Good evening, everyone.

Welcome to the Tempe City Council regular council meeting.

Item number one is called order council meetings can be watched in real time via Cox Cable Channel Eleven and at Tempe.gov slash Tempi Eleven.

Members of the public may also attend the meeting virtually through Microsoft Teams.

If you have signed up to speak on items later on in the agenda, please know that as the presiding officer, I have the discretion to introduce items out of their regular order as listed on the agenda.

So those wishing to speak on those items don't have to wait until later in the meeting or to otherwise expedite the business of the meeting.

If you wish to speak on an agenda item and you haven't filled out a speaker card yet, please make sure to fill out and submit your completed card to the city clerk prior to the item coming forward for council discussion.

I'd now like to invite everyone who is able and willing to stand to join me in a moment of silence, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.

Thank you.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands.

One nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.

So those rules still do apply for this regular council meeting.

But we are now going to play a video conveying the City of Tempe's native land acknowledgement statement.

We acknowledge that Tempe lies on the ancestral land of the Native peoples who have lived here since time immemorial.

Stretches far beyond the boundaries of our city.

The landscape is sacred to them.

Embodying cultural values that are integral to their identity and way of life.

The autumn and deposit continue to maintain a deep spiritual connection to this land.

We embrace the responsibility of caring for these places and vow to uphold this commitment in all our actions.

Thank you very much.

Next up, uh item four meeting minutes.

Councilmember Chin.

Thank you, Mayor.

I move to accept the board, commission, and committee meeting minutes in items 4B1 through 4B2.

It's been moved by Councilmember Chin and seconded by Councilmember Keating.

Please vote.

And that item passes six to zero with Vice Mayor Garland absent.

Next up, item 5A, Mayor's reports and announcements.

I don't have any this evening, which brings me to item 5B, City Manager's reports and announcements.

Madam City Manager.

Thank you, Mayor.

I don't have anything this evening.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate it.

That moves us to public appearances.

Once again, before we move into public appearances, I want to take a moment to address campaign-related activity as we are now in the 2026 election season.

City Council meetings are open to the public and are a vital forum for civic engagement.

We welcome all individuals, including candidates to speak on matters of public concern during the public comment portion of the meeting.

However, because this is an official city council meeting that is both televised and live streamed using city resources, we ask all candidates, including any current council members, to refrain from electioneering or campaign-related activity while participating in this meeting.

That means no discussing your candidacy, asking for votes to signatures, or displaying campaign materials such as signs, t-shirts, or literature while speaking.

Thank you for helping us maintain the integrity and neutrality of our public meetings.

That brings me to item six, public appearances.

According to the Arizona Open Meeting Law, the City Council may only discuss, respond to, or take action on matters listed elsewhere on this agenda for discussion and legal action.

The purpose of the open call to the public is to allow individuals to address the city council on any issue within the jurisdiction of the city council.

No person shall speak more than once, and there is a limit of three minutes per speaker.

In the interest of allowing all members of the public to have an opportunity to speak, in the case that there are such a large number of persons intending to speak during the meeting that it may deprive other members of the public from the reasonable opportunity to speak, the mayor may limit each speaker to less than three minutes.

Speakers present at the podium must state their name and city of residence and provide a speaker card.

Members of the public shall refrain from making personal, impertinent or slanderous remarks, and from becoming boisterous while addressing the city council or while attending the meeting.

Speakers will be taken first come, first serve in the order in which the cards are received.

Speakers' visual aids and appearances by phone or recordings are not allowed.

The city council is prohibited by state law from discussing, responding to, or taking action on matters raised during the call to the public, even if asked to do so by a member of the public.

So long as the subject discussed by the speaker is not listed as a specific agenda item for council's consideration for discussion and legal action.

Individual members of the council may respond to criticism made by speakers, ask staff to review a matter, or request a matter to be placed on a public on a future public agenda.

That being said, I will look to our clerk here to see do I have any cards this evening for general public appearances?

I've not received any for this section.

Okay, thank you very much.

Is there anyone in the audience wishing to speak under item number six public appearances?

