Public Meetings - Tempe, Arizona

This meeting of the Tempe City Hearing Officer took place on August 19, 2025, at 1:00 PM. Hearing Officer Vanessa McDonald presided. The agenda included consideration of meeting minutes from August 5, 2025, and five public nuisance abatement items. Two items were removed before the hearing (item 2 continued, item 3 brought into compliance). Three abatement requests were heard and approved, including one emergency abatement conducted on May 8, 2025. Meeting Minutes Approval - The minutes from the August 5, 2025 hearing were reviewed and unanimously approved by the Hearing Officer. Public Comments & Testimony - No members of the public spoke or were present; only City of Tempe staff attended. Discussion Items Item 4 – GRAFFIS Property (210 East Vaughn Dr) - Inspector Melissa Ensing requested a 180-day open abatement for deteriorated landscaping, a tree obstructing the sidewalk and street, an inoperable vehicle, and trash/debris. The case was initiated in December 2020 (over four years ago). The property owner was contacted but failed to make any progress. The Hearing Officer noted a discrepancy: the inspector referred to the address as 210 East Bond Drive, while the agenda lists 210 East Vaughn Drive. The Hearing Officer later referred to it as 210 East Fawn. The approved abatement was for the address as listed in the agenda case (CE207434). - Outcome: Approved – 180-day open abatement. Item 5 – COHEN Property (3511 South Cutler Drive) - Inspector Michael Moreno requested a 180-day open abatement for excessive animal feces, junk/trash/debris, overgrown grass/weeds, and a dead tree. The case began in February 2025; the owner was given multiple extensions and a citation but did not correct violations. Photos from late June showed no change by mid-August. - Outcome: Approved – 180-day open abatement. Item 6 – FAULKNER Property (725 East Papago Drive) - Inspector Michael Moreno requested approval for an emergency abatement that was conducted on May 8, 2025. Junk, trash, and debris blocked the alley behind the property, preventing access for police, fire, and solid waste vehicles. The owner claimed it was bulk trash. The city conducted an emergency cleanup. - Outcome: Approved – retroactive approval of the emergency abatement. Key Outcomes - Meeting minutes from August 5, 2025, were approved. - 180-day open abatement approved for the GRAFFIS property (210 East Vaughn Dr) – case CE207434. - 180-day open abatement approved for the COHEN property (3511 South Cutler Dr) – case CE250951. - Emergency abatement approved for the FAULKNER property (725 East Papago Dr) – case CE252719. - The next hearing officer meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, September 2, 2025, at 5:00 PM.

The Development Review Commission (DRC) held a regular meeting on August 12, 2025, at 2:00 PM local time. The meeting covered approval of prior meeting minutes, a consent agenda for two use permit applications, and announcements from commissioners and staff. All action items were approved without public comment. Consent Calendar - Meeting minutes (items 2A and 2B from the July 22, 2025 study session and regular meeting) were approved with six votes in favor and one abstention (Commissioner Joe Forte abstaining). - Item 4A: A use permit to allow two required parking spaces in the front yard setback for the 13th Street Residence, located at 527 West 13th Street (applicant: drattr, LLC). Approved unanimously as part of the consent agenda. - Item 4B: A use permit to modify an existing condition of approval to extend the hours of permanent outdoor entertainment uses in the RCC zoning district for Electric Pickle, located at 8688 South Emerald Drive (applicant: Withey Morris Baugh, PLC). Approved unanimously as part of the consent agenda. Public Comments & Testimony - No members of the public spoke on any agenda item. Discussion Items - No discussion items were considered; all scheduled items were handled via the consent calendar. Key Outcomes - The commission approved the consent agenda unanimously. - Commissioner Joe Forte announced his absence from prior meetings, attributing it to travels representing Tempe's sister city program. - The next regular meeting was scheduled for August 26, 2025. Announcements - Commissioner Announcements: Commissioner Forte apologized for missing recent meetings, stating he was visiting Tempe's sister cities. - Staff Announcements: None.

