um, how this uh began as part of the public improvement or public safety improvement plan, and what the human services department did was first take a look at the police uh crime uh improvement report and to see what is happening uh with juveniles um in our city in those statistics.

We also looked at information on the American Community Surveys Act from there.

Staff did do an analysis to see kind of base programs that are trying to prevent uh youth crime across the country and also do an analysis of what type of youth programming are is happening within the city along with what is happening in the community, and that is where the uh basic pillars and framework of what the RFP would become how that was created.

And I'd mentioned what cities did you admire?

What other cities did you look at?

So obviously, so many cities have these programs.

Sure.

I um Mayor, I apologize.

I do not have the list of those cities that the staff did look at in front of me now.

I apologize.

And was human service staff that researched other cities?

Yes, it was.

And was the police department involved?

We worked with the city manager's office to uh share the framework along with uh to uh receive feedback on the development of both that framework along with the RFP.

Okay, so the police department was not involved in this.

The um I could not speak to May at what point the police department um was uh included because it was part of the public improvement um or the public safety improvement plan um and we were working with the city manager's office, there were additional individuals pulled into those meetings to provide feedback.

Okay, so you were in meetings with police officers about this specific program.

Um I believe uh or just general there, I believe that there were um representatives from the police department, but I would um consult with Lori if uh she recalls.

Mayor, I can speak to that.

Mayor, members of the council.

Um, the way that this discussion and this program and ultimately the RFP came to be was actually borne out of the work that was done uh in response to the Department of Justice report.

Um it was part of a uh larger effort to address the report and ultimately you know culminated in a presentation to the council on what the staff was recommending that we do to respond to the DOJ report at the time, but also to build upon many years of work that the council and the community had been working on to make improvements within the police department and public safety in general.

And so there had been many discussions leading up to that point.

Um, the police department, in response to the Department of Justice investigation and report, did build a team called the Organizational Integrity Bureau, which is still in place today, and that team, in response to the components of the report having to do with youth, did much research related to best practices and how to build uh police related policies with youth.

But the other component that we wanted to look at were preventative measures with youth and how do we get ahead of some of the incidents that happen with juveniles in our community.

And so as we started to do that, police did do some preliminary research on it and looked at best practices, but then ultimately we realized this is not the right department to be conducting this research, and we really need to ask human services to get involved.

And that's when Jacqueline and her team got involved and her assistant director Nicole was very instrumental in developing uh the scope of the RFP and figuring out what it was that we were trying to accomplish based on the council's direction and based on the overall public safety improvement plan.

And so that's how that's how the RFP itself came to be.

Um there were many, many factors that played into the the inputs into even making that recommendation in the first place, um, some of which came from this council body.

You know, we have uh Councilwoman Pastor and Councilwoman O'Brien who both have education backgrounds.

They've mentioned multiple times, you know, how valuable it is to engage with youth positively.

Um we have many other members of the council, you know, mayor yourself included, who are very passionate about serving youth in our community.

And so we wanted to make sure that we incorporated that positive um proactive approach into the public safety improvement plan so that it wasn't just reactionary and and former city manager Barton and I had many conversations about how we did that, and there were many um groups, the council community members, um members of our staff who provided input on what that plan should look like.

And you know, while I do want to acknowledge, you know, Mr.

Harris and the Justice Coalition that we've been working with, and I was actually in place um many years before I was in this role.

Um that group did provide input, but it was not the sole input that led to the recommendation to the council.

It was one component of stakeholder input, and there were many other factors that played into staff's recommendation to conduct uh exploration into youth prevention programming, and then ultimately, you know, leading to the RFP when we were able to identify funding through the Blockwatch Funds.

So I hope that provides some context.

It does.

And would you date the council involvement to this to the September 24th, 2024 meeting with the memo from the vice mayor, councilman Robinson and myself?

Um Mayor, members of the council, uh, that is the first time that I know that there was a formal recommendation approved uh related to youth prevention programming.

However, there have been multiple conversations, you know, that I can recall over the years where council has uh emphasized the importance of serving youth in our community.

So I wouldn't say that was the only time it's ever been uh mentioned, but that was certainly the first formal um approval of a recommendation related to this particular program.

Okay, because I think we're hearing feedback from a very diverse coalition that this isn't the what we were expecting.

If this were to be unsuccessful, could we have meetings with each council person who is interested to talk about what we might see as goals and what metrics and who are some stakeholders we would want to be part?

Certainly, mayor, members of the council, we would be happy to do that.

Um I will um just mention that this program and this proposal um for the RFP was not the program itself, but the the proposal for the RFP and the best practices and the evidence-based practices were presented to the public safety and justice subcommittee last year, and the intent you know, with that was to um garner that feedback.

Um, we also have um included those uh updates in our quarterly updates to the full council.

Um, and so we thought that we were providing you know updates on on what staff was working on, and unfortunately did not gather the level of feedback that that mayor and council would have liked.

And so we're hearing that loud and clear and happy to make any adjustments you would like us to make and and you know revise the procurement if you would like us to.

Um, but you know, we we were we were um making a good faith effort to incorporate what we believe the council direction was and to bring forward a product that um you know was addressing that direction.

And if if it is not the direction that you would like us to go in, we are more than happy to to change direction and and to um update the process.

Thank you.

Councilman Hernandez.

Thank you, Mayor, and thank you so much for your questions and just all the work that you and the council has done prior to me joining this around this topic.

I know we're all very passionate about the services that we're pouring into our youth and finding ways to find preventative measures.

Um, because of a lot of things, I I would move that, I would move to deny uh fathers matters as the the grantee for this um award or for this grant.

We have a motion in a second.

Would anyone like to speak before roll call?

I would.

Councilman Pastor.

Um I I just want to I want to appreciate the acknowledgement of the the work and history that we have been doing for the last four years, five years, um, and the conversations uh that were had, but like anything, everything evolves, and we evolved and we we we know more and um you know more, and I think it now needs to be a uh re-looked at on how we want to do some of this prevention.

And uh, and just want to say or appreciate all the hard work because there are many people in this at the table, um, not only community but internal community and had a voice.

Uh a lot of this work was was started um around many incidences that happened within our community, but also around uh how would we do this around the DOJ items and pieces?

Um, and then we clarified it, got clarified in a three-person memo.

And so I think we have to take a step back and re-look at it and uh um put it back out at a at a different time.

Thanks, Mayor, and then we'll go to Councilman O'Brien and then Councilman Guardado.

Thank you.

Um I'll start off by saying I want to thank staff for their efforts to get us this far.

We recognize I recognize with any new program sometimes there could be a level of um probably could have been clearer.

I think what has been articulated here from uh my colleagues and myself is that we probably wanted to see a little bit more um, maybe we need a little bit more involvement.

Um so I'm actually a little torn about denying the current awardee without having further um conversations about what all of the applications look like.

What would I guess so my question is more so um is there a process for us to amend the RFP to incorporate all of the feedback that you have heard or and any additional and then allow for the applicants that have submitted to commit maybe submit a new application?