All right, seeing none, I will move on to item number seven, which is the consent agenda.

All items listed on the consent agenda will be considered as a group and will be enacted with one motion by the city council unless an item is removed for separate consideration.

Members of the public may remove public hearing items for separate consideration.

Public hearing items are designated as public hearing item at the beginning of the item title.

Council members may remove any item for separate consideration or to declare a conflict of interest.

If a council member would like to declare a conflict at this time, the city clerk will provide the council member with a disclosure form.

If you wish to speak on a public hearing item, please fill out a speaker card and submit your completed card to the city clerk prior to the agenda item coming forward for council discussion.

I will call your name when it is your turn for public comment.

This evening the consent agenda is listed as follows.

Item 7v1 through 7B5 and resolutions item 7C1 through 7C4.

Once again, any agenda item designated as public hearing item can be removed by a member of the public for separate consideration.

If anyone would like to have a public hearing item removed, please get my attention now.

All right, seeing that I'll look to the council.

Uh, do you have any agenda items that you'd like removed from the consent agenda for separate consideration?

So moved.

Okay, it's been moved by council member Hodge.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Councilmember Adams, please vote.

And that item passes six to zero with Vice Mayor Garland Absip.

All right.

That means I'm gonna move to item eight, which is the non-consent agenda.

All items listed on the non-consent agenda will be considered separately.

Agenda item scheduled for introduction and first public hearing will be heard, but will not be voted upon at this meeting.

Agenda item scheduled for second public hearing and final adoption will be voted upon tonight.

Council members who may have a conflict of interest may abstain from voting on a matter, and the city clerk will provide the council members with the disclosure form at this time.

First up here, item 8A, miscellaneous items, bids, contracts, and resolutions.

There's only one item under the section, which is 8A1, which is to approve a time extension for a planned area development overlay and reapprove a development plan review for a new three-story attached single family residential development consisting of eight units for Vedanta Temp B located at 2447 East University Drive.

The applicant is in light 10 architecture.

Okay, just want to see that's note to the property owner uh Amit Sudan, uh, architect Steve Greco and developer Dave Mazza are attending the meeting virtually this evening in case the council has any questions for the applicant regarding this item.

Uh no presentation was planned, though.

So, council members, do you have any uh questions for the applicant?

No.

All right, seeing none, I will then look for a motion on item 8A1.

It's been moved by council member Keating and seconded by Councilmember Hodge.

Please vote.

And that item passes six to zero with Vice Mayor Garland absent.

The next section on the non-consent agenda is ordinances and items for introduction and first hearing.

The item under the section will be read and introduced tonight, but no substantive vote will be taken.

The second hearing and vote for this item is scheduled for December 11th, 2025.

Once again, the only item under the section is 8B1, which is to introduce and hold the first public hearing to adopt an ordinance authorizing the city manager to negotiate and execute a lease agreement for lease of city owned commercial property located at 125 East Fifth Street in Tempe, Arizona, subject to approval of the lease terms by the city attorney.

Council, any questions for staff regarding this item?

All right, this is a public hearing item, so I'll open up the public testimony portion.

Is there anyone wishing to give public testimony on item 8v1 this evening?

If so, please get my attention.

Seeing that I'll close the public testimony portion of the meeting.

Uh do anyone have any uh further comments or questions before we move forward?

All right.

The second and final public hearing on this item once again is scheduled for December 11th, 2025.

The last section on the non-consent agenda is ordinances items scheduled for second hearing and final adoption.

So votes will be taken tonight.

The first item under the section is 8C1, which is to hold the second and final public hearing to adopt an ordinance for planned area development overlay for Dorsey Station, located at 1320 East Apache Boulevard and 1412 South Dorsey Lane for a new mixed-use development with 400 dwelling units located within five buildings and approximately 11,000 square feet of new commercial floor area on 6.7 acres.

The applicant is Dorsey Development Partners.

Let's see, Mr.

Huhlemans, is there a presentation this evening?

I know you gave one during the first eating.

Um this is a public hearing because I've got to withdraw that motion.

So okay, thank you.

Uh okay, so Mr.