The City of Tempe Hearing Officer, Vanessa McDonald, convened the meeting on Tuesday, August 5, 2025, at 1:00 PM (local time). The agenda included approval of minutes from July 15, 2025, and a request for a 180-day open abatement for a property at 4024 South Judd Street. A third agenda item (205 McClintock LLC) was listed but not discussed; the hearing officer stated only two items were on the agenda. Consent Calendar - Approval of Minutes (July 15, 2025): The hearing officer reviewed the minutes and found them accurate, approving them without objection. Discussion Items - Abatement Request – 4024 South Judd Street (Case CE243805): Code Compliance Supervisor Anna Chern presented a request for a 180-day open abatement for the property owned by Dutch Capital Investments LLC (in care of Andrew Detling). The case was initiated on May 21, 2024, following a public complaint for violations of junk, trash, and debris (code 213B1), deteriorated landscape (213B8), and a deteriorated pool (213B16). Multiple inspections and notices were sent to the owner and property manager, but violations were never fully corrected. Two citations were issued; the owner failed to appear in court. Although some progress was made (e.g., grass cutting), as of the hearing date all violations remained. The hearing officer noted the 15-month duration and the owner’s minimal compliance efforts, and granted the full 180-day open abatement. No public comments were received, and no one appeared on behalf of the property owner. Key Outcomes - Minutes: Approved unanimously. - Abatement Order: The hearing officer authorized the City of Tempe to abate the public nuisance at 4024 South Judd Street, with a 180-day open abatement period. The property owner is responsible for all abatement costs, to be collected as an assessment against the property. The owner has 14 days (until August 19, 2025, at 3:00 PM) to either appeal the decision to the Board of Adjustment or bring the property into compliance. Note: The agenda listed a third item (Request approval to abate public nuisance at 209 South McClintock Dr., applicant City of Tempe, CE243986), but it was not discussed during the hearing. The hearing officer indicated only two items were on the agenda.

The Tempe Board of Adjustment met on July 23, 2025, starting at 6:00 p.m. and adjourning at 7:28 p.m., to hear an administrative decision appeal filed by Dawn Sinclair. The appeal challenged the Zoning Administrator’s opinion that a Use Permit is not required for detached accessory dwelling units (ADUs) exceeding the 15-foot height limit previously applied to accessory buildings. The board also considered the Zoning Administrator's dismissal of Sinclair's related appeal of a Development Review Commission (DRC) decision for a specific ADU project on Cairo. After deliberation, the board voted 6-1 to uphold both aspects of the Zoning Administrator's opinion, effectively denying the appeal. Consent Calendar - May 28, 2025 Meeting Minutes: Approved by a vote of 5-0, with two abstentions (members who were absent from that meeting). Discussion Items - Appeal of Zoning Administrator's Opinion (PL250217): Dawn Sinclair appealed the Zoning Administrator's June 6, 2025 opinion that a Use Permit is not required for ADUs taller than 15 feet, arguing that the Zoning Administrator lacked authority to make legislative changes, violated due process by not providing public notice or hearings, and improperly applied the decision retroactively to block her earlier appeal of the Cairo ADU project. She urged the board to find the Zoning Administrator exceeded his authority and send the matter to the City Council. - Staff and Zoning Administrator Response: Robert Manzalillo (Senior Planner) and Ryan Levesque (Deputy Director/ Zoning Administrator) argued that the opinion was a valid administrative interpretation to resolve a conflict between the Tempe Zoning Code and Arizona Revised Statutes (ARS 9-461.18), which mandates ADUs as a permitted use and prohibits more restrictive regulations than for single-family dwellings. They noted the code itself states state law controls in conflicts, and that the Zoning Administrator had authority under ZDC 1-303 to interpret and enforce the code. They also argued that Sinclair's original appeal became moot once the Use Permit requirement was determined to be erroneously required, and that she lacked standing to raise due process claims on behalf of others. - Board Deliberation: Board members discussed whether the Zoning Administrator had authority to dismiss the appeal and whether the interpretation was proper. Member Siegel expressed concern that the retroactive clarification improperly blocked the appeal and that the city had not timely corrected the code, potentially triggering statutory penalties under ARS 9-461.18(F). Other members (Chair Morrow, Foy, Siegel) generally supported the first opinion (ADU height) but were split on the second (dismissal of appeal). The board decided to vote separately on the two opinions. Key Outcomes - First Opinion (ADU Height Regulations): The board voted 6-1 to deny the appeal and reaffirm the Zoning Administrator's opinion that a Use Permit is not required for ADU height above 15 feet. The motion was made by Chair Morrow, seconded, and carried with only Brett Siegel voting nay. - Second Opinion (Dismissal of Sinclair's Appeal for the Cairo ADU): The board voted 6-1 to deny the appeal and approve the Zoning Administrator's decision to dismiss the appeal as moot, with Siegel again voting nay. The motion was made and seconded. - Future Procedural Issue: The board agreed to discuss deadlines for appellants to submit materials to the board at their next study session, following Sinclair's complaint about lack of timely delivery of her response to the staff report. - Next Meeting: Scheduled for August 27, 2025.