So everyone is kind of starting out from the same graces versus because I'm not sure what happens from an uh awardee who has been denied.

I don't want I don't want someone to be denied, um, which may have a negative repercussion on them because they didn't meet the unstated goal from us here as a council.

So hopefully my question made some level of sense.

But mayor, mayor, vice mayor does make sense.

And I think I'd ask the city attorney.

We may actually want to frame the motion just slightly differently.

It will accomplish, I think what you're seeking, but uh to what you're saying about the process.

So Julie.

So mayor, vice member, vice mayor, members of council.

Yeah, I think the discussion is are you um you're declining the contract rather than so you're you're disapproving the contract, not the particular um, you know, not father matters specifically.

Well that was the motion.

If you have options you could also continue it if you wanted to um to review the scope in more detail, so you do have some options.

Um if you you know decline to approve it at this point, you can direct staff to go back to do further work um and to um basically cancel the RFP and resubmit it, um, or you can cancel it outright and the funds go back to uh it sounds like to the block watch program.

I think my my recommendation from here in the conversation would be to cancel the RFP, you know, reject the RFP, cancel it, direct staff to come back working with each of you to reissue an RFP in the future after conversation with the council.

And you're saying that the funding, if I heard you correctly, um, is that the money goes back into the CBG C B D G C D B G.

Mayor, yes, it's it's the neighborhood blockwatch grant program.

Okay, and just so we can maybe maybe helpful for understanding purposes, if we were to reconvene or to move down that path, how long does the procurement process normally take?

I guess my concern is when would we be able to actually be able to move forward our program and once we come up with what we want to see all collectively in the RFE process?

Um because I what I gathered was with this time frame, this would allow us to start maybe in the when school reconvenes in um September or August of 2020 of this year, 2026.

Mayor, members of the council, vice mayor.

Um the process that we just went through started in October and um recently concluded.

It it went a little bit longer because there were some um administrative issues at the end that needed to be worked out.

But the the time frame was about six months.

I it could be slightly faster than that, but if it was reissued, it would not be likely that it would be able to start for the new school year.

So I just wanted to understand that.

Thank you so much.

But so you're I just want to make sure could you restate the two options just so we clearly understand the difference between denying um the current contract and continuing it and allowing modifications to the RFP uh process.

Um mayor, members of council, vice mayor.

So the the request is to authorize to enter into a contract.

Um so you would either you know approve or you would um would not approve that contract and direct staff to go back and um review the RFP process and reissue.

I think the issue is if you continue it, it has to come back at a future date, exactly like it is now.

That's not what I'm hearing from you that you want.

If you but I think you're seeking let's not do this RFP as Stans, let's just cancel it, start over by having a robust engagement process with the mayor and the council to develop a new RFP.

I think that's uh what I would say would be the sum of the motion to accomplish what I heard you say.

Thank you.

That is accurate to what I'm hearing.

I and I wanted to ensure that the current proposed awardee isn't negatively impacted in future procurement opportunities because we are making a a decision that says it's a decline.

That's what I would prove.

So from my process, I was wondering if it if it was easier and it made more sense for us to just continue the RFP with the with staff direction to modify it.

But what I'm hearing is we we can't, is what I'm hearing.

You prefer for us to deny sorry to reject the contract.

Right?

Mayor vice direction.

That is correct.

So if you continue the item, it would have to come back as is.

The um all of the applicants or those that proposed would still be eligible to propose to a new RFP.

So this doesn't affect okay.

Um so just out of clarification, Councilwoman uh Hernandez, your motion, if I recommend remember, was to reject the contract.

Correct.

So I think what the motion needs to be is that um I would move to uh cancel the RFP with direction to staff to reopen reopen the RFP or work on the RFP process with a uh more thorough engagement with mayor and council.

I think that works, and I would just commit to you.

I think what we would do in this case because it's had such robust conversation from you all is we would actually bring it back and had you authorize us issuing the RFP again so that you would see what it was and what the evaluation criteria were before it even went out to the public.

That would give you the most insight into Councilwoman O'Brien made a suggestion that may work for all us on Cinco de Mayo.

We have a policy meeting on public safety, and so we could discuss the goals there if we think having all of us together would be helpful.

Right.

So I just want to follow the bouncing ball.

Where the motion becomes to council the RFP with direction to discuss this item at the policy meeting on May 5th, and then I believe what we'd like to see if at all possible.

So I'm gonna look for at the facial expressions to have that it be done so that the contract could start for the second semester of the school year, which would be January of 2027.

See, I I caught you guys.

You thought I was gonna say the beginning of the school year, but you didn't let me finish.

Does that seem possible?

Mayor, councilman O'Brien, members of the council, that seems doable.

Thank you.

Okay, and I would ask my councilwomen at the other end if they would accept a friendly amendment to the motion with those additional items.

Yes.

Okay.

Okay.

And just to clarify, I would suggest at May 5th.

We discuss what we want out of the RFP.

We not issue it because writing an RFP in a council meeting never goes well.

Yes, exactly.

Thank you.

And Mayor, before we just add, and yeah, I just want to reiterate and be clear that this is no reflection of the RFP process itself.

I it sounds like we're really close to what we feel is gonna work for to achieve all of our goals.

Um, and really thank you so much for all the work.

Um, you know, sometimes we just gotta take a little step back and do a little bit more work to make sure that our youth, I think this is such so important.

I know we are also passionate about making sure we serve our youth in the best way possible and do by right do right right by them.

Um so please, it's no reflection on the work that staff has done on this.

We're close, we're almost there.

Um, but thank you so much for all the hard work.

Great, and then councilman O'Brien, did you still want the floor?

No, you all right.

Councilman Gordado, very patient.

Mayor, I'm okay now.

Thank you.

All right, are we ready?

Does anyone wish to speak before roll call?

Roll call.

One of the other one, yes.

And on this yes, O'Brien, yes, pastor, yes, Robinson, yes, Stark.

Just uh one comment.

I do want you to understand we really do appreciate everything you did.

Um, so with that, yes.

Wearing Hodge Washington, yes.

Diego, yes, motion passes nine zero.

All right, now we go to the the uh the fun item, uh item 35.

Councilman Hutt or Vice Mayor Hudge Washington, do you want to introduce what we're doing in 35?

Yeah, or would you rather I you can if you want okay?

I will do it.

So I would ask a celebrity to come forward.

Sonny has proudly served the City of Phoenix department and the region for seven years as an accelerant detection dog with the Phoenix Fire Investigations Task Force, responding to more than 40 fire scenes each year.

He has an exceptional nose and has played a key role in solving complex fire investigations, and he's helped cities beyond Phoenix, including the County Goodyear Mesa and Gilbert.

He works 12 hours a day alongside Captain Robbie Simpson.

In fact, uh they this is how he began serving Phoenix almost immediately after landing at Sky Harbor around 11 30 p.m.

in 2019.

He was dispatched to a fire scene an hour later.

So he has uh my case, I would say earned retirement, and and apparently his favorite pastime is collecting sticks.