Hubert, yes, there's no substantive changes since the first hearing.

We had a presentation uh just last week, a full presentation on November 6th, last Thursday.

So I'll open up the public uh hearing portion of this item.

Uh does anyone wish to give any public testimony on this item?

I've got one speaker this evening, and then I'll take anyone else.

Uh the speaker I had this evening is Charles Bus.

Please come forward and state your name and city of residence.

You have three minutes.

Uh my name is Charles Buss.

Um I'm representing University Heights neighborhood, which is adjacent to the two parcels that make up this project.

Um I previously spoke to the council last week and to uh DRC the week before.

Um I'm very happy to see more affordable housing.

Um I have no problem with that at all.

Um I've had a variety of issues voiced by neighbors of mine.

Um unfortunately, I think they've decided the city's going to do what they want, it being their own their own land, so they're not they're not here, they've given up.

Um some of the issues were having to look at six-story buildings across their backyards, um, increased traffic, uh cutting through the neighborhood from the project.

Uh the biggest issue that's come forward is the issue of providing a market.

Uh Mayor Woods had said five years ago when the city bought the property that there would be a market.

Um the problem I'm having with this right now is that the RFP was drawn up only requesting 10,000 square feet.

I have yet, uh I have yet to find a grocer that can operate in that size of a space.

I called many myself, as has Mr.

Hugh Mantle.

Um most uh grocery stores, even the smaller sized ones need around 17 to 20,000 square feet.

Uh with that in mind, I'm asking that the council increase the uh square footage to 20,000.

Or if we are stuck with 10,000, I would ask that the council consider um uh rent assistance to the operator of the market, who will then likely be just a one-location grocery store who doesn't have the buying power of someone like Aldi, who has dozens or hundreds of locations and can get their items cheaper and pass them on to the consumers cheaper.

The residents living here will be low income.

Uh the neighborhood is primarily low income as well.

And I don't see a reason why there shouldn't be a uh a rent abatement issued to the um operator of the grocery store since we're giving it to the 400 units that this project will uh will provide.

So I think it's fair that if the residents are going to get help with their rent, the market operator should as well.

That would allow this single location market operator to have less of a rent burden and be able to provide needed groceries at a more reasonable price than in say a convenience store.

Um I'm afraid this will turn into a convenience store like what they have at um the Cal-de-Sac project.

So thank you.

That's my concerns.

Quick quick thing regarding that.

I don't know, um, staff, I guess whether it's I don't know Mr.

Tamulevich, I don't know if it's you or maybe Mr.

Anderson to the notion of the rent abatement that Mr.

Bus is raising.

The only thing I'm I'm uh questioning is I'm not saying I'm personally opposed to that, but I also do understand that you know when an RFP or request for proposals is issued.

Do we have any ability afterwards to ask for anything additional, or would that basically be sort of violating the initial terms of the RFP?

As in someone could come back later on and say, well, hey, if I knew a renovate that was on the table, I might have applied, or I might have chosen to do something differently when it comes to responding to the city's original RFP.

So maybe Mr.

Anderson, I'll ask you that question.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Yes, that's that's always an issue.

We tried to keep it.

Uh I will point out I believe that the 10,000 is a minimum.

It's not necessarily a maximum.

So there is that's just a minimum.

Um, but yeah, we do try to make sure that uh as we do a development agreement with the selected developer that the council has given us authority to work with that we make sure it's consistent with the RFP, so it's fair to all people who may have or considered responding to it.

So thank you, Mr.

Anderson.

Appreciate it.

Could I comment?

I I understand that the rules of the RFP, that's why I wish it had been written differently.

Um I just don't see why we can't tweak that a little bit, at least on the renabatement issue, if we're stuck with 10,000 square feet.

Well, I just once again I want to go back to the point of what Mr.

Anderson said too.

It's uh I I know I said this during the last hearing, you know, it's it's not a maximum of 10,000 square feet, it's a minimum of 10,000 square feet.

And I know I asked Mr.

Huell Mantle during the meeting last Thursday.

If someone came along, let's say a Trader Joe's or some or an Aldi or someone of that nature and said, we need 15,000 square feet to actually make this happen.