The Tempe Development Review Commission held a public hearing on July 22, 2025, at 2:00 PM (local time). The meeting was chaired by Andrew Johnson. Commissioners present: Stefan Richter, Larry Tom, Michelle Schwartz, Charles Redman, Linda Spears, and Barbara Lloyd. City staff present included Whitney Mayfield, Robert Mansileo, and others. The commission considered a consent agenda and two use permit requests, all of which were approved unanimously. Consent Calendar - Items 4C, 4D, and 4E were approved unanimously as a consent agenda. These included: - 4C (Edwards Dr Project) – Use permit to allow one required parking space in the front yard building setback at 3005 South Edwards Drive. - 4D (Gandalf Project) – Use permit to allow two parking spaces within the front yard building setback at 1705 North Oleander Street. - 4E (Bubak Residence) – Two use permits: one to allow two required parking spaces in the front yard building setback, and one to allow a detached engineered shade structure in the front yard setback at 1015 East Concorda Drive. - No public speakers requested to speak on these items, so they were kept on the consent calendar. Public Comments & Testimony - Item 4A (Modares Residence) – Two public speakers addressed the commission: - Jim Lackey (neighbor) asked a clarifying question confirming that the request pertained only to the existing two-story building and not an additional structure. He expressed satisfaction with the explanation. - Mike Zamora (Tempe resident) asked for a definition of "attached" versus "detached" accessory dwelling units, specifically whether a roof covering connecting the garage to the house constitutes attachment. Staff clarified that the connection is a non-structural breezeway cover, and the unit is considered detached. - Item 4B (Apache Townhomes) – Two public speakers addressed the commission: - Joe Emory (neighbor on Telmerson Street) expressed general support for the project, noting it would replace a long-vacant motel that attracted crime. He urged the commission to focus on noise mitigation and enforcement of vehicle noise laws as the city densifies. - Stephen Cook (Tempe resident, neighbor across the street) expressed disappointment with the attitude of the developer at a prior meeting (which the applicant contested) and concern about the removal of commercial space on Apache Boulevard. He stated he is not opposed to the project but wants more commercial space to support walkability. He also noted that the development is tasteful and that he supports light rail but feels Apache Boulevard is underutilized. Discussion Items - Item 4A: Modares Residence (PL240292) – Use permit to allow a second-story detached accessory dwelling unit (ADU) at 2102 East Balboa Drive. The existing 504-square-foot garage-top suite was built without a permit; the current owner, Jeff Modares, purchased the property 14 years ago and has kept it vacant except for storage. Staff found the application met all approval criteria. Conditions include a paint refresh of the exterior. The commission unanimously approved the item. - Item 4B: Apache Townhomes (PL250083) – Use permit to allow a residential development (20 single-family townhomes) in a commercial zoning district (CSS/TOD Overlay) at 1461 East Apache Boulevard. The site currently contains two vacant motels. The project includes six three-story buildings, each with a two-car garage and three bedrooms. The commission had previously heard a design review and a use permit for reduction of ground-level commercial; this hearing was specifically for the use permit to allow residential in a commercial zone. Staff noted that the project would generate less traffic than the prior hotel use and that the commercial space at the corner was removed in favor of landscaping after consultation with the community. The applicant stated the homes will be owner-occupied, not student housing. The commission unanimously approved the item. Key Outcomes - Approval of Minutes – The minutes from the June 24, 2025 Study Session and Regular Meeting were approved unanimously. - Consent Agenda Approval – Items 4C, 4D, and 4E were approved unanimously without discussion. - Item 4A (Modares Residence) – Approved unanimously (motion by Commissioner Spears, seconded by Commissioner Richter). - Item 4B (Apache Townhomes) – Approved unanimously (motion by Commissioner Richter, seconded by Commissioner Tom). - Next Meeting – The next regular meeting is scheduled for August 12, 2025.