So we look forward to sending him on a tour of North America and our best sticks.

And we all will recognize uh you forgot the most important part.

Sonny's a good boy.

So handsome.

Thank you for having us today.

Uh as you said, Sonny joined the Phoenix Fire Department seven years ago.

He's been an integral part of the fire investigations task force.

Uh we're on call 24-7 when we're not at work.

Um as you can see, he's a happy dog.

He brings a lot of joy to the city of Phoenix.

Uh he sniffs accelerants, so gas, diesel, lighter fluid, any organic hydrocarbon.

Um I use him on tragic fire scenes as a support dog to the people who need.

But if there's one thing I'd like you to know, Sonny can take a complicated fire scene that might take a group of investigators a day or two to find the best location to find a place to pull evidence.

Sonny can do that in minutes.

10 minutes, 15 minutes, less than 30 minutes on a big complicated scene.

So he's uh a very effective tool for us.

I want to thank you for having us down today.

We're so grateful that you brought him and thank you for your patience with our last agenda item.

That was a great item.

Vice Mayor.

Thank you, Mayor.

Just wanted to say thank you again to Sonny for all of his years of service here in the city of Phoenix.

Thank you for all the scenes that he has processed.

Thank you for all the families he has brought comfort to, and thank you for the hours that he has spent with us.

And we hope he enjoys retirement.

And I know you'll be following him soon.

So congratulations to you both.

Yes.

Councilman O'Brien.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

And I also want to thank both Captain and Sonny for your um service to our city.

Um, what an amazing careers for both of you.

Sonny is nine years old and so well deserved uh retirement coming up.

And thank you.

Appreciate it.

Oh wow, so he has done very well.

So appreciate that.

And can I make the motion to approve?

Yes.

I move to approve item 35.

Second.

Second.

Councilwoman Pastor.

Thank you, Sonny, because I don't I don't Sunny probably doesn't know how much love he has given to many at very dark moments.

And uh also has saved many lives.

So thank you, Sonny.

Looking for sticks.

Thank you.

Roll call.

Yes.

Hernandez?

Yes.

O'Brien?

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Wearing?

Hodge Washington?

Yes.

Gallego.

Yes.

Passes 9-0.

Well, thank you to Sonny and to Captain Simpson.

We appreciate all members of Team Phoenix two legged or four.

Or any other combinations.

All right.

41 is fixed wing pilot training.

Vice Mayor.

Motion to second.

We have a motion from the Vice Mayor and a second from Councilman O'Brien.

Roll call.

Guardado.

Yes.

Hernandez?

No.

O'Brien?

Yes.

Pastor.

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Waring?

Hodge Washington?

Yes.

Gallego.

Yes.

Passes 8-1.

Item 43 is the authorization to accept reallocated federal fiscal year 2022 Homeland Security Grant Funds.

Vice Mayor.

Motion to approve item 43.

Second.

We have a motion of second.

Councilman Hernandez.

Thank you, Mayor.

Just have a couple questions on these grants for our police department, probably chiefly assistant chiefly will join us.

Thank you, Chief Lee.

You know, we're we're voting on receiving funding from two grant programs here, both of which are used for planning equipment and training so that we can prevent, protect, respond to, and recover from terrorism, terrorism related risks, and catastrophic events.

So I understand all that.

Just curious about some of the actual details in there.

So for example, how do we define terrorism-related risk?

Um and what like what kind what criteria do we use?

Mayor, members of council, councilwoman Hernandez.

So the term terrorism is a very broad, broad spectrum that's actually defined by uh the Department of Homeland Security at the federal level.

Um it's a term that uh we use here in the state, uh, but it also uh really refers to the entirety of any type or a central nexus to any type of activity uh or actions that are caused by either man-made or natural disasters that could impact or have a centralized nexus to that could affect the state of Arizona or the city of Phoenix.

Okay, thank you so much.

And in trying to prevent that, does that mean that we are investigating, just to confirm we're investigating possible threats?

The threat component is one of the uh the three uh components that we actually have to do an assessment on on an annual basis in order to be able to be qualified to submit for one of the grants, yes.

Okay, thank you.

Um and in the past, has Phoenix PD responded to any specific groups or organizations because they presented a terrorist terrorism risk uh for Phoenix residents.

So, mayor, members of council, councilwoman Hernandez, any type of threat that is received or forwarded to the Phoenix Police Department, whether it's based on uh religion, ideological theories or or stances uh or certain groups, whether it's based on uh ethnicity, all of those are reviewed to see where they best fit for investigation.

So the City of Phoenix Police Department does have a biased crime squad, so we always look to see what's the centralized nexus again towards the commission of that crime, who is it targeted at and why.

Uh so the why is what we try to get to to figure out uh you know exactly who it is that we're dealing with there.

So, yes, each one of those those threats that come in, they're uh they're vetted, they're reviewed, and then they're assigned accordingly.

Okay, thank you so much.

And as part of this work, um, do we investigate and monitor hate groups?

Uh mayor, members of council, councilwoman Hernandez, as I mentioned, as far as groups that are considered hate crimes.

Again, we look at the we look at the criminality of the act, not the group, uh, and that's how we define whether or not it fits that criteria.

Uh we do that at the at the local level, uh, that's also reviewed at the state and federal level, uh, again, depending on jurisdiction.

Okay, thank you so much.

I just asked that question because in 2023, uh Southern Poverty Law Center released a report, um, and that group uh tracks hate groups across the United States.

Uh in their report, they identified 38 active hate groups in that in the state of Arizona.

Um, and I also asked because you know, our American history illustrates an established practice of labeling black and brown-led groups like the Black Panthers, the Brown Berets, Black Lives Matter, um, and even current immigrant rights organizations now as hate groups.

Um, so just trying to understand the broader context of this work.

Um in the on this agenda item, there was actually a question or public comment submitted by a resident.

Um I did read Teresa's comment and question that was submitted.

Um obviously in the climate we're in right now, there's we hear anyone here is Homeland Security or Department of Homeland Security sets off alarm bells, right?

Um, and so in the comment, it's uh she was wondering is is any of this money for this grant connected to ICE?

Um, and how can we assure residents that these groups don't have uh hidden strings that will open us up to having to collaborate with ICE?

Mayor, members of council, councilwoman Hernandez, that's actually a really great question.

So if I may to give you a little bit of background context, the way the uh Arizona Department of Homeland Security Grant program is structured.

The state of Arizona is the recipient of the federal grant that comes directly from FEMA.

The City of Phoenix has uh participation in the Urban Area Security Initiative grant.

That's one of three grant programs.

Uh so the state has a suite of three different programs, the UASI, the State Homeland Security Grant Program, and then uh Operation Stone Garden, which only affects the southern border.

It's not something that we we deal with.

So for the City of Phoenix, the grants that we apply for are typically under the UASI grant, but we also have the ability to apply for the state homeland security grant, but that's typically focused on the central region.

So the broader Phoenix UASI has a uh a greater stake in applying for the UASI grant itself.