Would that be something you could accommodate?

And he said, Mayor, absolutely we can do that.

So I just want to make sure for everyone watching at home, it's not a maximum so uh you know 10,000, it's a minimum of 10,000.

But it could, but if but the developer I know stated a couple of times to me, not only privately but publicly at the meeting last Thursday, that if someone comes along and it's a viable grocery opportunity, not a convenience store, and they need to make room to ensure that that grocer can go in to serve the neighborhood, they will actually absolutely make that happen.

And I will also note as well, I know you talked about uh Mr.

Buss, some of the demographics of the neighborhood.

I know one of the things that we've talked about with the developer uh is definitely making sure we recognize that uh I will say a Whole Foods or an AJ's or some of these very kind of uh more high-income grocers would not be appropriate for the area.

It needs to be a grocery store that actually matches the incomes of the people who live on Apache Boulevard and in your neighborhood in some of the surrounding neighborhoods.

So definitely I know that's something the council's really uh thinking about, and I know it's something that the developer's thinking as well, and something that we've talked about.

So yeah, I think this I've been involved in those discussions.

I'm just concerned that time is running out to adjust the size of the grocery store space as our developer needs to get his plan submitted very soon.

Absolutely.

Yeah.

No, definitely I definitely definitely appreciate that.

Thank you.

Right.

Thanks.

Thank you.

Uh Mr.

Hume Mantle.

Uh actually, before I go back to you, Mr.

Hill, and let me see if there's anyone else in the audience wishing to address the council uh on this item.

If so, could you please get my attention now?

Okay, seeing none, I will close the public testimony portion of the public hearing.

Mr.

Hume Mantle?

I'll be brief in my response because you're right, we did talk about this last time.

I think it's worth noting that your staff has been working very closely with us on this issue.

Obviously, it's a difficult time for grocery stores with inflation and other things happening now.

But and Sprouts, you mentioned Sprouts last time.

I don't want you to think we didn't hear that as Sprouts uh has some interest in the site already because of some other things they're doing with your staff.

So April's here.

Um but Josh Rutherford from your department, uh, economic development department has been working closely with us and willing to talk to grocery stores with us and and do those kinds of things.

So we continue to work to try to find a grocer that will suit our purposes on as a developer, but also the cities as well.

And we've been working really hand in hand to make that work.

I'm happy to answer other questions, but that seems to be the issue on the table.

Sounds good.

Thank you, Mr.

Yulmantle.

Uh, Councilmember Hodge?

I just want to say I'm not uh I didn't give anybody a heart attack today when I talked, because the last time I talked to you, I think I scared everybody in the room by calling your name out, uh Carl and Mary Wood's name out at the same time.

You don't remember that?

You certainly got his attention, speaking.

Oh, I remember that.

Yes, now I remember.

Yes.

Oh, yes, it's yours.

We all wondered what God's voice sounded like in it at the moment.

And it sounded just like Councilmember Hodge.

Thank you.

Well, Mr.

Hume Idols here, anyone uh on the council, any comments or questions for him?

Sounds like you okay, thank you.

And yeah, just once again, just uh really quickly too to uh Mr.

Buss's point.

I mean, definitely recognize the need for a grocery store.

I mean, it's something that's not, I don't want to throw any names out there, but you know, obviously not looking for a circle K or something of that nature, really something where you're going to have, you know, fresh produce and vegetables and meat and things of that nature that really is going to serve the needs of that neighborhood.

Because we recognize, as you've talked about, you and I have talked about even privately, uh, the Apache Boulevard corridor in the city of Tempe is one of the fastest growing parts of our community, and there definitely is need for a grocer on that block.

Uh, it's one of the reasons I know why we purchased the site back in December of 2021.

Uh, it was because many of the leaders in the neighborhood uh came to us and basically said we're concerned now that the food and I should clarify this too, because I saw a couple things online, not that Mr.

Buss has said any of this, but just uh there were a couple of comments online saying, you know, well, why did the city you know buy this or they put the grocery store out of business?

No, the reality was the uh Bash's corporation announced in September of 2021 that they were going to close the grocery store.