The Tempe City Hearing Officer, Vanessa McDonald, conducted the second hearing of the month on Tuesday, July 15, 2025, to consider the approval of minutes and five public nuisance abatement requests brought by the City’s Code Compliance Division. After reviewing each case, the Hearing Officer granted 180-day open abatement orders for four properties, with one property (the Ruiz property) having been brought into compliance prior to the meeting. No members of the public testified. Consent Calendar - Meeting Minutes (July 1, 2025): Approved. No additional discussion recorded. Public Comments & Testimony - No public comments were made in person or online for any agenda item. Discussion Items 1. Weary Property – 1939 East Apollo Avenue (Case CE250781) - Inspector: Hector Heretti (Code Compliance) - Violations: Junk, trash, debris, inoperable/unregistered vehicle, dead palm stump, dead palm fronds, missing address numbers, alley maintenance; later deteriorated pool and overgrowth. - History: Case initiated February 6, 2025, via anonymous complaint. Multiple notices and extensions were sent; the property owner’s mother reported the owner was in a mental health care facility. Partial compliance was achieved, but violations persisted. A citation resulted in failure to appear. - Decision: The Hearing Officer granted a 180-day open abatement, citing severity and owner unavailability. 2. Ruiz Property – 4603 South Hanna Drive (Case CE243986) – Not heard - Inspector noted the property had been brought into full compliance before the meeting, so this item was skipped. 3. Murphy Property – 1013 West 12th Place (Case CE251183) - Inspector: Kevin Kowalski - Violations: Transients living in backyard and shed, junk, trash, debris; property fenced after a residential fire. - History: Case initiated February 24, 2025. Owner (Leighton Murphy) was deceased; property in probate for two years. The owner’s niece (Rebecca) initially helped clean but later withdrew. No citation issued due to probate and owner’s death. Trespass authority was filed with Tempe Police to address ongoing homeless encampments. - Decision: The Hearing Officer granted a 180-day open abatement, noting the continuing presence of people living on the property. 4. Canzano Property – 1133 East Concordia Drive (Case CE251010) - Inspector: Andres Lara Reyes - Violations: Trash, litter, debris in front, back, side yards and alley; inoperable vehicle; dead trees and vegetation. - History: Case initiated February 14, 2025, via public complaint. The owner (Robert Canzano) ended a call with the inspector and did not comply. A citation was issued; owner failed to pay/appear. Photos showed extensive scrap, machinery, water heaters, and an apparent encampment in the backyard. - Decision: The Hearing Officer granted a 180-day open abatement, citing lack of owner cooperation. 5. Askey Property – 1514 North Sunset Drive (Case CE247436) - Inspector: Anna Churin (Code Compliance Supervisor) - Violations: Junk, trash, debris in front, sides, backyard; dead trees, vines, grass/weeds in gravel; piles of garbage bags, deteriorated furniture, hundreds of cans. The swimming pool was noted to be clean and clear. - History: Case initiated October 22, 2024. Multiple notices, extensions, two citations, and a failure to appear. Owner made minimal progress; communication ceased after May 2024. - Decision: The Hearing Officer granted a 180-day open abatement. Key Outcomes - Approved abatements (180-day open): - Weary property (1939 E Apollo Ave) – CE250781 - Murphy property (1013 W 12th Pl) – CE251183 - Canzano property (1133 E Concordia Dr) – CE251010 - Askey property (1514 N Sunset Dr) – CE247436 - Item not heard: Ruiz property (4603 S Hanna Dr) – declared compliant. - Next hearing: Scheduled for Tuesday, August 5, 2025, at 5:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers and on Tempe Channel 11.