So we do have the ability to apply for both.

When a grant is actually submitted, it has to be based on individual specific projects that an agency has identified that they would like to work on.

It has to meet the uh the state and the federal uh descriptions as to what constitutes an acceptable project.

If it's equipment, it has to be reviewed at the state and the federal level.

If it's a program, it has to be reviewed at the at the state and federal level as well.

Uh so those programs are very um specifically defined.

So uh we do not have investigations that we would do outside of our normal jurisdiction.

So if the city of Phoenix were to apply for a grant, uh it would have to be something that we typically do as part of our normal course of business.

And to your point, uh those types of investigations are outside the scope of what the police department would do.

Okay, thank you so much, uh assistant chief.

Um great clarity.

I want to make sure that the residents' questions and concerns are addressed the best that we can.

Um, you know, I totally understand the importance of preparing for the big catastrophes.

Obviously, I can't talk today, um, and understand why we should be planning for that and how we recover, how we care for people.

Um, it is important to acknowledge that we must be vigilant um about how we are using these funds um against our own communities, and we must assure that we are focusing on the hay groups here in Phoenix that are calling for violence and pushing white supremacy.

Um, would you be can we set up a time to meet with our team to review uh the department and the fire department's overall plan for responding um to and recovering from acts of terrorism?

Uh mayor, members of council, councilwoman Hernandez, absolutely.

Um it is a very broad program.

We'd be more than happy to set up a time to kind of go walk you through that and go over any of the questions that you might have.

Okay, thank you.

And I'm still gonna claim the as a newest member, right?

And there's just so much information to learn and to know.

Um, so I just really appreciate your willingness to always answer our questions.

Absolutely.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Roll call.

Guardado.

Yes.

Hernandez.

Mayor Mayor?

Please.

Thank you.

Um, again, just want to thank the chief for all the questions walking me through uh myself and my office through that.

Um, still have a lot of remaining concerns and need to understand more thoroughly uh about what the city is doing before I vote yes.

Plus, I really want to understand how different groups are being researched as terrorist groups, um, and with that I vote no.

O'Brien.

Yes, Castor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark Waring?

Hodge Washington.

Yes.

Gallego.

Yes.

Passes 81.

Item 50 is the Martin L.

Schultz Way Ceremonial Signage.

Vice Mayor.

Motion to approve item 50.

Second.

We have a motion and a second.

The city has a variety of ways to honor people who have helped built our community, and one way we do so is to honor people with ceremonial street signs.

These are the beautiful blue signs that you may see throughout our community.

Uh today we will be voting on a sign that would recognize Martin or Marty Schultz, as many of us know him.

It's very appropriate to have a street sign for him in the city of Phoenix.

I got to serve with him as co-chairs of the Prop 104 campaign, which included funding for our city streets.

Uh, got to work with Council, the Vice Mayor on this one.

It is a sign in her district.

Uh it overlooks ASU signage where uh uh Mr.

Schultz served as a uh trustee.

It's also near the Bioscience Corps.

Uh he helped us with the bioscience plan through the Flynn Foundation.

Um he worked with Arizona Public Service nearby, and he also helped bring forward Arizona Center, trying to bring much demanded retail to our downtown.

Uh Marty has been involved with so many groups from helping the homeless to addressing autism to valley leadership, and it's just exciting to be able to say thank you to him in this way.

He also very involved in the city of Phoenix, serving as chief of staff to three mayors of our city.

Uh so with that, I will turn to the vice mayor.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, thank you for bringing this to my attention, and I'm thankful to everyone who helped bring this item forward and help make this recognition possible.

Today we are saying thank you to Marty, honoring him, someone whose work has had a lasting and meaningful impact on our city.

His contributions to our community, whether through his leadership, his service, or his commitment to simply improving the lives of others, have helped shape the fabric of our city in ways that continue to be felt today.

Um, as mentioned, this will be right on our in our bioscience core, an item that he took a lot of ownership for and pride in, and I am grateful to support his efforts in public service and continue to see those economic development continue to this day.

It has helped to create pathways for others and strengthen the foundation of the community we serve.

Um this ceremonial street designation ensures that his name and the values that he stands for will remain a visible and lasting part of Phoenix story.

It also will serve as a reminder to future generation of the importance of service, leadership, and giving back to your community.

This recognition is a is a reflection of the deep respect and admiration our city has for his contribution.

I'm proud to support this item and ensure that Martin Schultz's impact on Phoenix is honored, remembered, and celebrated.

Thank you, Mayor.

Councilwoman O'Brien.

Thank you, Mayor.

First, I want to thank the mayor for bringing this to the matter to the attention of the council.

I think something that she has made an effort to do, which is to honor people and their legacies while they are still with us rather than waiting until they have passed is such an incredibly smart thing to do.

It's so important for us to let the folks know who have made a great impact in our city that they did so.

If you spent any time in the last 20 or 30 years attending a concert or convention downtown, working in the urban core, or writing light rail, you're experiencing the results of decisions that Martin Schultz helped move forward.

At a time when downtown struggled to attract investment, he built partnerships that made projects like Arizona Center possible.

And once that door opened, others followed.

Mr.

Schultz also understood the strength of a city is reflected in how we care for each other and his work to help create the human services campus, brought dozens of providers together in one place, making it easier for people experiencing homelessness to accept access shelter, health care, and support.

And through his work on transportation, higher education, and economic development, Mr.

Schultz helped connect people to jobs to school and to opportunity.

So this recognition is more than name on a sign.

We're acknowledging someone who helped turn big ideas into real systems that residents rely on every day.

And that is a legacy worth honoring.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Councilman Waring.

Thank you, Mayor.

I've known Marty for almost 30 years, and he's been just a fantastic friend, been proud to know him.

He was instrumental at the state legislature crafting energy policy and just generally being someone who tried to move our community forward.

This is a fitting honor.

It's a shame because he really missed out.

He was full of energy, full of life, always positive.

And I'm glad that we're doing something to honor his legacy.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Stark.

Thank you, Mayor.

I am very excited to support this.

When you look up the definition of public service, you'll see Marty Schultz right by it.

He really embodies that.

He's a great guy and so deserving of this.

He's done so many wonderful things for this city, and I'm proud to call him a friend.

I've enjoyed him over the years talking about infrastructure and all kinds of geeky things that I like to talk about.

And so I think this is a wonderful, wonderful tribute to him.

Thank you.

Councilwoman Pastor.

Thank you.

I just have to say I was able to watch Marty in action.

And I was able to watch two men in action, which was my father Marty, and many others, building Phoenix, and in particular downtown.

As the hand, as his hands were part of Arizona Center, and I I look back and I see today where it's at and the growth that has happened in a hotel.

Arizona Center was just there at one point, centering the downtown, and then everything was built around it.

His impact at APS, his influence at APS and in energy and in legislation.

The fact that he was also part of many pieces of downtown, but in particular, he was also part of Phoenix Community Alliance and worked really closely there.

And he and he was definitely part of the human service campus at the time when we were uh facing we're still facing but uh homelessness at that time, and we and he was truly uh instrumental in that piece.