And the first call I received was from Phil Amarosi, who's the chair of the Hudson Manor Neighborhood Association, who reached out to me personally and said, we really would like to see if the city could take a larger role in potentially acquiring this plaza.

We're concerned that we're just gonna end up getting some kind of a luxury student housing complex here for kind of wealthy young people that's frankly not going to serve the neighborhood.

It might serve the students in that in that uh particular development, but we really do want something here that's gonna serve the broader needs of the neighborhood.

And the two specific things he mentioned were as Mr.

Buss talked about, uh getting a grocer back on Apache Boulevard, but also trying to bring some much needed affordable housing to the area, especially in one of the fastest growing sections of town that Mr.

Buss lives in.

So just wanted to make sure to point out some of the history as to why the city spent about initially, I think it was 10.6 or 10.7 million dollars acquiring that property back in December of 2021.

It was really at the behest of the neighbors, and it was frankly to make sure that that uh didn't just become another luxury housing complex, but it became something that really truly did serve the neighborhood and many people who were getting rapidly priced out of our community.

So just wanted to put that out there just sort of you know for context and a little bit for the record.

So, but thank you, Mr.

Boss, and thank you, Mr.

Huel Mandel as well.

Appreciate it.

Um, council members, any comments or discussion on item 8C1.

Okay, if not, I'll I'll entertain a motion.

It's been moved by Councilmember Hodge.

Do I have a second?

Seconded by Council Member Adams, please vote.

And that item passes six to zero with Vice Mayor Garland absent.

Thank you.

Thank you.

The next item under the section is 8C2, which is to hold the second and final public hearing to adopt an ordinance for an amended planned area development overlay for Rio 2100 residences located at 2132 South Cambern Way for a new six-story mixed-use development with 315 dwelling units on 4.61 acres.

The applicant is Barry Rudell LLC.

Good evening, Miss Sawyer.

Good to see you again.

Good evening, Mr.

Mayor.

Good to see you as well.

Okay here in council.

Sarah Sawyer, Barry Ridd, uh 6750 East Camelback.

My pleasure to be back this evening to seek approval of Rio 2100 residences.

To remind you, the site we are talking about, it is outlined in green here on the slide, uh, located adjacent to the loop 101 and 202 uh interchange.

East of our site is Tempe Marketplace, the Rio 2100 business park, and then also some synergistic multifamily uses in the area, the Cameron to our west and to the south, the Smith and Rio.

The site was entitled in 2023 for a mixed use development with multifamily units and co-work space.

It is zoned mixed use high with a general plan of mixed use high as well.

Also at this time, a major development plan was approved and has since expired.

Today we have a new developer seeking to come forward and develop this site.

Um, and as such, we are requesting to amend the PAD and seek a major development plan review for a uh 315 uh market rate multifamily apartment complex with co-working space on a 4.6 acre site.

Uh just to quickly go over why this request is consistent with the general plan and area plan.

It does offer greater density than the 65 dwelling units an acre for its designation close to Tempe Marketplace and reinforces Tempe Marketplace as a central activity hub and uh utilizes in fill development and incorporates public art.

This is a view of our conceptual site plan.

Again, uh 315 market rate multifamily units, multi-level parking structure tucked along our eastern edge, adjacent to the loop 101 loop 202 interchange to provide a buffer to future residents, and uh almost 2500 square feet of public co-working space along the south along Cameron Way.

Uh Councilmember Adams, to address uh one of your comments last week.

I wanted to show you all of the trees that we have on the site.

As you can see, there's significant uh trees around the perimeter of the site and on the interior uh amenity areas.

Really, the only area that we don't have trees is on the east portion of, or I'm sorry, the west portion of the site where there's an electrical easement.

So limited trees there.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate that.

And to give you an idea also of how the trees are gonna function on a pedestrian level, uh, we wanted to provide you with a view of the pedestrian experience here.

So this is right outside of the proposed leasing office and co-working space.

And as you can see, the detached sidewalk with landscaping buffer and shade trees providing shade to the sidewalk and to the building.