On July 10, 2025, the City of Tempe held a press conference to highlight its newly passed worker protection ordinance amid record-breaking extreme heat. Congressman Greg Stanton, Mayor Woods, Councilmembers Keating and Hodge, and city worker Adrian Martinez addressed the dangers of extreme heat, the ordinance's provisions, and the need for federal action. The event also included a brief Q&A session where Stanton criticized the Trump administration's handling of federal emergency management and heat-related programs. Public Comments & Testimony - Adrian Martinez (Tempe Solid Waste small collections worker): Expressed appreciation for the ordinance, noting the extreme heat and humidity make work difficult. He stated that the mandatory 10-minute breaks every two hours will help employees cool down in their air-conditioned trucks. Discussion Items - Congressman Greg Stanton (D-AZ): Described the record-breaking heat—118°F in Phoenix on July 9, 2025, and a low of 93°F. He reported that over 600 people died from heat in Maricopa County last year, with more than 6,000 heat-related hospitalizations statewide. Stanton criticized the Trump administration for firing federal heat-safety researchers, eliminating LIHEAP funding, and dismantling NOAA and FEMA programs. He announced his bipartisan Extreme Heat Caucus and advocated for federal action on heat protection, including protecting outdoor workers and ensuring infrastructure resilience. - Councilmember Keating (Tempe): Highlighted the ordinance's unique provisions: cool drinking water and shade within reasonable distance (air-conditioned spaces required, not just shaded cars or containers), mandatory 10-minute breaks every two hours during heat advisories, review of contractor heat safety plans by city procurement, and whistleblower protections for city and contract workers. He called the ordinance the most robust in the state. - Councilmember Hodge (Tempe): Expressed pride in the ordinance, stating it goes beyond rules to value people. She noted that the city's governing board has empowered students to take action on heat ordinances, inspired by Tempe's efforts. - Mayor Woods (Tempe): Emphasized the ordinance's impact on essential city employees such as solid waste workers, water utilities, police, and firefighters. He thanked the council and congressman for their work. Key Outcomes - Announcement of Tempe's Worker Protection Ordinance: The ordinance is now in effect, providing mandatory shaded breaks, water, and safety training for city employees working outdoors. It is described as the most robust in Arizona. - Federal Advocacy: Congressman Stanton reiterated his commitment to the Extreme Heat Caucus and protecting federal programs like LIHEAP, FEMA support, and heat-research initiatives. - Q&A Highlights: Stanton criticized FEMA's delayed response to floods in Kerr County, Texas, and the administration's cuts to the National Weather Service, calling them harmful to public safety and the economy. A question about a referendum effort was not answered on the record.