Um I want to say Marty really mentored many Phoenicians that are here today in government, but also in development and in private practice.

Uh he knew what it was to take somebody and influence, not influence, but mentor, uh guide.

Um, and sometimes you didn't agree with him, and it was okay, and he would argue back with you, and you would be like, okay, here's my argument.

But eventually it was a good dialogue and centered around getting to the right space.

So uh thank you, Mayor, for wanting to honor him, and thank you, uh Hodge Washington for um making it happen in your district.

Thank you.

Thank you, and Diane Barker is here to testify in support of this item.

Thank you, Mayor and Council for deciding that I should speak.

Um I knew Marty, and he was seen here when he was not the assistant to several mayors, and the last time he had a big smile on his face because he was able to get reusable water out of Phoenix to be used out at the nuclear generating station.

We all know how powerful that is, and in the future, mayor, we want it to do more renewables, but for the time being, can you imagine this summer when it gets hot and people can't get their energy in their AC, and what are we gonna do?

The guy with the coal is getting richer, and that's dirty.

We need to go full force into renewables here in Phoenix, and thank you, Marty.

Thank you.

Roll call.

Yes, Hernandez, yes, O'Brien, yes, pastor, yes, Robinson, yes, Stark, yes, Waring, Hodge Washington, yes, Gaygo, yes, passes 9-0.

Wonderful.

Congratulations to Mr.

Schultz, and we'll be having an event soon to put up the signs in his honor.

A huge thank you to Tony Matullah from my team who's been coordinating this, and if you have questions, okay, maybe I'll help.

Item 54 is next is the consolidated rail infrastructure and safety improvements, two step construction manager at risk.

Vice Mayor.

Motion to move item 54.

Second.

We have a motion and second.

Diane, why don't you come back on thank you, Mayor and Council?

And by the way, I'm in a very educated woman's district called Anna Hernandez.

What a delight to speak with her.

And um on this, this is on safety.

We're getting Keywood as a cons as a consultant, I guess, and also the engineer to go over on safety at 43rd in Camelback and then down to 19th and um Grant.

Now I spoke with Ed Zurker about the 35th in Avenue, that big big project, 200 million dollars, and that is the on the same BSNF line.

And I didn't see anybody from the city of Phoenix at that meeting that I came out of, hopped on a bus, got over the light rail and downtown when we had people making dialogue that they couldn't get downtown out of Maryville, you know, on any transit, so you had to build the light rail.

Now I'm giving these different facts is I'm just being neutral on this.

It's 10 million dollars.

I'd like to have you ask Ed Zirker.

Maybe in the future we can get the answer from McCune from the streets department.

Is this are they looking at this line holistically?

You know, Phoenix, we called the whole valley Greater Phoenix for a long time.

BSNF was 19th century railroad.

This is what made this whole area prosper back in the day.

Phoenix still has, and I just learned this MOBES, it's a signaling, the largest signaling station.

You guys haven't been talking about what's happening with BSNF.

Huge project up at surprise.

It's been curtailed kind of over and very sleepy at the Board of Supervisors, but finally, these safety things along Grand Avenue are in Phoenix, and it all needs to be looked at whole holistically and with A dot.

Thank you.

Roll call.

Yes.

Hernandez?

Yes.

O'Brien?

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Warren?

Hodge Washington.

Yes.

Fallego.

Yes.

Passes 9-0.

We next go to the planning and zoning portion of our agenda.

We'll have one public hearing for two related items, but two votes.

These are related to the six the southeast corner of 64th Street and Mayo Boulevard.

They are in District 2.

We'll open the hearing.

There is a representative for the applicant here to speak if necessary.

Does anyone have questions?

I'll close the public hearing on 72 and 73 and turn to Councilman Waring for a motion first on 72.

Motion to approve, Mayor, the planning commission recommendation adopt the related resolution.

Second.

Motion and a second.

Any comments?

Roll call.

O'Brien?

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Waring?

Yes.

Hodge Washington?

Yes.

Gallego.

Yes.

Passes nine zero.

Item 73, Councilman Waring.

Motion to approve for the Planning Commission recommendation.

Second.

Roll call.

More than this?

Yes.

O'Brien.

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes.

Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Warren?

Yes.

Hodge Washington?

Yes.

Gallego.

Yes.

Passes 9-0.

Thank you.

And thank you to Plaza, Councilman Waring and all the folks who went into getting us to where we are today.

A lot of community input and an important investment in a very dynamic area.

We next go to item 74, which is a rezoning application near 11th Avenue and Michigan Avenue.

We uh will be have a public hearing.

The applicant and the pellant will each have 10 minutes.

Any number of people can speak during those 10 minutes, but if you speak, you will not have two minutes later, or one person can speak the entire time.

The applicant can resume reserve up to two minutes to respond to issues raised.

And we'll begin with the applicant.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council for the record, Bill Allison with you, Morris Ba.

2121 East Highland here on behalf of Arcadia Communities.

I do have a presentation that I'll go through quickly.

I should not be taking anywhere close to 10 minutes.

I do not believe.

So we would call this an in-fill site.

The zoning for the particular property we're talking about today is R18.

You can see that the surrounding zoning is R18 to the south with fairly standard single family development on those lots.

To the west, it's R16 again, fairly standard single family.

And then the property which is closest to this on the north and the east is zoned R3, but developed with detached single family homes.

So we're looking at a property that's kind of a thumb up into that R3.

Uh the proposal we have today is to rezone this site from R18 to R2.

This is to allow the development of 19 detached single-family homes on platted lots.

The density here is at about 7.712 units per acre, which is lower than the R2 maximum.

The project has been designed to meet all of the R2 standards.

The development will include the construction of a sidewalk on the east side of 13th Avenue where one does not exist today.

There will be landscaping along 13th Avenue and then within the community itself.

And then per a requirement of the street transportation department, there will be the completion to the extent possible of a partially complete cul-de-sac at the end of Michigan Avenue, which is at the southeast corner of the site, which is the lower right-hand corner of the image before you.

At that point, we were looking at a U-shaped street that had two access points of 13th Avenue.

And unfortunately, this design also required some variances because it did not meet standard.

The project has evolved since that time.

First, it was redesigned to accommodate the need to finish that Michigan Avenue cul-de-sac.

The number of units was reduced from 23 to 19.

The U shaped street has been replaced with a development that has access to both 13th Avenue and Michigan Avenue.

The City Council approved the middle housing text amendment late last year.

After that occurred, staff called us and asked if we would reevaluate our request and change from an R3 rezoning to an R2 rezoning, which we did.

We were able to meet all of the R2 standards in doing that.

We also, over the last several months, as this project has gone through the public hearing process, introduced several uh traffic calming measures within the community itself as traffic will approach Michigan Avenue to address concerns that we have heard from the neighbors who live on Michigan Avenue.

This slide shows the site plan as it appeared before the Deer Valley Village Planning Committee and the Planning Commission and how it has changed what is now before you today.