And then the vice mayor asked about our uh the green building code.

Uh so I did want to talk about how we're incorporating the green building code into this design.

Um we are proposing energy efficient appliances and wherever irrigation is used, it's focused on the turf areas, uh designed to reduce uh spray onto the hardscape and the building, and then also incorporating EV spaces, um charging stations, capable spaces, and EV ready spaces into the garage.

And we are um going to provide an additional two EV ready spaces as well.

So with that, we respectfully request approval of the minor PAD amendment and major DPR, and I'm happy to answer any questions.

Sounds good.

Thank you so much.

Um council, any questions for Ms.

Sawyer or for staff on this item.

All right, thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

I'm not gonna open up the public testimony portion of the public hearing.

Is there anyone wishing to give any public testimony on item 8C2?

If so, can you please get my attention at this time?

All right, seeing that I'll close the public testimony portion of the public hearing.

Council members any final comments or discussion, or do I have a motion?

It's been moved by councilmember Hodge and seconded by council member uh Adams.

Please vote.

And that item passes six to zero with Vice Mayor Garland absent.

Thank you.

Next up, you're welcome.

The last item under the section is 8C3, which is to hold the second and final public hearing to adopt an ordinance authorizing the city manager or designee to negotiate and execute a lease agreement or lease agreements with Dorsey Development Partners LLC to facilitate the redevelopment of three parcels of city owned property located near the intersection of Apache Boulevard and Dorsey Lane, pursuant to a development agreement between the parties.

Council members, any questions for staff on this item.

All right.

Seeing none, this also is a public hearing item.

So if there's any public testimony on item 8c3, can you please get my attention at this time?

Okay, seeing none, I'll close the public testimony portion of the public hearing.

Council members, any final comments or discussion, or can I entertain a motion?

It's been moved by councilmember Hodge.

Seconded by Councilmember Amberg, please vote.

And that item passes six to zero with Vice Mayor Garland absent.

That brings me to item number nine.

Current events, council announcements and future agenda items.

Just want to note that uh council members can also add, well, they can request that an agenda item be added to a future council meeting during their allotted time, but in accordance with the Arizona open meeting law.

There should be no discussion on the item other than to clarify the request.

Uh this evening, I'm gonna start with councilmember Chin.

Thank you, Mayor.

I just have two quick announcements.

One is more of a greeting to some of you know it's ASU homecoming this weekend.

I'm sure this was a stop in the the first stop in homecoming festivities, the Tempe City Council meeting, but welcoming any alumni back and hoping for a win on Saturday.

And the next item and the last item I have is we won't be back until December for a meeting.

So I wanted to wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving.

Safe and just be safe.

Thank you all.

Thank you very much, Councilmember Chin.

Next up, Councilmember Hodge.

I have no announcements, I just want to wish everybody a happy Thanksgiving, also.

Thank you so much.

Next up, Councilmember Amberg.

I have no announcements, thank you.

Thank you very much.

Next up, Councilmember Keating.

Um, first I do want to wish everyone a happy Thanksgiving as well.

Hopefully, my lions beat Councilmember Hodges Packers on Thanksgiving this year.

They'll looking like they probably will.

So sorry about that, Councilmember Hodge.

Um, and I do have uh my upcoming round table at drink me tea room.

That will be on Tuesday, December 2nd from 6 to 7:30.

You can find out more information at Tempe.gov forward slash Keating.

Please RSVP if you can, because we will be buying treats for everyone that shows up and want to make sure we have enough for everybody.

So hopefully we'll see you there.

Thank you, Mayor.

Bring Randy some tissue for his crime after he loses the game.

All right then.

Thank you, Councilmember Keating.

Uh, next up, Councilmember Adams.

I have no announcements.

Thank you, Mr.

Mayor.

Thank you very much.

I don't have any announcements either, which brings me to item number 10 public appearances.

Uh, is there anyone else in the audience who'd like to address the council?

If so, please get my attention.

Okay, seeing none, I will move to item number 11 adjournment.

The next scheduled regular council meeting will be on December 11th, 2025.

We are adjourned at 6 52 p.m.

Have a great night.