The Tempe City Council met on July 2, 2025, in a lengthy session that extended past 1:00 a.m. The primary focus was a controversial proposed ordinance to regulate park activities, including requiring permits for gatherings of 30 or more people. After extensive public comment—mostly in opposition—the council voted 7-0 to approve the ordinance. The meeting also covered numerous other agenda items, including the adoption of the Diablo West Character Area Plan and approval of various contracts. Public Comments & Testimony - Jack Maverick (Tempe resident, self-described internet troll): Spoke sarcastically in favor of the ordinance, using the acronym FUG (Friendly Unfettered Government) to mock what he saw as the council's hostility toward park users who are not wealthy or white. He concluded by praising Councilmember Rosa. - Daniel Taylor (former Tempe resident, ASU alumni): Expressed concern about the ordinance's impact on weekly community events like Acro Yoga at Tempe Beach Park and Yoga & More in the Park at Papago Park. He noted these free, inclusive gatherings promote wellness and creativity and asked how the city can ensure public spaces remain accessible for grassroots events. - Tom Brown (Tempe resident): Urged the council to improve the ordinance, noting it contains problematic and potentially legally impactful terms. He advocated for a continuance to gather more public input and encouraged respectful dialogue from all sides. - Gretchen Reinhardt (30-year Tempe resident, Escalante neighborhood): Shared her experience with similar restrictions 30 years ago that pushed vulnerable people away. She argued the ordinance is not a solution, undermines care for the most vulnerable, and ignores the need for covered, safe spaces. - Danielia (ASU student, Tempe resident): Voiced concern that the ordinance would make it difficult for student organizations to host arts and music events due to permit fees and the risk of being shut down. She urged the council to protect the local arts and culture community. - Ken Jacobson (Tempe resident): Criticized the mayor and council for what he described as targeting the destitute and suppressing mutual aid efforts. He stated that feeding the hungry is a religious obligation and warned of moral consequences. - Tamara Joe Schopper (TJ) (new Tempe resident): Shared positive experiences volunteering with New Deal Meals at Moore Park, describing the unhoused community as wonderful and loving. She argued there is no problem to solve and urged voting no on the ordinance. - Alex Monty (Tempe resident): Argued the ordinance is unconstitutional and authoritarian, noting it gives the city manager discretion with no clear criteria. She referenced past selective enforcement and claimed the council is already using permits to criminalize mutual aid groups like Cloud Covered Streets. - Nicholas Mink (South Scottsdale resident, Phoenix DSA, Vice Chair of Arizona Democratic Party): Opposed the ordinance, criticizing its placement at the end of the agenda, its unconstitutionality, and the impractical requirement to plan events two months in advance. He warned of political consequences for the council. - Austin Davis (founder of AZ Hugs, Tempe): Read a poem dedicated to people who died on the streets from fentanyl. He invited the mayor to walk Mill Avenue after bar close to see the people the city is failing. - John Farrell (Tempe resident): Expressed support for the ordinance, describing experiences with trash, drug paraphernalia, and human waste at Papago Park, as well as theft and property issues from homeless individuals in his neighborhood. He said the current situation is not working. - Nathan Charlton (now Mesa resident, formerly Tempe): Opposed the ordinance as a volunteer with Aeris Foundation, which provides meals to children. He discouraged the council, warning of serious political consequences if the ordinance passes. - Philip (South Phoenix resident, musician): Argued that restrictions on parks will harm the arts community, which is already seeing touring acts skip Arizona. He encouraged the city to open up more spaces for creative expression. - Gilbert (Tempe resident): Accused the council of wasting time and using backhanded tactics, like putting the controversial issue at the end of the agenda. He stated the council's approach is fascist-enabling and called for a vote no, citing selective enforcement against mutual aid groups. - Megan (Mesa resident, raising her sister's child): Opposed the ordinance, noting parks are where family members seek out homeless relatives. She highlighted the imbalance between police restrictions on park use and the need for resources like cooling centers and job services. - Amanda Reef (North Tempe resident): Argued the ordinance is a band-aid that will only push the homeless problem elsewhere. She called for real solutions like rent control and repurposing vacant commercial real estate into transitional housing. - Andrew Hinkle (ASU student, originally from Gilbert): Opposed the ordinance, stating it does not help the homeless issue. He closed with a reminder that he is a young constituent with time to