The change in the site plan is the addition of stamp pavement at the north and west sides of the entrance to the cul-de-sac.

And there is a stipulation in a staff memo provided to you to address that issue.

Public outreach we've had on this project.

We had a neighborhood meeting in early January.

Four people attended, three had questions about the project.

We then started receiving some opposition correspondence from the folks who live on Michigan Avenue.

And we have had three virtual meetings with Kimberly Sisk, who is living on the south side of the cul-de-sac, one before the village planning committee to understand better what the concerns were that the neighborhood had with the Michigan Avenue cul-de-sac and access to it.

As a result of that discussion, we proposed three traffic mitigation measures to at the Deer Valley Village Planning Committee.

That committee, however, did not incorporate those measures into its recommendation of approval.

We then had a second meeting with Ms.

Sisk after the Planning Commission to discuss the three traffic mitigation measures that the planning commission did include in its recommendation of approval and some additional ideas that she had asked us to evaluate.

We then had a third meeting with Ms.

Zisk last Friday to show the new site plan that's before you today and also talk further about some developer contributions to landscape improvements for the two lots that are have access in the existing neighborhood to the cul-de-sac.

Just very quickly looking at traffic generation from this site, it's really relatively low.

We're looking at 13 morning peak trips and 18 in the evening with the other trips being distributed across the day.

That's just built into the project.

Then the Plan Commission did adopt or recommends adoption of three traffic mitigation measures within the new development.

First, that the developer will put stop signs at the entrances from the new neighborhood onto that cul-de-sac to stop people before they drive into the cul-de-sac.

Second, there will be speed humps that will be installed also north and west of the entrance to the cul-de-sac to get people to slow down before they stop at the stop sign.

Third, the developer will install a private access do not enter sign facing the Michigan Avenue cul-de-sac to discourage people from using Michigan Avenue to cut through from 11th to 13th Avenues.

That's been a concern we have heard from the neighbors.

And then finally, there is the new stipulations before you today regarding the stamp pavement north and west of the cul-de-sac.

This is the cul-de-sac design that street transportation has approved.

This is completing as much of the cul-de-sac as is possible on this property.

This cul-de-sac improvement will happen regardless of whether development is on this site, whether it's using the zoning that's in place today, or it's a proposed project going forward.

Um, regardless, this cul-de-sac needs to be improved to improve safety for the folks who actually live on it so that uh emergency vehicles have a better chance to get there and turn around.

Um, in summary, we're looking at a redevelopment of an infill site.

We're looking at 19 homes on detached lots.

Uh, we are completing a cul-de-sac, that is a requirement from the street transportation department.

This is going to be new market rate housing that produces a low amount of traffic.

Uh, we have built several traffic mitigation measures into the development itself.

And finally, we are here, and we're pleased to say we're here with recommendations of approval from the planning commission with a seven to zero vote.

The Deer Valley Village Planning Committee was a seven to three vote, and from staff.

And my client is in complete agreement with the recommendation from the planning commission with the additional that is before you today.

And without if you have any questions, I'd be glad to answer them.

Thank you.

Appreciate that.

We will now hear from Kimberly Sisk.

Good afternoon, mayor, vice mayor, council members.

My name is Kimberly Sisk.

I have lived on 1117 West Michigan Avenue for 11 years.

There are five homes in that cul-de-sac.

This is not an opposition to the development.

This is about whether the city is about to approve a site plan design that materially impacts property rights without analysts, without mitigation, and without consequence.

I'd like to mention that the um site plans that were shown just now.

It's kind of a like flawed in the way it did not have any houses on Michigan Avenue.

If it, if you would look, if you had looked at any of the letters that I had sent, you would see how close those houses are to the bulb of that cul-de-sac that they're creating.

Looking at it without the houses on there, you can easily say it doesn't look like it's going to impact anything.

I've submitted multiple letters uh into the record demonstrating the traffic impact study is flawed and that critical information is missing.

Thus, the rezoning application is not ripe for approval today.

The proposal is fundamentally one-sided.

The city benefits, the developer benefits, and the five homeowners on Michigan Avenue bear the entire entire burden of all the losses associated with this production with this development going forward.

There's no balance, there's no offset, and the proposed mitigation, landscaping, stamp payment, signage, it's all cosmetic.

None of it that we requested.

I mean, as far as like we never, it's not a benefit to us.

The proposal before you does not address safety, access, property rights, property value, and constitutional rights.

This proposal eliminates a five home cul-de-sac that has existed for 19 years.

This is not minor.

This is a fundamental change in how this terminal road operates today.

This is not about traffic volume.

This is not about how, this is about how access functions.

Today the cul-de-sac provides minimal traffic, minimal conflict points, predictable ingress, egress, and a safe residential environment and a recognized premium of value.

This proposal removes every single one of those protections.

Our cluster mailbox is located on 11th Avenue.

It's not even on the cul-de-sac in Michigan Avenue.

We requested the post office to move it to our cul-de-sac.

They refused.

They said there is insufficient space on our cul-de-sac for their mail carrier to safely operate.

That matters.

The federal U.S.

Post Office determined the cul-de-sac cannot safely accommodate even a limited service access vehicle.

But yet this development, this proposal is introducing substantially more traffic into the same space, and this should raise serious concerns, serious safety concerns.

At the last meeting, it was suggested that the residents would simply follow traffic laws when you're backing out of my driveway and into an active traffic pattern that has not that does not exist today and has not existed the 11 years I've lived there.

That is not a solution, that is a deflection.

This is a design problem, not a behavior problem.

The proposal forces residents to reverse into active traffic, a condition that does not exist today.

And it has not existed in the 11 years that I've been there, nor in the 19 years of Cal-de-Sac has existed.

This has not been analyzed.

There's nothing in the record that analyzes the safety hazards to the residents on Michigan Avenue.

Traffic laws do not eliminate conflict points.

Design does.

Expecting residents to rely on perfect driver compliance for their safety is at best an unrealistic and naive assumption.

And at the worst, a foreseeable and a preventable safety hazard.

The city's own street planning and guidelines.

I'm sorry, street planning and design guidelines do not allow for guesswork when it comes to public safety.

Section 9.3 requires a traffic impact study to analyze actual operating conditions, including access points, how vehicles interact at those locations.

Section 6.7 require evaluation of driveway placement, alignment conflict points.

Section 2.6 mandates that intersection design account for site distance, safe vehicle movements.

These are not discussed.

I'm sorry.

These are not discretionary standards.

These are baseline safety requirements.

And none of these have been done.

Does not contain one single sentence regarding any of those concerns.

They are obvious, hazard, foreseeable hazards.

This is textbook, textbook, driveway conflict condition.

It's not been analyzed, it's not been modeled, it was not mitigated.

The city's own guidelines emphasize protecting the public and preventing unsafe design outcomes.

Approving a design where known conflict points are not evaluated, exposes the city to exactly the type of preventable incidents that these standards are intended to avoid.

This is not a disagreement over the planning preference.

This is a failure to apply the city's own adopted safety standards.

When a required safety condition is ignored, the conclusion is not just incomplete, it is invalid.

And the failure, that failure should have consequences.

This is also a property rights issue.

Under Article 2, Section 17 of the Arizona Constitution, property owners have a protected right to safe and reasonable access.

Arizona courts are clear that when a government action materially interferes with those protected rights, mitigation is required.

This proposal converts a 19-year-old terminating call-de-sac into a through traffic access point, introducing continuous traffic directly in front of our connected driveways.

That is substantial, and there is no analyst on the record addressing that impact.

None.

Just everything.

Number two, is the record before you complete?

Does it have all the site-specific analysts that's required to make a sound informed decision?

Has it all the safety concerns thoroughly been analyzed?

Have the diminished values been analyzed?

Property rights been analyzed, proportionality been analyzed.

Is there legally sufficient mitigation?

Spelled out.

Approval is not legally supportable.

And based on the record as it stands today, all three of those questions cannot be answered in the affirmative.

Cosmetic measures such as stamp pavement and signage minimal landscaping are legally insufficient and do not offset the loss of safety, right of access, diminished values, property rights, and residential character.

If you approve this, you're not approving development.

You are approving a design with actual knowledge of those deficiencies, and that matters.

This is no longer a planning decision.

It becomes a legal decision with legal consequences.

Inverse condemnation, unlawful extraction, substantial impairment of access, interference with property rights, liability for preventable site, hazardous site plan design.

Not hypothetical, not speculative.

This is exactly how these cases arise.

If you're not prepared to deny it, then you should also not approve it.

You should continue it until the missing analyst is involved.

May I have just like 30 seconds?

If you could finish your sentence, but we do have um Cheyenne and Adrian, so we'll hear from them.

The evidence on the record today does not support approval, but the risk clearly supports a denial.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Also in opposition, we have Cheyenne and then Adrian.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak today.

Me and my fellow residents, including Adrian on Rosemary Lane, are very opposed to this development as it is currently designed.

It has already resulted in the removal of significant trees that allowed us to view wildlife on many occasions, and was a portion of why we bought the house to begin with.

Sorry.

Now it will result in the building of all two-story homes to block our mountain views, our sunlight, and rob us of any privacy in our own backyards, which are all reasons why we bought the homes where we did, as opposed to other nearby homes.

We would be far less opposed to this development if either the homes were not two story or if there was any kind of spacing between our homes and the new homes.

If I'm understanding the plans right, and this will be like the development that I believe the same developer did on Union Hills and 11th, these homes will only be offset about 20 feet from the wall.

They'll basically be on top of us.

However, a distinct difference in that development was that there was a landscaped area put between the existing homes, backyards, and the new homes, but we are not being given that same consideration.

This would be a much better situation for all of us living on Rosemary, a landscaped area or even a street adjacent to our walls instead of these two-story homes.

These two-story homes will be reducing our property values, destroying our views, and robbing us of privacy, and we are opposed to it.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you, Adrian.

So this proposal raises serious and unacceptable concerns for the residents on Rosemary Lane.

Like ours will drastically reduce our privacy, creating direct site lines into our backyards and living spaces.

While there are taller homes elsewhere in the community, none are positions directly behind us.

It introduces elevated structures right next to our properties, resulting in a clear and unavoidable intrusion into our daily lives.

This is not a minor adjustment.

Our backyards will no longer feel private, secure, or comfortable.

Additionally, these new homes will block our mountain views, which were a major factor in our decisions to live here.

We paid premium for those mountain views and they are which were a major factor in decisions to where we live.

We paid premium for those mountain views, and they are a defining feature to our property.

Losing them is not a small inconvenience.

A clear enforceable measure to mitigate the harm to existing homeowners.

Simply meeting minimum zoning requirement is not sufficient when the real world is consequences are this severe.

We strongly oppose the approval.

Sorry.

Thank you.

Thank you.

To our team, did we get all of our speakers?

We did.

All right.

Um we're good.

Okay.

I'll close the hearing and I'll turn to councilwoman Stark.

Thank you, Mayor.

Just a couple quick questions of staff.

Um if they were to develop with the R18, potentially we would still require the CODESAC, correct?

Because CODASAC generally is built so our emergency vehicles like fire trucks can turn around.

Yes, Mayor, uh Councilwoman Stark, members of the council, you are correct, regardless of the rezon, the cul-de-sac would have to be completed with the redevelopment of the site.

So without this rezoning, and they were to develop it under an R18, we would probably require that call to stack because we have to get our fire trucks in and out if there is a 911 call.

So I think regardless of their argument that could happen today under the R18.

Also, under the R18, they could also build two stories.

Correct?

Mayor, Councilwoman, sir, members of the council, you are correct.

So what they're trying to do is build a product that is although maybe not affordable, it's close to affordable because they're going to do a rent to own that then helps a person build equity and they can actually see true ownership in the future.

And I think that's important.

And I think that they are trying to provide some type of middle housing product here, and we need that in our city.

Right or wrong, we still need housing in our city.

And so I support this request.

Um, and I'm happy to make a motion, but if there's any other comments, I can hold off.

Councilwoman Hernandez.

Thank you.

Um, just have a question or maybe a couple questions for staff.

Michigan Avenue, is that a privately owned street or is it a public right of way?

Public.

Mayor, Councilwoman Hernandez, members of the council, it is a local street, so it is a public street.

Okay.

Okay.

I I was just wanting to get that clarity.

Um, because I'm I'm not really following the property rights argument that we heard by the up by some of the residents opposed.

Um, if that street is publicly owned, then it's publicly owned.

So I don't see if the the development is over across or at the end of the cul-de-sac.

Um from looking at the drawings, I don't see the impact into the properties along Michigan Avenue.

So thank you for clarifying that.

Um, I you know, prior to joining the council, I have 15 years of experience in residential mortgage, reading appraisals, right?

Like closing loans, doing all the things.

I don't recall mountain views being used in the valuations of properties.

I don't think there's a line listed for that on any appraisal.

So I'm a little concerned that that is an argument we're listed, we're hearing on this rezone application.

Um that was my question and comments.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, I just had one question regarding um some of the applicant or the residents' concerns about reversing into oncoming traffic and some of those concerns.

Is there anyone that can address um from that from your perspective?

Okay.

Certainly.

Mayor, uh, Vice Mayor Hodge Washington, members of the council.

Um, with it being a local street, it is expected as many of our residential subdivisions are all on local streets that we back out into because those are low volume uh streets as well.

So it isn't um, thank you for joining us.

So it is not it would not be an inconsistent expectation on in this development.

Mayor, Vice Mayor Hodgewash to members of the council, that is correct.

Thank you.

And then my other question was one that councilman Hernandez um started to ask, and it was whether or not um the potential impact to proposed property value, whether or not that is a consideration that is undertaken in the rezone and um considering to rezoning application.

Vice Mayor Hodgewashman, I apologize.

Could you repeat your question?

Thank you.

Oh, thank you.

I'll do better.