canvass. - Jim Sterry (Scottsdale resident): Warned the council of the 2024 election of Zoran Mandani in New York, suggesting that young voters can replace officials who do not follow through on promises. He criticized the council for not helping the homeless. - Jules De La Hose (Tempe resident): Expressed appalled at the ordinance, calling it a clear attack on the homeless and unconstitutional. She urged a vote no and more community involvement. - Christy Dargas (Tempe resident, formerly 10–15 years): Expressed concern about the unclear First Amendment implications of enforcing the ordinance. She urged pausing passage to get genuine community engagement. Discussion Items - Parks and Public Spaces Ordinance (Item 8C7): The council discussed the proposed ordinance that would create a tiered permit system for use of parks. Mayor Corey Woods explained that the intent was to simplify the process for small events (like renting a ramada) and to separate them from large-scale events. He emphasized the $25 fee is standard for Tempe residents and has not been raised in years. Vice Mayor Amber Garland defended the council's commitment to all residents, including the unsheltered, and noted that many residents who support the ordinance are not comfortable speaking publicly. Councilmember Kevin Brake condemned racial attacks during public comment and defended the council's care and effort. After extensive discussion, a motion to approve the ordinance passed 7-0. - Diablo West Character Area Plan (Item 8A2): Jacob Payne, Principal Planner, presented the final character area plan for the Diablo West area (east of 48th Street, north of the High Line Branch Canal, west of Priest Drive, south of the Salt River). The plan was developed over 10 years with public input and includes 12 themes focusing on extreme heat management, shade, sidewalks, and public health and safety. It is non-regulatory but will guide future development. Vice Mayor Garland noted the plan is overdue and praised the work. Councilmember Keating joked about staying awake. The resolution was approved 7-0. Key Outcomes - Parks Ordinance (Item 8C7): Approved 7-0. The ordinance creates a permit system for park use, with a $25 fee for most small events, while larger events will require a more complex process. - Diablo West Character Area Plan (Item 8A2): Approved 6-0 (Councilmember Keating temporarily absent). The plan serves as a policy guide for future development in the Diablo West area. - Other Consent and Non-Consent Items: The council approved numerous items, including: - 8A4: Contract with Perdovo Radiology for MRI services. - 8A5: Cooperative contracts with Verizon, AT&T, and T-Mobile for wireless services. - 8A6: Contract for operational consultant services at the Kyren Water Reclamation Facility. - 8A7: Contract renewals for vehicle repair services and parts. - 8A8: Contract renewal for vehicle fuels. - 8A9: Storm drain improvements on Roosevelt Street (project 5810911). - 8A10: Recharge wells at Ken McDonald Golf Course. - 8A11: Well improvements at South Tempe water treatment plant. - 8A12: Engineering services for recharge wells at Ken McDonald Golf Course. - 8C3: Zoning code amendments for aggregate mining, data centers, and other land uses. - 8C4: Water conservation code amendments. - 8C5: Development agreement for property at 108 East 7th Street. - 8C6: Partial abandonment of utility easements on Rural Road and Warner Road. - 8C8: Ordinance setting salary rate for mayor and city council. - Items Introduced/Set for Second Hearing on August 28, 2025: - 8B1: Amended planned area development overlay for Revelry at 955 East University Drive. - 8B2: Code text amendment for adaptive reuse of commercial office and mixed-use buildings, related to HB 2110. - 8B3: Lease agreement for city-owned property at 34 East 7th Street. - 8B4: Continued to August 28 at the applicant's request. - Adjournment: The meeting adjourned at 1:43 a.m.

Note: The agenda listed the meeting date as Tuesday, July 1, 2025, but the provided metadata indicates the meeting took place on July 2, 2025, at 20:00 UTC. This summary uses the July 2 date as instructed. The City Council held a second and final public hearing to adopt the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Property Tax Ordinance (Ordinance No. O2025.29). The first public hearing was held on June 5, 2025. No public testimony was offered, and the council voted unanimously to adopt the ordinance. Public Comments & Testimony - No members of the public offered testimony during the public hearing. Discussion Items - Councilmembers had no comments or questions for staff regarding the property tax ordinance. The item was moved by Vice Mayor Garland and seconded by Councilmember Hodge. Key Outcomes - The council voted 7-0 to adopt the Fiscal Year 2025/26 Property Tax Ordinance. The roll call vote: Council Raj, Councilmember Adams, Councilmember Keating, Vice Mayor Garland, Councilmember Chin, and the Mayor (all voting aye). The vote occurred at 11:59 PM (time noted in transcript). - The meeting adjourned, with the next scheduled special budget meeting noted for May 14, 2026.