Um, so yes, I can repeat the question.

One of the concerns that was raised was an impact, uh, one of the impact that they alleged was about three to ten percent um diminution of values to their property.

My question is whether or not the proposed impact to property values of adjacent property owners is a factor that is considered in a rezone and application.

Mayor, vice mayor, uh Hodge Washington members of the council.

I believe that the the residents are referring to um Prop 207 or ARS.

Um I apologize for 12-1134 about diminution of value, and that does not apply to adjacent property owners.

That was my understanding as well.

So thank you for the clarification on that.

And then um, I don't know if there's any clarity that can be given regarding the cluster mailbox and the concerns about the postal service saying that it would not um not fit a track uh uh uh vehicle.

Um I presume that is because the cul de sac is not completed, so it makes it difficult for any vehicle, especially a male vehicle to um turn in that area.

Actually, you don't have to answer that one.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you.

And anyone additional wishing to speak.

All right, so you have a motion.

Yes, I do.

So I make a motion to approve per the memo from the planning and development director dated April 6th, 2026 and adopt the related coordinates.

Okay.

Roll call.

Yes.

And on this, yes.

O'Brien?

Yes.

Pastor?

Yes, Robinson?

Yes.

Stark?

Yes.

Wearing?

Yes.

Hodge Washington?

Yes.

Yes.

Passes 9-0.

Thank you, everyone, for participating in this process and giving us your time.

We next turn to the final portion of the agenda, and I'll ask our city attorney to endorse to introduce that.

Thank you, Mayor.

During 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 that prohibits council members from discussing or acting on the issues presented.

However, council members may respond to criticism.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll begin with Diane Barker, followed by Bonnie Nichols.

Thanks again, Mayor and Council.

You didn't say come on down the prices, right?

But uh I won't take your time pretty much.

Uh you'd misspelled my name.

Put an extra N in there, okay.

My dad was an Air Force Colonel, so he had to make sure all the kids had all the letters above the line.

Okay.

But I just wanted to say, hey, we had a great, you know, Phoenix Final Four.

And um, what's important is actually our neighbor over in UCLA, they're the champions now.

Uh I would like to see Mercury up there, but you know, we keep supporting them, and they've done a good job, you know.

And um I thought that also I attended the Kevin Robinson's uh safety meeting, and I did notice some more uh police officers around the convention center for this event.

It seemed to run smoothly, and we didn't have like the monarch or any of those kind of events that we're getting rid of the violence downtown, thank God.

And um, so I just want to say keep on going, and I would like to have you look into those polluting pop and bang cars that are running 24-7 downtown.

It's aggressive driving, and people think it's real cool, it's not and it doesn't do anything to help bring people live downtown.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Bonnie is next followed by Noah James.

I'm gonna start by saying I don't want SOS shut down the safe outdoor space that you guys run.

But however, I called the health department over a month ago.

I've been to SOS twice in the last year and a half.

The first time I went there, I had somebody bullying me, and um they were selling drugs out of the tent.

They not once ever flipped the tent.

Trevor was well aware of everything going on.

Um I had to get an order of harassment against said person.

Not even two days after I did that.

Oh, wait, they exited me first for noncompliance because I was pointing out everything that was wrong.

Because I was putting out everything that was wrong.

I've been a caregiver for over 24 years with physically mentally disabled person, so I'm well aware of people's behaviors and everything.

Oh my god.

But anyways, the bottom line is that the first time I was there, I got exited because I was pointing out things that they weren't doing.

Like, oh, the cameras only work when they want them to work.

But yet somebody can go into somebody else's tent and steal it.

But yet if they want to decide to dictate who does what, all of a sudden the camera works.

I was there when two people that were in wheelchairs got attacked by a gentleman, and he got to stay there over the weekend because there was no supervisor.

I don't know about anybody else, but I know how to pick up a phone and call and say, hey, you know, this isn't if it had been me, they would have exited me right out immediately.

On top of that, like I said, two days after I got the order of harassment, that same person attacked another resident, and they sent her and the resident that she attacked off campus.

Moved them, gave the gal that started the fight that was when I served the order of harassment against.

Gave her right over to Cass.

The other one had to walk over.

And that person should have never been exited because guess what?

She had a heart attack, and she wasn't the one that started the fight.

That's the first time I was there.

I left, I went to Michigan to help take care of a family member.

I came back because I've lived in Arizona for over 50 years.

It's my home.

I've come back.

I came back to, I walk over to Cass.

You got people doing all kinds of drugs and stuff right there on the campus, plain as day.

And that's that's not the cast that I knew.

I went to Cass way back in 2012, and it was not like that.

They've got and know the city of Phoenix got sued.

And you know what?

It's starting to look like the zone again.

Just so you all are aware.

This time I've gone back to SOS.

I did graduate culinary school.

I appreciate that.

But however, they've got staff there and security that they don't have the mentality to be there and they shouldn't be there.

When people start talking and saying, you people, you know what?

I'm not you people, I'm an individual.

It's banned up, we're homeless, but you don't have to put us on blast either.

I literally, the other day I was sitting out waiting for somebody to come out, and I had a gal ask me, and I don't know where she was from or whatever.

She asked me, um, you know, are you hungry?

I'm like, no, I'm I'm good.

And I was dressed as nice as I am right now.

I was literally sitting on just across from SOS.

Thank you so much for this important testimony and bringing those items to our attention.

Uh, we'll go next to Noah.

Aloha um mayor and the rest of the city council.

I'm gonna talk about the ice problem here.

And I'm going to talk about it because actually I'm support for it as a Democrat.

I'm a strong Democrat.

And we know that President Barack Obama, the first black president, yes, and President Joe Biden, yes, they supported ICE too.

But they knew what to do with ICE.

We know that Republicans don't know what to do with ICE.

As you can see that with Donald Trump, and you and um, you know, President W.

Bush, too.

There are the two presidents that the Republican Party, I could never be a part of the Republican Party.

This is a disaster.

This party is a disaster.

Also, when I'm in like the stores and you know, it's kind of weird that somebody comes up to me when I have my shirt off in the store and they tell me to put my shirt back on.

It feels very pedophile is very it's just very weird and just disturbing.

Oh, so I know that people complain about the homeless people out here in the parks.

And you know, that's just really it just feels uncomfortable.

Being somebody that has been homeless and you know, it's hot here.

I I understand why they want to be at the park.

I understand they want something cool to stay at.

I have no problem with homeless people, and I don't have a problem with homeless people having you know their shirts off, or I don't know what's going on with them.

Everybody has something going on with them.

Also, I don't really see a lot of women's police officers around here.

I see more old white men hanging around here.

I don't want to see that in Phoenix.

I rather see women police officers.

Also, I know it might not happen, but we do need um another city manager, a woman, please.

Maybe a black woman, Asian, I don't know, but we need a woman to take in charge, and we need a mind of a woman.

So thank you so much, Mahalu.

Thank you.

I believe that is our final speaker.

We are adjourned.

Um a theater.

And so they hired him and building it starting in about 1964.